Daniel Abraham's "A Private Letter from Genre to Literature"

[Catlady]

I couldn't get through all the four-letter words to decide if it was misogynistic or not.

What does he think he's conveying with that sort of foul language? There may be something worthwhile buried in there, but I'm not going to wade through garbage looking for it.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I'm fairly certain that Sam Sykes doesn't have a misogynistic bone in his body, but you're clearly going to believe what you want to believe... so further interaction about it is obviously rather pointless.

People use misogynistic language all the time without being 'bad' people. That doesn't make it right; it means we live in a toxic society and we absorb a lot of that toxicity. (We also frequently use ableist, racist, etc. language without being 'bad' people.)

However, I do expect a professional writer to examine the words and language zie uses. Intent is not magic, and a professional writer should examine why zie needs to use misogynistic language in order to make the point they seem to want to make.

ETA: And a writer should not be surprised if zie's language of choice alienates a decent portion of 50% of the world's population.

[DiapDealer]

ETA: And a writer should not be surprised if zie's language of choice alienates a decent portion of 50% of the world's population.

Guarantee the number is nowhere near 50%.

[taosaur]

So, I just scanned the Sykes post, and unless he made some ninja edits, he doesn't appear to be characterizing literature as a woman at all. Based on the pictures, both parties are dudes. Yes, the b-word is inherently misogynistic to a degree that often goes ignored for purposes of using it ironically or in jest, but it is not being directed at a woman or used to imply feminine traits in this case. It's being used in a very general way, where any other expletive could be substituted with no effect whatsoever on the overall text.

The post is uninspired, misguided, unfunny and overlong, but not terribly misogynistic.

ETA: Additionally, and I hesitate to even bring it up, he invokes "Mainstream Literature"--the original letter was not addressing mainstream anything, but genre fiction and literary fiction. A little of both manages to be mainstream, but the majority of the mainstream is neither, consisting instead of General fiction with elements of both. Of the two parties imagined to be in conflict, genre certainly has a larger share of the mainstream.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Guarantee the number is no where near 50%.

My statement was that misogynistic language offends a decent portion of women. Are you saying that 50% of the world's population is not female or did you misread me? Perhaps I wasn't clear.

Originally Posted by taosaur

So, I just scanned the Sykes post, and unless he made some ninja edits, he doesn't appear to be characterizing literature as a woman at all. Based on the pictures, both parties are dudes. Yes, the b-word is inherently misogynistic to a degree that often goes ignored for purposes of using it ironically or in jest, but it is not being directed at a woman or used to imply feminine traits in this case. It's being used in a very general way, where any other expletive could be substituted with no effect whatsoever on the overall text.

The post is uninspired, misguided, unfunny and overlong, but not terribly misogynistic.

As I said, and you concur: the post uses misogynistic language. HOW misogynistic the overall post is will be a matter of subjective opinion. I've no need to discuss it further -- I only posted original as a sort of Trigger Warning for anyone wanting to avoid the article -- I wish I had known in advance and avoided it entirely, because I didn't need a strong splash of the b-word with my morning coffee.

I didn't see pictures in the post, and -- amusingly enough -- the site is blocked by my work protocols for vague "inappropriateness" reasons, so I can't go back and look. However, using the word to apply to a male does not make it better, as you note.

[DiapDealer]

I only posted original as a sort of Trigger Warning for anyone wanting to avoid the article -- I wish I had known in advance and avoided it entirely, because I didn't need a strong splash of the b-word with my morning coffee.

Wouldn't it have been easier to simply heed my "NSFW" warning? I apologize if you aren't familiar with it, but the various "Not Safe For ***" tags are fairly common internet terminology to warn that possibly offensive language and/or content may follow...click at your own risk. That's why I included the warning and then linked, instead of quoting, the material.

[pholy]

I was wondering what NSFW meant.

Thanks, I think.

[DiapDealer]

My apologies to those who didn't understand my cryptic internet acronym and clicked on the link I posted and were consequently offended by the language. I truly believed I was giving everyone fair warning. My bad.

I'll edit the post to clearly indicate that it contains profanity and vulgarity.