In addition to the lives she harmed, MZB’s works saved the lives of other people by speaking to them when other works and other people would not and/or did not.It sounds fairly innocuous. Everyone does good things and bad things, right? Until you find out that the woman is knowingly trying to excuse a famous feminist writer's abuse and rape of her son and daughter, as well as her long-time complicity in her husband's repeated homosexual child molestations.
Truly....
MZB gave a start to a lot of women writers—a higher percentage than anyone else in the genre at the time. Those writers helped pave the way for even more female voices in the genre.
The feminist will never hesitate to sacrifice any number of children on the stinking altar of feminism
27 comments:
One word: Moloch.
Not much has changed in thousands of years.
Yes. This. Never assume the sweet girl or lady, seemingly so proper and lovely, would not, or has not already, put a knife in her own child in her own womb in order to avoid losing her social status or material comfort. To avoid 'what people might say.'
And the white-knight beta in me still has trouble accepting this. Caught myself last night saying "she's nice" about a girl I had met over the weekend. No, she's not nice. She was only nice because I was gaming her.
Reminds me about some neighbors and their son who now has a new girlfriend after getting divorced from his cheating ex-wife and mother of his 3 grown sons. A few months ago he got more serious with the new girlfriend and was excited about her, telling his parents "And she doesn't lie to me."
Silly rabbit, you clearly didn't learn the right lesson from your ex-wife and the 25 years you put into her. They ALL lie to you. At one point or another, a little lie, or a great big one, will slip out, even be intentional crafted for your ears only. In. Evitable. Female imperative.
Her call for diverse writers and diverse opinions made me chuckle.
So why were you a member with an organization that included child-molesters again?
SFM2 - Probably due to his boundless optimism that he could expose them and reform the organization.
You'd figure Vox would know better by now.
So why were you a member with an organization that included child-molesters again?
Good question. I didn't know anything about Bradley and I'd never even heard of Breen. I only read two of her books and part of a third - never managed to finish The Mists of Avalon - I didn't attend cons and I didn't associate with any of those people at all except for Raymond Feist and about five writers in Minnesota, so I wasn't privy to the information. Had I known about it, I would have first raised the issue, then quit if it wasn't resolved to my approval.
First, a hat tip to Vox Day for shining the light on rank duplicity with written judo. Well done, offering up the red pill of truth to any and all.
It's not like we didn't see this on full display for Bill Clinton and Al Gore.....
Apparently being a sexual degenerate (see the comments) means the fiction of a child molester "saved their life" by being able to relate. One can just see the irony of remarking how abusive one's fundamentally religious father is compared to a woman who raped her children and wrote about other perverted people. This goes to show why these perversions were punished in the first place -- even those who commit the "lesser" crimes will rush to make apologies for the worst of them all.
It is rare I hear women advocating on behalf of some noble sounding cause where it wasn't a deflection of criticism for a personal perk.
Normally, I wouldn't respond to a post like this about me. I'm being jumped on both by you (and others with similar sentiments) and by MZB's supporters. And, as someone who's never been a part of MZB fandom and has previously had choice words to say about someone else MZB was a mentor to (Vera Nazarian), I'm not exactly loved by that fandom.
The entire reason I posted about Marion Zimmer Bradley at all is that she did unconscionable things and enabled unconscionable things and Tor.com was whitewashing that. Full stop.
Even if you disagree with me about almost everything else, we probably agree that suicide, in general, is a sad loss of life. There are a lot of people who've had rough childhoods who feel suicidal and who have attempted suicide. If MZB's books help keep a few of them living long enough to get through that dark patch, then I think that is a good thing.
It does not change the fact that I think she belonged in prison.
However, a lot of people felt that I'd just ripped up their hearts, and I felt compassion for them. Not for Marion, but for the people she'd helped, whoever they are. As an example, S in the comments on this post: http://deirdre.net/marion-zimmer-bradley-gave-us-new-perspectives-all-right/ who I then went and got Marion's own words to point out that S was being entirely too charitable.
If you want to take a dump on someone for throwing the people MZB harmed under the bus, I offer you Deborah J. Ross, who called the whole thing "sensationalist rumors" and said to listen to the other half.
http://twitter.com/DeborahJRoss/status/477939064696360960
I'd argue that the other half of the story as far as she's concerned is in her bank account. (For those who don't know, Deborah J. Ross writes in Marion's Darkover universe. So keeping the name of MZB sanitized is in her wallet's best interest.)
