naamah_darling: The Punisher skull with a red ribbon barrette. (Punisher Ribbon)
I just wanna rant for a minute here.

So, what with the whole kerfuffle about Papa John's and Hostess and, a while back, Chik-Fil-A, there's been a lot of food-related assholery going around. Corporate douchebags doing what they do best: acting like total pricks.

And people justifiably protesting this stuff are becoming part of a different problem: food-shaming. Y'all, I can barely read a Facebook post or a Tumblr reblog or comments to something on LJ that doesn't eventually – or immediately – degenerate into food shaming. Which rapidly degenerates into body shaming.

"OMG that stuff is disgusting/bad for you/why Baby Jesus cried." "You shouldn't eat that crap anyway! You should eat healthier!" "That stuff contains pellets of arsenic/baby brains/cat poop dirt from an old woman's garden!" "Why don't you just cook? It's easier/better/healthier/cheaper/more fun to make your own!" "It makes you fat anyhow. Calories calories fat fat fat OMFG CANCER." "Maybe Americans wouldn't be so fat and unhealthy if they quit eating this stuff anyway. CHILDHOOD OBESITY EPIDEMIC! TAXPAYER MONEY! LARD-RELATED FINANCIAL RUIN!" And so on.

Can we not? Can we just . . . not? Okay? Because people are gonna eat what people are gonna eat, and I don't think that anyone is laboring under the misconception that Twinkies, Ding Dongs, chicken nuggets fried in crack, and that delicious cinnamon dessert pizza is good for us on a nutritional level. I mean, maybe there are some benighted souls who have not yet been exposed to enough health fearmongering that they aren't yet aware that eating anything but fat-free organic produce watered with unicorn tears, fertilized with fairy dust, and picked fresh by virgins bathed daily in the milk of flying white horses will make them fat and then kill them. But odds are, you are not friends with them on Facebook, Livejournal, Tumblr, or anywhere else. Odds are, they cannot read. And frankly, I think we should leave them comfortably languishing in ignorance for as long as possible, because honestly, that fearmongering hateful bullshit is far more harmful than a handful of Little Debbies.

So on a bigger level, just don't give people shit for eating "unhealthy" food.

Food deserts are real. I once lived in a neighborhood where the nearest supermarket with produce was . . . Jesus . . . six, seven miles away? Across a huge highway, through a series of really, really bad neighborhoods. You could not walk there. Bus routes in this city are a joke, and buses stop running at night, so you're fucked anyway if you have a job with weird hours. Not everyone can bike, or hike, especially in the boiling heat or deathly cold, which describes Oklahoma nine months out of the year, or if they have allergies, which is a problem for about the same amount of time. Or if they have small children.

Some stores have horrible food, period. The nearest store to us has a produce section. The stuff I bring home from it sometimes goes bad within hours of coming in the door. I should take a camera down there and just take a picture of the apples, then do the same for the apples at the good store, across the river where the rich people live. Sure, the apples at the "good" place are sometimes second-rate. But the apples at the Poverty Mart a mile away are bruised, dented, mushy, puckered, have slashes in them, are misshapen and often really small, or they are just plain unripe and give me the shits. Sometimes they are unripe AND bruised and mushy. It's fucked. They are certainly not organic -- not that I care, although I've had people hollering down my neck that I should for many years now. But the shitty apples are cheap. So I eat them if that's all we can afford that week. Unless they are unripe. Then I have some cookies. The broccoli at that place sometimes bends almost 90 degrees before it snaps. The carrots are leathery. The lettuce is all iceberg, and it's sweet because it's already going over. Berries? They have 'em, but they are fuckass expensive. I don't know if they're good, I can't afford to try them. Stores in poor areas get horrible produce. Rich people who shop at high-line stores don't realize this, I think, or they don't realize the scope of the problem, but it's true.

Don't start with me on farmer's markets. Don't. It's not happening. Too much walking, too many people, incompatible hours, too much being out of the house, too much of an anxiety disorder.

I realize this is sometimes super-hard for people who love cooking to grok, but some folks hate cooking. I mean, it makes us miserable to do it, actually sad. Some of us can't handle doing it every day. Some of us don't have the fridge space to store adequate fresh food, or frozen pre-made healthy meals. Some of us don't have fridges that work at all. Some of us have no kitchen space to prepare food. Some of us would rather spend time doing other stuff than cooking. Some of us have no time to prepare or plan meals. Or we don't have the mental or emotional energy to do it. Sometimes, on a party day or game day, you don't want to have to cook, because you've got nine other things going on and you're doing them all with one hand.

Some of us don't know how to cook. "It's not hard" doesn't help anyone; unless you are willing to come and teach in person, or offer detailed advice, don't go there. I appreciate that some people like it, and that it's easier than it looks, but I'm not learning before I am ready, period, thanks. And I won't be ready until I am not so fucking tired and batshit crazy that I'll often wait three hours to take my meds in the morning because I am too fucked to get up and get a drink of goddamn water because the cats knocked over the one I leave standing next to my meds basket.

Grow your own? I'd LOVE to have a garden, but that is not happening. I'm sun-sensitive, I have allergies, I don't have the energy for upkeep, let alone getting it started.

Some of us like shitty food. We find it comforting. It's filling. It's satisfying. It's sweet. It's got that slippery mouth-feel from all the fat that people love to scream and shit themselves about. It's crappy in a way that a lot of folks find enjoyable. And those are all legitimate things to like about things like Twinkies and those "chocolate" donuts that taste like candle wax and sweetened paper pulp. Yes, other foods are satisfying and happy-making as well, but, oh, hey, I just got a bulletin from Under A Rock University's Center for the Study of Really Obvious Things:

NOBODY HAS TO FUCKING JUSTIFY OR DEFEND THEIR FOOD CHOICES TO YOU, EVER. It really is that simple.

Some of us don't do our own shopping. Some of us don't have time or energy to argue with the other people in the household about what gets bought. That sounds lazy, like a cop-out, but it's not. When you live a rough life, and you don't have many emotional resources, and you live with people with totally different food tastes than yours, sometimes it's easier – and cheaper – to compromise and get the fucking Little Debbies that you both like, rather than get more expensive stuff for two people.

Some of us genuinely, for-real, put our "health" second, behind our emotional well-being. The fact that people get all het up about physical health, and think that emotional health should come second, is a seriously fucked-up manifestation of ableism, and a seriously fucked-up manifestation of just how deeply we equate "healthy" with "looking fuckable" (i.e. thin). If you start up with that shit to my face, it makes me want to puke Twinkie goo all over your sandals. Food, and how we acquire, prepare, store, and eat it, is actually a huge part of our emotional well-being. As far as I am concerned, my mental health is all I have, because if I lose the delicate balance on that, then I commit suicide, and if I do that, all those petty concerns about trans fats and empty calories and just have a fucking celery stick and some peanut butter go straight out the window. Giving me hack about how/what I eat? Not cool. At all. Because it is basically attacking my coping mechanisms and how I administer emotional care to myself. Do I have to explain, really, how not-okay that is?

As a sub-point of the above, some of us are recovering from ugly food issues. Shut up about us eating Twinkies. There was a time when I was so mentally fucked I would have had a breakdown if you'd made me eat one. The fact that I can eat them without blinking now is a fucking victory, fuck you. They are little golden trophies of I AM NOT STARVING MYSELF ANYMORE. Every bite is a raised middle finger to that skinny cunt inside me who WANTED ME TO KILL MYSELF because I was so fat I deserved it. So, you know, leave off.

