Star Trek novels by authors of color

[Doom Shepherd]

Psychiatrist: "Are the SJWs in the room with us right now, Karen?"

 

[Extrocomp]

Psychiatrist: "Are the SJWs in the room with us right now, Karen?"

I don't really understand the hostility I'm receiving regarding my opinions on SJWs. Do you guys want to live in a world that's full of censorship, political correctness and double standards regarding race? Do you want to risk getting fired from your job if you post an opinion on a controversial topic? I would've thought free speech and treating everyone the same is something we can all get behind.

 

[Smiley]

Equal opportunity does not yet exist, and the pandemic and the dialogue that followed George Floyd's death are indicators of that. Every person is entitled to be treated with respect and dignity, but groups that are disadvantaged under current systems in society need to be treated better than they currently are and with intention for the disadvantage to start to recede.

Free speech is great, but it does not mean freedom from consequences. If my child's teacher is using slurs on social media or joining a tiki torch march, it is not censorship to be disturbed by that behavior and take corrective steps, no matter what the teacher's behavior is at school.

I don't use the term myself, but those who I see labeled as SJWs are typically working for a better world where there is more opportunity and less privilege based on the circumstances of one's birth. That doesn't mean looking down on straight white males in America, but it does mean that some scholarships, jobs, and other opportunities that previously went to that group will be going to others.

 

[Christopher]

I don't really understand the hostility I'm receiving regarding my opinions on SJWs. Do you guys want to live in a world that's full of censorship, political correctness and double standards regarding race? Do you want to risk getting fired from your job if you post an opinion on a controversial topic? I would've thought free speech and treating everyone the same is something we can all get behind.

None of that is actually true, though. It's the right twisting the language of the left to misrepresent what the left actually stands for. People aren't getting fired for "opinions," but for open racism and misogyny that hurts or endangers other people. "Censorship" is not being applied, because the government is not preventing ideas from being expressed; rather, private businesses and consumers are exercising their freedom to decide for themselves what ideas they're willing or unwilling to reward financially -- a market-driven process that's entirely in line with what conservatives supposedly believe in.

And the "double standard" of race is the one that's existed for centuries putting white people above everyone else. Naturally pushing back against that imbalance requires prioritizing the needs of disadvantaged groups over the luxuries of white people who are already on top and don't need any advocacy. We're trying to create a level playing field where none has ever existed. But those who benefit from the bias and imbalance built into the system feel threatened by the removal of their unfair advantage, so they pretend they're the victims being persecuted and hated. But it's not about that. In a truly fair system, they'd still have the same chance as everyone else. It's just that everyone else would finally have a chance too. It's not about tearing them down, it's about lifting everyone else up to their level.

I am a heterosexual white male, and I stand completely with the people that the right wing labels "social justice warriors" as if that were somehow a bad thing. I'm a member of the group with the unfair advantage, but I don't feel persecuted or threatened by attempts to level the playing field, because I was taught in kindergarten how to share the playground rather than hogging it to myself, and because I have confidence in my ability to compete fairly. I know quite a few other heterosexual white males who agree with me, including pretty much every Star Trek author who posts here. We want to see more women and people of color join us in writing Star Trek, because Star Trek has always, always been the embodiment of the "social justice warrior" philosophy. Not us against them, but everyone together -- including people like me but not limited to us. That's what social justice means.

 

[DS9Continuing]

None of that is actually true, though. It's the right twisting the language of the left to misrepresent what the left actually stands for. People aren't getting fired for "opinions," but for open racism and misogyny that hurts or endangers other people. "Censorship" is not being applied, because the government is not preventing ideas from being expressed; rather, private businesses and consumers are exercising their freedom to decide for themselves what ideas they're willing or unwilling to reward financially -- a market-driven process that's entirely in line with what conservatives supposedly believe in.

And the "double standard" of race is the one that's existed for centuries putting white people above everyone else. Naturally pushing back against that imbalance requires prioritizing the needs of disadvantaged groups over the luxuries of white people who are already on top and don't need any advocacy. We're trying to create a level playing field where none has ever existed. But those who benefit from the bias and imbalance built into the system feel threatened by the removal of their unfair advantage, so they pretend they're the victims being persecuted and hated. But it's not about that. In a truly fair system, they'd still have the same chance as everyone else. It's just that everyone else would finally have a chance too. It's not about tearing them down, it's about lifting everyone else up to their level.

I am a heterosexual white male, and I stand completely with the people that the right wing labels "social justice warriors" as if that were somehow a bad thing. I'm a member of the group with the unfair advantage, but I don't feel persecuted or threatened by attempts to level the playing field, because I was taught in kindergarten how to share the playground rather than hogging it to myself, and because I have confidence in my ability to compete fairly. I know quite a few other heterosexual white males who agree with me, including pretty much every Star Trek author who posts here. We want to see more women and people of color join us in writing Star Trek, because Star Trek has always, always been the embodiment of the "social justice warrior" philosophy. Not us against them, but everyone together -- including people like me but not limited to us. That's what social justice means.

An excellent summation – I may quote this in future if you don't mind.

.

 

[Christopher]

^Sure.

 

[Extrocomp]

None of that is actually true, though. It's the right twisting the language of the left to misrepresent what the left actually stands for. People aren't getting fired for "opinions," but for open racism and misogyny that hurts or endangers other people.

Tell that to Shane Gillis and Roseanne Barr who were fired from their jobs over harmless jokes. Or J.K. Rowling who was cancelled just for pointing out that biological sex exists. Or the incident where game designer Eric Wile tried to get Melonie Mac fired from her job because she disagreed with his opinion that Lara Croft's original design was sexist. Showing that a social justice warrior's respect for women quickly evaporates when faced with a woman who disagrees with them.

"Censorship" is not being applied, because the government is not preventing ideas from being expressed; rather, private businesses and consumers are exercising their freedom to decide for themselves what ideas they're willing or unwilling to reward financially -- a market-driven process that's entirely in line with what conservatives supposedly believe in.

Censorship is being applied not by the government, but by companies who listen to people on twitter, mistakenly believing that these people are the majority, instead of a very vocal minority that likely had no intention of ever buying the companies' products. Since you're a heterosexual male, I wonder how you feel about the fact that women in movies, comics and video games are being covered up more and more often to please social justice warriors who believe that showing women in bikinis is objectification and the "male gaze" is something that needs to be fought.
By the way, I'm not a right-winger. I voted for a left-wing party and I consider myself a liberal, but the kind of liberal that actually cares about free expression, not the kind of modern-day "liberal" that has more in common with a 17th century puritan.

I've never claimed to be any kind of victim and I think the idea of leveling the playing field sounds good in theory, but I believe that categorizing people based on their perceived level of disadvantage and giving them preferential treatment over each other will ultimately do more harm than good. It's bringing back a form of segregation.

 

[Christopher]

Tell that to Shane Gillis and Roseanne Barr who were fired from their jobs over harmless jokes.

The fact that you think institutional racism is harmless just proves your failure to listen.

Or J.K. Rowling who was cancelled just for pointing out that biological sex exists.

As with everything else you've said, that is a misrepresentation of the actual issue. There is a huge difference between asserting the "existence" of biological sex and irrationally denying the medical fact that there are occasional alternatives to the gender binary, or that some people are mistakenly assigned the wrong gender at birth and simply want to correct the mistake. Society's intolerance of non-binary or trans people drives many of them to suicide, so when a famous public figure aggressively denies the legitimacy of their identity, it is literally a threat to their lives. Rowling is not the vulnerable one who needs defense here. She's the one punching down.

Censorship is being applied not by the government, but by companies who listen to people on twitter, mistakenly believing that these people are the majority, instead of a very vocal minority that likely had no intention of ever buying the companies' products.

Again: That is not what the word "censorship" means and it is dishonest to use it that way. Censorship, by definition, is imposed by the government. Private companies have the same right as private citizens to decide what people get to say and do on their property.

Since you're a heterosexual male, I wonder how you feel about the fact that women in movies, comics and video games are being covered up more and more often to please social justice warriors who believe that showing women in bikinis is objectification and the "male gaze" is something that needs to be fought.

On a personal level, I find it disappointing, but I'm also a mature adult with empathy and the ability to listen, and thus I understand that my personal amusements are not more important than the safety and equal opportunity of women in a society that still systemically threatens both on a regular basis. And if I want to see women uncovered, it is quite easy to find opportunities to do so on the Internet. There is a place and a time for male gaze (i.e. in contexts where women willingly invite it), so it doesn't have to be everywhere.

As I had Reiko Onami say in The Higher Frontier, "Here’s the thing about rights: If you’re going to get defensive about your own rights, then it follows that you should defend everyone else’s rights just as forcefully. Otherwise you’re just being a hypocrite and abusing the concept for your own advantage."

I've never claimed to be any kind of victim and I think the idea of leveling the playing field sounds good in theory, but I believe that categorizing people based on their perceived level of disadvantage and giving them preferential treatment over each other will ultimately do more harm than good. It's bringing back a form of segregation.

You say you're not right-wing, but you're parroting the right wing's favorite misrepresentations pretty much verbatim. I've seen this particular lie used multiple times, the claim that trying to ensure equal rights for a group that's been denied them is actually about giving them "special rights" above everyone else.

 

[trampledamage]

Back to discussing opportunities for under-represented authors, please.

Thank you kindly.

 

[JD]

Censorship is being applied not by the government, but by companies who listen to people on twitter, mistakenly believing that these people are the majority, instead of a very vocal minority that likely had no intention of ever buying the companies' products. Since you're a heterosexual male, I wonder how you feel about the fact that women in movies, comics and video games are being covered up more and more often to please social justice warriors who believe that showing women in bikinis is objectification and the "male gaze" is something that needs to be fought.
By the way, I'm not a right-winger. I voted for a left-wing party and I consider myself a liberal, but the kind of liberal that actually cares about free expression, not the kind of modern-day "liberal" that has more in common with a 17th century puritan.

I'm sorry, but I really just want to address this. I know this wasn't directed at me, but even as I heterosexual guy, I'm glad their finally moving away from constantly putting women in as skimpy costumes as possible. In video games and comics especially, I've always thought it was ridiculous, assinine, and disgustingly sexist, when we'd have all of the men covered from head to toe in uniforms, or body armor, or whatever, and then the women would be running around 2/3 naked. I'm glad to see that they are finally moving away from that, and actually dressing the women believably. I have no problem with sex and nudity, but I prefer it to be appropriate to the situation and make sense, and not to be exploitive.

 

[trampledamage]

I'm sure I had to do this last time, and I see I will have to do it again now. The discussion around Extrocomp's post is over - anyone else addresses it after I post this and I will be issuing warnings.

Please get back to discussing Star Trek authors and publishing, and opportunities (and lack thereof) for minority authors in general

 

[Reanok]

I read on trekcollective Star trek books has hired Cassandra Rose who's going to write a new TNG book about Beverley Crusher and Deanna Troi and another author Ian White is writing anew Star trek book too. He wants to write a book about Dax.

 

[Jinn]

I read on trekcollective Star trek books has hired Cassandra Rose who's going to write a new TNG book about Beverley Crusher and Deanna Troi and another author Ian White is writing anew Star trek book too. He wants to write a book about Dax.

I'm pretty sure there's no Ian White, but there is an Alex White, and they are writing the book about Dax

 

[The Wormhole]

I'm curious. When we say "a book about Dax" do we mean a specific host or the symbiont itself?

 

[Jinn]

I'm curious. When we say "a book about Dax" do we mean a specific host or the symbiont itself?

The quote from Alex White is kinda ambiguous (TrekCollective has the quote), they mostly talk about how they like Dax as a being that transcendes lives (which I very much related to, as a trans person who figured out they were trans shortly before watching DS9), so it seems they are interested in that aspect of Dax and might want to write about multiple lives or even the symbiote without a host.

But I'm just speculating, so meh.

Either way, I would love another Lives of Dax anthology, maybe with additional future hosts, if any turn up in PIC or DSC.

 

[JD]

I'm sure I had to do this last time, and I see I will have to do it again now. The discussion around Extrocomp's post is over - anyone else addresses it after I post this and I will be issuing warnings.

Please get back to discussing Star Trek authors and publishing, and opportunities (and lack thereof) for minority authors in general

Sorry, I just couldn't not address that part of the post.

 

[Reanok]

Sorry I meant Alex White is writing a Star trek book. I think it's great we're going to have new writers working on new Star Trek books.

 

[Sci]

I'm sure I had to do this last time, and I see I will have to do it again now. The discussion around Extrocomp's post is over - anyone else addresses it after I post this and I will be issuing warnings.

Please get back to discussing Star Trek authors and publishing, and opportunities (and lack thereof) for minority authors in general

This is an unreasonable demand to make. It is impossible to adequately explore the topic of opportunities (or lack thereof) for minority authors without addressing larger social questions around privilege and marginalization and how to tackle them.

If you are unwilling to allow such a discussion to take place, you ought to close the thread.

 

[Turtletrekker]

If you are unwilling to allow such a discussion to take place, you ought to close the thread.

And if the thread were to be closed, it would be the right of the board moderators to do so and would not constitute censorship.

 

[trampledamage]

This is an unreasonable demand to make. It is impossible to adequately explore the topic of opportunities (or lack thereof) for minority authors without addressing larger social questions around privilege and marginalization and how to tackle them.

If you are unwilling to allow such a discussion to take place, you ought to close the thread.

It is however possible to discuss larger social questions around privilege and marginalization without dragging in Extrocomp's post back from February. I know this because both before and after the distraction of his post, this thread was managing to do it very well.