Remember that I'm the person who exposed that, as Vox Day commenter Some Dude phrased it, "THIS FUCKING PIECE OF SHIT RAPED HER OWN DAUGHTER."
Yes.
Exactly so.
In summary: we may not agree about many things, but I do not support what MZB did to harm children or what MZB knowingly allowed Breen to do to harm children.
Bit off-topic, but if you thought getting full-on, verbal / written permission for sex was bad enough, how about this one: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-27831626#
Yes, you're now expected to obtain EXPLICIT PERMISSION and ASK to if it's "ok" for you to kiss a girl.
Because otherwise, it's rape. No joke, have a read.
Of course this only leads further to a world where the only guys who aren't afraid to make a move are 100% confident Alphas who are brilliant at being attractive, being handsome, not being unattractive, and reading body language. Oh and the sort of tosspots who just don't care, and won't care at doing a lot of things too..
Whereas "Good" guy betas are expected to stick to asking for permission, killing moods, getting rejected, and knowing their place of being there simply to pay money to support women / alpha's kids, and die.
I can't count the number of times the soothing words of a child rapist stopped me from offing myself.
The entire reason I posted about Marion Zimmer Bradley at all is that she did unconscionable things and enabled unconscionable things and Tor.com was whitewashing that.
I salute you for that. Without question, you did the right thing.
However, a lot of people felt that I'd just ripped up their hearts, and I felt compassion for them. Not for Marion, but for the people she'd helped, whoever they are.
That is kind of you, but it's bullshit. Her books are dreadful and wallow in her evil. I don't doubt that some of these women believe that they were helped by reading them, but there is a big difference between believing you were helped, or claiming you were helped, and actually being helped.
The important thing is that morality is not math. It's not a sum. One cannot earn one's way to Heaven, and no amount of good deeds can compensate for evil acts, particularly when the evil individual is remorseless and unrepentant.
I understand that you genuinely believe "MZB’s works saved the lives of other people". And so your perspective is understandable. But I simply do not believe that for one second, no matter how many drama queens insist that is the case.
I offer you Deborah J. Ross, who called the whole thing "sensationalist rumors" and said to listen to the other half.
Oh, we'll get to her. Yes, we will.
I do not support what MZB did to harm children or what MZB knowingly allowed Breen to do to harm children.
I believe you. And I also believe Ms. Greyland.
I also noted your clarified position on VP, Deidre. I may not agree with your take on the effects of her work, but it is a reasonable position.
Scratch a leftist and evil oozes out. I sensed this even in the Sixties when I fancied myself a revolutionary. I could feel the evil infecting me the closer I got to the Marxist liars. They occupy the kingdom of darkness and filth. I used to feel silly when I prayed. I no longer do.
Also in that article I linked, note this part:
"At the trial of Conservative MP Nigel Evans earlier this year, the court was told that he had tried to kiss someone, been rebuffed, and had backed off. This was regarded by the Crown Prosecution Service as potentially criminal. Evans was acquitted."
Fortunately he was acquitted, but "potentially criminal", for going in for a kiss, and BACKING OFF when rejected. Because rape!
Vox, I personally only read one of her books, though I tried to read a couple of others. I don't think I made it beyond a chapter because the plots don't sound familiar at all. The one I did read was delivered with my other Starblaze books in a subscription. That book (The Ruins of Isis) bugged me deeply.
I agree with you that she was remorseless and unrepentant based on her own words in her depositions. I don't know that she felt differently in the last few months of her life. Nor was that enough.
"there is a big difference between believing you were helped, or claiming you were helped, and actually being helped"
I was a Scientologist. At the time, I believed that it helped me, so I do understand your point. I try not to judge what did/didn't help people unless it involves testable hypotheses.
Going back up-thread, Raymond E. Feist and J. Michael Straczynski did help get me out of Scientology. It took me about a year after that to extricate myself, but they opened the crack.
And thank you for believing Moira. Myself I'm less concerned about, but she had no idea how big this would get, nor did I.
Like Vox, I believe Moira. The way she has handled herself on Deirdre's blog is admirable. It is my hope that God raises her from the hellish life handed to her by her parents, and uses her to create an honorable, lasting legacy for her family, one far-removed from MZB and Breen.
As for MZB's works, I have no desire to read them. Because of the nature and breadth of her offenses, I cannot separate the author from the works.
