Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 597 posts

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#491

Post by Macha »

srtjstjsj wrote: post #355
Macha wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That one was used pejoratively pretty much instantly, so never had much momentum, so my understanding is "person with disabilities" is the currently correct term.

Nope! "Person with" was almost instantly rejected because it is insulting to an unremovable aspect of someone's existence, condemning someone as broken and lesser. Here we have a too-common case of virtue chasers on the "same side" attacking each other because they have slightly different useless solutions to a problem. (The way you to show more respect to different people with differences is to show more respect in…

Huh, I was basing that on someone I know who recently completed a relevant college degree and is now working in the field of intellectual disabilities - the advice they received, both academic and professional is that "people with disabilities"/person centered language is the approach.

I had a look, the wikipedia page[1] indicates at least in the US that the American Medical Association, United Spinal Association and various federal and state bodies recommend it as best practice, but also points out various groups for deaf and blind people disagree.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People-first_language#Rational...

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#492

Post by barbacoa »

opheliate wrote: post #339
mellosouls wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The summary in Wikipedia may be correct but it is worth remembering that Wikipedia itself is hideously biased to the left at times in its coverage of political issues. I've generally taken that not to be down to malevolence but probably just down to the fact those drawn to editing it are most likely of a similar political hue to those from academia.

Honest question: Could you point to some examples of Wikipedia's "hideous" left-wing bias? Not trying to catch you out, I've just personally always been surprised by how neutral Wikipedia's political articles tend to be when I've read them, and I'd like to challenge my own perception here.

https://thecritic.co.uk/the-left-wing-bias-of-wikipedia/

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#493

Post by kls »

cpursley wrote: post #416
donny2018 wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I want to talk politics, I do it with my friends over a beer. As a former Soviet citizen, this is particularly funny to me. Where the safest place for political discussion was at home, in the kitchen, with vodka and couple of good friends. It was part of Soviet culture back then.

Even then you could still end up in the gulag. My wife's great grandfather spent years in work camps because his drinking "friends" turned him in for expressing "unfavourable opinions about Stalin". While not anywhere nearly that extreme, it makes me nervous that we're moving in that direction culturally (where it's socially acceptable and encouraged to turn someone in for having the "wrong" thoughts).

This is in no way an endorsement of the Soviet Union but it does need to be noted that the Soviet Union was in most parts of it's history, far more moderate than the Soviet Union under Stalin, Stalin has a higher body count than Hitler. Now in saying that, the Soviet Union was never a bastion of enlightenment era liberalism, free thought or personal freedoms. I agree it's not a end goal we should be striving for.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#494

Post by Veen »

hluska wrote: post #469
Chazprime wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those quotes really don’t warrant the disproportional responses to his book nor the vitriol directed at him personally & professionally. I think it’s time we start calling out the social media mobbing for what it really is: hateful .

Did you actually read his interview though? If you’re going to mock your entire genre, you should at least be accurate. Otherwise, critics will rightly point out that you’re writing a genre you don’t know. When you add in that second quote, it’s even more obvious that he doesn’t know his genre. The dude wrote some books at a team with YA was all the rage and got a film deal out of it. He made some godawful marketing…

It's beyond my comprehension that anyone can believe that it was a reasonable response to some anodyne literary criticism. Hunger Games is rubbish. It's OK to say so. It's not OK to behave like a vicious lunatic because someone said the books and genre you like are rubbish. If you do lose your shit over it, then you are at best infantile and at worst mentally ill. The reaction might be predictable, but it's not defensible.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#495

Post by paperwasp42 »

hluska wrote: post #469
Chazprime wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those quotes really don’t warrant the disproportional responses to his book nor the vitriol directed at him personally & professionally. I think it’s time we start calling out the social media mobbing for what it really is: hateful .

Did you actually read his interview though? If you’re going to mock your entire genre, you should at least be accurate. Otherwise, critics will rightly point out that you’re writing a genre you don’t know. When you add in that second quote, it’s even more obvious that he doesn’t know his genre. The dude wrote some books at a team with YA was all the rage and got a film deal out of it. He made some godawful marketing…

>And seriously, who would outright mock the Hunger Games without expecting some sort of disproportionate backlash?

I believe you're having some selective memory issues. This was back in 2015, when "Hunger Games" was starting to lose steam. And many feminists on twitter were lampooning it for focusing on romance, and having a flimsy love triangle, when the life-or-death situation of the book wouldn't realistically allow for that.

Mocking the "Hunger Games" and any book with a love triangle was totally in vogue.

>He made some godawful marketing and communications decisions and faced predictable consequences.

It's funny, because I've seen dozens of YA authors sneer at "Fifty Shades of Grey." Call it toxic, poorly written, laugh at it, mock it, insist it was dangerous to even publish it.

Yet I've never seen the Fifty Shades of Grey fanbase, or any Romance genre authors, talk about threatening, stalking, and publicly heckling those authors who criticize the work.

You call it "predictable consequences." I call it "hateful, disturbing, potentially dangerous behavior that reeks of censorship."

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#496

Post by nec4b »

forgingahead wrote: post #113
tptacek wrote: post #63

Just a reminder that Newsweek ceased publication back in 2013, and the rights to its brand were purchased by an odd Christian sect, somewhat along the lines of The Washington Times and the Reunification Church. The new "Newsweek" capitalizes on the brand reputation of the old one, but has no connections to it; a good thing to do with Newsweek pieces is to check the byline and look up what their background is.

Honest question - it's obvious how you identify politically by all your posts here, but what has your comment got to do with the story? If it's a false story, say it. If it's not - what exactly are you saying with your comment?

His intent was to discredit and disqualify the source and to turn attention away from what is being debated.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#497

Post by cema »

hairofadog wrote: post #466
cpursley wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why you're getting downvoted. Communists and Fascists share a lot of the same authoritarian tactics.

It’s because they’re positing that it’s only people on the left that do this. I’ve heard it said that the enemy of extremists isn't the extremist on the other side, it’s the moderates. Extremists are itching for a fight, and they’ll continue fighting forever. Moderates and pragmatists stand in the way of that goal. If an extremist group were to win and completely eliminate the other side, they’d draw some other battl…

No they are not positing they _only_ prior on the left are doing it.

Militant left is as dangerous as militant right. The problem is not the side of the political spectrum but the approach to dealing with opponents.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#498

Post by bitwize »

brodouevencode wrote: post #430
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the horseshoe theory works. The critical factor is authoritarianism. Which is a grown-up word for bullying and narcissism. Authoritarians are invariably toxic damaged people who are full of rage and are looking for a target to make themselves feel better. Sometimes they end up on the left. Sometimes they end up on the right. Sometimes they end up in management or venture capital. Same issues, same dynam…

Pretty sure leftist authoritarianism exists and is violent. i.e.: Communist Russia, Maoist China, Cuba.

Bob Altemeyer would disagree. He formulated the idea of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) as a psychological condition. His research discovered that there is no corresponding left-wing authoritarianism -- that even the authoritarianism exhibited by followers of Stalin or Mao was right-wing.

Kinda hard to be authoritarian if one of your central beliefs is in the fraternity and equality of all. It's more useful to describe Stalinist USSR or Maoist China as right-wing regimes cloaked in leftist rhetoric.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#499

Post by bitwize »

baron_harkonnen wrote: post #422
paperwasp42 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have literally seen NYT bestselling authors talk about how they're super excited to publicly heckle an author at his next book signing. And join in on conversations promoting burning his book. His crime? Writing a female character who goes on the run, has limited food, and trains in martial arts--which leads to her losing weight. This was, apparently, fat-shaming and deeply sexist. The authors involved in these thr…

> is super safe if you're on the far left Liberals are not considered the "far left" and people on the far left dislike them as much as people on the right do. This isn't a "no true Scotsman" issue either, there are clear distinctions between various left-wing ideologies and mainstream liberalism (radical or not). Finger pointing and blaming individuals, the type of behavior your describing, is classic dominant capit…

> Liberals are not considered the "far left" and people on the far left dislike them as much as people on the right do.

Indeed. Graffiti in the wake of a recent riot read: "Liberals get the bullet too "

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#500

Post by [deleted] »

profunctor wrote: post #450
eplanit wrote: post #400

The Left is using psychological projection as a technique. They accuse their opponents of doing exactly what they themselves are doing. They'll call you a fascist while they burn books. They'll call you racist while accusing you of "white privilege". Like you say, they'll destroy people's lives, based on racial hatred, while accusing those people of racial hatred. Domestic terrorism.

There is a clear difference between racism and acknowledging white privilege. White privilege simple describes one way in which racism manifests itself. If you can't tell the difference between a KKK member and someone says that people with white names getting called back for job interviews more than people with black names is white privilege then you are willfully ignorant. It is not racist to say that someone benef…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN