An Apology

We would like to offer our apology for the offensive April Fool’s post that was published on the site today. The April Fool’s pieces were not seen by the Locus HQ staff before being posted — it was an ugly moment this morning when we saw the post already online, and we immediately took steps to remove it. Of course, being after the fact, it was too late, and the offense had already happened.

We did not find the post funny at all, and it does not reflect in any way the opinions of the magazine staff. We apologize for it appearing under our auspices.

Updated 4/2/13:

From Liza Groen Trombi, editor-in-chief of Locus magazine: The writer who penned the offensive Wiscon post will no longer be contributing to or associated with Locus in any way, online or in print. The Locus Online editor will retain his editorial autonomy, with the understanding that nothing like this can or will be permitted to happen again.

I’ve worked very hard in the past three years to build a better, more modern Locus, with greater parity, social awareness, and more inclusive coverage. I will continue to work to that end, despite obstacles. I am mortified that this happened on my watch; my apologies to you all.

-LT

52 thoughts on “An Apology

  • April 1, 2013 at 3:36 pm
    Permalink

    I’m slightly concerned to see no mention here that you’ll be reviewing your procedures for authorizing material that is provided for upload to your website. An apology, while welcome, is insufficient if steps are not taken to stop anything of the sort happening again.

    Reply
  • April 1, 2013 at 3:37 pm
    Permalink

    Has this person’s posting rights been revoked? Or anything? Or shall we just expect random offensiveness from here in the future?

    Reply
  • April 1, 2013 at 5:04 pm
    Permalink

    I find the breast-beating posts offensive. There was a problem. It was dealt with. Let’s move on.

    Reply
  • April 1, 2013 at 5:58 pm
    Permalink

    Yeah, you guys had better be sorry for that thing about Detroit!

    But seriously, I found the piece to have an average level of offensiveness, as far as the trend goes. However, I also found it amusing and clever in a cynical way. I also took it as not being at the expense of the organizers and members of WisCon. The joke could apply to all Americans, and to all human beings on Earth. How would any man like it to try on the chains of subjugation for size?

    Reply
  • April 1, 2013 at 7:23 pm
    Permalink

    As the editor of Locus Online, I’m the person who posted the three April 1st pieces earlier today, as I’ve done every year for some 15 years, ever since Charles Brown suggested posting some April 1st spoofs at an ICFA conference in the mid-’90s (I believe the first joke was that Locus was buying Simon & Schuster). Blame me, not Liza or Locus HQ, for whatever sins we may have committed, and for whatever targets of death threats. Apparently I have a higher threshold for being offended, or even detecting possible offense, than others. (This is not the first time something like this has happened, if not to this degree.) So any future April 1st posts (if there are any…) will be vetted through multiple editors, not just one.

    Reply
  • April 1, 2013 at 8:56 pm
    Permalink

    I’m saddened that anyone would consider death threats an appropriate response to what happened today. But then, this is the Internet.

    Philipp – so you don’t consider there should be any attempt, after a problem has been “dealt with”, to ensure the same problem can’t recur? That’s an …interesting… attitude. I hope they don’t follow it in, say, the airline industry. “Well, we plummeted for a while but got things under control and we’re still in the air. So nothing to worry about. Certainly no reason to review maintenance procedures, or examine other aircraft of this type, because the problem has been dealt with!”

    Reply
  • April 1, 2013 at 9:32 pm
    Permalink

    Dear admin,

    I always thought professional webmasters were mature enough to take responsibility for their decisions without petulantly announcing they’re picking up their footballs and going home, but apparently not. We both live and learn!

    Reply
  • April 1, 2013 at 9:53 pm
    Permalink

    Death threats are common when members of the Wiscon community are outraged. That’s been true since the “Wiscon troll” incident of 2008–Zathlazip got a threat scrawled on a Wiscon program that was left in her office. It’s undoubtedly just bluster, but it’s understandably terrifying. Good luck.

    Reply
  • April 1, 2013 at 10:11 pm
    Permalink

    “admin”: It might be worth considering that Muslim folk are readers of science fiction too, once you come down offa yer self-pity pedestal. We could get as advanced as attempting to keep in mind that “offense” also means “attack”.

    Reply
  • April 1, 2013 at 10:13 pm
    Permalink

    I sincerely hope whomever wrote this racist, sexist, and so many other -ist piece of prejudiced and hateful piece of crap will not be writing for Locus ever, ever again.

    Reply
  • April 1, 2013 at 10:13 pm
    Permalink

    Although thank christ the white men found it not all that offensive! The *real* demographic of science fiction.

    Reply
  • April 1, 2013 at 10:24 pm
    Permalink

    I’d also like to point out that, while Locus is sorry, it seems the author is in no way sorry, and in fact is continuing to spew hateful vitriol at those who asked Locus to take the post down:

    http://www.battleswarmblog.com/?p=16802

    Don’t read his anti-feminist diatribe if you don’t want to be disgusted to the very pit of your stomach.

    Reply
  • April 1, 2013 at 11:14 pm
    Permalink

    Space27: “I also took it as not being at the expense of the organizers and members of WisCon.”

    In which case, why would the author pick that convention as a target instead of making one up? (I’ll give you a hint: 2.5 years ago he called the WisCon concom “cowardly” because they did something he disagrees with, and this was a reprise of that attack combined with additional offensiveness claiming to be “an April Fool’s joke”.)

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 3:49 am
    Permalink

    “I always thought that SF/F readers were more tolerant, less apt to take offense, than other folks; but apparently not. ”

    That’s not a way to apologize. That’s actually making it worse. 🙁

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 4:34 am
    Permalink

    It actually was pretty funny.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 4:58 am
    Permalink

    “I always thought that SF/F readers were more tolerant, less apt to take offense, than other folks; but apparently not.”

    Really, that is your response…
    An April Fool’s joke that was clearly directed at a convention, for taking back an invitation to someone stating that worshipping the wrong religion should disqualify you from becoming a citizen of a country, and at the same time making fun of that religion, didn’t make you think “this is right wing BS that Locus shouldn’t give a platform”?
    -Have you seen the blog-post that was written by the author of that “joke”? -If there has indeed been real death threats, I think they come from people who have read that post. That post also makes it perfectly clear what type of person you were giving a platform. It also makes it clear that the “joke” was intended as trolling, and got just the response the right-wing bigot who wrote it was hoping for. (If he in fiact didn’t think that Locus would support his views, that is.)

    That you, by what I quoted at the beginning of this comment, clearly has no idea what normal people find offensive makes you ill suited to run any website other than a personal blog.
    Take responsbility for your actions and resign while you can. For if Locus intends to be inclusive they will have to fire you for allowing that “joke” to go online.

    And really…”So, no more April 1st spoofs ever.”
    I read that as, “You didn’t find our attempt at disrespectfully poking fun at religion and women funny, so you get no more jokes”, and I’m sure I’m not the only one. -But hey, if Locus does the sensible thing, that I mentioned above, you will be in no position to have a say on what happens on April 1st next year.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 7:33 am
    Permalink

    Every time stuff like this happens there’s always someone going OMG DEATH THREATS and, I have to say, I’m seriously dubious about that claim. Not only because we know (due to proof) that there are people who follow after any discussion of this sort to make things worse by pretending to be offended and saying/doing super outrageous stuff in order to make the “social justice warriors” look bad, and that’s where any death threats (if they exist) come from. Also because: “death threat” is tossed around so lightly and so quickly. I don’t believe that any credible death threat was issued in this case. I hardly believe a fake one exists. Receipts, please.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 7:36 am
    Permalink

    I didn’t find the piece particularly funny or offensive. The truth is that it is up to Locus to decide to what extent they want to be satirists or a Zap Comix politicized expression of humor so I myself have no problem with them taking it down. Having said that, I showed the piece to Muslim friends in their own countries and they understood it was at least an attempt at humor. None of them were in the least way offended and had no idea how it was “ugly.” Beyond that we have a double standard where a principle is being subverted to an identity.

    At Salon.com, in “Is A Game of Thrones Too White?” Saladin Ahmed says GRRM is the product of “a culture rich in racist stereotypes and xenophobic fear-mongering.”

    Ahmed recently Tweeted:

    “Being Muslim means Americans unconsciously link your name to child killers, even as they rationalize killing children with names like yours.”

