SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
The 75th World Science Fiction Convention (commonly known as WorldCon) is being held this weekend in Helsinki, Finland. The convention is where the annual Hugo Awards are presented, and today, the convention announced the latest recipients.
This year, women almost completely swept the Hugo Awards, taking home the top prizes for literature in the science fiction community. That's particularly notable, given how the awards have been increasingly recognizing works from female and minority creators. The trend prompted a counter-movement from two group of fans, the self-described "Sad Puppies," and their alt-right equivalents, the "Rabid Puppies." These groups gamed the awards and forced a slate of nominees onto the Hugo ballot in 2015, prompting widespread backlash within the wider genre community. Another award, the Dragon, faced similar issues earlier this week when several authors asked to pull their nominations over concerns about Puppy interference and the award's integrity.
This year's sweep by female creators seems to be a strong repudiation of anti-diversity groups. 2017 also marked the year the ceremony earned its own award: a representative from the Guinness Book of World Records certified that the Hugos are the longest-running science fiction awards ever.
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Thursday August 17 2017, @01:58PM (2 children)
I believe that using the term "SJW [wikipedia.org]" as a pejorative [dictionary.com] and not explaining yourself falls afoul of the moderation rules (specifically, "ad hominem" and "ridicule without backing it up"). As such, comments that do so are legitimate candidates for down-modding, irrespective of how the moderator feels about the comment.
Apparently, you believe that the moderation rules do not support that. I'm not sure why - maybe you think SJW is not a pejorative, or maybe you believe that you're allowed to apply a pejorative label to any group/activity as you see fit and that that in itself justifies the group/activity being factually SJW.
The good: we seem to agree that using pejorative terms can be warranted.
The bad: we definitely disagree on the barrier for "warranted".
The ugly: not there. Since both of us seem to be fed up with this discussion, likely both of us are going to stop going off-topic.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 17 2017, @03:23PM (1 child)
Scuse the tone up above. Coffee wasn't working very well this morning for some reason.
SJW is a pejorative, yes. It also has a pretty well-defined meaning when I use it though; if it didn't it wouldn't be a very good insult. In this case it was precisely the correct term to describe the groups I was speaking of.
I have no beef with run of the mill progressives being part of any culture they're able to contribute to. SJWs by definition though contribute primarily bigotry, thought policing, hatred, and exclusionism. None of which are desirable traits in a community of any kind. Well, maybe they're desirable in Daily-Stormer-type communities but not in the vast majority of western culture.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Sunday August 20 2017, @02:22PM
Aha! I am (relatively) unfamiliar with the term "SJW" - beyond seeing it used as a pejorative.
This definition is rather clear. I don't think I would like anyone that fits the description - we seem to be in full agreement there.
I seem to have misunderstood what you meant, sorry for that.