In an effort to prove that they’re not dour, humorless, thin-skinned avatars of political correctness with authoritarian tendencies, Wiscon’s Feminist failfandom brigade had my contribution to Locus Online’s April Fools Day festivities taken down. (Note that, under the transparent pseudonym of L. Ron Creepweans, I’ve participated in every Locus online April Fools Day since 2002.)
Locus forced Locus Online editor Mark Kelly to pull the piece only a few hours after it went up.
Thanks to the magic of Internet caches, you can still read it in its entirety:
And the text:
WisCon Makes Burqas Mandatory for All Attendees
Today the SF3 ruling committee for the Madison, Wisconsin-based feminist SF convention WisCon announced that starting this year, all attendees would be required to wear burqas.
“We were trying to think of what we could do to make Wiscon more inclusive,” said con chair Belle Gunness. “Suddenly, we realized that devout Muslims could easily be offended by the amount of sinful and wanton flesh on display at Wiscon. Therefore, starting with this year’s Wiscon, we’ve made burqas mandatory for all attendees. Allah Akbar!”
Both male and female members will be required to don the traditional black, face-covering, head-to-toe Islamic garb for all convention events. Gunness indicated that the convention would have substantial quantities of Burqas for rental to congoers, from Small to 5XL sizes. As an added benefit, she said that the new regulations would help eliminate “rampant lookism.”
Gunness said that guests would be required to wear the garb as well, “in the spirit of egalitarianism.”
Wiscon also announced that next year’s guest lineup would consist of J. K. Rowling, Stephen King, George R. R. Martin, Joss Whedon and Suzanne Collins. “At least as far as you know.”
For those tuning in for the first time, this was a direct jab (in humorous form) at WisCon’s previous decision to yank their Guest-of-Honor invitation to Elizabeth Moon for daring to voice (in the mildest possible form) politically incorrect thoughts about certain aspects of modern Islam.
How radical Islam became so sacred to radical feminists is a topic for another time, and I have hamburgers to cook. But it’s sad to think how a tiny, unimportant, radical fringe of disgruntled feminists (so aptly dubbed “Failfandom” by Steven Francis Murphy) have not only come to believe that their right not to be offended trumps the free speech of others, but that other people in the SF community have come to cave into their petulant demands. (Whatever happened to “The solution to free speech is more free speech?” It seems that fewer and fewer people on the left side of the political aisle believe that any more.)
But if there objective was to get this piece to disappear down the memory hole, I think they shall find that they are sadly mistaken…
Tags: April Fools, Elizabeth Moon, feminism, Locus, Media Watch, science fiction, Social Justice Warriors, WisCon
Orange Mike deploys a cute little phalanx of straw men to take on Greg Q, that well-known serial assaulter of only the finest in name-dropped female authors. Which, you know, that’s almost as funny as the original piece that started this little controversy.
Well, actually thats’s not fair; the original piece was actually intended to be funny while you managed to get there completely without intent. Bravo!
Holy mackerel, fandom certainly has gotten the political correctness bug. One mildly funny April Fool’s gag about burqas and suddenly charges of “minority-phobic,” “hate,” and “sexism” are launched. Folks, a joke about a piece of clothing worn by members of one religion might be edgy, might be in bad taste, and might even offend some, but it’s not evidence of an irrational fear, an intense dislike, or a prejudice against women.
As Sergeant Hulka said, “Lighten up, Francis.”
Thought experiment: A rewritten piece about how all attendees will be required to wear nun’s habits. Would there be equivalent outrage? Of course not.
And no, you can’t preemptively dismiss those who say “you can’t take a joke” by predicting that that will be said. It will be said because it is exactly what is happening. People who don’t simply find a joke unfunny but feel that it needs to be publicly condemned as “offensive” make Lenny Bruce and George Carlin spin in their graves.
I think Michael needs to go back to his job helping Jim Carrey script gun rights parodies. Super funny stuff.
Womyn are bytches. And the correct term is femorrhoid.
Always hilarious when they live down to expectations.
And Orange Mike calling himself “intelligent” and a “guy” is even funnier. What’s not funny is that he’s bred, and doesn’t see any hypocrisy in using his own false stereotypes without any trace of humor.
BTW, Lawrence, funny shit. Well done.
Also, I notice the woman lawyer parodied the stereotype of demonstrating why you should never hire a woman lawyer.
I’d almost think she was serious.
As an independent, employed woman who raised a son to adulthood as a single mother and who HAS been to WisCon, I’m appalled that so many people have no sense of humor on April Fool’s Day and that political correctness has taken over with a vengeance. I’m not offended by this joke and I’ve earned the right as a woman to have my opinion on this as well. And as someone who has worked in the legal and publishing fields, I am even more appalled that so many people think that free speech should be stifled whether or not the government is involved. Lighten up, seriously!!!
Oh yes–and that one experience of attending WisCon persuaded me to never attend again, even though I have admired many of the guests over the years. I don’t need to offend other people in the name of me protecting my own rights. Feminism was once a powerful force for good. Mostly now, it is a label applied to those way far left of my blatantly liberal bias.
Orange Mike: the beta is strong in you. You have pleased you feminine overlords. Go forth and sip your appletini with deserved pride.
I thought the Wiscon piece very funny indeed. Have we lost all sense of satire?
Wow Michael: nice to see that you can stereotype with the best of them.
I decided not to ever consider WisCon when I heard abut Ms Moon, and her treatment because she made a statement. Me? I’d probably have a lynching attempted.
Jebus H. Mohammed Krishna. If these mentally defective harridans had an issue with Ms. Moon, Tom Kratman would give them heartattacks.
Hooray! Michael J. Lowery is here! The White Knight is here to defend the honor of humorless women!
(Just don’t let the aforementioned humorless ones know about it because they really do hate you as much as they hate all the other men.)
Hey, the Onion has been around for years with this kind of absurd humor. Too bad the delicate flowers of Wiscon couldn’t just turn the page without reverting to high dudgeon.
Wow – overall this is a bunch of nothing, but I had to post due to my reaction to the over the top self-congratulating babble by Mr. Lowrey.
Sorry – not going to use your full title, which you seem we should all be very impressed by, along with:
1. the lame namedropping
2. bragging about being ‘an intelligent guy’
3. bragging about your kid hanging around a con
4. the humble-brag about being a quaker
5. racist remarks about pasty white butts
6. topped off by a threat of violence because you’re a good ole boy.
Go shove some oats up yer ass, ya self-righteous douche.
The cool kids never let you eat lunch at their table, did they, Orange Mike?
Michael J. Lowrey-
Am I correct in interpreting your last paragraph as a threat of physical violence against anyone who shares beliefs you don’t agree with? And that you’re making this statement on a public website under your full name?
So, a writer pens an April Fools joke that mocks Wiscon’s decision to withdraw an invitation Elizabeth Moon for some un-PC remarks about Islam.
This joke, which defends a woman and ridicules through satire a religion that covers women up, is then deemed to be anti-women and scrubbed.
And then some fellow named Orange Mike leaps to the defense of women everywhere including, for some unfathomable reason, his teenage daughter because, apparently, the author is a sexist and women are about to be attacked.
My head hurts just thinking about the stupidity of it all.
The Left only believes in frees speech for them, but not for thee. The onlly time YOU are allowed is if youre speech is politically correct regurgitation of Leftist talking points. Otherwise, you must be muzzled.
Shorter ORANGE MIKE:
You disagree with me so you are a sex offender.
B/c, you know, logic.
The idea of a “feminist SF convention” is funny.
The rest, not so funny because it all too plausibly fits so much of the feminist narrative. Feminists fear “lookism” and the “male gaze”. So do traditional desert Muslims. Feminists and Muslims both agree that lookism must be stopped; they only differ on how.
Barbara said:
The right to free speech is irrelevant to women’s rights and freedom of religion.
Much like the “lawyer” Elizabeth R. McClellan said above, you (Barbara) and her both need to go back to remedial reading comprehension classes. ONce you complete them please show me the irrelevancy of Free Speech as it relates to “women’s rights”, “freedom of religion”, and the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.
And to those who dislike the jab at Islam all I can say is when Muslims stop murdering everyone (Including a lot of children) in the name of their religion we’ll stop calling it a religion of hate, rape, and murder.
Threatening a beatdown is such an effective way to argue your point.
Orange mike mad mangina.
I second that Barbara has won this comments section.
[quote]I think that I can speak for all women when I say that this very important because we cannot offend science fiction fans of other religions. The right to free speech is irrelevant to women’s rights and freedom of religion. People need to understand that being offended is a really big deal and that we should be able to make you not offend us. And science fiction cannot be sexist or minority-phobic either. This is what it is. Period.[/quote]
Wow. Just wow. (Excuse my while I go throw up.)
Bill Peschel “Threatening a beatdown is such an effective way to argue your point.”
Especially when you like to pose and posture as a defender of free speech.
But like most leftists, Orange Mike Lowrey believes in free speech only for those who agree with him. All others shall be “reeducated.”
Gregory Benford “Have we lost all sense of satire?”
Yes. Thou Shalt Not Poke Fun At Leftists, you thought criminal.
Face it Lawrence. The joke fell flat – boring, old material, targeting a minority.
“It seems that fewer and fewer people on the left side of the political aisle believe that any more.”
You’ll need to provide some evidence in support of the underlying premise, otherwise I’ll assume that sentence was also tongue in cheek.
Tristan Phillips, you’re welcome to go to the State of Tennessee’s Board of Professional Responsibility website and verify that I am, in fact, a lawyer, making your sarcasm quotes ill-advised. Elizabeth R. McClellan is both the name I publish under and my government name. You’ll need to read a few Supreme Court cases to verify that, in fact, “freedom of speech” only applies when the government is involved. Perhaps you should know something about a principle before you invoke it, like the author who holds your esteem. But given the echo chamber over here encouraging you to write off a private business making its own choices as to content as them not exercising their own private right to choose what is published under their aegis but somehow the choice of Wiscon feminists, I don’t really expect you to do either. You don’t seem to have noticed that Locus wouldn’t back up your esteemed author on his offensive content, either in continuing to publish it once they had reviewed it or giving it their editorial backing. What about their rights to make their own decisions, or do they not have any? Does Wiscon control Locus now?
Old light bulb joke:
-How many feminists does it take to put in a light bulb?
-THAT’S NOT FUNNY!!!
Gee a lawyer who doesn’t understand or accept any notions of morality above and beyond the legal code.
Humorless too.
Go figure.
So, you really are a lawyer?
My condolences, have you considered re-training for something that offers gainful employment?
I was going to suggest an International Make Fun of Wiscon Day, perhaps coinciding with Everybody Draw Mohammed Day…
…but then I realized: EVERY day should be International Make Fun of Wiscon Day.
I’ve complained about this before: Science Fiction used to pride itself on being the “dangerous” genre. No more. Now Science Fiction wants to be the “safe” genre. Inoffensive, at all costs. At least to certain demographics, and in a certain political framework. That Wiscon, the so-called “feminist” science fiction convention, evicted Elizabeth Moon—a high-profile female author—for ridiculous and trumped up reasons . . . is indicative of the mind-rot. These individuals who pestered Locus are not people that can be taken seriously in a rational conversation. They have decided that the best way to combat suppression, is with suppression. The weapon of thine enemy, etc. That this might, in fact, be hypocritical, doesn’t seem to bother the oppressors. They have declared themselves Correct and woe to any of us who fall into their crosshairs. Shame on Locus for caving. Shame on the denizens of WisCon for acting as agents of authoritarianism. An iron fist cloaked in a velvet glove, is still an iron fist. And the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
I think that I can speak for all women when I say that this very important because we cannot offend science fiction fans of other religions. The right to free speech is irrelevant to women’s rights and freedom of religion. People need to understand that being offended is a really big deal and that we should be able to make you not offend us. And science fiction cannot be sexist or minority-phobic either. This is what it is. Period.
The more I read the above quote, the more convinced I become that it is parody. And if it’s not parody . . . well, like I said: mind-rot.
We have the civil rights act, the EEOC, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and now even Obamacare that can violate freedom of religion, conscience, or anything else. The EEOC WILL take action against employers that create “a hostile work environment” which is usually some “Barbara” initiating the harassment action because she feel offended at something. What free speech – or religion if the speech is deemed “offensive”? Not in ANY US workplace. Many seem to think these are very good things, so can actual censorship be far behind? They do have it in Canada. Throw people in jail for posting things like this because they offend certain blessed groups? Take down “offensive” web sites?
Meet the new boss, more oppressive than the old boss.
Not quite as catchy, but it does have the benefit of being accurate.
Gulliver’s travels, an old work of SciFi manages to precisely describe lawyers:
I said there was a society of men among us, bred up from
their youth in the art of proving by words multiplied for the
purpose, that white is black, and black is white, according
as they are paid. To this society all the rest of the people
are slaves. For example, if my neighbour hath a mind to
my cow, he hires a lawyer to prove that he ought to have
my cow from me. I must then hire another to defend my right,
it being against the rules of law that any man should be
allowed to speak for himself. Now in this case, I who am the
true owner lie under two great disadvantages. First; my
lawyer, being practised almost from his cradle in defending
falsehood, is quite out of his element when he would be an
advocate for justice, which as an office unnatural, he always
attempts with great awkwardness, if not with ill-will. The
second disadvantage is, that my lawyer must proceed with
great caution, or else he will be reprimanded by the Judges,
and abhorred by his brethren, as one who would lessen the
practice of the law. And therefore I have but two methods to
preserve my cow. The first is to gain over my adversary’s
lawyer with a double fee, who will then betray his client by
insinuating that he hath justice on his side. The second way
is for my lawyer to make my cause appear as unjust as he
can, by allowing the cow to belong to my adversary; and this
if it be skilfully done will certainly bespeak the favour of the
Bench.
The passage does go on further.
There is justice, tolerance, liberty, freedom, and peace. Then there is the law, lawyers, and the judicial system. The two are disjoint.