    He wasn’t “kidding” and I found them to be remarks of truly “ugly” racial bigotry. In return Ahmed gets Hugo and Nebula nominations. Something is broken in the SF community’s fairness meter.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 7:49 am
    Permalink

    I’d be saddened if anyone considered death threats appropriate, but I’d also be surprised. Perhaps you’d care to share the threats you’ve received?

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 8:35 am
    Permalink

    Space27, if you think that a burqa automatically equates to “the chains of subjugation”, it’s no wonder you didn’t find the piece particularly offensive.

    The author of that piece was pretty unambiguous over on his own blog that it was a hatchet job directed at WisCon’s “political correctness” (i.e., attempts to acknowledge that being and culturally Christian aren’t prerequisites for humanity). The people victimized by his “joke” are mostly Muslim women, but that was incidental to him… I don’t suppose he thinks highly enough of them to consider what harm he does them.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 9:50 am
    Permalink

    Can we see proof of the “death threats”? Seeing as racists perceive any remotely angry brown person as a threat; see the murder rate by cops in your country for proof.

    Perhaps you should have instead penned an April 1st joke about rape being made legal at SF cons? Or would that instead have been too believable?

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 9:59 am
    Permalink

    Hmm…thin skinned and humorless. Today’s feminist women and further proof that any industry women enter they degrade.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 10:09 am
    Permalink

    James May’s comment above about Saladin Ahmed is a perfect example of how people make it harder to confront bigotry in SF/F (and other) circles by labeling attempts to discuss that bigotry as bigoted.

    It’s ugly to point out how “mainstream” fantasy caters to a whitewashed view of reality and excludes people of color? Really?

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 10:11 am
    Permalink

    We know Zathlazip took the threats she received to the police. Google “Internet famous, real-world notorious: UW student mocks WisCon, starts online firestorm”. The Locus staff have good reason to be cautious.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 10:22 am
    Permalink

    No Alexandra, here’s how I define bigotry: when a Jew, a black person, a Muslim, a white person, a woman, or a man mysteriously come up on the short end of the moral stick virtually 100% of the time in some clever argument, then that is simple bigotry. No country in the world is less xenophobic than America. Go to any exotic locale in the world and you’ll find crowds of Americans visiting and living. Americans have million of immigrants coming in daily and we support them with social programs. I am concerned with anti-Semites who say they are merely against Zionism and white supremacists who hide behind the “historic” nature of Confederate battle flags. Were I to assume no one else does that because their ethnicity is innately moral, that would be bigotry indeed. I stand by my comment.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 10:22 am
    Permalink

    I’m saddened to hear there are threats; I primarily think of WisCon as trying to provide a *safe* community for celebrating SFF, particularly for vulnerable groups and individuals feel uncomfortable in the dominant mainstream SFF community. The April 1 post was upsetting because it made vulnerable people feel unsafe. Where were the threats sent, and did anyone claim authorship?

    In any case, as a member of the WisCon community, I think it is inadequate for me to simply say that I’m deeply sorry and saddened to hear there are threats. I think the police should be notified. Even if no action is taken, it should be officially documented.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 10:35 am
    Permalink

    I am not too familiar with the blogger’s political leanings, nor his views regarding WisCon, but judging from the comments many posters have opinions and this is certainly coloring their view of the April 1st post.
    In my reading, the post takes issue with political correctness, which should be legitimate topic for debate without threats of death or unemployment. Specifically, political correctness within the SF community. I have not been to WisCon, but I gather it takes inclusiveness seriously thus opening it up to accusations of being overly politically correct by trying not offend anyone as long as they hew to prevailing orthodoxy.
    I feel as if the poster was lampooning the fact that when you try not offend one group, you may well be offending another. Too much skin visible in some of the hall costumes at NorWesCon would certainly offend many people from more prurient cultures (the same way, and for the same reasons, it would have shocked our grandparents or great-grandparents), but should these costumes be banned for that reason?
    The post reminded me of Le Guin’s “The Lathe of Heaven” where everybody’s skin is turned gray as a solution to racism. That solution was just as ineffectual as having all con attendees wear burkas, but it points out the fallacy of uniformity, be it in how we look or how we perceive the world.
    Sadly the consensus solution has been to censor opinion rather than debate it.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 11:01 am
    Permalink

    If people are offended, good. Shock is the basis of humor.