And, finally, anyone who resorts to fat-shaming on the topic needs to have their head surgically extracted from their rectal cavity before they asphyxiate.

You may have YOUR reasons for not eating that stuff, and that's actually cool. I'm down with that. But don't you give people shit about THEIR reasons for eating it. You are not them. You do not know their deal. And even if they are a lazy-ass slovenly bastard who is too stupid not to be fat, or whatever dumb-shit thing you are thinking, that is none of your business, either. You can't shame someone out of being unhealthy, unsightly, or just generally not to your liking. Shocking, I know, but it's true. Otherwise, I would be a very different and much less entertaining person. Or I wouldn't exist. I can't quite tell. And pardon me, but I think that not having me in it would actually make the world a worse place. Not by much, maybe, but I do good things for people and animals, I make my friends laugh, I help people find things in the craft store I don't even work at, and I sometimes tell people they look beautiful if it seems unlikely to me that they realize it.

Also, don't fucking let these corporate assholes off the hook. At all. Okay? They are greedy shitheads. We don't need to talk about how shitty the food is, or how bad it is for you. That's shifting the point. We need to focus on their behavior, because they are slime-sucking bastards. It wouldn't make a fucking difference if they were purveying five-star cuisine made of stardust and unicorn butter. They would still be pricks.

So hold them accountable for that. Don't slag off the food choices people make. It's fucking annoying, and missing the point.

Here endeth the lesson.
naamah_darling: Picture of a treasure chest with a skull and crossbones on top. My art! (Artistic)
Long story short, the printer we were using won't take adult material, and we need to find someone else, stat. They charged $5 a book, we currently have a place that runs $12. That's a big kick in the pants, and we would really like to find something better if we can. So if you can help us find a place that can produce a 6x9 trade paperback with 500 pages, we'd be really super-duper grateful. We're anticipating a run of 25 or 30 as a minimum order.

I'll be posting about this again, once people have had a chance to get back online after the weekend, but I wanted to get the ball rolling now.

Long story long, the publisher we were originally going to go with for The Golden Mask apparently does not take adult material. We did not find this out until we were in the actual process of trying to get our book uploaded, whereupon a fucking popup window appeared saying that they don't take erotica -- information, I'll add, that was nowhere else on their site.

They were, unfortunately, a very inexpensive publisher. So now we can't use them, and we're stuck with way higher production costs than anticipated. I'm . . . to say I'm upset about this is to completely ignore the fact that I would like to chew someone's face off.

What we're doing is running another Indiegogo campaign, a short one, to print up copies of Pride and Prostitutes and charge some extra to make up for some of the shortfall. We have a publisher we're looking at that charges about $12 a book -- it's a big book at 500 pages and trade paperback sized.

Obviously, if we could find someone cheaper, we would make up more of the money we basically lost because people are dicks and hate our genre for no logical reason, and lump what we do in with hate speech, material encouraging criminal acts, and materials depicting minors in sexual situations.

We're desperately searching for another publisher who is low-price and who will take explicit adult material.

This is where you come in.

I'd like to enlist your help finding an appropriate publisher. We're combing the net, but we haven't found anyplace with prices as good as the first place, which was around $5 a book for a 500 page 6x9 trade paperback. Right now we're looking at a place that's about $12 a book. Any place we can find that can beat that would be fantastic.

A lot of you have said "anything I can do to help." Well, this would be something you could do that would help a lot. If you have any self-publishing friends, maybe ask where they get their stuff done.

Just FYI, Sargon will be moderating comments on this entry and responding to stuff, since I've delegated this part of it to him.
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Default)
A comment in passing.

Someone in comments elsewhere remarked "I’m sick of [X state]. Why do women even live there if the whole state hates them?"

Because women there are stupid and therefore deserve what they get?

I mean, seriously, what answer does this person expect? Fuck. "Why don't you just leave?" That's basically what they're asking.

I live in Oklahoma because it is incredibly cheap to live here, and because I don't have the money to move away, or the spoons, or the social resources, or the medical support system necessary. There are so many reasons people stay in a state that "hates them." Being able to leave a state that "hates you" is a fucking privilege. Not all of us have it!

Everything that allows me to survive is here. My home, my friends, my doctor, my father. I could theoretically buy or create a support network elsewhere, if I had the money and the emotional and physical energy to do it, not to mention the emotional drain of leaving friends and home, but I have none of those things. I have fifty bucks in the bank, and a mental illness, and most days I am so fucked in the head I can't manage more than an hour or two of concentrated effort at anything. So show me the map to the pirate treasure you expect me to dig up to fund this little venture. Please! And show me the magic spell that will make me not-crazy enough to take advantage of it.

I think the solution is not people moving away from their homes and families and familiar places and things that they love. I think the solution is to fucking fix what is wrong. Call me crazy.

Besides, even if I had the resources, I'm not being chased out of my territory by assholes. If I go, it will be because I found someplace I want to live, not because I don't want to live here.

In short, STFU, whoever you are. I know that was probably flippant, I know you are probably not as much of a jerk as that makes you sound like and you were just trying to be funny, but it stops being funny when you consider, you know, the thousands of people who would love to follow your cute lil' suggestion and can't. We deserve a little more consideration from you than that.

Also, if you're "sick" of my state, fuck off. Just fuck off. I don't care what state it is. Texas, Georgia, North Carolina, Kansas, New York, Alabama. If you have a problem with how shit is run someplace specifically because it is hurting people like you, you have an obligation to support the folks that live there by not, you know, being a fucking asshole.

I live here. I don't have the option of being "sick" of it, of ignoring news about it, of just switching away from what goes on here. Rejecting a bad place as irredeemable, and labeling all the people who live there as stupid hicks who obviously don't care about their rights, is not really helpful to the cause of promoting equality and justice.

It is a nice little dodge for having to give a shit or do anything to help, however.
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Cruel Intentions Asshole Day)
So, this person I've never heard of even though her 'About' section makes her sound really important has decided that NaNoWriMo is a waste of time, and has decided to write about it in a particularly condescending and unpleasant way.

I've done NaNo three times in the past. It's fun, or it's meant to be. It's not meant to be a method by which Great and Significant Works of Art are brought into the world. From what I recall of the original NaNo handbook, there was a lot of emphasis on first-time novelists and people who would never otherwise have written a book giving it a try, and experiencing the joy of having created something that most people never create. The novel-in-a-month thing gives it a skydiving-like rush. It's crazy, which is part of its appeal.

A lot of crap gets written during NaNo. No disputing that. Hell, my NaNo novels will probably never see the light of day, and it's probably for the best that way. And I agree with her that mentioning that the novel that you have just submitted to an agent or publisher was your NaNo novel is probably not the best way to inspire confidence.

But she seems to have somehow come to the fucked-up and incorrect conclusion that the novel-writing of NaNo comes at the expense of novel reading. I believe her when she talks about how an acquaintance of hers has met people who want to write but do not read. I've met those people myself. I agree with her when she says that we should celebrate readers, though I am not sure readers are the dying breed she makes them out to be.

But overwhelmingly, the NaNo writers I know are readers. Overwhelmingly. There is no evidence, none, that NaNo is turning readers away from reading and making them into bad writers. She talks about taking up reading challenges in place of NaNo. I've done the 50 Book Challenge. I think it's fantastic.

Can she explain why reading and writing cannot coexist? Can she reasonably assert that they don't already?

As long as we're relying on anecdata for our authority, I've met a lot of professional writers who admit that they don't read. They focus on their writing. Yet here she is, scowling because when bad, unpublished writers do this, it's a waste of time they could be spending doing something she considers more valuable.

