The handsome and hard-working Larry Correia has a handy
Internet Arguing Checklist, which I just saw a beautiful example of. The blogger will remain nameless, as will the person he was "replying" to (or past, really), but damn if he didn't hit 1, 2, 4, and 7 on the list without even trying.
The "inconvenient fact" that he (and by extension, the rest of his side of the cohort in this absolutely ridiculous argument we seem to be having) is ignoring is this: His side does not wish to
engage the other side. His side wishes to either
silence or assimilate the other side. His side assiduously wishes that the other side would just
go away. And so whining that the other side has finally thrown up its hands and said "How the hell do you even engage in a dialogue with people like this? It's useless to even try!" is disingenous.
I'm sorry, I'm not going to just stand here while you berate me. You've put me in a no-win situation. If I yell back, then I'm a
bully and
mean and how dare I. If I walk away, then I'm unwilling to engage. Any disagreement is seen as badthink, because you are by-God
right and so anyone who has a different opinion (even if that person is squarely in the demographic of the Marginalized that you are attempting, however poorly, to "defend") is now in a Burn The Witch situation.
You know what? How about we
all write what we want to write and read what we want to read and let the marketplace decide. Considering the fact that self-pubbing is no longer the Kiss of Death it was even five years ago, the market is certainly open enough that we can all do what we bloody well wish. If you want to write QUILTBAG Check-Box Message Fic, have a party. If I want to write my Kick-Ass Heteronormative Hero Who Badly Fails the
Bechdel Test, I should be permitted to have a similar party.
Because guess what? This place
really is big enough for the two of us--and all the Us in between. And "diversity" (a) should be more than skin deep; and (b) shouldn't mean that one side is silenced forever.
