Disagreeing with the approach is fine. But characterizing what Laura Anne wrote as "shaming" and "punishment" is not reasonable, given the extreme mildness her remark. And the unreasonableness is only compounded by your latest accusation, that she's "going after" those who have left SFWA.
I think there are plenty of legitimate arguments for giving up on SFWA at the moment, and I really would not seek out and hector any individual who did it, even if I disagree. As a friend pointed out to me in a Twitter conversation about this yesterday, different people have different tolerance levels, and need to balance their lives in different ways.
But what you are arguing is that nobody may express even the mildest, no-names-specified disagreement with that choice of action, on pain of being accused of ugly things like "shaming", "punishing", and "blaming the victims." That's not a reasonable position.
(And by the way, regarding "blaming the victims"? There are a lot of victims of the gross misbehavior at the heart of this dustup. Some victims are those who find they can no longer stand to be in SFWA. Other victims are those, like Laura Anne, who see their volunteer work rendered invisible by the focus on the intemperate words of a couple of old men. Setting one category of victims against another isn't exactly helpful.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2013-06-02 04:36 pm (UTC)Disagreeing with the approach is fine. But characterizing what Laura Anne wrote as "shaming" and "punishment" is not reasonable, given the extreme mildness her remark. And the unreasonableness is only compounded by your latest accusation, that she's "going after" those who have left SFWA.
I think there are plenty of legitimate arguments for giving up on SFWA at the moment, and I really would not seek out and hector any individual who did it, even if I disagree. As a friend pointed out to me in a Twitter conversation about this yesterday, different people have different tolerance levels, and need to balance their lives in different ways.
But what you are arguing is that nobody may express even the mildest, no-names-specified disagreement with that choice of action, on pain of being accused of ugly things like "shaming", "punishing", and "blaming the victims." That's not a reasonable position.
(And by the way, regarding "blaming the victims"? There are a lot of victims of the gross misbehavior at the heart of this dustup. Some victims are those who find they can no longer stand to be in SFWA. Other victims are those, like Laura Anne, who see their volunteer work rendered invisible by the focus on the intemperate words of a couple of old men. Setting one category of victims against another isn't exactly helpful.)