When this woman complains about NaNo, what she is really complaining about is bad writers; both amateur writers who write bad fiction and amateur writers who have bad manners. As an Important Publishing Person, she doesn't want to be bothered with these idiots. According to her, all the support should go to readers, whose job is to support "real" writers. I see her point, but picking on NaNo is petty and pointless. She cites the statistic that 21,683 people officially finished NaNo last year. In the grand scheme of things, stacked against the slushpile of shit that is already out there, being shipped to publishers unsolicited and by the ton, do 21,683 manuscripts really matter all that much? And the failed NaNo-ers, who according to her do not read? Are they really some terrible blight upon the publishing world, driving sales down?

Or could it be one or both of these facts:

1) Most people just don't value reading, and this is something that begins long before anyone ever considers whether they want to write or not.

2) People write and submit shitty fiction -- so much of it, in fact, that the amount produced by NaNo writers is hardly a drop in the bucket, and they will continue to do so even when NaNo dies.

Yes, I do occasionally find the NaNo push, the hype, to be tiresome. But people talked to me about their ideas and tried to get me to read their work before NaNo became a Thing. All NaNo seems to have done on that front is concentrate it in November and the months immediately after, and make it slightly more likely that the writer will admit that what they wrote was, in fact, crap, both of which are GOOD side-effects. More of my friends have written books because of it. I haven't read even the tenth part of these, and don't want to, but they are happy, and that makes me happy. I was not litter-trained to piss in other folks' Cheerios.

This woman misses the point of NaNo completely. She herself says she doesn't write novels. How the crap is she qualified to judge it, then? Does she understand what NaNo is really about? What it offers? Why it has become so popular? Does she know any participants? Has she spoken to even one participant in-depth about what they got out of it?

My take on it has always been that writing a book, telling a story, expressing yourself, is a good thing, whether the manner in which you do it has artistic value or not. And I was also taught that the creative impulse is not something reserved for the rarefied elite, something that should only be indulged by the beautiful people of the creative world. Scoffing at the fact that incompetent people feel the urge to write is like lamenting the fact that ugly people have sex. As long as nobody is making you look, you really have no right to be upset by the idea that this is going on. It's not about you.

The feeling of creating something is powerful. Everyone should get a chance to feel that, if they want it.

I'm not saying that all creative output is of equal worth. It's not. I am just saying that everyone should get a chance to feel that, if they want to, and that they shouldn't be told they should be ashamed because they aren't good at it. We dance and fuck and sing in the car because those things feel good, not because those are acts of mighty consequence. For most of us, they aren't. We seek joy. If this woman thinks that doing something that makes you feel extraordinary and happy and satisfied is a waste of time unless it meets her standards of value, well, that doesn't reflect very well on her, does it?

And if she wants to point the finger at "self-aggrandizing," she's looking in the wrong place. Very little is as self-aggrandizing as the professional publishing world, with its snotty insistence that there is a right and wrong way to write, a right and wrong reason to write, a right and wrong way to be published, with its constant sneering at genre work, with the genuinely fucked-up manner in which things like reprints and sequels and royalties and so forth are negotiated.

And for all that she lauds readers, who by definition require someone else to produce what they read, she doesn't seem to have much respect for writers in general:

So I'm not worried about all the books that won't get written if a hundred thousand people with a nagging but unfulfilled ambition to Be a Writer lack the necessary motivation to get the job done. I see no reason to cheer them on. Writers are, in fact, hellishly persistent; they will go on writing despite overwhelming evidence of public indifference and (in many cases) of their own lack of ability or anything especially interesting to say. Writers have a reputation for being tormented by their lot, probably because they're always moaning so loudly about how hard it is, but it's the readers who are fragile, a truly endangered species. They don't make a big stink about how underappreciated they are; like Tinkerbell or any other disbelieved-in fairy, they just fade away.


I don't even know where to begin describing what is wrong with this. It drips with condescension. The whole essay does, in fact. It's like she has no generosity left in her at all for people doing something that is perhaps annoying but, ultimately, doesn't actually affect her life at all.

It's just stupid.

Lady, if you don't like NaNo, fine, but don't be an asshole about it and blame shit on NaNo and NaNo-ers that are more properly the fault of our jacked-up culture. NaNo is a crappy bogeyman, and it's really kind of pathetic that you'd need one in the first place.
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Cruel Intentions Asshole Day)
So, this person I've never heard of even though her 'About' section makes her sound really important has decided that NaNoWriMo is a waste of time, and has decided to write about it in a particularly condescending and unpleasant way.

I've done NaNo three times in the past. It's fun, or it's meant to be. It's not meant to be a method by which Great and Significant Works of Art are brought into the world. From what I recall of the original NaNo handbook, there was a lot of emphasis on first-time novelists and people who would never otherwise have written a book giving it a try, and experiencing the joy of having created something that most people never create. The novel-in-a-month thing gives it a skydiving-like rush. It's crazy, which is part of its appeal.

A lot of crap gets written during NaNo. No disputing that. Hell, my NaNo novels will probably never see the light of day, and it's probably for the best that way. And I agree with her that mentioning that the novel that you have just submitted to an agent or publisher was your NaNo novel is probably not the best way to inspire confidence.

But she seems to have somehow come to the fucked-up and incorrect conclusion that the novel-writing of NaNo comes at the expense of novel reading. I believe her when she talks about how an acquaintance of hers has met people who want to write but do not read. I've met those people myself. I agree with her when she says that we should celebrate readers, though I am not sure readers are the dying breed she makes them out to be.

But overwhelmingly, the NaNo writers I know are readers. Overwhelmingly. There is no evidence, none, that NaNo is turning readers away from reading and making them into bad writers. She talks about taking up reading challenges in place of NaNo. I've done the 50 Book Challenge. I think it's fantastic.

Can she explain why reading and writing cannot coexist? Can she reasonably assert that they don't already?

As long as we're relying on anecdata for our authority, I've met a lot of professional writers who admit that they don't read. They focus on their writing. Yet here she is, scowling because when bad, unpublished writers do this, it's a waste of time they could be spending doing something she considers more valuable.

When this woman complains about NaNo, what she is really complaining about is bad writers; both amateur writers who write bad fiction and amateur writers who have bad manners. As an Important Publishing Person, she doesn't want to be bothered with these idiots. According to her, all the support should go to readers, whose job is to support "real" writers. I see her point, but picking on NaNo is petty and pointless. She cites the statistic that 21,683 people officially finished NaNo last year. In the grand scheme of things, stacked against the slushpile of shit that is already out there, being shipped to publishers unsolicited and by the ton, do 21,683 manuscripts really matter all that much? And the failed NaNo-ers, who according to her do not read? Are they really some terrible blight upon the publishing world, driving sales down?

Or could it be one or both of these facts:

1) Most people just don't value reading, and this is something that begins long before anyone ever considers whether they want to write or not.

2) People write and submit shitty fiction -- so much of it, in fact, that the amount produced by NaNo writers is hardly a drop in the bucket, and they will continue to do so even when NaNo dies.

Yes, I do occasionally find the NaNo push, the hype, to be tiresome. But people talked to me about their ideas and tried to get me to read their work before NaNo became a Thing. All NaNo seems to have done on that front is concentrate it in November and the months immediately after, and make it slightly more likely that the writer will admit that what they wrote was, in fact, crap, both of which are GOOD side-effects. More of my friends have written books because of it. I haven't read even the tenth part of these, and don't want to, but they are happy, and that makes me happy. I was not litter-trained to piss in other folks' Cheerios.

