ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, January 21, 2013

Rabbit man is rabbity

McRapey asks for more mancrushing and I am gracious enough to oblige him.  Although I must warn you, if you are reading this, we are reliably informed that risks making you one of my "merry band of racist sexist homophobic dipshit readers".  Otherwise known as... THE DREAD ILK!
On the way home from ConFusion today I received a concerned phone call from a good friend, who informed me that someone had just posted something about me online that to his eye was entirely libelous; he then gave me a brief rundown on the piece. It appears the racist sexist homophobic dipshit who has an adorable little mancrush on me has been spinning up his racist sexist homophobic dipshit blog readers yet again with a typically gibbering gout of stupidity, with my name inserted into it at some point.

I told my friend not to worry about it. Aside from it being just another example of this particular racist sexist homophobic dipshit trying to work out his adorable little mancrush issues in public, it’s probably not libel. One of the pillars of libel is that what’s being written has to effect material damage on the person allegedly being libeled. I experience no material damage in this case, because no one actually gives a shit what this particular racist sexist homophobic dipshit has to say about anything, other than his merry band of racist sexist homophobic dipshit readers. And why would I care what any of those racist sexist homophoblic dipshits think about me? They’re racist sexist homophobic dipshits. The racist sexist homophobic dipshit market is one I’m willing to lose.

I imagine that one day the racist sexist homophobic dipshit with the adorable little mancrush on me will finally figure himself out. Until then, I suppose his adorable little mancrush on me is cheaper than therapy. So mancrush on, you racist sexist homophobic dipshit. Because it’s adorable, and I get a giggle about just how much you can’t quit me.
The interesting thing about gammas is that they don't realize that what scalds their souls doesn't bother those higher in the socio-sexual hierarchy in the slightest.  Still less those who are comfortable outside the social hierarchy.  But it's a lovely attempt at playing "ha ha ha, see if I care cuz I don't" through the tears.  I have to confess, it stings a little to be accused of homophobia when John keeps putting delectable, mancrushable eye candy like this on display.  Can you honestly blame me for my adorable little mancrush?  I really think he's created a whole new category of hotness, the "doughy-sexy"!  But I'm very glad to hear that he gets "a giggle" about it, because, let's face it, we all know that I will never quit him until his gamma antics cease to provide amusement, which should happen right around the time Heimdall blows his horn.  Mancrushes may not be legal in Ohio, but this is a committed one nevertheless.

One should appreciate the way McRapey keeps trying to work "libel" into his responses?  Not that he would ever threaten anyone with it, because he totally believes in free speech... but he's got to mention it, you know, just because.  This reminds me of the scrawny little seventh-grader who can't fight his way out of a paper bag, who froths at the mouth and tells the high school bullies not to mess with him because he's crazy.  CRAAAZY!  But I find the most interesting thing to be how he thinks that simply pointing out the attack on female-oriented urban fantasy covers is a misguided attack on female preferences amounts to "a typically gibbering gout of stupidity".

In that vein, this comment from a Whatever reader pretty much says it all about the Rabbit People: "I found the RSHD after Scalzi’s piece on the mind of a rapist. The RSHD decided that this post meant that Salzi himself was a rapist. The rest of his thought is on a par with this gem. I’ve been looking at his blog with a kind of horrified fascination ever since. I find him thoroughly dispiriting, rather frightening, and in the end just inexplicable. He presents as a well-educated, articulate, functioning kind of guy, and yet he traffics in vile racism, a sexism so absolute that women seem not to exist as real people, weird conspiracy theories, and general religious crackpottery. I don’t get it at all. Is he insane? I wonder. Are all his readers insane as well?"

Frightening and inexplicable stupidity.  That concept summarizes the midwitted limits of this particular warren of Rabbit People.  They literally cannot imagine that their worldview is incorrect or is not in line with observable reality.  Anything that is over their heads or beyond them has to be either stupid or crazy, or perhaps both.  And, of course, scary.  They also fail to realize how their responses and accusations betray their own psychologies. John Scalzi is obviously engaging in satire, but I could not possibly be doing anything of the sort.  I must be the insecure and upset one even though it is McRapey who refuses to link to or even identify the RSHD he is nominally addressing.  He even requests that his fellow rabbits follow his lead, whereas I am content to simply shine a light on his creepy, crawly gamma antics and don't concern myself with what anyone else does.  He deletes or "subverts" the comments of any of those favorable to me who comment on his blog while I both permit and respond to comments by those favorable to him.

 The Rabbit People think I am obsessed, and yet they rush to call his freaking phone simply because I mentioned him in a post.  And my failure to recoil in horror and flee in terror from the VERY BADDEST WORDS THEY CAN POSSIBLY IMAGINE leaves them not only bewildered, but scared.

"He didn't react to the H word.  And I already called him stupid.  And crazy. What now?"
"Did you try the S word?"
"Yeah, good idea... ZOMG, that didn't work either!"
"Very well, he leaves us no choice.  I don't like it, but he totally asked for it."
"You don't mean...."
"I do.  The R word."
"Wow.  I pity him.  I really do.  Here goes... OMFG, NOTHING HAPPENED!"
"What?  That can't be!  Try it again... TRY IT AGAIN!"
"R word!  S word! H word! Stupid!  Crazy!  R WORD!  S WORD!  R WORD!  DAMMIT, IT'S NOT WORKING!"
"AAAUUUGGH!  RUN!  SAVE YOURSELVES!  WHERE IS THE SAND?  WHERE IS THE SAND?" (thunk) (thunk)

Later that day, sounds are heard emanating from a pair of seemingly headless bodies.

(muffled) "Mmff.  Well, we sure showed him!"
(muffled) "Yeah, now everyone will see he's evil and bad, and sooner or later, the emptiness and loneliness of the social rejection that will surely follow will make him say he's sorry and that we're really good people who only want to help everyone.  Also, hugs."
(muffled) "Do you think he'll pat us on the head too?"
(muffled) "That would be nice."

 I am aware there are a few who still believe I post about McRapey due to jealousy, and it is to them I direct this question: what part of Award-Winning Cruelty Artist do you not understand?  This is not an obsession.  This is a Voxiversity course.  And if you still don't grasp that, you're not passing it.

Labels: , , ,

174 Comments:

Anonymous OCS January 21, 2013 4:22 AM  

But is it really cruelty if he's doing it to himself?

Anonymous VryeDenker January 21, 2013 4:49 AM  

I remember stumbling across a website a few years back called The Chronicles of George. This topic reminds me of that to some extent.

Anonymous Crude January 21, 2013 5:10 AM  

The one thing I question here is Scalzi's attack of "racist sexist homophobic dipshit". He repeats it over and over, and I get the impression he thinks those are really cutting, nasty words that may get under Vox's skin. I don't know Vox through anything but his blog posts, but I have to say... I don't think any of those words will phase him, and it's not like they become all that cutting when strung together. Much less the 'mancrush' thing.

I would have thought he'd have something sharper to use, being a writer.

Anonymous Signe January 21, 2013 5:24 AM  

What we need is Liberal Shaming Bingo. I think everyone would win on this particular foray.

"I was too busy to follow the blog myself; a friend told me about it."
"Libel/slander/you liar."
"Racist."
"Sexist."
"Homophobe."
"Stupid/dip****/ignorant."
"You're gay."
"I'd sue you but..."
"I'm more important than you."
"All your friends are stupid."
"I don't care what you think, and neither does anyone else who actually matters."

See? That's enough to win bingo in just the three paragraphs you quoted.

Anonymous Mudz January 21, 2013 5:28 AM  

He certainly doesn't sound upset. But what was wrong with his paste function?

Anonymous VD January 21, 2013 5:32 AM  

I would have thought he'd have something sharper to use, being a writer.

I'll have a post on this at AG later today. It relates to what some call the modern vs postmodern discourse, or heterotopic vs sensitivity-driven discourse. Consider the recent posts in light of what I previously wrote about the two modes of discourse:

The Rabbit People have three weapons and three weapons only. The first is to demand submission to their terms by virtue of the sensitivity imperative. If their interlocutor is unwilling to do that, they quickly move to the name-calling and the inevitable psychological analyses, again in the hopes of the interlocutor's submission. (This, by the way, is where most people crumble and permit themselves to be sidetracked into defending themselves against the charges that they are a raciss, sexiss, homophobiss rapiss.) Their final weapon is exclusion, which can be seen in the way feminized atheists like Richard Dawkins and PZ Myers, (unlike Sam Harris and the late Christopher Hitchens), shun debate with potentially competent opponents, and in the way gamma bloggers like Scalzi habitually attempt to attack people and arguments without so much as identifying them or even providing links to the arguments they are attacking.

His present behavior is entirely predictable and consistent with the discourse theory. His problem is that I do not acknowledge the sensitivity imperative, am impervious to the name-calling, and being outside their little warren, am immune to the exclusion. He has no choice but to either engage me on heterotopic terms or to hop away. He rightly fears the former but can't do the latter and still expect to retain the respect of the higher socio-sexually ranking members of the warren.

So, he hesitates, hopping away as far as he dares, then returning to the name-calling when the other Rabbit People literally demand a response from him. Notice how he is begging them to stay out of it, because he wants to remain Chief Rabbit and if they engage while he doesn't, he no longer merits the position. The totemic repetitions of "racist sexist homophobic dipshit" are only superficially intended for me; their real target is the warren because he is trying to show them how determined he is to fight for them and how worthy of his Chief Rabbit position he is.

What it signifies is his desperate desire to hop away entirely and his awareness that he is at risk of losing at least part of the warren over his demonstrated lack of ability to deal with the threat.

Anonymous Shutup, Tad January 21, 2013 5:41 AM  

I guess Tad hasn't gotten to work yet.

Shutup anyway, Tad.

Anonymous RacistSexistHomophobicDipshit January 21, 2013 5:55 AM  

...furthermore, he is strongly considering not having sex with us...

Blogger GAHCindy January 21, 2013 5:56 AM  

Funny. When something doesn't bother me, I tend to ignore it, not write foaming at the mouth blog posts about it. I'm feeling kinda sorry for the guy. Imagine being that panicked over attention you brought on yourself. Also, thank you for not making us look at that picture again. Gross.

Anonymous daddynichol January 21, 2013 6:07 AM  

That's Mister Racist Sexist Homophobic Dipshit to you, buster!

Blogger GF Dad January 21, 2013 6:17 AM  

On the one hand, I have to wonder why Scalazi would even condesend to acknowledge VD and the Ilk. On the other, I think this may be the opening salvo on behalf of his chosen candidate for SFWA president.

Anonymous VryeDenker January 21, 2013 6:39 AM  

What a little bitch.

Blogger Remo January 21, 2013 6:43 AM  

Okay I admit that my IQ is far less than stellar and I certainly do not self identify as a far removed Sigma (TM) but permit me an observation... This is friggin hilarious!! Even a dull-wit like myself can see the obvious comedy in this moron asserting that because he can't get laid that this somehow makes Vox a racist! He puts his disgusting, weak, people of Walmart quality bod on display, he is called on it, and suddenly we're all fags? This is great stuff!

Vox, I know you are only mildly amused by this, likely akin to Sheldon's patented .5 second laugh, but seriously this had me smiling for an hour. To keep the less complex of your viewing public entertained please keep poking the bunnies - where else I am going to get called every politically correct slur in the book just because this guy wants to be a doughy voyeur.

Anonymous Stilicho January 21, 2013 6:45 AM  

Encourage him to sue for libel. The truth is always a defense. I'll represent you just for the opportunity to cross examine him.

Blogger SgtGideonsDad January 21, 2013 6:46 AM  

Why are the guys who attack you so doughy?

Blogger tz January 21, 2013 6:48 AM  

Free speech I would grant to all.

Guns to all but those judicially judged to not be responsible.

I had to think about the bunny brigade for a moment, but I think their reaction to a firearm would be "Ewwww..."

The last rite is that of suffrage.

The problem is a system where votes translate into guns by proxy. The rabbits hire hyenas, wolves, or other canines. Creating an army of blue-coats worse than the red-coats which were expelled only with much difficulty and suffering. Yet the key here is in the original Constitution and something VD said above. Vote to declare me insensitive, say what you want, declare me not part of the community, I won't care and we can see who gets along better, who is the trunk and who is the branch.

But votes instead translate into jackboots - on both the right and left. Watership Down as war novel with the rabbits on the right and left fighting each other, not noticing the threat is from the increasingpopulation of hired canines.

Anonymous VD January 21, 2013 7:02 AM  

What we need is Liberal Shaming Bingo.

You forgot "sycophant".

Because I actually have a readership too large to pretend does not exist, it's very important to be sure to disqualify them too. Because Whatever readers who obediently feign shock-horror, tell McRapey that he is brave and fearless for standing up to the crazy stupid evil, and follow his instructions not to name the nameless or link here are fierce and independent freethinkers, while those who simply laugh at his antics must be my mind-controlled automatons.

And they think we're the insane ones....

Anonymous Mudz January 21, 2013 7:04 AM  

“John Scalzi says:
January 20, 2013 at 6:41 pm

I should note, incidentally, that I am trying a new setting on the Mallet of Loving Correction, borrowed from The Bloggess, in which certain sorts of racist sexist homophobic dipshits discover their comments subtly altered. I’ll try it on this thread and see what I think for future use.”

Do you guys think this is serious, or am I misinterpreting whimsy?

Anonymous Faust January 21, 2013 7:12 AM  

Yeah, for somebody who's not going to sue Vox for libel, he sure does use the word "libel" a lot.

Anonymous VD January 21, 2013 7:15 AM  

I know you are only mildly amused by this, likely akin to Sheldon's patented .5 second laugh, but seriously this had me smiling for an hour.

Oh, we've moved up to "modestly amused" now. I haven't actually laughed yet, but to put it the way so many bad writers of the sort who read Whatever would, my lips may have momentarily "quirked".

Blogger Jamie-R January 21, 2013 7:50 AM  

I want a McRapey. But I don't want fries or a coke. Okay I want fries, but I don't want it to be $8.15. That's the problem, price. Oh you can't do that? McDonald's today. Living off its name. Won't last much longer, cause Jordan and Bird don't eat bloody McNuggets no more. And I pay like $15 for 20 McNuggets here, that's not what this joint was set up for! Send em broke, fuck em!

Anonymous trk January 21, 2013 7:59 AM  

giggles

Anonymous anon123 January 21, 2013 8:08 AM  

On his way home from ConFusion? Sounds like he is still there.

Anonymous Noah B. January 21, 2013 8:08 AM  

No MLK day tribute?

Anonymous Crude January 21, 2013 8:09 AM  

The totemic repetitions of "racist sexist homophobic dipshit" are only superficially intended for me; their real target is the warren because he is trying to show them how determined he is to fight for them and how worthy of his Chief Rabbit position he is.

Alright, this actually makes a lot of sense. He's not really trying to get under your skin, he's launching the most devastating salvos he can easily reach for among his fanbase. So they're thinking 'oh wow, did you see the smackdown Scalzi put out? He called him racist, sexist, homophobic AND a dipshit. He's really coming out swinging!'

It took me a little to remember that for some people, "them's fighting words" and not parody.

Anonymous JartStar January 21, 2013 8:10 AM  

are only superficially intended for me; their real target is the warren because he is trying to show them how determined he is to fight for them and how worthy of his Chief Rabbit position he is.

Absolutely they are for the warren, and they are code words for the rabbits not to read what you have written lest they have an impure thought.

Blogger Joe A. January 21, 2013 8:13 AM  

Scalzi and friends are scared as hell of Vox. They openly admit it. They use name-calling as an argumentative tactic, and it's the highest level of argument they produce.

Anonymous TJIC January 21, 2013 8:13 AM  

@Crude:

> I would have thought he'd have something sharper to use, being a writer.

Yeah, but not a GOOD writer.

Have you read any of his stuff? It's mediocre, through and through.

A friend commented the other day that he doesn't have a creative bone in his body: his stuff is all rip-offs (excuse me - "homages") to Heinlein, Star Trek, H Beam Piper's Fuzzy universe, etc.