I have no desire to bash Deidre; while our worldviews are clearly at variance, I think she has provided even-handed coverage of MZB, doing justice by not glossing over her evils or those of Walter Breen.
At the same time, I would stop well short of lauding MZB for "[giving] a start to a lot of women writers."
Whatever "good" that was is overwhelmingly negated by the evil that MZB both perpetrated and perpetuated.
Or excuse and undermine justice for the rape of someone else's daughter...
http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/16/tapes-reveal-hillary-clinton-discussing-her-defense-of-child-rapist-video/
@Schubox, at the risk of sounding like I'm defending Hillary Clinton, which I guess I am, I have to say that under our current legal system where a defendant has no choice of courts and the prosecution is an arm of the state with nearly unlimited resources to prosecute, it benefits all of us when defense attorneys force the prosecution to follow procedure and the rules of evidence to the letter. Under our system a lawyer has a duty to defend her client with zeal and to act in the best interest of her client. What should Rodham (Clinton) have done instead? Throw her own client under the bus? It is one thing to defend a child molester in court, it is another to make excuses or defend a child molester in the public sphere.
It is one thing to defend a child molester in court, it is another to make excuses or defend a child molester in the public sphere.
Yes, they are two different things as the former (in Clinton's case) allowed a child rapist to actually go free back into society and the latter doesn't necessarily (but it's still bad).
@Marissa, are you suggesting that defendants who are guilty as charged should not have attorneys that zealously represent them? I'm not sure what you mean by "it's still bad." How is it bad when the prosecution fails to prove a charge beyond a reasonable doubt that a criminal is acquitted? No one gets away with anything. God is still judge. But a government isn't God. Hillary admitted that this man was a bad person. She pretty much stated that he is child molester. He is a known entity. No one is saying that what he did was not wrong or that we should support him. Although that could change if he is a leftist and begins to author science fiction novels.
I do think it's wrong to assist a child molester in avoiding punishment. You're trying to make a morally neutral abstraction "representing a defendant" out of a situation that cannot be separated from morality. A virtuous woman would have declined to take the case if she knew he was guilty. Mind you, we're speaking about Clinton's actions here, which God will also judge (and not based on any liberalist support for "fair trials"--but based on what she actually did, assisted a child molester in avoiding punishment). I'm not sure who you're trying to convince that no one gets away with anything, no one here said they will, but Clinton bore false witness and assisted in the cover-up of a heinous crime. Personally, I don't think God is going to pat her on the head for being a good lawyer.
"It's still bad" refers to the latter part of your statement: "mak[ing] excuses or defend[ing] a child molester in the public sphere".
There is no logical comparison to what Clinton did as a defense attorney and what these fans do for these rapist authors. The fans are justifying their actions, saying they are great people, that they've helped people, etc. Clinton has not made any such claims about her former client.
Also, lawyers do not testify. She did not bear false witness, she never claimed he was innocent. A pleading in a trial is a procedure that says "My client believes that you cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty as accused", it is not the lawyer saying, "he didn't do it.".
I'm saying that the comment about Clinton is not relevant to this thread. It doesn't add to Vox's point. Clinton was not coming to the defense of another woman based upon her solipsism. Her actions had nothing to do with solipsism. Her actions were nothing like these women.
Sure there is a logical comparison - both Clinton and these fans are responsible for providing a cover of legitimacy for child rapists. But I'm not sure who here is comparing the acts--someone noted that the warren is likely to provide cover for even the most heinous crimes and I agreed. Their motivations are actually the same, which is to avoid their own complicity in evil (sure, call it solipsism). And while Clinton doesn't come out and say child rape is okay (and neither do Bradley or Breen's fans) her silence is deafening--never mind her laughter and smirking while discussing the case.
Lawyerly worming to the contrary--what she did was defend a man who raped a child and helped him avoid punishment. A lie of omission is still the sin of bearing false witness--she also knew the evidence which contained his DNA wasn't sent back by the crime lab to the prosecutor, another omission, so she could win. I know a few women who kept quiet about their husband's depravities against children, which is a similar lie of omission. Contrary to man's law, God's law expects us to confront sin, not hide from it and find ways for the sinner to avoid punishment.
People in this thread are more than welcome to discuss the child rape defenders of left-liberals; it doesn't really matter if you find the subject relevant or not.
Post a Comment
NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.