This woman misses the point of NaNo completely. She herself says she doesn't write novels. How the crap is she qualified to judge it, then? Does she understand what NaNo is really about? What it offers? Why it has become so popular? Does she know any participants? Has she spoken to even one participant in-depth about what they got out of it?

My take on it has always been that writing a book, telling a story, expressing yourself, is a good thing, whether the manner in which you do it has artistic value or not. And I was also taught that the creative impulse is not something reserved for the rarefied elite, something that should only be indulged by the beautiful people of the creative world. Scoffing at the fact that incompetent people feel the urge to write is like lamenting the fact that ugly people have sex. As long as nobody is making you look, you really have no right to be upset by the idea that this is going on. It's not about you.

The feeling of creating something is powerful. Everyone should get a chance to feel that, if they want it.

I'm not saying that all creative output is of equal worth. It's not. I am just saying that everyone should get a chance to feel that, if they want to, and that they shouldn't be told they should be ashamed because they aren't good at it. We dance and fuck and sing in the car because those things feel good, not because those are acts of mighty consequence. For most of us, they aren't. We seek joy. If this woman thinks that doing something that makes you feel extraordinary and happy and satisfied is a waste of time unless it meets her standards of value, well, that doesn't reflect very well on her, does it?

And if she wants to point the finger at "self-aggrandizing," she's looking in the wrong place. Very little is as self-aggrandizing as the professional publishing world, with its snotty insistence that there is a right and wrong way to write, a right and wrong reason to write, a right and wrong way to be published, with its constant sneering at genre work, with the genuinely fucked-up manner in which things like reprints and sequels and royalties and so forth are negotiated.

And for all that she lauds readers, who by definition require someone else to produce what they read, she doesn't seem to have much respect for writers in general:

So I'm not worried about all the books that won't get written if a hundred thousand people with a nagging but unfulfilled ambition to Be a Writer lack the necessary motivation to get the job done. I see no reason to cheer them on. Writers are, in fact, hellishly persistent; they will go on writing despite overwhelming evidence of public indifference and (in many cases) of their own lack of ability or anything especially interesting to say. Writers have a reputation for being tormented by their lot, probably because they're always moaning so loudly about how hard it is, but it's the readers who are fragile, a truly endangered species. They don't make a big stink about how underappreciated they are; like Tinkerbell or any other disbelieved-in fairy, they just fade away.


I don't even know where to begin describing what is wrong with this. It drips with condescension. The whole essay does, in fact. It's like she has no generosity left in her at all for people doing something that is perhaps annoying but, ultimately, doesn't actually affect her life at all.

It's just stupid.

Lady, if you don't like NaNo, fine, but don't be an asshole about it and blame shit on NaNo and NaNo-ers that are more properly the fault of our jacked-up culture. NaNo is a crappy bogeyman, and it's really kind of pathetic that you'd need one in the first place.
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Douche)
Christopher Gregorio, small-time Flash game developer and underaged douchebag, has revealed the secret to achieving a profitable working relationship with artists:

Take advantage of them.

My message to this kid: If this lapse of judgment damages your reputation and hits you in the wallet -- and I hope it does -- you have only yourself to blame. Don't expect a lot of sympathy. I realize you're, like, a high schooler, but you made $45k last year. You can afford to show some fucking class.

A list of his games, which appear on a number of sites:

Penguin Massacre
Medieval Rampage
Medieval Rampage 2
Gravity Mouse
Between the Lines
Road Rage
Cell Warfare
Mech Slayer
Blob Survival
Icy Evade
Smiley Collapse

And, just in case he decides to pull the entry, here are relevant quotes:

How to find an artist:

I recommend looking through art sites such as Deviantart for an artist which suits your taste, or any other site that has a decent art community such as Newgrounds. . . . First of all, they’re cheaper. These guys aren’t used to making a lot of money for their work so they will be more appreciative of the chance even if they are being payed slightly less than what professionals are payed. Second of all, they’re better. . . . Unless you have a specific price you want to pay in mind, ask THEM what they are willing to charge for the project. This usually causes people to give offers that are lower than what you normally pay, and will make them happy.

How NOT to find an artist:

Do not look for either professional artists, or an artist that has done a lot of game design work in the past . . . they’re usually expensive . . . they know how much flash games can earn so they expect a decent percentage of the profit. It’s ridiculous to pay something 50% of a sponsorship when you can find someone else who would accept $500 for the same job.

Artist payment:

Keep them in the dark:

This relates back to what I talked about earlier. If an artist knows how much their artwork will increase the value of the game they will then feel they deserve that amount of money. This is not how a market economy works, you hire whoever is able to do the best job for the lowest amount of money, anything else is a loss of money on your end.

Timelines:

Give strict dates about when you need the art done (even if you don’t) and give consequences by deduction in pay if the art is not completed by the date. Unless the person you’ve hired happens to be very punctual, you will need strong motivation to make sure they finish the art in a timely manner. Try to only hire people ages 18+ (I may sound a little hypocritical here), kids are generally less reliable and have more IRL things come up that they can’t control.
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Douche)
Christopher Gregorio, small-time Flash game developer and underaged douchebag, has revealed the secret to achieving a profitable working relationship with artists:

Take advantage of them.

My message to this kid: If this lapse of judgment damages your reputation and hits you in the wallet -- and I hope it does -- you have only yourself to blame. Don't expect a lot of sympathy. I realize you're, like, a high schooler, but you made $45k last year. You can afford to show some fucking class.

A list of his games, which appear on a number of sites:

Penguin Massacre
Medieval Rampage
Medieval Rampage 2
Gravity Mouse
Between the Lines
Road Rage
Cell Warfare
Mech Slayer
Blob Survival
Icy Evade
Smiley Collapse

And, just in case he decides to pull the entry, here are relevant quotes:

How to find an artist:

I recommend looking through art sites such as Deviantart for an artist which suits your taste, or any other site that has a decent art community such as Newgrounds. . . . First of all, they’re cheaper. These guys aren’t used to making a lot of money for their work so they will be more appreciative of the chance even if they are being payed slightly less than what professionals are payed. Second of all, they’re better. . . . Unless you have a specific price you want to pay in mind, ask THEM what they are willing to charge for the project. This usually causes people to give offers that are lower than what you normally pay, and will make them happy.

How NOT to find an artist:

Do not look for either professional artists, or an artist that has done a lot of game design work in the past . . . they’re usually expensive . . . they know how much flash games can earn so they expect a decent percentage of the profit. It’s ridiculous to pay something 50% of a sponsorship when you can find someone else who would accept $500 for the same job.

Artist payment:

Keep them in the dark:

This relates back to what I talked about earlier. If an artist knows how much their artwork will increase the value of the game they will then feel they deserve that amount of money. This is not how a market economy works, you hire whoever is able to do the best job for the lowest amount of money, anything else is a loss of money on your end.

Timelines:

Give strict dates about when you need the art done (even if you don’t) and give consequences by deduction in pay if the art is not completed by the date. Unless the person you’ve hired happens to be very punctual, you will need strong motivation to make sure they finish the art in a timely manner. Try to only hire people ages 18+ (I may sound a little hypocritical here), kids are generally less reliable and have more IRL things come up that they can’t control.
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Warning: Death Ray)
An Indiana hospital ridicules Erin Vaught and refuses her treatment after she came to the emergency room coughing up blood. Why? Because she is a transgendered woman.