Anonymous Orville January 21, 2013 8:38 AM  

The one thing I question here is Scalzi's attack of "racist sexist homophobic dipshit". He repeats it over and over, and I get the impression he thinks those are really cutting, nasty words that may get under Vox's skin.

This is more a symptom of those preachers who have a secret fetish who spend all there words denouncing it. It's a giant red flashing light that the Pillsbury Tranny loves hot black man love.

Anonymous Toby Temple January 21, 2013 8:38 AM  

I guess McRapey got what it takes to be a drag queen.

He can add this to his resume - Looks 'queenie' on drag.

Anonymous grey_whiskers January 21, 2013 8:42 AM  

@VD --

"I do. The R word."
"Wow. I pity him. I really do. Here goes... OMFG, NOTHING HAPPENED!"
"What? That can't be! Try it again... TRY IT AGAIN!"
"R word! S word! H word! Stupid! Crazy! R WORD! S WORD! R WORD! DAMMIT, IT'S NOT WORKING!"
"AAAUUUGGH! RUN! SAVE YOURSELVES! WHERE IS THE SAND! WHERE IS THE SAND!" (thunk) (thunk)


*That* had me LOL'ing and in serious risk of waking my wife. Thank you for a great start to my morning.

Blogger vandelay January 21, 2013 8:46 AM  

I see he's moved on from "assbag".

Blogger LP 999/Eliza January 21, 2013 8:47 AM  


Now if that white cup were a white hoodie...

Aww, he looks better as a man. In some strange way, it is somehow fitting to praise a man when he does something right. Considering his status, which he is aware of, the encouragement might be helpful. But not the sign or the wallet on the head, just be, (gasp normal) nevermind. It is not wise to tell a man what to do anyways.

So, its now all Vox's fault for having a mancrush, which he doesn't have about rabbit pple or Sca/McR for pointing out what has happened to writing in our era? Oh, so everything is V's fault here?

Nothing but another diversion from the real issue and the poor man in a dress is taking everything too personal, again.

However, is there anything else better to cover or rehash this week? Probably not.

Anonymous Noah B. January 21, 2013 9:08 AM  

"It's a giant red flashing light that the Pillsbury Tranny loves hot black man love."

Now that would make an interesting book cover and would allow Scalzi to prove his moral superiority once and for all.

Blogger Nate January 21, 2013 9:09 AM  

My take on McRapey's response.

http://www.geeksaresexy.net/2013/01/19/thoughtful-comments-on-the-internet-comic/

Anonymous AmyJ January 21, 2013 9:30 AM  

You know, he really reminds me of this kid that used to pick on my baby sister. He was really tough with her, but when confronted by one of my three brothers about it, chose to shout insults at him through his bedroom window on the second floor of his house with his parents inside, rather than meet him head on when called out.

Blogger JD Curtis January 21, 2013 9:31 AM  

The truly sad part is that Scalzi couldn't cite a single instance of racism OR homophobia from Vox's writings this site if I bet him a hundred bucks. Really.

Anonymous Daniel January 21, 2013 9:32 AM  

This is really one of those cases where "no more pics and I'll believe you that it happened."

It's like watching slaves revolt to demand tighter shackles.

Anonymous Starbuck January 21, 2013 9:34 AM  

This all reminds me so much of middle school that I actually had flashbacks. eesh..

However I do keep hoping that Scalzi tries his best on a fiery response to this. It would be rather humorus.

Anonymous DaveD January 21, 2013 9:34 AM  

"Mancrushes may be. illegal in Ohio...."

Are you telling me McRapey is from Ohio too?

Fuck. Yet another reason to leave this state.

DD

Anonymous Poli_Mis January 21, 2013 9:38 AM  

I am having a t-shirt made that says, "The Dread Ilk" so that I may wear it at one of my band's next shows. When questioned about what kind of band are they, the inquirer will get an earful.

Anonymous ridip January 21, 2013 9:39 AM  

The only one in that picture worthy of a mancrush is Mary.

Blogger Nate January 21, 2013 9:49 AM  

The term rabbit people is insulting to the long eared rodents.

Bigwig would kick Scalzi's ass.

Anonymous Curlytop January 21, 2013 9:53 AM  

I have never observed this much attention seeking behavior outside the female sex. This douches' slogan needs to be: "I am Gamma, here me whine!"

Anonymous Lulabelle January 21, 2013 9:58 AM  

So, McR has a crush on Vox. Classic projection symptoms.
Run, Vox!! The Chubster wants you.
Lulabelle
(Proud member of the Dread Ilk since 2006)
On another note......why doesn't Nate post on his blog anymore?

Anonymous Lodi January 21, 2013 9:58 AM  

Vox, I suspect that arguing with Scalzi on the internet will be a lot like the Special Olympics, you may win, but you'll still be a retard.

Blogger Nate January 21, 2013 10:02 AM  

"On another note......why doesn't Nate post on his blog anymore?"

Because he is extremely busy. Firing off a comment here and there is one thing. Blogging is another... but again... I will try.

its monday... may as well start on a monday.

Anonymous Razoraid January 21, 2013 10:09 AM  

Oh noes, I am insane!!1!!!!! nOOOooooo

Anonymous VD January 21, 2013 10:10 AM  

I suspect that arguing with Scalzi on the internet will be a lot like the Special Olympics, you may win, but you'll still be a retard.

Do you see this as "arguing with Scalzi"? I don't. I consider it to be a cross between education, public service, and patronizing performance art.

Anonymous Daniel January 21, 2013 10:11 AM  

Lodi
I suspect that arguing with Scalzi on the internet will be a lot like the Special Olympics, you may win, but you'll still be a retard.

No. It is more like an able-bodied person entering the paralympics because some of the contestants hired a lawyer via a federal grant to sue Subway and Nike, thinking they were owed Michael Phelps' endorsement contracts.

Anonymous Lulabelle January 21, 2013 10:15 AM  

"its monday... may as well start on a monday."

Good. I look forward to the next post.


Anonymous Lulabelle January 21, 2013 10:17 AM  

Patronizing Performance Artist (PPA) may need to be added to the description up top.

Anonymous Razoraid January 21, 2013 10:19 AM  

It's for situations like this that God created the internet, and he saw that it was good.

Anonymous The CronoLink January 21, 2013 10:20 AM  

"OMFG, NOTHING HAPPENED!"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

Blogger Giraffe January 21, 2013 10:28 AM  

Patronizing Performance Artist (PPA) may need to be added to the description up top.

One of the many skills of an award winning cruelty artist.

Anonymous Loki of Asgard January 21, 2013 10:28 AM  

Vox, I suspect that arguing with Scalzi on the internet will be a lot like the Special Olympics, you may win, but you'll still be a retard.

You appear ignorant of the uses of fools. Few such uses are, but the amusement found in toying mercilessly with them until they squeal in outrage is unmatched.

Blogger vandelay January 21, 2013 10:29 AM  

While I appreciate the mockery of those who so deserve it, I can't imagine that this is winning Vox too many votes in the SFWA presidential race.

Anonymous Anonymous January 21, 2013 10:31 AM  

His peeps are wondering why he won't link to you. Also, some of them are questioning the 'I get to change your comments but keep your name on them' policy. It is a little wild. You're supposed to just ban trolls. Anyhow, there's trouble in rabbit land.

Anonymous Mrs. Scalzi January 21, 2013 10:37 AM  

What I wouldn't give for a racist sexist homophobic dipshit with tight abs and a tan right about now...

Anonymous Daniel January 21, 2013 10:42 AM  

While I appreciate the mockery of those who so deserve it, I can't imagine that this is winning Vox too many votes in the SFWA presidential race.

You might be amazed. Secret hamster is secret.

Anonymous Curlytop January 21, 2013 10:44 AM  

Any of the home-educating Ilk who are familiar with the Story of the World series will understand why "Rabbit Shoots the Sun" is running mercilessly through my head as I read the original post this morning.

Rabbit, great rabbit,
Rabbit, enemy of the Sun.
The Sun will learn my strength
Ho! Rabbit is coming!

Blogger Magister Wood January 21, 2013 10:46 AM  

Scalzi writes like an offended woman.

Anonymous rycamor January 21, 2013 10:55 AM  

I have to confess, it stings a little to be accused of homophobia when John keeps putting delectable, mancrushable eye candy like this on display.

I I especially like the implication that replacing young, lithe, fit attractive women with pasty white manboobed middle-aged men really flips the script, thereby exposing the misogyny. All it does is reinforce the existing gender stereotypes:

A. Top-tier alpha male surrounded by a servile harem of young women at the height of nubility.

B. Thirty-something woman finally retiring from the alpha-chase, giving a weary sigh while surveying the beta orbiters she is left with.

Anonymous Stilicho January 21, 2013 10:56 AM  

Scalzi's capacity for unintentional, self-righteous, self-mocking humor defies belief. That he takes himself so seriously when doing this just magnifies the hilarity.

Anonymous Josh January 21, 2013 10:58 AM  

I think the dread ilk should unleash the mad Aussie on the rabbit people. Imagine their collective outrage.

Anonymous Stingray January 21, 2013 10:59 AM  

have never observed this much attention seeking behavior outside the female sex.

I was thinking the exact same thing. If there was no name attached I would have sworn this was written by a woman.

Any of the home-educating Ilk who are familiar with the Story of the World series will understand why "Rabbit Shoots the Sun" is running mercilessly through my head as I read the original post this morning.

HA!

Anonymous patrick kelly January 21, 2013 11:11 AM  

Would y'all get a room already. Sheeze... after the lil' bit'o' this thread I read I need to go bathe in whiskey and gunpowder.

Anonymous The other skeptic January 21, 2013 11:13 AM  

Uh oh: Russia becomes a nation on Homophobes

Clearly, we have always been at war with Russia.

Anonymous Lodi January 21, 2013 11:17 AM  

Do you see this as "arguing with Scalzi"? I don't. I consider it to be a cross between education, public service, and patronizing performance art.

Just don't go full retard. Never go full retard.

Blogger IM2L844 January 21, 2013 11:18 AM  

Scalzi, the mundane pedestrian resorts to banality. Why am I neither surprised nor interested?

Anonymous zen0 January 21, 2013 11:25 AM  

I think I have an idea about what the main thrust of the anti-Vox campaign at SFWA is going to be.

You people should listen to me because I nailed the Electoral College vote, and therefore am a political genius.

Anonymous Tad January 21, 2013 11:26 AM  

@Vox Day

I think many see what looks like an obsession on your part. Some will wonder about the source of the obsession. Jealously? Envy? Whatever?

In any case, I think to most who casually observe the back and forth (and it does look like most of it is "forth" on your part, Vox Day) wonder why all the attention on one very successful author in your general genre.

It does come off as a little "icky".

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 21, 2013 11:35 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 21, 2013 11:35 AM  

Tad,

Why are you so obsessed and consumed with Vox? You should seek therapy, as clearly you are unbalanced and in need of institutional help.

Anonymous jack January 21, 2013 11:36 AM  

@ RacistSexistHomophobicDipshit

Well, you beat me to it, darn it. My my, Vox, you do write purty stuff don't you? Maybe that really is what the panting label generator is looking for. A session where you are spouting literate prose while administering whatever it is he desires most.

OK. Thats enough of a descent into prurient material for one day. Unless, the mancrusher master comes through again, and Vox treats us to more of those written things we desire most when visiting this blog.

Anonymous VD January 21, 2013 11:36 AM  

I think many see what looks like an obsession on your part. Some will wonder about the source of the obsession. Jealously? Envy? Whatever?

Let me get this straight. I post every now and then about John Scalzi. Let's be generous and say about once every three weeks on average. Meanwhile you post scores of comments on this blog every single week despite the fact that most of your fellow commenters observably regard you as the token syphilis-addled queer and shoot down your every argument with ease.

And from this, you somehow conclude that I'm the one with an obsession?

Blogger Giraffe January 21, 2013 11:37 AM  

@Tad

I think many see what looks like an obsession on your part.

In any case, I think to most who casually observe the back and forth (and it does look like most of it is "forth" on your part, Tad) wonder why all the attention on one very successful author in the fantasy genre.

It does come off as a little "icky".

Anonymous Signe January 21, 2013 11:38 AM  

I think many see what looks like an obsession on your part. Some will wonder about the source of the obsession. Jealously? Envy? Whatever?

Well, solipsism does that.

In any case, I think to most who casually observe the back and forth (and it does look like most of it is "forth" on your part, Vox Day) wonder why all the attention on one very successful author in your general genre.

"Very successful", huh? You left out "good-looking, intelligent, and charismatic" there, fanboy. I doubt he'd sleep with you, though, no matter how much you flatter him. Sorry to break your heart.

It does come off as a little "icky".

Did you really just use that word...? Dude, what's creepier is your apparent taste for teen-girl novels.

Blogger IM2L844 January 21, 2013 11:41 AM  

I think many see...
Some will wonder...
I think to most who...


Project much, Tad?

Blogger Giraffe January 21, 2013 11:42 AM  

"syphilis addled queer" Now that was much more funny than poking Scalzi with a stick. Which was also mildly amusing.

Anonymous Josh January 21, 2013 11:42 AM  

token syphilis-addled queer

How the VQPF have fallen

Anonymous Tad January 21, 2013 11:43 AM  

@Vox Day

Let me get this straight. I post every now and then about John Scalzi. Let's be generous and say about once every three weeks on average. Meanwhile you post scores of comments on this blog every single week despite the fact that most of your fellow commenters observably regard you as the token syphilis-addled queer and shoot down your every argument with ease.


And from this, you somehow conclude that I'm the one with an obsession?


You are a fan of logic, right? Ok. Then you'll agree that my own actions are no indicator of the correct characterization of your actions. That said, you do seem defensive to me...and a little obsessed.

Fact is, some folks see you as obsessed with this successful author in your general genre. No biggie....Just an observation.

I presume you dismiss this characterization. I can only imagine your surprise in learning that I dismiss your categorization of my actions as silly nonsense.

Anonymous Noah B. January 21, 2013 11:44 AM  

'It does come off as a little "icky".'

While most here would surely admit that you have an uncanny tendency to home in on all things "icky" like a heat seeking missile, in this case, I suspect your motives are somewhat disingenuous.

Anonymous The other skeptic January 21, 2013 11:44 AM  


Clearly, we have always been at war with Russia.


That should have been: Clearly, we have always been at war with homophobia.

Tad, your duty is clear. Begone to Russia and show those homophobes a thing or two.

(Just as clearly the homosexual lobby cannot afford this affront to their authority.)

Anonymous jack January 21, 2013 11:46 AM  

@How the VQPF have fallen

OK. I will take the plunge and risk criticism. What is VQPF?

Anonymous Signe January 21, 2013 11:50 AM  

You are a fan of logic, right? Ok. Then you'll agree that my own actions are no indicator of the correct characterization of your actions.

No, but it's fun to point out that you're a syphilis-addled queer. Rolls right off the ton--

Eee, no, can't say that. You'd get the wrong mental image, you perv.

That said, you do seem defensive to me...and a little obsessed.

Fact is, some folks see you as obsessed with this successful author in your general genre. No biggie....Just an observation.


Should he care what you and the frog in your pocket think, or should he not? God, you vacillate more than a woman--but then again, it's always the amateur imitators who overdo, so yeah.

But don't mind my opinions. Just, y'know, some people think you're kind of womanish. And that's just icky.

I can only imagine your surprise in learning that I dismiss your categorization of my actions as silly nonsense.

We are all familiar with your selective approach to reality by now, Tad. Dead people are not surprised.

Blogger Nate January 21, 2013 11:51 AM  

"What is VQPF?"

Vox's Queer Party Friends. Think of it as the flaming gay counter culture of the Ilk... lead by El Zinky Pinky himself.

Blogger The Great and Powerful Oz January 21, 2013 11:53 AM  

I used to follow Scalzi's blog when it was mildly interesting. These days it has become an attention seeking "look at me! Look at me!" vehicle. Unfortunately, Blogger is so badly broken that I can't remove him from my list of blogs I follow.

One of the things I find interesting is that one of the professionals who runs in the same circles and who is a devout Mormon would endorse Scalzi on some issues, but remain totally silent on those that conflict with the Mormon faith. Over the past year or so, he has become much quieter about almost everything that Scalzi says. It's obvious to me that he is slowly distancing himself, but is being careful to not generate negative publicity for himself.

On a different topic, I saw that Steve Gould has announced his candidacy for President of SFWA. I knew Steve many years ago and I can't say that I would recommend him for the office, like the current incumbent he tends to get into liberal political issues, which I think detracts from the business of supporting professional writers.

Anonymous VD January 21, 2013 12:19 PM  

You are a fan of logic, right? Ok. Then you'll agree that my own actions are no indicator of the correct characterization of your actions. That said, you do seem defensive to me...and a little obsessed.

No, I do not agree. But yes, let's turn to the logic. You have chosen a metric as the basis of your claim concerning my purported obsession. By that metric, you are observably around two orders of magnitude MORE obsessed than I am.

Logic and your chosen metric dictates that you are significantly more obsessed with me than I am with John Scalzi. Is that the case, Tad? Are you far more obsessed with me than you believe me to be with McRapey? Or is your metric incorrect?

Anonymous VD January 21, 2013 12:24 PM  

I saw that Steve Gould has announced his candidacy for President of SFWA. I knew Steve many years ago and I can't say that I would recommend him for the office, like the current incumbent he tends to get into liberal political issues, which I think detracts from the business of supporting professional writers.

Yes, he is the status quo candidate. It's great, because the membership has a very clear choice between Steve, who has promised that he will maintain the present direction, and my platform of extremely radical reform. But I expect one or two more candidates to emerge before the election. I'm a little surprised that the current VP hasn't declared for President yet; she is the one I expected to be the status quo candidate.

Anonymous Tad January 21, 2013 12:26 PM  

@Vox Day

If you and I worked in the same industry or wrote in the same genre...If I wrote a blog and constantly criticized you in it. Well then, yes, you might be right.

But I'm just saying, Vox Day, your constant attention paid to this person, his blog, his actions; your taking him on in an election you have no intention of competing in; your mocking of him.....Well, gee, it just comes off as not just obsessive, but as envy and jealously.

No matter. It's just an observation, young man. I have every confidence you'll mature out of this seemingly envious phase. I have confidence in you.

Anonymous Shutup, Tad January 21, 2013 12:29 PM  

Tad is logically incorrect

Ergo

Tad should shutup.

Shutup, Tad.

Blogger ajw308 January 21, 2013 12:33 PM  

Bunny Boy's overuse of adjectives reminds me of a peanuts strip where someone had to write a paper and meet a word count. The overuse of adjectives was the comical point of the strip.

Now, if it's ridiculous for a fictitious 3rd grader to overuse adjectives in a comic strip, where does that put a grown man in real life?

Anonymous Signe January 21, 2013 12:38 PM  

If you and I worked in the same industry or wrote in the same genre...If I wrote a blog and constantly criticized you in it.

No, you just work in law and rights, which is the subject of a lot of his posts. And you comment on his blog, where you are sure to get his attention. Totally different.

But I'm just saying, Vox Day, your constant attention paid to this person, his blog, his actions

Nothing better demonstrates an obsession than paying constant, close attention to a man's blog and commenting on his actions, amirite?

your taking him on in an election you have no intention of competing in; your mocking of him.....Well, gee, it just comes off as not just obsessive, but as envy and jealously.

Solipsism, be our wild mistress!

No matter. It's just an observation, young man. I have every confidence you'll mature out of this seemingly envious phase. I have confidence in you.

Hmm, is this an attempt at patronizing? Um...wait...ye--NO. The wrist was too limp for that gesture to be a pat on the cheek. I think it was a badly aimed grope.

Anonymous Signe January 21, 2013 12:39 PM  

Bunny Boy's overuse of adjectives reminds me of a peanuts strip where someone had to write a paper and meet a word count. The overuse of adjectives was the comical point of the strip.

Found it!

Anonymous Randy M January 21, 2013 12:40 PM  

"Fact is, some folks see you as obsessed with this successful author in your general genre. No biggie....Just an observation. "

Name some?

I don't see it as envy or "icky" but pointing out a prime example of some of the ideas Vox discusses. It's become a running gag, emphasis now on gag.

Blogger ajw308 January 21, 2013 12:41 PM  

syphilis-addled queer
The Godwin Factor of this thread has reached unity!

Anonymous VD January 21, 2013 12:42 PM  

If you and I worked in the same industry or wrote in the same genre...If I wrote a blog and constantly criticized you in it. Well then, yes, you might be right.

That has nothing to do with your metric, Tad. You can't escape it, logic dictates that either I am not obsessed with John Scalzi or you are far more obsessed with me.

But I'm just saying, Vox Day, your constant attention paid to this person, his blog, his actions; your taking him on in an election you have no intention of competing in; your mocking of him.....Well, gee, it just comes off as not just obsessive, but as envy and jealously.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, Tad. John isn't running for president. My opponent is Steven Gould. Moreover, I am actively competing in the election, in fact, I have been asked far more questions about my platform, and answered them, than my opponent has. Apparently you are not a member of the SFWA and do not have access to the member forums.

Anonymous Signe January 21, 2013 12:43 PM  

The Godwin Factor of this thread has reached unity!

Nazi.

Anonymous The CronoLink January 21, 2013 1:06 PM  

Too bad Tad will never mature out of his obsessive phase.

Anonymous Amanjaw Marcuntte January 21, 2013 1:09 PM  

So I felt like having a little sport at thinskin's blog.

First post, short & sweet: "Vox destroyed you." He edited out my (admittedly offensive) name and yours within minutes.

Second post: "Why does he get under your skin so badly? Is it because he calls you McRapey? I bet it's because he calls you McRapey. And what is it with you manginas and kittens? Bitchtitz Futrelle is obsessed with them too. He deleted that text wholesale, also within minutes.

Lesson learned: you really, really got in this guy's head, Vox. Well done. Also, McRapey" rattles him hard.

Anonymous Tad January 21, 2013 1:14 PM  

@Vox Day

That has nothing to do with your metric, Tad. You can't escape it, logic dictates that either I am not obsessed with John Scalzi or you are far more obsessed with me.

Vox, calm down. It's just an observation. I'm not implying your obsession is debilitating. I just think it implies envy and jealously and that it doesn't reflect well on you. No big deal. Just an observation.

You should quit obsessing on my observations and move on to more political predictions or attempts at understanding and interpreting the American Constitution or explaining why women or jews or or gays or atheists or minorities are dangerous. That's the real entertaining stuff.

Blogger Giraffe January 21, 2013 1:26 PM  

Vox, calm down. It's just an observation. I'm not implying your obsession is debilitating. I just think it implies envy and jealously and that it doesn't reflect well on you. No big deal. Just an observation.

You should quit obsessing on my observations and move on to more political predictions or attempts at understanding and interpreting the American Constitution or explaining why women or jews or or gays or atheists or minorities are dangerous. That's the real entertaining stuff.


Translation: Please don't be creeped out. Everyone I want always gets weird about it. Go back to posting about other things and I'll go back to fantasizing about you washing my back in the whirlpool........

Anonymous Loki of Asgard January 21, 2013 1:30 PM  

Vox, calm down. It's just an observation. I'm not implying your obsession is debilitating. I just think it implies envy and jealously and that it doesn't reflect well on you. No big deal. Just an observation.

You should quit obsessing on my observations and move on to more political predictions or attempts at understanding and interpreting the American Constitution or explaining why women or jews or or gays or atheists or minorities are dangerous. That's the real entertaining stuff.


Kindly stop. Your deviant obsession and consequent attempts at flirtation with Vox are giving us legitimate trolls a bad name. Go on and threaten to withhold sexual favours from him and be done.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 21, 2013 1:34 PM  

Tad,

Quit revolving around Vox.

The pleasure you get from having the object of your desire and obsession respond to you has reached such a level that I bet you can't control yourself and stop posting.

The first step is to admit that you have a problem.

Anonymous Mr. Nightstick January 21, 2013 1:38 PM  

Tad's very real man crush on Vox is apparent to all the ilk. I wonder which pictures of Vox he keeps on his computer, the pics of Young Vox or Mature Vox. At second thought, I don't want to know.

Anonymous VD January 21, 2013 1:51 PM  

Vox, calm down. It's just an observation. I'm not implying your obsession is debilitating. I just think it implies envy and jealously and that it doesn't reflect well on you. No big deal. Just an observation.

Okay, you've convinced me, Tad. I must be obsessed with him. I clearly have a mancrush his squicky prose and his snarky taunts. I am going to own my obsession and embrace it as if it was his doughy white flesh. I've just posted my first homage to him in my new light of understanding. There will be more to come.

Thank you, Tad, for helping me see the light!

Anonymous Tad January 21, 2013 1:57 PM  

@Giraffe

I'll go back to fantasizing about you washing my back in the whirlpool.......

A whirlpool has never figured into the fantasy....They tend to be very untidy.

Blogger Giraffe January 21, 2013 2:01 PM  

Uh... I'll take your word for it.

Anonymous Tad January 21, 2013 2:03 PM  

@VD

Thank you, Tad, for helping me see the light!

It's a first step to redemption. Acknowledging the problem. Plus, and again, it's really the focus on how jews, gays, minorities and women are all unworthy that gets your readers all lathered up. I'd go with that.


The political predictions though.....Not a profitable space for you.

P.S....Are you looking to do a full scare overhaul of the Bylaws of the SFWA if the membership forgets your obsession and votes for you? I think you'll have a better chance at victory and Bylaw reform if you just let it go.

Anonymous Jack Amok January 21, 2013 2:14 PM  

What it signifies is his desperate desire to hop away entirely and his awareness that he is at risk of losing at least part of the warren over his demonstrated lack of ability to deal with the threat.

Belatedly he discovers that being the Alpha of any group doesn’t just mean accepting accolades and wearing a snazzy crown. You’re expected to defend against threats too, and my goodness those dogs have sharp teeth.

This is where Vox’s cruelty comes into play as a force for good. Forcing the Rabbit Leaders to stand and fight or run and abandon their positions, will eventually destroy the warren. The rabbits will still exist, they’ll always be with us, but without leaders they can’t be organized, and without the weight of numbers behind them they have no power. They’ll drift quietly into whatever niches they can occupy and nibble on their clover without disturbing the rest of us. Thing is, that’s a great life for the rabbits – we don’t want their clover, they’re welcome to as much of it as they want, and we’d be happy to leave them alone if they’d just quit creating problems for us.

It’s the wannabe Chief Rabbits like Scalzi that ruin it not just for us, but for the rabbits too. He gets them all riled up, drawing unwanted attention to the warren. The problem with a Kingdom of Gammas is they have no real Alphas to lead them, and Alpha (the socio, rather than the sexual type) involves a lot of clear understanding about force, power, and the downside of belligerence. Gammas, like drama-addicted women who assume someone will rescue them from any serious harm, mouth off at the wrong time and don’t know when to back down. They make terrible leaders. You folks noting Scalzi writes like an attention-seeking woman are spot on.

The problem is a system where votes translate into guns by proxy. The rabbits hire hyenas, wolves, or other canines

Interesting observation. It’s a twist on “two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch.” The rabbits vote with the wolf, thinking he’ll only eat mutton. Stupid, stupid rabbits, one day the wolf will run out of sheep…

Anonymous kh123 January 21, 2013 2:15 PM  

"On the way home from ConFusion today I received a concerned phone call from a good friend, who informed me that someone had just posted something about me online that to his eye was entirely libelous;"

Ahhhh, good times. Have only gotten this far and can already tell that the vapors will be quite heavy from the rabbit dutch today.

Anonymous kh123 January 21, 2013 2:16 PM  

Or hutch.

Need one of those SARS masks before reading further.

Anonymous I Am Irony, Man January 21, 2013 3:01 PM  

Tad: "I think many see what looks like an obsession on your part...It does come off as a little "icky"."

Pot-kettle.

Anonymous Todd January 21, 2013 3:05 PM  

Yeah, so, new reader here. What's with the bizarre rabbit metaphor? Can't you just explain what you mean without the metaphor?

Anonymous Megabozz January 21, 2013 3:08 PM  

Vox is apparently Lord Voldemort (He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named) in Scalzi's timid universe.

Anonymous Signe January 21, 2013 3:16 PM  

Yeah, so, new reader here. What's with the bizarre rabbit metaphor? Can't you just explain what you mean without the metaphor?

This seems to be where the term was first used. Read and learn, and as a tip, less aggression next time. The Ilk have sharp claws.

Anonymous TD January 21, 2013 3:18 PM  

>>>The problem is a system where votes translate into guns by proxy....

>>Interesting observation.

It's not just interesting -- it's the observation to understand and integrate into one's thinking about democratic politics. (This isn't directed so much at you -- everyone here is smart enough to grasp it already -- but rather to the generic American citizen I'm mentally envisioning as I write this.)

Voting is simply the way "we" decide how the state's guns will be used, and toward whom they'll be pointed. That is what's so maddening about the "gun control" push: Insofar as big government is a proxy for the left, gun control is just a way for the left to keep itself armed while disarming its opponents.

The state is violent force. Laws aren't suggestions.

Anonymous jay c January 21, 2013 3:26 PM  

RSHD.... Got to start using that as a hashtag.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 21, 2013 3:28 PM  

@ Todd

Metaphors are useful devices to reference that which would otherwise take too long to fully explain over and over and over again, ad nauseum. Especially every time a new reader came aboard (and welcome aboard).

Some of these things can be found in the Voxicon (also linked at top left).

Blogger Nate January 21, 2013 3:30 PM  

"This seems to be where the term was first used. Read and learn, and as a tip, less aggression next time. The Ilk have sharp claws."

You also have the whole R/ selection thing...

Anonymous Todd January 21, 2013 3:33 PM  

Signe, yeah, so I read your link. There is no clear indication why rabbits are used. In fact it seems to distract from the actual point being made.

Also, tipping me to be less aggressive, whatever that means, seems rather ironic given the link.

Anonymous FP January 21, 2013 3:36 PM  

"The state is violent force. Laws aren't suggestions."

And we're going to be "led" by dudes getting their panties in a wad after they put on a dress and panties. Armed with crossbows of truth, social justice, and kinky farkery.

Oh, and the mangina author forgot to throw in "bigot" in his name calling rant. Its just not the same unless they call me a bigot.

Anonymous Signe January 21, 2013 3:48 PM  

Also, tipping me to be less aggressive, whatever that means, seems rather ironic given the link.

Well, you said you were new. If you want to fight with folks, you won't find a shortage of fighters, that's all.

Anonymous kh123 January 21, 2013 3:52 PM  

In simpler terms:

-What Scalzi and the warren imagine

-The reality, otherwise known as the Volkovoy/Okhotnik Paradox.

Anonymous stevev January 21, 2013 4:06 PM  

I know this comment will get lost among all the erudition (not you, Tad), but Nate's link to the comic literally set me off choking on my swig of Dr.Pepper.

"I can typing!"

I'm getting a t-shirt, dammit.

Anonymous VD January 21, 2013 4:18 PM  

Also, tipping me to be less aggressive, whatever that means, seems rather ironic given the link.

He was doing you a favor. The point is that, based on considerable past experience here, the chances are very, very high that you're going to get your ass metaphorically kicked in a brutal and humiliating manner by someone here who is much smarter and experienced in dialectic discourse than you are. Especially since you needed help with the Rabbit People metaphor for r-selection rhetorical postmodernists; I've never bothered to explain it since everyone gets it.

So, if you want a fight, fine. You'll find one. But if you're not keen to get publicly shredded like a few thousand other commenters before you, you may want to start out on a lighter note. Doesn't matter to me. Doesn't matter to anyone else. It's your call.

Anonymous Stilicho January 21, 2013 4:21 PM  

r/k selection theory in one picture: rabbit people

Blogger Bogey January 21, 2013 4:41 PM  

"his racist sexist homophobic dipshit blog readers"

All of us here who read Vox Popoli were just fucking slandered by this grotesque little doughy troll of a man.

Blogger Nate January 21, 2013 4:45 PM  

"I know this comment will get lost among all the erudition (not you, Tad), but Nate's link to the comic literally set me off choking on my swig of Dr.Pepper."

Thank God someone saw it...

Anonymous Signe January 21, 2013 4:50 PM  

"He"?

I'm going to go have a good cry now.

Anonymous Todd January 21, 2013 5:02 PM  

@ VD

You make some pretty bold assertions with limited evidence, especially because I am new here. Dialetics? Hegel? Yeah, I've clearly never heard of any of that.

Clearly you can make whatever metaphors you want. Using obtuse or unclear metaphors will not help spread your ideology to noobs like me.

Anonymous kh123 January 21, 2013 5:03 PM  

As per Vox's observation, there's also the Robbespierre Paradox to consider: Scalzi attempting to be the dominant r-Type within the warren. In other words, the biggest baddest rabbit of the hutch.

Anonymous Idle Spectator January 21, 2013 5:06 PM  

I'm sorry I was reading and I can't help myself.

Clearly you can make whatever metaphors you want. Using obtuse or unclear metaphors will not help spread your ideology to noobs like me.

Yes, using a rabbit and a wolf is very obtuse. Next we'll be featuring Winnie the Pooh, which has a tiger and a donkey in it. Remember, Winnie loves you.

Anonymous kh123 January 21, 2013 5:06 PM  

Explanations and pictures. What more can one want. There's even the wonderful world of Wikipedia, where one can type in r/K selection theory.

Anonymous Daniel January 21, 2013 5:07 PM  

Todd, the ideology wouldn't spread to you if Vox buttered you in it, both sides.

Although it might make a mean hasenpfeffer, now that I think of it...

In any case, I wouldn't twitch my cute little nose too much thinking about it, if I were you.

Blogger Nate January 21, 2013 5:12 PM  

"Clearly you can make whatever metaphors you want. Using obtuse or unclear metaphors will not help spread your ideology to noobs like me."

I encourage you to hang out here more. You've clearly go a lot to learn... and this is a good place to learn it.

Anonymous Todd January 21, 2013 5:17 PM  

I'm curious. How many commenters here have a degree in biology or environmental science, and have studied these concepts in a formal class setting? I have.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 21, 2013 5:22 PM  

Todd,

Many, many, many, numerous of the Ilk (those who that regular here) in fact have degrees in what is commonly termed the hard sciences.

I would say that most do, but I don't know that to be fact.

Biology and environmental are soft science.

So now that you don't feel better about yourself, do as Nate suggests, and read and learn.

If you behave nicely, so will it be returned to you, even in disagreement.

Anonymous Stickwick January 21, 2013 5:22 PM  

I'm curious. How many commenters here have a degree in biology or environmental science, and have studied these concepts in a formal class setting? I have.

How is this relevant to the discussion?

Anonymous Loki of Asgard January 21, 2013 5:26 PM  

I'm curious. How many commenters here have a degree in biology or environmental science, and have studied these concepts in a formal class setting? I have.

A badass with a sheepskin. You've not had one of those about. Prepare to be enlightened, mortals.

Blogger Giraffe January 21, 2013 5:27 PM  

I'm curious. How many commenters here have a degree in biology or environmental science, and have studied these concepts in a formal class setting? I have.

Yeah he's the Dick to the Dawk to the P-H-D,
he's smarter than you he's got a science degree!
The Dick to the Dawk to the P-H-D,
he's still smarter than you he studied biology!

Blogger SarahsDaughter January 21, 2013 5:32 PM  

What an unfortunate time to have a guest coming for dinner. I'll catch up with popcorn later.

Anonymous Stilicho January 21, 2013 5:34 PM  

I'm curious.

Tad can help you with that.

How many commenters here have a degree in biology or environmental science, and have studied these concepts in a formal class setting? I have.

Yet you did not recognize the references to r/K selection. Interesting.

Anonymous Idle Spectator January 21, 2013 5:41 PM  

Biology and environmental are soft science.

Biology is no longer a soft science. That stamp collecting quote by the physicist Ernest Rutherford is way out of date. With the addition of genetics, bioinformatics, and biochemistry, it's as rigorous as physics in many areas now.

Environmental? Maybe. They are starting to apply rigorous mathematical models and computing to it. It has a better chance of succeeding than economics (probably).

Blogger LP 999/Eliza January 21, 2013 5:43 PM  

An obsession?! Nein. This is pure entertainment and very edu-AWCA train.

Carry on Vox!!

Anonymous Daniel January 21, 2013 5:50 PM  

I'm curious. How many commenters here have a degree in biology or environmental science, and have studied these concepts in a formal class setting? I have.

What is your point?

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 21, 2013 5:51 PM  

Idle:
Biology is no longer a soft science.....


It was a general statement. Are all endeavors in biology soft? No. But it is still a common saying that most understand.

Anonymous Idle Spectator January 21, 2013 5:56 PM  

It was a general statement. Are all endeavors in biology soft? No. But it is still a common saying that most understand.

And now it is detailed, so all may understand.

So sayth the Spectation of Idle.

Blogger Bogey January 21, 2013 6:45 PM  

After seeing Scalzi in that sexy slinky little number, blond wig and panties (I'm only guessing or fantasizing), I feel the arguments made here have become manifestly realized. Now if we can only get him to dress in a bunny suit.

Anonymous VD January 21, 2013 7:25 PM  

You make some pretty bold assertions with limited evidence, especially because I am new here. Dialetics? Hegel? Yeah, I've clearly never heard of any of that.

No, I really don't. I've been doing this for a long time. The question isn't whether you've heard of it or not, but do you truly know and understand it. This isn't college boy crap where you can fake it. People here actually know what they're talking about, for the most part, and posers get exposed very, very rapidly.

Also, you should probably note your credentialism isn't going to cut any ice here. There are people here whose academic credentials will certainly trump your own. You're already showing signs of being in over your head as one accustomed to postmodern discourse.

"is oriented to the standard measures of grades, tests, and a closely defined curriculum"

Anonymous VD January 21, 2013 7:26 PM  

What is your point?

I imagine he wants to show us how high he has hopped, Daniel.

Anonymous Tad January 21, 2013 7:58 PM  

@Vox Day

No, I really don't. I've been doing this for a long time. The question isn't whether you've heard of it or not, but do you truly know and understand it. This isn't college boy crap where you can fake it.

Hold on now. That sort of depends on the subject matter. For example, if its reading the political landscape and making predictions, you certainly are doing this at pre college level. I've also seen you offer up very limited, high school level analyses of the U.S. Constitution. So, really, depending on the subject, these are faked here.

Anonymous The CronoLink January 21, 2013 8:46 PM  

You're way over your head, Tad. But by all means, keep going ahead. FORWARD!!

Anonymous MendoScot January 21, 2013 9:15 PM  

Biology is no longer a soft science. That stamp collecting quote by the physicist Ernest Rutherford is way out of date. With the addition of genetics, bioinformatics, and biochemistry, it's as rigorous as physics in many areas now.

All sciences start out as stamp (or butterfly) collecting. They move to physics or, better, mathematics as they become more logically rigorous. Of your three, I would say that bioinformatics is the most rigorous, but sadly lacking in butterflies. Genetics and biochemistry fail in parallel with the specificity of their mathematical predictions.

Anonymous Jack Amok January 21, 2013 9:31 PM  

I'm curious. How many commenters here have a degree in biology or environmental science, and have studied these concepts in a formal class setting? I have.

I have a strange feeling I've seen this movie before.

Anonymous Ridip January 21, 2013 10:09 PM  

[T]he ideology wouldn't spread to you if Vox buttered you in it, both sides.

Although it might make a mean hasenpfeffer, now that I think of it...


Uh, no. Not butter. Hasenpfeffer is made with the rabbits own blood.

But hey, make of that what you will.

Anonymous Idle Spectator January 21, 2013 10:35 PM  

I would say that bioinformatics is the most rigorous, but sadly lacking in butterflies

Well if you squint, and imagine hard enough, I guess the adenine and guanine nucleobases with two biochemical heterocyclic rings from purine look like butterfly wings.
And the thymine, cytosine, and uracil nucleobases with a single pyrimidine ring look like lepidoptera abdomens.

Genetics and biochemistry fail in parallel with the specificity of their mathematical predictions.

For now.

Anonymous Rex Little January 22, 2013 1:28 AM  

what part of Award-Winning Cruelty Artist do you not understand?

Well, I would like to know if the awards you've won are for Cruelty Artistry or for something else. And if the former, who gives out such awards? (That last might fall under the heading of Things Man Was Not Meant To Know, but I'll risk it.)

Anonymous tiredofitall January 22, 2013 2:58 AM  

"Lesson learned: you really, really got in this guy's head, Vox. Well done. Also, McRapey" rattles him hard." - Amanjaw Marcuntte

Yeah, even if you slip "McRapey" in as an acrostic in a post he'll catch on to it eventually and banhammer it away.

My humble opinion is that Vox Day is far better at getting his point across.
Contrary to you Mr. Scalzi, who must sink to childish name-calling.
Recent posts by you only bolster that fact.
And if you continue on this track, will alienate people who might agree with you.
People who are also members of the book buying public.
Every time you fall into the trap of emotion vs logic you lose.
You can be better than that.

Anonymous Rex Little January 22, 2013 3:43 AM  

I'm also curious where "Mcrapey" comes from. It's clear why "rape" is in there, but is there a reason why you wrap it in an Irish coating instead of German or Italian or Polish or something else?

Anonymous Todd January 22, 2013 3:51 AM  

@ VD
I am out of my depth in postmodern discourse. So what's new? You sound like Will Hunting by the way. College boy crap. LOL.
My reason for asking about people's science backgrounds is that it helps me understand the assumptions they may or may not be bringing to this discussion.
Using r/k theory as a metaphor for (what exactly is still unclear - individual fitness of political ideas?) whatever is problematic. It's use in biology has some serious problems of validity, so extending it into metaphor seems like a poor choice. Take my feedback or don't, it just seems like a dumb metaphor that obfuscates what you are trying to say. It seems more like a secret handshake rather than something leading to a rigorous discussion.
As for whether biology is hard or soft, it has elements of both, in different degrees in different sub-disciplines.

Anonymous Luke January 22, 2013 4:21 AM  

Interesting essay on the history of, and decline due to women's admission to college, of debate and rhetoric:

http://unmaskingfeminism.wordpress.com/2013/01/04/the-feminization-of-rhetoric/

Anonymous Luke January 22, 2013 4:29 AM  

Oh, and the worthy Steve Sailer wrote something related, and substantive:

http://isteve.blogspot.ca/2012/12/intellectual-discourse-taking.html

On another topic, I'd love to hear Vox's take on Lysander Spooner's rejection of the Constitution binding anyone but those who favored it at the time of its adoption:

http://jim.com/treason.htm

Anonymous VD January 22, 2013 4:57 AM  

I am out of my depth in postmodern discourse. So what's new? You sound like Will Hunting by the way. College boy crap. LOL. My reason for asking about people's science backgrounds is that it helps me understand the assumptions they may or may not be bringing to this discussion.

No, again you show that you can't follow. You are out of your depth in modern discourse; you are engaging in post-modern discourse. Your reason for asking about people's science backgrounds is not because you want to better understand their assumptions, but rather because you wish to be able to disqualify people from the discussion. This is a basic postmodern tactic and is almost always seen from those with at least a modest amount of credentials.

The fact is that you don't need to understand their assumptions, you only need to know what the ideas are.

Using r/k theory as a metaphor for (what exactly is still unclear - individual fitness of political ideas?) whatever is problematic. It's use in biology has some serious problems of validity, so extending it into metaphor seems like a poor choice.

It is not problematic at all, particularly not when it so nicely fits the observable patterns of behavior exhibited by different groups of people. Its validity in the current consensus in biological science is irrelevant, as the utility of a metaphor lies in whether it makes a concept easier to grasp or not, not its literal reality or acceptance by the scientific community.

Take my feedback or don't, it just seems like a dumb metaphor that obfuscates what you are trying to say. It seems more like a secret handshake rather than something leading to a rigorous discussion.

It doesn't obfuscate, but rather clarifies. Why would you imagine that a rigorous discussion is the purpose? The purpose is to help the dialectical to identify the rhetorical and understand the need to communicate with the rhetorical in their language. A wolf cannot reason with a rabbit. A wolf can only frighten a rabbit, force its submission, force it to run away, or devour it.

Now, I can, and have, explained this literally ancient Aristotelian concept in dialectical terms, but the Rabbit People metaphor has proven much easier for people to grasp and utilize.

Now, are you following this and do you have a rational response to it or are you simply a rabbit whose only objective is to try to show he can hop higher than me and thereby claim I am crazystupidwrongbad on that basis? The jury is still out.

Anonymous VD January 22, 2013 4:59 AM  

You sound like Will Hunting by the way.

That is an apt way to put it. Except I have the college degree, so I know from experience how useless they are. At least by calling it a BS, there is honesty in the advertising.

Anonymous VD January 22, 2013 5:04 AM  

I'm also curious where "Mcrapey" comes from. It's clear why "rape" is in there, but is there a reason why you wrap it in an Irish coating instead of German or Italian or Polish or something else?

It sounds funny. It's short for Rapey McRaperson. Originally coined for the author now known as "Black Seed" Bakker due to his love for lethal interspecies rape scenes, the title was stolen by John Scalzi with his now famous "I, Rapist" post.

Anonymous Todd January 22, 2013 3:49 PM  

@ VD

A wolf cannot reason with any animal. To the extent that it is capable of reasoning, it does so in its own mind.

I agree with you that a college degree is often BS. Many college students spend their time partying rather than studying.

Because I don't have the power to disqualify anything, you saying that I ask about educational background to disqualify is plain wrong. Educational background can tell me something about assumptions. Assumptions are also ideas. Therefore, by understanding assumptions, I can understand ideas, such as the utility of r/k selection, more completely.

You are the only person so far who has brought up being crazystupidwrongbad. I thought we were engaged in discourse. You seem to be worried about value judgments against your character.

Anonymous Anonymous January 22, 2013 5:16 PM  

Rabbit people hate everything they dont understand and since they understand little everything is hated.

Anonymous VD January 22, 2013 7:40 PM  

Because I don't have the power to disqualify anything, you saying that I ask about educational background to disqualify is plain wrong. Educational background can tell me something about assumptions. Assumptions are also ideas. Therefore, by understanding assumptions, I can understand ideas, such as the utility of r/k selection, more completely.

Bullshit. That's entirely faux logic. Penis size can also tell you about assumptions. Assumptions are also ideas, therefore, by understanding assumptions, you can understand ideas more completely. So why didn't you asking everyone how big their dicks are?

You are the only person so far who has brought up being crazystupidwrongbad. I thought we were engaged in discourse. You seem to be worried about value judgments against your character.

You're rabbiting. If we are engaged in discourse, then why are you engaging in theorizing about what does or does not concern me? What is your logic behind concluding that I am "worried about value judgments against your character."

You don't seem to realize that you are providing additional evidence that the discourse you seek is a postmodern, sensitivity-driven one, as I surmised from the moment you sought to appeal to credentials. And you have tried to discuss practically everything except the actual idea that you supposedly want to discuss.

So please clarify, specifically what is your object with regards to the discourse you are seeking. And what do you believe the subject of that discourse to be?

Blogger tz January 23, 2013 6:34 AM  

I didn't comment earlier, but it was about two decades ago I started noticing the use of racistsexisthomophobe in discourse and it was the ad-hominem of choice when they had no logic or way out of a contradiction I or others would point out. I haven't until now seen the D.

Anonymous SaintBen January 23, 2013 7:04 AM  

Vox, why do you invest so much time in replying to people like Todd? I doubt it would be for his benefit, and the only potential benefit to you I can think of is keeping yourself sharp -- is that it? Or is it for the benefit of your readers?

Anonymous Anonymous January 31, 2013 1:49 PM  

At least Mr. Scalzi doesn't have to create fake Amazon accounts write reviews of products they have never read.

Right, Eox? Oh, I'm sorry, Vox. Very clever, changing the first letter.

Blogger Some dude February 05, 2013 4:29 PM  

WHERE IS THE SAND? WHERE IS THE SAND?!

Hilarious.

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts