5 ms·

The sci-fi writer in question is a trans woman herself. Saying she was attempting to normalize hate speech is the least charitable read of the situation, in my

The sci-fi writer in question is a trans woman herself. Saying she was attempting to normalize hate speech is the least charitable read of the situation, in my opinion.

bitwize 5y ago
Aka the only read that matters. Charity breeds wiggle room for actual hate groups. Similarly, depending on the conference, naming your talk "Make X great/Y again", even ironically, may be grounds for a ban from the conference, under the same rubric: normalizing hate speech.
- _vertigo 5y ago
  That strikes me as extremely reductive. You're trying to narrow the avenues of acceptable discourse, and worse yet, you're putting your enemy in the driver's seat of that effort.
- BitwiseFool 5y ago
  >"Charity breeds wiggle room for actual hate groups." We must fight bigotry and hate, by being intolerant and disavowing the principle of charity! It is better that ten innocent persons "face consequences" than that one hateful person speak freely.
- chipotle_coyote 5y ago
  Why is your read the only read that matters?
  - bitwize 5y ago
    I don't make the rules, mate.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- dandelany 5y ago
  What a bizarre comment. I guess we should get rid of ALL queer lit then, since the least charitable reading of “queer” is a slur? I’d rather be a part of a community that gives folks the benefit of the doubt/charitable interpretation despite sometimes being duped by bad actors, than one which shuns and demonizes anyone who says anything that could be taken the wrong way despite their true intentions.
- teawrecks 5y ago
  Oh hey, I just read an article about you.
- zasz 5y ago
  Did you even read the short story? It's an excellent exploration of gender issues.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    ...among other things. I’m in awe of the amount packed into that tightly-written package.
- jfengel 5y ago
  This was a case that deserved a charitable reading. She was attempting to co-opt a slur that had been used against her. Unfortunately, co-opting slurs is hard. You'll get push back. It was the headline, and many people don't read past headlines. She wasn't normalizing hate speech, but she was reflecting hate speech, very much in public. It's easy to call that a mistake in retrospect, and easy to say that as somebody who wasn't prepared for the consequences she should have shied away from it. That puts the blame on her and misses the bigger picture, that almost anybody can get caught up in forces far beyond their expectation or ability to handle that. I don't know how to fix that. There's not much advice I can offer. I wish I could offer her some comfort, but probably the best thing I can do is leave her alone and hope that she can recover.
  - zozbot234 5y ago
    > She wasn't normalizing hate speech, but she was reflecting hate speech, very much in public. Even if that was the case (and do note that the claim that the "attack helicopter" phrase is hate speech is by no means uncontroversial), how does this excuse the Twitter trolls who hurled far greater amounts of hate speech at her? Is this the sort of moral code that the "woke" would want to universalize on our society in their inerrant pursuit of perfect social justice - lex talionis on super steroids? Come on, even on its most charitable reading this makes absolutely zero sense.
  - Wowfunhappy 5y ago
    > She was attempting to co-opt a slur that had been used against her. Actually, I'm pretty sure she used the slur as her writing prompt, which is far more interesting! Particularly as it generated a genuinely good story!
    - jfengel 5y ago
      That's a more accurate description of what happened, yes. It's more like satire than like co-option, but has some similar social dynamics.
dragonwriter 5y ago
No, to be even “the least charitable read of the situation” it would have to be a remotely tenable reading of the situation. It's the most actively looking for the opportunity to regurgitate shallow canned complaints kneejerk reaction to the title in isolation.

The sci-fi writer in question is a trans woman herself. Saying she was attempting to normalize hate speech is the least charitable read of the situation, in my opinion.

bitwize 5y ago

Aka the only read that matters. Charity breeds wiggle room for actual hate groups. Similarly, depending on the conference, naming your talk "Make X great/Y again", even ironically, may be grounds for a ban from the conference, under the same rubric: normalizing hate speech.

_vertigo 5y ago
That strikes me as extremely reductive. You're trying to narrow the avenues of acceptable discourse, and worse yet, you're putting your enemy in the driver's seat of that effort.
BitwiseFool 5y ago
>"Charity breeds wiggle room for actual hate groups." We must fight bigotry and hate, by being intolerant and disavowing the principle of charity! It is better that ten innocent persons "face consequences" than that one hateful person speak freely.
chipotle_coyote 5y ago
Why is your read the only read that matters?
- bitwize 5y ago
  I don't make the rules, mate.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
dandelany 5y ago
What a bizarre comment. I guess we should get rid of ALL queer lit then, since the least charitable reading of “queer” is a slur? I’d rather be a part of a community that gives folks the benefit of the doubt/charitable interpretation despite sometimes being duped by bad actors, than one which shuns and demonizes anyone who says anything that could be taken the wrong way despite their true intentions.
teawrecks 5y ago
Oh hey, I just read an article about you.
zasz 5y ago
Did you even read the short story? It's an excellent exploration of gender issues.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  ...among other things. I’m in awe of the amount packed into that tightly-written package.
jfengel 5y ago
This was a case that deserved a charitable reading. She was attempting to co-opt a slur that had been used against her. Unfortunately, co-opting slurs is hard. You'll get push back. It was the headline, and many people don't read past headlines. She wasn't normalizing hate speech, but she was reflecting hate speech, very much in public. It's easy to call that a mistake in retrospect, and easy to say that as somebody who wasn't prepared for the consequences she should have shied away from it. That puts the blame on her and misses the bigger picture, that almost anybody can get caught up in forces far beyond their expectation or ability to handle that. I don't know how to fix that. There's not much advice I can offer. I wish I could offer her some comfort, but probably the best thing I can do is leave her alone and hope that she can recover.
- zozbot234 5y ago
  > She wasn't normalizing hate speech, but she was reflecting hate speech, very much in public. Even if that was the case (and do note that the claim that the "attack helicopter" phrase is hate speech is by no means uncontroversial), how does this excuse the Twitter trolls who hurled far greater amounts of hate speech at her? Is this the sort of moral code that the "woke" would want to universalize on our society in their inerrant pursuit of perfect social justice - lex talionis on super steroids? Come on, even on its most charitable reading this makes absolutely zero sense.
- Wowfunhappy 5y ago
  > She was attempting to co-opt a slur that had been used against her. Actually, I'm pretty sure she used the slur as her writing prompt, which is far more interesting! Particularly as it generated a genuinely good story!
  - jfengel 5y ago
    That's a more accurate description of what happened, yes. It's more like satire than like co-option, but has some similar social dynamics.

dragonwriter 5y ago

No, to be even “the least charitable read of the situation” it would have to be a remotely tenable reading of the situation. It's the most actively looking for the opportunity to regurgitate shallow canned complaints kneejerk reaction to the title in isolation.