She was kept waiting for treatment for two hours, ridiculed by staff, called "he-she" and "it," ignored, and eventually refused treatment altogether because of "the transvestite thing." All in front of her wife and son, both of whom must have been horribly worried about her.

No, I did not make a typo. These are medical professionals so ill-educated they do not know the difference between "transgendered" and "transvestite," and are such fucking assholes they do not care.

I want to point out that this was not a failure of one person. It was multiple people. In essence, yes, the hospital as a whole.

Ms Vaught is receiving treatment at another hospital thanks to an advocacy group. Thankfully, there was time to arrange that. What would have happened if she had been in critical condition? Would these people have turned her out to die? Yes, I actually think they would have.

For fuck's sake. These people should not be allowed to change birdcage liners, much less provide care to human beings. They should all be fired and hopefully never hired for a position requiring contact with the public ever again.

Send Ball Memorial Hospital a message demanding accountability via petition.

Ball Memorial's Facebook page. Click "like" and leave them a comment telling them how disgusting they are.
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Warning: Death Ray)
An Indiana hospital ridicules Erin Vaught and refuses her treatment after she came to the emergency room coughing up blood. Why? Because she is a transgendered woman.

She was kept waiting for treatment for two hours, ridiculed by staff, called "he-she" and "it," ignored, and eventually refused treatment altogether because of "the transvestite thing." All in front of her wife and son, both of whom must have been horribly worried about her.

No, I did not make a typo. These are medical professionals so ill-educated they do not know the difference between "transgendered" and "transvestite," and are such fucking assholes they do not care.

I want to point out that this was not a failure of one person. It was multiple people. In essence, yes, the hospital as a whole.

Ms Vaught is receiving treatment at another hospital thanks to an advocacy group. Thankfully, there was time to arrange that. What would have happened if she had been in critical condition? Would these people have turned her out to die? Yes, I actually think they would have.

For fuck's sake. These people should not be allowed to change birdcage liners, much less provide care to human beings. They should all be fired and hopefully never hired for a position requiring contact with the public ever again.

Send Ball Memorial Hospital a message demanding accountability via petition.

Ball Memorial's Facebook page. Click "like" and leave them a comment telling them how disgusting they are.
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Default)
In other news, I received a not-entirely-unexpected kick to the groin that is my life. I've now been turned down for insurance twice, meaning that very soon I will not have insurance.

I can't explain the situation fully. It's all acronyms and if/thens and deductibles and bullshit and so forth. I don't understand it at all, which makes me feel exceedingly stupid -- also helpless -- but Sargon has been working on it, and it's just not coming together in a way that we can afford.

I thought that if we paid for the COBRA coverage we wouldn't have these problems. Apparently there's a way out of that for the insurance shitheads, because they've denied me based on my preexisting conditions. I'm eligible for "high risk" insurance, which is more expensive than not having it at all.

Being denied coverage because of my thyroid condition and my mental health issues sucks. I did nothing to cause or deserve these things (and even if I had, that's not their fucking business to determine). I manage this shit very well with comparatively little intervention. It makes me angry, it makes me sick, it makes me sad, and I wish to god it didn't make me feel like pond slime, but it does because some part of me believes that if I had just sucked it the fuck up and held on, that I would never have been diagnosed and could not now be denied because I am a human being with the temerity to not have perfect mental health.

AND GUESS WHAT IS NOT HELPING MY MENTAL STATE? YOU SHITPICKING INSURANCE FUCKNECKS, THAT'S WHAT. Thanks a lot, you soulless piss-gargling anal sores. Go suck horse cock-sized shit popsicles in hell. And may the wind from Satan's colon boil your eyes in their sockets and strip the flesh from your bones for a thousand thousand years. Amen.

Sargon, because he doesn't have any chronic health problems and thus theoretically won't actually need the insurance, is insurable.

I love their logic. And by "love," I mean I would like to break all their bones, force-feed them bees, blood-puke, and maggot cheese, drown them in chilled menstrual blood, and then serve them to a pit full of angry wild pigs. Like revolting human ortolans. It would at least be a use for them. If all the insurance world had but a single throat. . . .

I know that many of you, and I suspect the majority, have gone through something similar, probably worse, so I don't need to go into further detail about it. It's just shitty. And it makes me feel shitty. Like I am not worth taking care of. I have nowhere to focus my anger, so it goes inward. I hate this.

Doctors have been fucking me over for 15+ years. I suppose it's not surprising that insurance assholes would get in on that action at some point.

I'm so tired of hearing about shit like this happening to other people, even more than I am pissed at it happening to me. It's so fucking stupid and so fucking unfair. Evil. Actually evil.

I guess the next step is to try to get myself on disability. I won't even go into the enormously complex shitpile of feelings I have about that.
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Default)
In other news, I received a not-entirely-unexpected kick to the groin that is my life. I've now been turned down for insurance twice, meaning that very soon I will not have insurance.

I can't explain the situation fully. It's all acronyms and if/thens and deductibles and bullshit and so forth. I don't understand it at all, which makes me feel exceedingly stupid -- also helpless -- but Sargon has been working on it, and it's just not coming together in a way that we can afford.

I thought that if we paid for the COBRA coverage we wouldn't have these problems. Apparently there's a way out of that for the insurance shitheads, because they've denied me based on my preexisting conditions. I'm eligible for "high risk" insurance, which is more expensive than not having it at all.

Being denied coverage because of my thyroid condition and my mental health issues sucks. I did nothing to cause or deserve these things (and even if I had, that's not their fucking business to determine). I manage this shit very well with comparatively little intervention. It makes me angry, it makes me sick, it makes me sad, and I wish to god it didn't make me feel like pond slime, but it does because some part of me believes that if I had just sucked it the fuck up and held on, that I would never have been diagnosed and could not now be denied because I am a human being with the temerity to not have perfect mental health.

AND GUESS WHAT IS NOT HELPING MY MENTAL STATE? YOU SHITPICKING INSURANCE FUCKNECKS, THAT'S WHAT. Thanks a lot, you soulless piss-gargling anal sores. Go suck horse cock-sized shit popsicles in hell. And may the wind from Satan's colon boil your eyes in their sockets and strip the flesh from your bones for a thousand thousand years. Amen.

Sargon, because he doesn't have any chronic health problems and thus theoretically won't actually need the insurance, is insurable.

I love their logic. And by "love," I mean I would like to break all their bones, force-feed them bees, blood-puke, and maggot cheese, drown them in chilled menstrual blood, and then serve them to a pit full of angry wild pigs. Like revolting human ortolans. It would at least be a use for them. If all the insurance world had but a single throat. . . .

I know that many of you, and I suspect the majority, have gone through something similar, probably worse, so I don't need to go into further detail about it. It's just shitty. And it makes me feel shitty. Like I am not worth taking care of. I have nowhere to focus my anger, so it goes inward. I hate this.

Doctors have been fucking me over for 15+ years. I suppose it's not surprising that insurance assholes would get in on that action at some point.

I'm so tired of hearing about shit like this happening to other people, even more than I am pissed at it happening to me. It's so fucking stupid and so fucking unfair. Evil. Actually evil.

I guess the next step is to try to get myself on disability. I won't even go into the enormously complex shitpile of feelings I have about that.
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Horatio Stupid)
If you all would take just a moment to go and read this entry over on Dreamwidth and then go to Livejournal feedback to tell them what you think, I'd be grateful. Be polite, but firm.

Short version, upcoming LJ code update will make specifying a gender mandatory, and it will force transgender/genderqueer/gender-fluid users to choose between "male" and "female." Current settings allow "unspecified," which is what I've changed mine to, for whatever effect that will have.

I find this shitty for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the likely reason for it: advertising. But mostly, goddamn, I just hate explaining that gender's not a binary. For fuck's sake.

Spread the word, as the code update is probably going up later this week.

(Also? I'm not doing Gender 101 in the comments here, because the legitimacy of any given person's identity is simply not a matter for debate, period.)

ETA: Received this:

Thank you for taking the time to contact us with your concerns. We understand that gender is not binary, and intend to respect that understanding for our users.

At this time, the code you reference is not live on the site, and will not become so in the future. We know that you, and many other users, have serious concerns about any requirement to specify gender, so we'd like to take a moment to explain events and our position further.

The intention of this code was to change the sign-up process to include a field for the selection of gender; that the code would completely disable the "Unspecified" option at the same time was deemed unacceptable. While the code in question had gone to our beta (testing) server, it had not gone to our production server, and will not do so due to this problem. Furthermore, we'd like to clarify that code posted to the changelog community is not always final, as such code must then go through the beta testing process and can often be changed before actual implementation.

Additionally, some erroneous information has been spread regarding the potential public display of the gender field. We would like to clarify that gender is not currently publicly displayed on the profile, nor anywhere else on the site, and there are no plans to change this behavior.

Regards,
LiveJournal Community Care Team


Hopefully that's the truth and not a backpedal. It IS the fastest actual response to a fail issue I have ever seen from Livejournal. So good for them.
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Horatio Stupid)
If you all would take just a moment to go and read this entry over on Dreamwidth and then go to Livejournal feedback to tell them what you think, I'd be grateful. Be polite, but firm.

Short version, upcoming LJ code update will make specifying a gender mandatory, and it will force transgender/genderqueer/gender-fluid users to choose between "male" and "female." Current settings allow "unspecified," which is what I've changed mine to, for whatever effect that will have.

I find this shitty for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the likely reason for it: advertising. But mostly, goddamn, I just hate explaining that gender's not a binary. For fuck's sake.

Spread the word, as the code update is probably going up later this week.

(Also? I'm not doing Gender 101 in the comments here, because the legitimacy of any given person's identity is simply not a matter for debate, period.)

ETA: Received this:

Thank you for taking the time to contact us with your concerns. We understand that gender is not binary, and intend to respect that understanding for our users.

At this time, the code you reference is not live on the site, and will not become so in the future. We know that you, and many other users, have serious concerns about any requirement to specify gender, so we'd like to take a moment to explain events and our position further.

The intention of this code was to change the sign-up process to include a field for the selection of gender; that the code would completely disable the "Unspecified" option at the same time was deemed unacceptable. While the code in question had gone to our beta (testing) server, it had not gone to our production server, and will not do so due to this problem. Furthermore, we'd like to clarify that code posted to the changelog community is not always final, as such code must then go through the beta testing process and can often be changed before actual implementation.

Additionally, some erroneous information has been spread regarding the potential public display of the gender field. We would like to clarify that gender is not currently publicly displayed on the profile, nor anywhere else on the site, and there are no plans to change this behavior.

Regards,
LiveJournal Community Care Team


Hopefully that's the truth and not a backpedal. It IS the fastest actual response to a fail issue I have ever seen from Livejournal. So good for them.
naamah_darling: Lucian from Underworld next to a snarling wolf. From the dark into the black, throwbacks always have to go. (Lucian Throwbacks)
Rape is a "pre-existing condition." Enjoy maybe getting AIDS.

Sometimes I want to resign from the human race just for the pleasure of saying "I have nothing in common with you shitfuckers. I hope you die in agony. Alone. Except for those 3d6 priapic wild pigs."

You can claim that those mule-felching piles of assvomit are not human all you like and that won't make it true. They are human, and that is the most disgusting part of this. You can't just stand up, point, and say in outrage: "Get away from me you pile of shit! I am chocolate!" They are human, you are human, we are all human. You share that with them, whether you like it or not.

As humanity is not something you have to earn, the label isn't reserved only for the best of us. That's part of the point that women and people of color and people with disabilities or mental illnesses and fat people and queer people are always trying to make. That you can't bestow or deny humanity, that we have that without asking, and that it cannot be taken away. So I can't say they aren't human, even though they obviously lack the constellation of traits (decency, charity, compassion) that we have come to call "humanity."

Why we call it "humanity" when most of our species is by that definition inhumane in the extreme is quite beyond me.

If I really were a werewolf, instead of a crazy person with a damn good metaphor, I would be taking great comfort in my inhumanity right about now.
naamah_darling: Lucian from Underworld next to a snarling wolf. From the dark into the black, throwbacks always have to go. (Lucian Throwbacks)
Rape is a "pre-existing condition." Enjoy maybe getting AIDS.

Sometimes I want to resign from the human race just for the pleasure of saying "I have nothing in common with you shitfuckers. I hope you die in agony. Alone. Except for those 3d6 priapic wild pigs."

You can claim that those mule-felching piles of assvomit are not human all you like and that won't make it true. They are human, and that is the most disgusting part of this. You can't just stand up, point, and say in outrage: "Get away from me you pile of shit! I am chocolate!" They are human, you are human, we are all human. You share that with them, whether you like it or not.

As humanity is not something you have to earn, the label isn't reserved only for the best of us. That's part of the point that women and people of color and people with disabilities or mental illnesses and fat people and queer people are always trying to make. That you can't bestow or deny humanity, that we have that without asking, and that it cannot be taken away. So I can't say they aren't human, even though they obviously lack the constellation of traits (decency, charity, compassion) that we have come to call "humanity."

Why we call it "humanity" when most of our species is by that definition inhumane in the extreme is quite beyond me.

If I really were a werewolf, instead of a crazy person with a damn good metaphor, I would be taking great comfort in my inhumanity right about now.
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Alpha Female)
The Sodomite Hal Duncan has a wonderful letter to share with you all this fine Friday afternoon.

My own letter is below.

To Mr. Wright,

Two things, before I begin.

First, if people have attacked you for your religious views, I don't approve of that. I am an atheist, not an anti-theist. As easy as it is to take pot shots, I cannot insult you for your beliefs without also insulting people I love.

Second, I had not heard about the incident with your wife until after discovering your entry. Going into what I think of that issue would not be appropriate here; I merely wished to point out that I'm not part of the mob that descended on her, lest you believe that everyone who took you to task is simply nursing a grudge from that whole affair. That's all I have to say on the matter.

Moving on, I was not the only person to link to that entry, but I concede I was one of the first, and my readership, for reasons I have never quite understood, is wide. I never would have called out your appalling remarks had you not been a published author whose books I have purchased in hardcover, and as gifts for others. You aren't a random dipshit on the internet yodeling into the vacuum of his own ass. You are a published writer in a field I love, and thus you are a person of whom I had stupidly assumed better. As someone who does not apply her money or loyalty to those who believe that I or my loved ones are perverted or defective, I felt betrayed.

If gay and gay-friendly folks choose to support you despite your views, that is their choice, but I believe they deserve to make an informed choice. That's why I pointed them your way. The fact that I pointed 1,500 people your way while saying "fuck" a lot is just how I do things. Because if we don't laugh and make fun of people who use ridiculous arguments to deny the validity of our relationships and the humanity of our brilliant, brief lives, well, that would just be too depressing.

