Log in

15 September 2010 @ 04:05 pm
Anti-immigrant, assimilationist if-they-don't-pass-as-white-it's-their-fault rage-inducing xenophobic BULLSHIT warning.

Thanks, Ms. Moon. I loved The Speed of Dark, but now you're joining Harlan Ellison in the Box of Shame.

Anyone I recommended that book to? Unrecommended.

Via maevele.

ETA: Just emailed the Wiscon concom about her being a GoH next year, and how I am NOT okay with that in light of this. No idea if it'll accomplish anything, of course, but it does make me feel uncomfortable/unsafe (and I'm not Muslim, it's got to be a tiny tiny fraction of how she's hurting directly-affected folk) so.

Going off the Wiscon contact page, since I wasn't sure who to write to, I wrote to concom35 [at] wiscon [dot] info.

<ETA2 So apparently people with less fuzzy brains can parse more of that post than I can, and it's EVEN WORSE than I thought. Wow. Apparently Ms Moon thinks the European settlers here were happy community-builders who were welcomed with open arms and... assimilated... or something. Also that the Native people of this continent don't exist?
Current Mood: angryangry
V vvvexation on September 21st, 2010 08:11 pm (UTC)
A misrepresentation may be a misrepresentation, but a speculation that is clearly labeled as such is not a misrepresentation. And I never claimed that the mere fact that the libeled party had made their own statements canceled out libel; what I said was that pointing directly to those statements would make it even harder for a claim of misrepresentation to stick. Frankly, I don't see how you can possibly claim that quoting (or linking to) someone's exact words and then speculating out loud as to the thoughts behind them counts as misrepresenting them. One can misrepresent someone else's position by making false claims as to what they actually said, but nobody's making any such claims here.
shweta_narayan shweta_narayan on September 22nd, 2010 02:26 am (UTC)
This is basically a repeat of RaceFail09's "POC are being loud, let's shut them up with legal threats". It's even more insidious in this case, in some ways, because intended targets are immigrants and thus inherently more legally vulnerable than US citizens.
V vvvexation on September 22nd, 2010 03:15 am (UTC)
So you suspect plain old bad faith in this particular argument? I didn't want to assume so, myself--but then I never do.
shweta_narayan shweta_narayan on September 22nd, 2010 03:40 am (UTC)
It started with the danger signal of "Let's just talk reasonably about why you feel threatened By Moon using her free speech (to claim that Islam "unfits" its followers for citizenship here), shall we, and why this makes you want to threaten her free speech?

It went on to be all about Moon with her victims brushed entirely under the carpet.

I am still not convinced it is deliberate bad faith, but it is most certainly not good faith, so it's unwelcome.