David Mack reposted to io9

[Sho]

^ That's interesting. I'm one of those people who read Ender's Game as a teenager and later ended up banishing Card's books from my shelves when I discovered what kind of person he is. My thinking at the time was that the lack of trust towards the author would violate my suspension of disbelief; I'd end up searching for evidence of his agenda instead of being able to enjoy the stories. Certainly there are those stories one actually reads for that very reason (usually when investigating a work in its historical context), but Card's books didn't seem to be among those for me. But that his own works might contain elements that contradict his public positions and reveal them as unsustainable is a very interesting idea, and a form of engaging with the material I hadn't thought about.

What I do keep having a problem with is the idea of contributing to the bottom line on his royality checks, though.

 

[borgboy]

I hope that the recent publicity Mack and Vanguard has gotten will result in increased interest in Mack/Vanguard/Seekers and Treklit in general. I'd think that at least some gays who aren't reading Treklit might pick up Vanguard after Towerload (a gay news site) covered the story.

 

[Christopher]

What I do keep having a problem with is the idea of contributing to the bottom line on his royality checks, though.

Well, as it happens, I got all the Ender books I own (only the first four) from used-book stores, and I borrowed the movie from the library.

Anyway, I still say boycotts are too negative to do any real good. The best way to counter something negative is with a greater positive. If someone's promoting bad messages, they're bound to get support from some circles anyway; so instead of just contributing nothing anywhere, it's better to contribute something to the promotion of a more positive message elsewhere.

 

[Stevil2001]

Yeah, like the well-known failure of the Montgomery bus and Taco Bell tomato boycotts.

 

[Sho]

I'd tend to agree; I'm not really calling for a boycott. I'd just feel queasy if I, say, went to Amazon now and put a bunch of his books into the cart. It's just against ingrained vote-with-your-wallet reflexes.

 

[CaptPapa]

And kudos to Mr. Mack for expressing it well . . . though I could have done without the f word. That's another thing I don't understand; what's the fascination with using that word? Does that somehow give a person's dialog more meaning, or gravity; or is it just that they can't come up with a more intelligent term.

What I want to understand is, why do so many people think they can discount my entire argument just because I used a "bad word"? I'm a New Yorker. It's how I talk. You don't have to like it, but I won't apologize for it when I used it on my own blog.

I don't believe I discounted your entire argument just because you used a bad word. As a matter of fact, I don't think I discounted any of it. I'm pretty sure I didn't say it, and if I indicated I did, that's not the impression I meant to leave.
Of course it's your blog, and its content is your business, and the 'bad word' usage that bothered me more was a later poster's use of the term f---ing hillbilly. I could have made that more plain.
I object to that word's use in almost any reference I can think of, but I suppose it stems more from seeing my high-school graduate granddaughters using it on Facebook than anything else.
Nobody's business but my own, I guess . . .
ME

 

[David Mack]

^ No, you didn't do so, and I apologize if I accidentally implied that you had. I was referring more to some commenters on the Blastr and TrekToday reposts of my blog.

 

[CaptPapa]

And kudos to Mr. Mack for expressing it well . . . though I could have done without the f word. That's another thing I don't understand; what's the fascination with using that word? Does that somehow give a person's dialog more meaning, or gravity; or is it just that they can't come up with a more intelligent term.

Not to pick on you or anything, but to pick on you for a moment....

Your complaint about Dave's use of the word "fuck" is exactly the same as the original e-mailer's complaint about the use of homosexuality in Star Trek fiction. You're using the same argument: I don't want icky cooties in my fiction, whether it's those yucky gay people or those vulgar words. They're both nonsense.

In a word, no. I can't see how you make that argument.
I don't care for the word's use in general; I don't understand its frequent use, and regret its acceptance. However, I never made any comment (nor do I believe I indicated, or gave the impression) that the word's usage would affect my reading choices.

ME

 

[CaptPapa]

^ No, you didn't do so, and I apologize if I accidentally implied that you had. I was referring more to some commenters on the Blastr and TrekToday reposts of my blog.

Thanks. I did make that argument at a poor time - admittedly it was not appropriate to side-track a more important issue.

ME

 

[KRAD]

I'm not the least bit offended by the casual profanity, but I do object to comparing someone objecting to profanity being "the same argument" as someone objecting to homosexuality.

I don't think any offense is meant, but they're really different issues.

Of course they're different issues, but CaptPapa's argument against the use of "fuck" was the same as the original e-mailer's. That was my point, which is being missed, leading me to think I made it poorly, for which I apologize.

Yeah, I don't think differing standards of polite speech really constitute a civil rights issue.

See above. I never said they were equal in importance, just equal in style.

In a word, no. I can't see how you make that argument.
I don't care for the word's use in general; I don't understand its frequent use, and regret its acceptance. However, I never made any comment (nor do I believe I indicated, or gave the impression) that the word's usage would affect my reading choices.

Fair point, and I apologize for not taking that into account, as the original e-mailer has cast Dave out of his bookcases forever, whereas you are just expressing distaste.

I just found it interesting that your reaction to the profanity was exactly the same as twit-nose's reaction to the homosexuality.

I also confess to finding a lot of the arguments against profanity to be silly. Why is "f***" or "screw" okay but "fuck" isn't? They all mean the same thing. Bleeping a piece of profanity is just ridiculous because the bleep calls attention to it.

Digression: back in 2010 or so, I and a bunch of other folks (the good Mr. Mack among them) was interviewed for the Biography Channel's "Captains of the Final Frontier," which was a "biography" of the six Trek captains (Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Janeway, Archer, and Kirk 2.0). At one point, I was talking about how the producers were caught off guard by Sir Patrick Stewart being the sexy symbol on the show when they had positioned Riker in that role, and then Stewart got voted TV's sexiest man by TV Guide, and I concluded with, "The producers finally said, 'Maybe we should get him laid.'"

The Biography Channel in their infinite bizarreness bleeped the word "laid," thus making it sound like I actually said "fucked" there.

Silly stuff...

Anyhow, my apologies to CaptPapa.

 

[Trek Survivor]

object to that word's use in almost any reference I can think of, but I suppose it stems more from seeing my high-school graduate granddaughters using it on Facebook than anything else.
Nobody's business but my own, I guess . . .
ME

You have every right to state that you don't like the use of that word or any other. You weren't trying to force Mack or anyone else not to use it, just stating that you don't like it.

 

[Sci]

"What are homophobes afraid of?"

Losing power, of course. That's what bigotry is inevitably about -- having an Other that you can marginalize and oppress in order to feel powerful yourself. And this is inevitably used by a society's elites as a way to divide those who ought to unite for their own legitimate empowerment.

LGBT persons are in particular the targets of oppression because, as sexual minorities, they represent an implicit threat to the heteropatriarchy's ability to control the means of reproduction.

 

[vegaslover62]

Gotta applaud David for his composure. I would have just told that ignorant hillbilly @#$& to get himself neutered so his stupidity wouldn't be passed on to the next generation.

[sarcasm]Right, because the solution to EVERY problem on the Internet is lobbing insults.[/sarcasm]

 

[Steve Roby]

I also confess to finding a lot of the arguments against profanity to be silly. Why is "f***" or "screw" okay but "fuck" isn't? They all mean the same thing. Bleeping a piece of profanity is just ridiculous because the bleep calls attention to it.

My wife's Xbox gamertag was inspired by a couple of euphemisms from Farscape and Galactica. She had one online friend who'd played with her for ages without knowing the source. When she asked and found out, she said, I can't call you that! Same set of syllables that mean nothing in any real language, but when she realized they were f-bomb euphemisms she was appalled.

In short, some people really have strong reactions to the very idea of the word "fuck."

 

[Turtletrekker]

The word "fuck" has a long and storied history.

 

[CaptPapa]

object to that word's use in almost any reference I can think of, but I suppose it stems more from seeing my high-school graduate granddaughters using it on Facebook than anything else.
Nobody's business but my own, I guess . . .
ME

You have every right to state that you don't like the use of that word or any other. You weren't trying to force Mack or anyone else not to use it, just stating that you don't like it.

Granted, and thanks, but on reflection, it was a poor time and place to bring that up. I really didn't mean to detract from David Mack's argument regarding homophobia.

ME

 

[Elias Vaughn]

io9 just posted a tumblr blog that posts pictures of action figures in hilarious situations too.

Man, those guys know talent when they see it!

(Not sarcasm. I love Gigabeetle. Also David Mack.)

 

[JD]

This discussion of the word "fuck" got me wondering, have we seen it in any Trek books since Kobayashi Maru and the Vanguard book I can't remember now?

 

[David Mack]

^ Precipice.

And no, I don't think we have.