There are plenty of rules, regulations, laws, and a great deal of arbitrary enforcement (Aaron Swartz, but look back at Alan Turing). All legal. All the law. All the system. Each generation thinks it knows better and is doing their set of monstrous acts out of kindness, science, and progress. We love darwin but hate eugenics only when we see what the solution to the equation finally is. Some of each generation try to point out that we need to be circumspect, tolerant, and allow many benign evils rather than have the government become a malignant evil we might not recognize. And they are ignored.
Apparently three generations of idiots weren’t enough or we would have done away with the lot years ago. Instead we continue to lose life and liberty to thunderous applause.
“Shame on the denizens of WisCon for acting as agents of authoritarianism.”
Wiscon has Maoist roots, so thuggish tendencies are no surprise.
“Some of each generation try to point out that we need to be circumspect, tolerant, and allow many benign evils rather than have the government become a malignant evil we might not recognize. And they are ignored.”
Folks, I believe this is the take-home quote.
PRO-TIP: Your free speech rights are not violated when a publication takes your work down. You do not have a right to be published in any specific publication, and you right to free speech does not trump the owner of the pub.
Silencing opponents is not a left or right tactic, as anyone who remembers McCarthyism ought to realize. It’s just a tactic loved by people who think their cause justifies ethical shortcuts.
It is a shame some people think the choice of “burqa” is aimed at Islam–the fact that the parody references “lookism” and recommends the burqa for everyone ought to tell them this parody is about the censoring of Elizabeth Moon and some of the wackier ideas of identitarian liberals.
And for anyone who doesn’t bother to use dictionaries, I realize this’ll be irrelevant, but censorship isn’t restricted to governments. As the ACLU notes, “Censorship, the suppression of words, images, or ideas that are “offensive,” happens whenever some people succeed in imposing their personal political or moral values on others. Censorship can be carried out by the government as well as private pressure groups.”
I’ll end with a lovely paen to the free press: “The free press is the ubiquitous vigilant eye of a people’s soul, the embodiment of a people’s faith in itself, the eloquent link that connects the individual with the state and the world, the embodied culture that transforms material struggles into intellectual struggles and idealises their crude material form. It is a people’s frank confession to itself, and the redeeming power of confession is well known. It is the spiritual mirror in which a people can see itself, and self-examination is the first condition of wisdom. It is the spirit of the state, which can be delivered into every cottage, cheaper than coal gas. It is all-sided, ubiquitous, omniscient. It is the ideal world which always wells up out of the real world and flows back into it with ever greater spiritual riches and renews its soul.” The author is Karl Marx. WisCon’s roots are a strange mixture of bourgeois morality and Maoism, not Marxism.
“And to those who dislike the jab at Islam all I can say is when Muslims stop murdering everyone (Including a lot of children) in the name of their religion we’ll stop calling it a religion of hate, rape, and murder.”
When I say the same thing about Christians, I get yelled at. I wonder why that is.
That’s treating people with respect gone mad!
Seriously, calling feminists a bunch of fat muslim-lovers no one likes anyway just makes you sound petty and jealous. It says far more about you than about the people who didn’t feel your mean-spirited bitterness was appropriate for their publication.
See also http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?HaHaOnlySerious for why this failed.
“People need to understand that being offended is a really big deal and that we should be able to make you not offend us.”
This.
Seriously.
This.
What has happened to the United States of America where otherwise intelligent people can argue that the concept of freedom of speech is only in reference to specific acts by the government?
Censorship is censorship. It doesn’t matter whether it is a kindergarten teacher preventing a student from expressing an opinion about a politician or a womyn’s group attacking an author because she pointed out truth about a religion or a website being changed because the content made some people’s hinies pucker.
ThreeOranges: PRO-TIP: it nonetheless remains PC run amok regardless.
XtinaS, probably because it shows you’ve a problem realizing the silliness of your comment in today’s world.
Considering the issue about women wearing dresses in the Ft. Hood trial and ultra Sharia feminists at the Ada Initiative maintaining that garb can produce harassment triggers (except when they do it) and also the general racial PC prevalent in the SF community, the satire seems entirely appropriate.
Whether Locus should have stuck with the piece depends on whether they have in the past sided with any conspicuous bigotry such as John Scalzi’s article about white privilege. I am not going to search the site but I doubt Locus has any similar standards about publishing the non-stop non-fiction racial bigotry of Saladin Ahmed and N.K. Jemisin.
In passing I must say I’m disappointed to see a lawyer too much the pedant to recognize the intellectual space that resides behind law. The idea that free speech is only expressed in terms of a governmental context is infernal, if not stupid. It is semantic gibberish to define matters arbitrated by law as being about law itself. Is an umpire baseball?
Mike, Mike, Mike……….you’re not a good ole boy, other than the beard you’re not even half the man Liz thinks she is.
Tomoe, what is hurtful or degrading about depicting Muslim women as wearing burqas? Have you ever walked around downtown Cairo? It that an irony-fest?