    It’s time free men took the war to the scolding harpies who war on expression. The next time some finger-wagging Ms. Grundy protests the offensive words you’ve written, don’t meekly crawl away with your paper neatly folded — wd t p nd rm t n hr fc. [disemvoweled for violent content]

    The ability to offend is the hallmark of the free man. The day when offense becomes impossible is the day freedom dies.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 11:30 am
    Permalink

    And now we’ve got actual exhortations to commit violence, specifically against women. This is way better than vague suggestions of possible death threats with no information to back it up.

    Yo, Locus, any thoughts on moderating this post, or is quote freedom of speech unquote gonna “win out”?

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 11:39 am
    Permalink

    B. Lewis, so your answer to people expressing offense is violence? That explains a lot.

    I am sincerely happy about the way Locus has handled this issue, and particularly that they will no longer allow the author of the post to write for or associate his name with Locus. I appreciate the EIC’s taking time to personally apologize rather than issue a weasel-worded non-apology. Such action makes me more likely to support Locus in the future.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 12:12 pm
    Permalink

    I have an idea: let’s adopt the principle behind the Constitution and favor every one has the right to be happy, to love and be loved. Let us marginalize any group like the KKK or neo-Nazis and any group that hands out awards, either moral or artistic, based on skin. Let’s all of us get new calendars. Let’s not engage in one-sided blame and mitigation to enable us to shy away from our principles. Let’s call out bigotry without regard to race, creed or gender. No excuses, no clever arguments where entire groups without names and faces always lose. You got a name, let’s have it – otherwise I don’t want to hear it. I’ve got a name: David Duke. There are more like him. Let’s be umpires and call those types of ball and strikes where they are, rather than reserving them for a certain group or predicting in advance what will be balls and what will be strikes based on identity. If we are all equally human, then we are all equally fallible. At the end of the day, if you can’t point to an actual law that formally and verbally discriminates, you can’t point to much, other than human weakness all about you.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 12:17 pm
    Permalink

    As another white “free man,” can I join in on telling women and PoC why they shouldn’t be offended, and how they have no sense of humor, and why can’t they all take a joke, and it didn’t bother *me* so obviously they’re all blowing it out of proportion and just looking for things to be offended by? Also, let’s make sure we keep criticizing all those mean ol’ ugly Wiscon feminists (even though an awful lot of people, male and female, complained about the tasteless, bigoted, and unfunny post yesterday)!

    Plus, someone once made a death threat in 2008, so it’s TOTALLY legit that Admin is getting hypothetical death threats now, and why are people still talking about an April Fool’s Day post when he’s the *real* victim here? That post was twenty-four hours ago, people! When are you going to learn to live in the now and focus on the truly important issue: SOME DUDE RAN A CRAPPY BLOG POST AND THEN GOT HIS FEELINGS HURT! WE NEED BAND-AIDS AND COOKIES OVER HERE, STAT!

    Also, censorship!!! Because the author of yesterday’s post has totally been censored, his free speech trampled all over the place by the jackbooted feminists, which is why you can only find his post on his blog and screencapped all over Tumblr and reposted on other blogs and pretty much linked all over the internet now.

    Ms. Trombi, I very much appreciate Locus’ quick response to this mess, and the steps you’ve taken. Thank you for recognizing that our genre should be welcoming to more than just white men.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 12:39 pm
    Permalink

    James May: what principle behind the Constitution? The one where Black people are chattel and only property-owning white males get to vote? Because the “everyone has a right to be happy, everyone has a right to love and be loved” stuff you cite isn’t in there anywhere. The rest of your comment makes so little sense I can’t respond to it, but I know what the principles behind the Constitution are and I don’t think you do, judging by your words.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 1:59 pm
    Permalink

    I find it very interesting how “suggestions” of death threats (as others have said above, show us the receipts) are used here. Because threats of violence against women in the industry (or hell, just daring to exist in public) are so common place, those caught with their pants around their ankles, like our “prankster” here, appropriate them in an attempt to garner sympathy. Nyuh uh, bub. You don’t get to project like that, you don’t get to use women’s very real experiences to inflame your rhetoric.
    Where’s “Derailing For Dummies” when you need it?

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 2:13 pm
    Permalink

    How about we behave like professionals?

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 2:51 pm
    Permalink

    Ummm… I’m pretty sure it’s 2013. So that would be today’s principles, and not those of Hernan Cortes. Enter the world of today instead of harboring resentments over dead people and trying to paste guilt onto living people and my post makes perfect sense. Otherwise you can simply posit I approve of the Roman Empire and lay the Dark Ages at my feet.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 4:30 pm
    Permalink

    The Aristocrats!

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 7:02 pm
    Permalink

    There is no reason to stop posting April Fool stories as was reported you have announced by Mike Glyer in File 770.

    The problem is that you and the April Fool tradition were used and your trust abused by someone who used the A. F. as an opportunity for deliberate offense based on a nasty form of contemporary political action. Just make it clear that the April Fool stories may NOT be used for axe-grinding. Make sure that the jokes are made in good faith rather than for deliberate hurt. In other words, use better editorial judgement and vet the copy.

    On a personal level, Mark Kelly, I am appreciative of the work you do in reflecting the news value of Locus Magazine in web form. Thank you for your unpaid and thorough effort, and please don’t let this cause you to stop.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 8:29 pm
    Permalink

    Two points:

    We know there were death threats in 2008 and 2009 from people associated with WisCon. If they’ve stopped doing that, that’s nice, but a pattern was established and people are right to be wary.

    As for censorship, it’s true that no one has an obligation to publish anyone. However, when people arrange to unpublish someone for political reasons, they’re engaging in censorship. To go back to the inspiration for this particular April Fool’s Joke, WisCon had no obligation to invite Moon, but once they had, when they uninvited her, that was censorship. See, for example, the ACLU on the uninviting of Norman Finkelstein at Clark University.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 8:43 pm
    Permalink

    Oh but please, keep shouting Shetterly, May, et al. We haven’t heard enough of what white men think about Muslim women, feminism, and said interactions thereof in your precious genre boys club.

    Reply
  • April 2, 2013 at 10:02 pm
    Permalink

    David, the problem is who decides what is nasty and hurtful. Locus has the right to do as they please. They are not putting themselves out there as an academic clearing house that is the mortal expression of fair play or free speech on this Earth. Having said that, outside of Locus, people should be more tolerant of satire precisely because it is meant to offend and expose hypocrisy – they obviously engage in the same thing themselves when it suits them. I find it difficult to believe the least tolerant groups within the SF community find themselves the most likely candidates for the legacy of the disgustingly vulgar and hilarious Zap Comix of the late ’60s. In truth, R. Crumb and S. Clay Wilson would be banned and censored wholesale by groups like WisCon, who resemble people who think white lightning’s still the biggest thrill of all more than Abbie Hoffman. What is telling here is that when Monty Python made the Life of Brian, the church whined but engaged in dialogue, but also bans when they could, but no violence. I think we all know what would happen had there been A Life of Mohamed. Locus should reserve the right not to be the battleground for such things, but the larger community should welcome being challenged since they claim that as their default setting, and being secure and big enough to tolerate challenge right back – that is the American legacy of humor and satire. I have already said I showed the offensive piece to Muslims outside America. They didn’t laugh cuz it was funny, but at our response to it, which they did find funny. Mostly they said, “I don’t get it. What’s the problem?” I had a hard time explaining the wonders of identity addicted political correctness and its weather vane of right and wrong that changes from Saturday to Tues., depending on whether you wear pants or like Nascar.

    Reply
  • April 3, 2013 at 1:05 am
    Permalink

    Uninviting a guest is not censorship: that person is still able to say anything they want, particularly in this day of blogs. It may be politically problematic, for all sorts of reasons, but it is not censorship.

    Censorship is burning all copies of a document and locking the person up in prison so they can’t say or write anything.

    Reply
  • April 3, 2013 at 7:29 am
    Permalink

    Nick:

    “The Aristocrats!”

    It’s painful to burst out laughing like that when I have a cold. Inconsiderate!! 😀

    Reply
  • April 3, 2013 at 7:43 am
    Permalink

    One thing I’ve definitely noticed in my time as a feminist is that there seems to be this fetish for using “satire”, as it’s commonly called, downward towards the oppressed class. It’s rare I see such “satire” used towards people in power above yall; it’s almost always used against women, or non-Christians, or non-white folk.

    Why On Earth Could This Be. Must be a fluke, every single time it happens! It surely couldn’t be part of a *pattern*!

    Reply
  • April 3, 2013 at 9:31 am
    Permalink

    Disco Biscuit, do you really think all muslim women are identitarian fans of censorship? Or even that all feminists are? You might start your research at the site of Feminists Against Censorship.

    Farah, since you’re not interested in googling the Finkelstein case, here’s the relevant part from the letter that the ACLU sent to Clark’s president: “…the cancellation of his speech violates the basic principles of freedom of speech and academic freedom which are so fundamental to an institute of higher learning. The existence of an opportunity to speak at another time or in another location does not remedy the wrong of censorship.”

    XtinaS, thanks for posting again! So long as I have one fewer comment than you, I won’t feel like I’m contributing too much. 🙂

    Reply
  • April 3, 2013 at 10:00 am
    Permalink

    WS:

    “So long as I have one fewer comment than you, I won’t feel like I’m contributing too much.”

    We’re tallying? I wasn’t paying attention to comment-specific statistics.

    Reply
  • April 3, 2013 at 10:04 am
    Permalink

    I just posted this to Lawrence Person’s BattleSwarm weblog:

    You had the privilege to write one of the annual Locus April Fool pages, and have for several years.

    This year you chose to use that privilege to rake up the coal of a dead incident back into roaring flame.

    Mr. Kelly and the other staff of Locus had it pointed out to them that the piece went past the level of good fun and into that of offensiveness based on a political p.o.v. that, whether true or not, considers itself persecuted and was aimed at a group holding another political view which also considers itself persecuted, whether true or not. Now there is screaming and name-calling and further insulting material being expressed by both groups. Good job of “let’s you and him fight.”

    You were free to write what you wanted on the Locus website because you had been well-behaved before, I presume. However, this year instead you did the written equivalent of throwing a candy bar into the swimming pool so you could point and laugh at the people trying to get out of the pool.

    (I’m being generous here by using the candy-bar in the metaphor. Your action possibly could be taken as the written equivalent of actually throwing fecal matter into the pool, but I would prefer to presume not.)

    After reader complaints, Locus decided to pull the piece, not having themselves wished to be raking a dead fire back into flame.

    Now you crow that you’ve been persecuted by a political mob and get to grin at your friends about how you’ve stirred up so much shit.

    The matter was over for WisCon. The matter was over for Elizabeth Moon. Nobody was yelling at anybody else. Then you came along.

    You misused your editorial privilege at Locus to deliberately provoke some people into emotional pain. Locus, as a responsible publisher, had the duty of either agreeing with it, regardless of its noxiousness, or pulling the piece and apologizing both for.letting themselves be taken in by you and for your public bad manners. Now, unless there has been another change, the funny tradition is canceled, to the detriment of everyone who enjoyed it as a good joke.

    What it seems that you and your most vocal friends cannot see is that your piece wasn’t taken down for its politics, but for its betrayal of faith that you would be a responsible human being and not deliberately act out in an ill-mannered way.

    Again, it wasn’t your politics or persecution, it’s that you were *rude* to the readership and to Locus and *abusive* of your privilege.

    Nobody is trying to censor you here on your own weblog, on which you are free to write whatever you wish. It was co-opting another weblog’s audience to bring a dead issue back to flaming heat, without asking the other weblog whether they wanted to be used for that co-opting.

    To sum up, people aren’t yelling at you to censor you in the name of “political correctness”. They’re yelling at you because you’re a rude little son who deserves a spanking for acting out.

    Reply
  • April 3, 2013 at 10:35 am
    Permalink

    Do you have a single stat to back up this theory about how satire is used? Of course not. Not any more than you can point to an oppressed class, of which there are none. People with overblown feelings of persecution, a tendency to politicize and racialize the least thing or even mental health issues is not a survey of America’s political landscape.

    Reply
  • April 3, 2013 at 12:12 pm
    Permalink

    There’s… no such thing as an oppressed class…

    Intriguing. Tell me more.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to XtinaS Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *