I have been aware for at least a couple of years now that I very rarely use this journal to write about the sorts of things I ought to write about. Not word counts and what I had for dinner last night and watching Blade Runner for the four hundredth time. Sure, it's nice to look back, a year or two or seven from now and be able to see what I was doing on any given day. But it's not very important. Not by my measure. I have thought, also, I might be more willing to broach these important subjects were LJ not, essentially, dead. Yes, it is. The few of us who remain, let's not play collective denial. ~95% of my LJ "friends" are now my Facebook "friends." Facebook is much safer. It's almost impossible to ever say anything important on Facebook. Oh, and a few have migrated exclusively to Twitter, where it's impossible to ever say anything of consequence. But I digress.
Here is an important thing. I might as well write about it. The time is only 11:17 ayem, and I already have a headache...so writing about it can't give me one. By the way, I don't necessarily mean to alienate people. But it happens when you decide to tell the truth, that version of the truth that your Reason and Observation has arrived at, I mean. As there is no Absolute Truth. See what I'm getting at? My moral relativism just alienated three people.
Yeah, well, okay. Here's something I believe is important, getting back to what I call "professional outrage," but also touching on an even more – at least potentially more – insidious phenomenon. I'm still not sure what to call it. There is an ever growing contingency of people online (and, presumably, offline) – largely, it seems, young, college-educated white women/girls in the Echo Boomer/Homeland Generation age bracket* – who are so astoundingly, viciously, humorlessly hyper-politicized that they are incapable of approaching a given work of fiction as a work of fiction. They approach it with their dogma held out before them like a shield, blinding them to whatever's actually going on behind the shield. Probably, I'm saying this poorly. For that I apologize, though not for the sentiment. But let's set art aside a moment.
Let's try this: Yesterday, I saw a sort of parody of the "X out of X kids are experimenting with drugs" ads. Only, substitute "science" for "drugs." It was smart, witty, and important. It was an attempt to use cultural satire to drive home a vital message about the miserable state of science and math education in America. Okay, so...the top image is a row of preteens. First kids a black boy, then two white boys, then a white girl, then a white boy. The girl has been circled and she's the one who's used as the example of that one American kid in five with an interest in science. Cool. The whole thing was funny, and it made the point.
Which no one seemed to get.
Instead, the comments section had been flooded with indignation that the black boy had not been chosen. The whole affair was deemed racist. Exclusionist. Classist. Even sexist. All the dæmonic -ists and -isms were there. But...
Had the black kid been chosen, there would have been outrage that a male had been chosen. Are we not supposed to encourage girls to become scientists?
And, of course, a white boy could not ever have been chosen. That much is obvious.
I suppose they might have dropped an Asian child in and used him or her, but then people would have been screaming about stereotypes. Also, what about an Hispanic child? And how do we know whether or not that girl was heterosexual, lesbian, bi, polyamorous, or...whatever? Can we be sure she was cisgendered? If she was, why wasn't a transgendered kid chosen? How much money does her family make? Those clothes she's wearing look like they were bought at Old Navy, and she has good teeth, and clear skin. Is she omnivorous, vegetarian, or vegan? And why didn't they choose a physically or mentally handicapped child? Can we be sure of her religion? Are her parents Christian, Muslim, Atheist, Buddhist, Wiccan, or Jewish? Democrat, Republican, or Libertarian? Wait! Why did I just list Jewish and Libertarian last in their respective sentences?! Is that some sort of cryptoelitism?
It's a trap of almost infinite regression.
So...how is a problem this idiotic ever addressed? The whole matter of science education (upon which the future of each and every nation may rise and fall) was swept aside in a storm of arguments and accusations over diversity, over race and sex and class (factors that, are, by the way, important in solving the mess that has been made of science education).
I haven't got an answer. I can only see the calamity. That young people have been so sensitized to issues of an ideal complete inclusiveness that they are unable to actually become engaged in art or, in the case above, political and social satire. A force for good – political awareness and a willingness to combat apathy – has become a disastrous tar pit, miring minds that might do great things into endless circular loops of "yeah, but" histrionics over minutiae (as in not seeing forests for toothpicks). Because no one has tempered the drive to make this world a better place with the understanding that change comes slowly, piecemeal, by hard work and bloodshed, and that the world will always be filled with inequities, and teh internets have not made it all better (and can't do so).
It does, of course, come back around to art. I'm about to do the GoH thing at Readercon 23, and, I will admit, I fear this mindset. I fear publicly telling people to fuck off, should they, say, tell me I'm homophobic for writing so many queer characters who come to nasty ends (even though most of my characters are queer), or that I don't have enough characters of color, or that India Morgan Phelps is a caricature of a schizophrenic. Because if I do hear that sort of shit, odds are I will forget to be politic. And I want to play nice.
It comes back to art. To nauseating irony. To people who level charges of racism against The Book Thief because we're watching the events surrounding the Holocaust through the eyes of a young German girl who isn't a Jew. To people who whine that Prometheus was (pick a complaint at random) sexist...even though, arguably, the three most powerful characters in the film are two women, plus an android that, being an android, is biologically sexless**. People who won't shut up about "haters," but who hate everything they lay eyes on. And, I'm sorry, but for a lot of these folks – people I know are intelligent – there is the distinct impression they always intended to disapprove.
Something has short circuited. America is a nation polarized between violent spite towards minorities, on the one hand, and, on the other, sensitivity that is not being tempered by sanity. Do the math.
Something My Soul Needs,
Aunt Beast
Oh...and this...

* This is my observation. Likely, this generalization will rain shit down upon my head, and I'll be accused of...whatever. But it is my long and considered observation, and makes me suspect that one factor at play is white guilt run amuck.
** Oh, and the fact that it's a black man who essentially saves Earth!
Postscript (4:58 p.m.): I am incapable of agreeing to disagree. That's called a cop out.
Here is an important thing. I might as well write about it. The time is only 11:17 ayem, and I already have a headache...so writing about it can't give me one. By the way, I don't necessarily mean to alienate people. But it happens when you decide to tell the truth, that version of the truth that your Reason and Observation has arrived at, I mean. As there is no Absolute Truth. See what I'm getting at? My moral relativism just alienated three people.
Yeah, well, okay. Here's something I believe is important, getting back to what I call "professional outrage," but also touching on an even more – at least potentially more – insidious phenomenon. I'm still not sure what to call it. There is an ever growing contingency of people online (and, presumably, offline) – largely, it seems, young, college-educated white women/girls in the Echo Boomer/Homeland Generation age bracket* – who are so astoundingly, viciously, humorlessly hyper-politicized that they are incapable of approaching a given work of fiction as a work of fiction. They approach it with their dogma held out before them like a shield, blinding them to whatever's actually going on behind the shield. Probably, I'm saying this poorly. For that I apologize, though not for the sentiment. But let's set art aside a moment.
Let's try this: Yesterday, I saw a sort of parody of the "X out of X kids are experimenting with drugs" ads. Only, substitute "science" for "drugs." It was smart, witty, and important. It was an attempt to use cultural satire to drive home a vital message about the miserable state of science and math education in America. Okay, so...the top image is a row of preteens. First kids a black boy, then two white boys, then a white girl, then a white boy. The girl has been circled and she's the one who's used as the example of that one American kid in five with an interest in science. Cool. The whole thing was funny, and it made the point.
Which no one seemed to get.
Instead, the comments section had been flooded with indignation that the black boy had not been chosen. The whole affair was deemed racist. Exclusionist. Classist. Even sexist. All the dæmonic -ists and -isms were there. But...
Had the black kid been chosen, there would have been outrage that a male had been chosen. Are we not supposed to encourage girls to become scientists?
And, of course, a white boy could not ever have been chosen. That much is obvious.
I suppose they might have dropped an Asian child in and used him or her, but then people would have been screaming about stereotypes. Also, what about an Hispanic child? And how do we know whether or not that girl was heterosexual, lesbian, bi, polyamorous, or...whatever? Can we be sure she was cisgendered? If she was, why wasn't a transgendered kid chosen? How much money does her family make? Those clothes she's wearing look like they were bought at Old Navy, and she has good teeth, and clear skin. Is she omnivorous, vegetarian, or vegan? And why didn't they choose a physically or mentally handicapped child? Can we be sure of her religion? Are her parents Christian, Muslim, Atheist, Buddhist, Wiccan, or Jewish? Democrat, Republican, or Libertarian? Wait! Why did I just list Jewish and Libertarian last in their respective sentences?! Is that some sort of cryptoelitism?
It's a trap of almost infinite regression.
So...how is a problem this idiotic ever addressed? The whole matter of science education (upon which the future of each and every nation may rise and fall) was swept aside in a storm of arguments and accusations over diversity, over race and sex and class (factors that, are, by the way, important in solving the mess that has been made of science education).
I haven't got an answer. I can only see the calamity. That young people have been so sensitized to issues of an ideal complete inclusiveness that they are unable to actually become engaged in art or, in the case above, political and social satire. A force for good – political awareness and a willingness to combat apathy – has become a disastrous tar pit, miring minds that might do great things into endless circular loops of "yeah, but" histrionics over minutiae (as in not seeing forests for toothpicks). Because no one has tempered the drive to make this world a better place with the understanding that change comes slowly, piecemeal, by hard work and bloodshed, and that the world will always be filled with inequities, and teh internets have not made it all better (and can't do so).
It does, of course, come back around to art. I'm about to do the GoH thing at Readercon 23, and, I will admit, I fear this mindset. I fear publicly telling people to fuck off, should they, say, tell me I'm homophobic for writing so many queer characters who come to nasty ends (even though most of my characters are queer), or that I don't have enough characters of color, or that India Morgan Phelps is a caricature of a schizophrenic. Because if I do hear that sort of shit, odds are I will forget to be politic. And I want to play nice.
It comes back to art. To nauseating irony. To people who level charges of racism against The Book Thief because we're watching the events surrounding the Holocaust through the eyes of a young German girl who isn't a Jew. To people who whine that Prometheus was (pick a complaint at random) sexist...even though, arguably, the three most powerful characters in the film are two women, plus an android that, being an android, is biologically sexless**. People who won't shut up about "haters," but who hate everything they lay eyes on. And, I'm sorry, but for a lot of these folks – people I know are intelligent – there is the distinct impression they always intended to disapprove.
Something has short circuited. America is a nation polarized between violent spite towards minorities, on the one hand, and, on the other, sensitivity that is not being tempered by sanity. Do the math.
Something My Soul Needs,
Aunt Beast
Oh...and this...

* This is my observation. Likely, this generalization will rain shit down upon my head, and I'll be accused of...whatever. But it is my long and considered observation, and makes me suspect that one factor at play is white guilt run amuck.
** Oh, and the fact that it's a black man who essentially saves Earth!
Postscript (4:58 p.m.): I am incapable of agreeing to disagree. That's called a cop out.
- Current Mood:
baffled - Current Music:Keaton Henson, "Nests"

Comments
I wish I had some idea, some words, some THING, to show hope that we're progressing, that we as a species are evolving. But it seems that we are doing the opposite.
Thank you, thank you for this.
You're welcome. You can help pick the bullets out later.
But it seems that we are doing the opposite.
Yup.
We can't control how people interpret what we create but we must remember that, whatever they do see in it, it's their own problem. If you try to be too politically correct, too polite and change your art because of that, you're not being sincere. And that would be the worst kind of art to anyone (creator and consumer).
Thanks for reminding me of that.
If you try to be too politically correct, too polite and change your art because of that, you're not being sincere. And that would be the worst kind of art to anyone (creator and consumer).
Generally, yes. For better or worse.
As for the mirror thing, that gets complicated. But, again, in general, yes.
I think the atmosphere you describe is creatively smothering, and breeds fear, and encourages intellectual dishonesty.
Yes. It is intellectually stifling. A generation is willingly accepting that it should be stifled for the Greater Good.
It can be very difficult to argue the point you've made here only because people tend to misinterpret it as an argument against the core impulse
That whole thing about McCarthyism and the "Red Menace": You try to defend yourself, that's an admission of guilt.
I'm a fanfiction writer myself, and lately, I've been terrified to Write Things, due to the influx of hyper-politicization in my various fandoms. I'm even terrified to *talk* online due to people jumping down my throat over perceived "ableism": I once used the word "insane" in a metaphoric way and had someone scream at me for being ableist, since the screamer has mental health issues. I've got a mild to moderate depression problem as well as neurological issues, but I also have the ability to laugh at the wacky things that my health problems can cause; if I didn't laugh at myself sometimes, I'd probably have killed myself by now!
It's especially bad on Tumblr: something about that site causes people to be nerve-fiber trigger in their fury about :: insert demographic:: not being included. I saw someone on there yelling about *underwear models* who weren't visibly disabled or of particular sizes. Eesh!
Edited at 2012-07-08 05:25 pm (UTC)
I once used the word "insane" in a metaphoric way and had someone scream at me for being ableist, since the screamer has mental health issues. I've got a mild to moderate depression problem as well as neurological issues, but I also have the ability to laugh at the wacky things that my health problems can cause; if I didn't laugh at myself sometimes, I'd probably have killed myself by now!
Speaking as someone with relatively severe mental-health issues (I call it "crazy"), I can only say that I'm sorry. But DON'T LET IT STOP YOU. I never would have written The Drowning Girl if I'd been that intimidated by these people.
I saw someone on there yelling about *underwear models* who weren't visibly disabled or of particular sizes. Eesh!
Case in point.
Oh, dog. Maybe there is a term for them after all. Thanks.
You're welcome.
Interestingly, all my friends loved that "X out of X" kids are experimenting with science" post.
You are lucky.
No negatives on that, either. I guess my FB pals are not politically correct.
And therefore EVIL.
I also agree with you about LiveJournal. I really miss the old LJ days. When you say, "It's almost impossible to ever say anything important on Facebook. Oh, and a few have migrated exclusively to Twitter, where it's impossible to ever say anything of consequence," you're absolutely right. I'm on all these "social networks" and they just leave me frustrated, lonely and sad.
I hope things go well at Readercon!
I want to say "Yeah" about Wiscon. But I do have mixed feelings on the subject. I do admire the Tiptree Award.
I also agree with you about LiveJournal. I really miss the old LJ days. When you say, "It's almost impossible to ever say anything important on Facebook. Oh, and a few have migrated exclusively to Twitter, where it's impossible to ever say anything of consequence," you're absolutely right. I'm on all these "social networks" and they just leave me frustrated, lonely and sad.
Yup.
I hope things go well at Readercon!
Thanks!
Edited at 2012-07-08 06:11 pm (UTC)
No, if that happens, I think you totally should.
No, if that happens, I think you totally should.
But isn't that when I'm kicked out of the con, and the con comm does something idiotic, like apologize for me (as I certainly never would)?
It's as if some people don't think enough of the world is aware of the things that might offend others, so they make it their calling to always carry enough outrage to make up for those that lack the proper amount, and to always point it out in an attempt to educate the slackers. "Professional outrage" describes it perfectly.
The fact is that the world is an extremely complicated and messy place, and everyone will always be able to find something that offends them, especially when they're actively looking. It takes no great awareness to be offended. It's not any kind of proof of intelligence whatsoever.
I like Stephen Fry's take on it:
It's now very common to hear people say, "I'm rather offended by that", as if that gives them certain rights. It's no more than a whine. It has no meaning, it has no purpose, it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. "I'm offended by that." Well, so fucking what?
I try to remember to reply that way when someone tells me I'm being offensive, though I admit most of the time I'm only thinking, "Well, so fucking what?" I'd really rather not further engage those types if I can help it. It's exhausting and never gets me anywhere.
as I do about the ones who want trigger warnings on every little possibly ugly thing.
Oh, fuck. Don't get me started on that.
As for privilege, I actually think there's a lot of hypocrisy at play here. These people behave as though they are privileged, even as they condemn it.
It's as if some people don't think enough of the world is aware of the things that might offend others, so they make it their calling to always carry enough outrage to make up for those that lack the proper amount, and to always point it out in an attempt to educate the slackers.
Ergo, they see themselves as heroes.
It's now very common to hear people say, "I'm rather offended by that", as if that gives them certain rights. It's no more than a whine. It has no meaning, it has no purpose, it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. "I'm offended by that." Well, so fucking what?
For the most part, yes.
I do hope it's a fad and the kids will grow out of it.
I do hope it's a fad and the kids will grow out of it.
This is my wish.
I think what bothers me the most is that there's a segment of the population that cannot seem to cut others the benefit of the doubt. The assumption is that everyone is coming from a place of malice, when my experience is that most folks are just oblivious or doing their best to just live their lives as best they can from day to day.
And yeah, I've got nothing too. I just try to remember to do my best to be kind. That's all I think anyone can do.
It does very much seem to be the modern variant of White Man's Burden, though I don't know what the hell you would call it now.
I like the above use of "Oppression Olympics."
I just try to remember to do my best to be kind. That's all I think anyone can do.
To paraphrase Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. But WAIT! He was a white man.
I love your writing and I love your sharpness and acumen too.
We do the best we can. We have a responsibility to be kind to others, yes. But never, ever let these fools stifle your creativity.
You are most welcome.
Problem is, the offended might be so bound up in themselves that they'll miss the REAL cases of prejudice, the things they should be calling idiots out on. That's what worries me.
There's probably a Rule 34 on this. Any opinion, any thought, however mild, will have its rabid opponent somewhere. It's depressing.
I'm pretty fucking sure that's the case.
I promise if I see you in Providence I won't hug you but I will want to.
A friendly hello will suffice.
And thank you.
In case you have not seen it already, here is a variation ("Paleontology Is Dangerous!") that you may enjoy.
Okay. Fucking hilarious. Posting that. Thank you.
You're a homophobe because your gay characters come to bad ends?! Have they looked at the ends of your straight characters? There are few characters in your work who are unscathed. Their sexual orientation is irrelevant.
I fear this attitude. As long as they believe that outrage at anything is the acceptable response, then they are not truly outraged by anyhing, whether they realize that or not. And healthy outrage is a powerful tool. They are abdicating their power to make true positive change for the opportunity to appear...I don't know? "Cool"?
I've encountered this sort of reaction in my oldest son (27), and a few pointed conversations are usually enough to steer him back towards more reasonable and productive ground. But who is steering these fragile unique snowflakes back towards any sort of reason?
I hope that you feel supported enough to say whatever you need to say a ReaderCon, and I wish I could be there to support you while you say it.
They are abdicating their power to make true positive change for the opportunity to appear...I don't know? "Cool"?
In part, yes. Cool. This outrage is fashionable. It is an attempt of moral and intellectual sophistication without any systematic ideology behind it.
I hope that you feel supported enough to say whatever you need to say a ReaderCon
I just hope I survive.
What Would Harlan Do?
Seriously, totally with you here. I do wonder if it's a kind of cultural overcorrection (and, as you say, white guilt). As it is, only a story about a person of indeterminate gender, race, orientation, whatever, doing absolutely nothing would pass muster.
At the same time, isn't the point of art that it isn't for everyone? If you're looking for democracy ... well, don't look most anywhere, but especially don't look to art.
I have a hard time thinking of the last fictional work that actually offended me (as opposed to the kind of offense where you just think it's stupid and wasted your time). I suppose I could find some if I looked -- say, fundie Christian scare fiction about the horrors of homosexuality -- but that would just fall under 'stupid.' (Although I do often find myself fascinated by Jack Chick tracts. Especially the ones drawn by Fred Carter, if only because he comes up with hilariously 'evil' expressions like this. The Jack Chick stuff is what I often point to as an example of being able to appreciate something as art -- even goofy naive art -- even if you're completely opposed to what it's saying.)
Okay. Gonna be laughing about the Chick page for a week.
But yes, and yes, throughout. No, art is not a democracy, which is a point too few of these people grasp.
However it is important and useful to speak out about our own positions on it, if for no other reason than that artists who might be afraid of running afoul of this arguments will be encouraged to write/paint/etc. the art they're inspired by instead of a lowest common denominator aimed at not offending people.
It's good to know you're not alone in moments of sanity like this.
However it is important and useful to speak out about our own positions on it, if for no other reason than that artists who might be afraid of running afoul of this arguments will be encouraged to write/paint/etc. the art they're inspired by instead of a lowest common denominator aimed at not offending people.
You expect conservatives to pressure the arts and produce that sort of oppressive effect, but I think this may be the first time in America that we've seen so much of it from people who consider themselves socially progressive.
It is indeed sad when good intentions are so pathetically twisted.
Yep. It truly is the Age of Irony,
Sometimes art is just art. Yes, there may be -isms behind it. In fact, I can assure you that most art has something like that behind it because it is fucking impossible to not have any prejudices or -isms if you're human. And guess who makes art?
But that doesn't make it ~~totally fucking evil~~. And you can appreciate art while understanding and pointing out the underlying problematic aspects.
(Yes, Virginia, there is a grey area between the extremes of complacency and reinforcing prejudices and sanitizing things to the point where they no longer mean anything.)
But, seriously, until these people either learn to find the middle between outrage and reinforcement of prejudices and -isms or until they produce something that fits their idea of perfection, they totally need to shut the everloving fuck up.
I do think you have a very good point about this being the Homeland Generation, though. I think that this is an extension of having the complete fear of terrorism and anger (which leads to terrorism) emotionally beaten into them. I have a history of being abused (which, in many ways, is terrorism) and have disabling PTSD. And, to me, the Social Justice movement really feels... almost like it's a systematic PTSD reaction in response to 9/11 in some ways.
It's like there's a feeling of "We must please everyone so they don't attack us again!", really. So you point out when people are Fucking Up and Pissing People Off, so that the offending person can crawl over broken glass to beg the forgiveness of whoever would be potentially offended, so that those people won't attack everyone.
I don't know. Just my random thoughts on it all.
Very good. Some stuff here for me to think on.