It is unfortunate that the people who came to comment on your journal were angry, and not up to your desired level of discourse. I asked them not to troll, and apparently I misjudged their restraint. That was an error on my part. I didn't rile them, though. You did that on your own. Your words were offensive. Your words were hurtful. When a person says offensive, hurtful things, those who hear will lash out. When compared to pedophiles and necrophiliacs, they will come in mobs and be downright cruel. This is not the most wonderful facet of human nature, but nor is it proof that you were right all along or that everyone who disagrees with you is an illogical maniac with no internal censor. When those people bitchslapped you for being offensive, that was proof that what you said was offensive. Your own words condemned you, and as many of us have taken screenshots of the original entry, they will continue to do so.

The fact that you were mobbed -- "trolled" does not apply to most of the comments, most of which were expressing genuine disgust and displeasure, and were not being made, as they say, for the lulz -- does not free you from the offense you gave. When you say something offensive and are called on it, even if the people you have offended are rude to you, you take responsibility for the harm you caused, you apologize, and then you listen to how you can do better. You turn the other cheek, not so you can show people how smooth and righteous it is, but to show that you are willing to listen, to put the hurt done to you behind you. You swallow your pride and you listen. Which, you know, I would have done, save that there was nothing to learn from your words. It was just more of the same fearmongering fags-as-monsters bullshit.

I'm not under the illusion you were just misunderstood, or your words taken out of context. You clearly hate and fear homosexuality, even if you probably wouldn't say you hate homosexual individuals (we'll leave the stupidity of that alone for now, and the matter of your own hypocrisy re: perversions). Love the sinner, hate the sin, blah blah blah. But you have been complaining about how rude and nasty and profane people have been. You've been using others' entirely justifiable anger to dismiss what they are saying, because you don't like how they say it. The tone argument. They aren't being respectful enough of you while you insult them. Your journal, you don't have to put up with people swearing at you or mobbing you, but it makes you look like an asshole to venomously insult a group of people that includes many of your fans and their loved ones, and then get all butthurt when they let you have both barrels in return. If nothing else, this should serve as a lesson to just how many of us there are, and that we are listening.

After comparing homosexuality to a litany of completely repellent nonconsensual crimes, you have no real grounds on which to complain about what anyone said to you. True, they said it in a great, rage-filled mass, but I will point out that each of those individuals felt personally wounded, personally hurt enough to comment and tell you exactly what they thought of your reprehensible screed. For them, your characterization of homosexuality as akin to bestiality, necrophilia, pedophilia, was not some abstract thing. You were talking about them, about people they know. Many -- self included -- actually held back or didn't comment at all. You're entitled to your opinion, hate-filled and foolish as it may be. Many might have engaged you in debate except for the fact that it was -- and is -- clear that your mind is tightly made up, the justifications you use for not listening so perfectly constructed as to allow no argument to penetrate.

Would you argue if you saw a published author whose works you own making ridiculous and stupid statements about Catholics? Called you lot baby-eaters, claimed that you engaged in incestuous orgies in secret temples, had congress with animals, and offered up the corpses of virgins for the carnal delights of your depraved priesthood? Would you engage such blatant stupidity in rational debate?

Adults do not answer the petty name-calling of a schoolyard bully with elaborate explanations of why we are not stinky dirty poopy-heads. That would be dignifying it with a response, which it does not deserve. You aren't a child, though. You are in a prominent position, and gay people and their friends pay to read your work, so we can't just ignore what you think of us or let it pass.

Protesting that you didn't mean your offensive words to reach so wide an audience is such foolishness I can't respond beyond pointing out your age. Few people actually mean to make enormous fools of themselves. They figure nobody's paying attention. But you are a published author on the internet, accessible to all of fandom. Your words can never be assumed to reach a small audience, and you aren't talking about abstracts solely to people who agree with you. You are insulting real people who are or who love someone who is gay. To those people, being anti-gay makes you look stupid no matter your reasoning. Defending or advancing that stance with blatant nonsense only means they will be more inclined to tell you to drop dead while throat-fucking a rabid weasel than actually try to educate you (which is not our duty, I might add, but yours) or debate with you.

If you want to argue the point, shore up your logic and start dealing with facts, stop regurgitating the same garbage. It's the internet. It's all computers. The rule of 5150, shit in, shit out, applies here. If you spout ignorant, hateful bullshit, you will get hateful bullshit in return.

I am posting this with comments disabled. This is not cowardice. I have no real desire to invite you to converse here, where such views as yours are not welcome, but I also have no real desire to allow the carnival of wank to continue in comments on my journal. That would simply make more work for me without putting people's scorn in front of you. If people want to register their displeasure with you, they can go to your journal to do it. If they wish to register their displeasure with me, there are many other entries where they can do so. I thought I would let this stand alone, a letter to you, in case you cared to read it.

I'm not holding my breath, but I hope that you will find some people to debate with you and perhaps help educate you. I hope that you will change your views. I personally suspect the damage has been done, and I know I won't ever have anything to do with you or your work again. I regret I ever did.

I am a generous woman, or try to be. I would wish you well, but I find the most I can wish you is wisdom, and a clearer vision. Those are not, as anyone who lives in interesting times will tell you, always pleasant things.

tiny permalink
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Alpha Female)
The Sodomite Hal Duncan has a wonderful letter to share with you all this fine Friday afternoon.

My own letter is below.

To Mr. Wright,

Two things, before I begin.

First, if people have attacked you for your religious views, I don't approve of that. I am an atheist, not an anti-theist. As easy as it is to take pot shots, I cannot insult you for your beliefs without also insulting people I love.

Second, I had not heard about the incident with your wife until after discovering your entry. Going into what I think of that issue would not be appropriate here; I merely wished to point out that I'm not part of the mob that descended on her, lest you believe that everyone who took you to task is simply nursing a grudge from that whole affair. That's all I have to say on the matter.

Moving on, I was not the only person to link to that entry, but I concede I was one of the first, and my readership, for reasons I have never quite understood, is wide. I never would have called out your appalling remarks had you not been a published author whose books I have purchased in hardcover, and as gifts for others. You aren't a random dipshit on the internet yodeling into the vacuum of his own ass. You are a published writer in a field I love, and thus you are a person of whom I had stupidly assumed better. As someone who does not apply her money or loyalty to those who believe that I or my loved ones are perverted or defective, I felt betrayed.

If gay and gay-friendly folks choose to support you despite your views, that is their choice, but I believe they deserve to make an informed choice. That's why I pointed them your way. The fact that I pointed 1,500 people your way while saying "fuck" a lot is just how I do things. Because if we don't laugh and make fun of people who use ridiculous arguments to deny the validity of our relationships and the humanity of our brilliant, brief lives, well, that would just be too depressing.

It is unfortunate that the people who came to comment on your journal were angry, and not up to your desired level of discourse. I asked them not to troll, and apparently I misjudged their restraint. That was an error on my part. I didn't rile them, though. You did that on your own. Your words were offensive. Your words were hurtful. When a person says offensive, hurtful things, those who hear will lash out. When compared to pedophiles and necrophiliacs, they will come in mobs and be downright cruel. This is not the most wonderful facet of human nature, but nor is it proof that you were right all along or that everyone who disagrees with you is an illogical maniac with no internal censor. When those people bitchslapped you for being offensive, that was proof that what you said was offensive. Your own words condemned you, and as many of us have taken screenshots of the original entry, they will continue to do so.

The fact that you were mobbed -- "trolled" does not apply to most of the comments, most of which were expressing genuine disgust and displeasure, and were not being made, as they say, for the lulz -- does not free you from the offense you gave. When you say something offensive and are called on it, even if the people you have offended are rude to you, you take responsibility for the harm you caused, you apologize, and then you listen to how you can do better. You turn the other cheek, not so you can show people how smooth and righteous it is, but to show that you are willing to listen, to put the hurt done to you behind you. You swallow your pride and you listen. Which, you know, I would have done, save that there was nothing to learn from your words. It was just more of the same fearmongering fags-as-monsters bullshit.

I'm not under the illusion you were just misunderstood, or your words taken out of context. You clearly hate and fear homosexuality, even if you probably wouldn't say you hate homosexual individuals (we'll leave the stupidity of that alone for now, and the matter of your own hypocrisy re: perversions). Love the sinner, hate the sin, blah blah blah. But you have been complaining about how rude and nasty and profane people have been. You've been using others' entirely justifiable anger to dismiss what they are saying, because you don't like how they say it. The tone argument. They aren't being respectful enough of you while you insult them. Your journal, you don't have to put up with people swearing at you or mobbing you, but it makes you look like an asshole to venomously insult a group of people that includes many of your fans and their loved ones, and then get all butthurt when they let you have both barrels in return. If nothing else, this should serve as a lesson to just how many of us there are, and that we are listening.

After comparing homosexuality to a litany of completely repellent nonconsensual crimes, you have no real grounds on which to complain about what anyone said to you. True, they said it in a great, rage-filled mass, but I will point out that each of those individuals felt personally wounded, personally hurt enough to comment and tell you exactly what they thought of your reprehensible screed. For them, your characterization of homosexuality as akin to bestiality, necrophilia, pedophilia, was not some abstract thing. You were talking about them, about people they know. Many -- self included -- actually held back or didn't comment at all. You're entitled to your opinion, hate-filled and foolish as it may be. Many might have engaged you in debate except for the fact that it was -- and is -- clear that your mind is tightly made up, the justifications you use for not listening so perfectly constructed as to allow no argument to penetrate.

Would you argue if you saw a published author whose works you own making ridiculous and stupid statements about Catholics? Called you lot baby-eaters, claimed that you engaged in incestuous orgies in secret temples, had congress with animals, and offered up the corpses of virgins for the carnal delights of your depraved priesthood? Would you engage such blatant stupidity in rational debate?

Adults do not answer the petty name-calling of a schoolyard bully with elaborate explanations of why we are not stinky dirty poopy-heads. That would be dignifying it with a response, which it does not deserve. You aren't a child, though. You are in a prominent position, and gay people and their friends pay to read your work, so we can't just ignore what you think of us or let it pass.

Protesting that you didn't mean your offensive words to reach so wide an audience is such foolishness I can't respond beyond pointing out your age. Few people actually mean to make enormous fools of themselves. They figure nobody's paying attention. But you are a published author on the internet, accessible to all of fandom. Your words can never be assumed to reach a small audience, and you aren't talking about abstracts solely to people who agree with you. You are insulting real people who are or who love someone who is gay. To those people, being anti-gay makes you look stupid no matter your reasoning. Defending or advancing that stance with blatant nonsense only means they will be more inclined to tell you to drop dead while throat-fucking a rabid weasel than actually try to educate you (which is not our duty, I might add, but yours) or debate with you.

If you want to argue the point, shore up your logic and start dealing with facts, stop regurgitating the same garbage. It's the internet. It's all computers. The rule of 5150, shit in, shit out, applies here. If you spout ignorant, hateful bullshit, you will get hateful bullshit in return.

I am posting this with comments disabled. This is not cowardice. I have no real desire to invite you to converse here, where such views as yours are not welcome, but I also have no real desire to allow the carnival of wank to continue in comments on my journal. That would simply make more work for me without putting people's scorn in front of you. If people want to register their displeasure with you, they can go to your journal to do it. If they wish to register their displeasure with me, there are many other entries where they can do so. I thought I would let this stand alone, a letter to you, in case you cared to read it.

I'm not holding my breath, but I hope that you will find some people to debate with you and perhaps help educate you. I hope that you will change your views. I personally suspect the damage has been done, and I know I won't ever have anything to do with you or your work again. I regret I ever did.

I am a generous woman, or try to be. I would wish you well, but I find the most I can wish you is wisdom, and a clearer vision. Those are not, as anyone who lives in interesting times will tell you, always pleasant things.

tiny permalink
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Gay Apocalypse!)
He's edited his entry and turned off comments. The edit is probably one of the funnier yet simultaneously sad things I've seen on the internet thus far. You should definitely go read it. I lol-ed. For so many reasons, I lol-ed. ETA: He's deleted the original entry.

He's apparently bent out of shape that we weren't arguing the way he would prefer, or kissing up. We're just a bunch of vulgar morons who would rather swear and make love with our faces than engage in some jolly good intellectual debate, by thunder. For shame, all of you, for upsetting this fine man. For shame.

I was willing to let it go, but he threw out a phrase so delightful that I just cannot resist. You see, apparently we are just a bunch of idolaters, bowing down to, and I quote:

The child-eating Moloch of political correctness!





Please, by all means supply your own child-eating Moloch pics in comments. If you can improve on my two-minute Photoshop mashup, feel free.
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Gay Apocalypse!)
He's edited his entry and turned off comments. The edit is probably one of the funnier yet simultaneously sad things I've seen on the internet thus far. You should definitely go read it. I lol-ed. For so many reasons, I lol-ed. ETA: He's deleted the original entry.

He's apparently bent out of shape that we weren't arguing the way he would prefer, or kissing up. We're just a bunch of vulgar morons who would rather swear and make love with our faces than engage in some jolly good intellectual debate, by thunder. For shame, all of you, for upsetting this fine man. For shame.

I was willing to let it go, but he threw out a phrase so delightful that I just cannot resist. You see, apparently we are just a bunch of idolaters, bowing down to, and I quote:

The child-eating Moloch of political correctness!





Please, by all means supply your own child-eating Moloch pics in comments. If you can improve on my two-minute Photoshop mashup, feel free.
naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Gay Agenda)
John C. Wright, aka [livejournal.com profile] johncwright.

It is completely up to you if you want to buy books written by this guy after reading what he thinks about homosexuality.

ETA: he deleted the original entry.

On another note not related to the above in any way, I've got several hardcover books I don't want anymore. The books are in good shape, so I'm trying to think of a meaningful application for them. Like cutting them apart and using them to compose stories about gay perverts fucking. Or should I make them into hollow book boxes to hold my rosary of anal beads and my baby Jesus butt-plug? What do you all think?

In the meantime, I really have to make an appointment to assrape a dead goat with a crucifix strap-on in front of some schoolchildren. Like, soon. I have to commit obscene and corrupting acts or my pervert card lapses and I won't be able to get in on all the good cocaine-fueled mule-fucking pedophilia and abortion parties. I hear Hillary Clinton goes to those, and that she's a real cougar. Grrrowl.

Also, whoever has my homosex indoctrination DVDs? Please send them back if you're done with them. I've been asked to speak at the nearby grade school's recruitment assembly on National Convert a Nubile Youth to Homosexuality Day, and you just can't expect kids to learn about the joys of non-procreative pervsex from books or handouts anymore.

Lazy little shits.

(No trolling. Not that I care if you go into someone else's house and crap on their floor, but it would reflect poorly on me if I sent you over there to do it, so I'm not. I'm just letting you know what he thinks of most of you so that you can decide whether or not to reward him for it by paying attention to his writing. That is all.)

Profile

naamah_darling: The right-side canines of a wolf's skull; the upper canine is made of gold. (Default)
naamah_darling

April 2017

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
2324 2526272829
30      

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 26th, 2017 08:40 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios