Quote:
Originally Posted by hildea
That doesn't mean they say it's OK, it just means they say that they aren't sure it's enough to warrant suspension from RWA. (As far as I know, the board haven't been very clear on whether the lifetime ban from leadership in RWA has also been withdrawn.)
I think organizations should be extremely reluctant to ban members for using their freedom of speech. And in cases like this, where the public record can be edited after the fact, they should be even more careful. (Grimshaw has deleted several hundred likes, so we can't go back and check for ourselves how fair or unfair the accusations of racism were.)
It seems you are in favour of more restrictions. What kind of statements do you think warrant exclusion from trade organizations?
To take one example: If you think Milan deserves suspension and lifetime ban from leadership because she has accused Grimshaw and Davis of racist statements, should Tisdale also face the same penalties after accusing Milan of being predudiced against people of a specific skin color, and comparing her to neo-nazis? |
Not quite more restrictions, but less. The freedom of speech card is being played at the same time as the diversity card. Not possible at the same time. When you ask for more diversity in books, then please don't try to archieve your goal by limiting what is an opinion too extreme for you to stomach. When anyone is asking for books to be politically correct, they are automatically favoring censorship.
Censorship is the end of free speech. Don't ruin freedom of speech under the umbrella of demanding to be politically correct. Political correct is not about inclusion of a diverse range of opinions, but about exclusion of everything that doesn't agree with your political opinion.