Mercedes Lackey Ejected From Nebula Conference For Using Racial Slur

[MGibster]

I'm going to have to disagree with you here, biology matters. As we age our brains shrink, it starts in your 30s - 40s and the rate increases in your 60s. The area of our brain most affected is the prefrontal cortex which is where executive functions like impulse control, reasoning, problem solving, memory and social interactions are handled.

I'm in my 40s and the language drift has affected me. If I tell you someone is a nice guy I don't mean that they're a "nice guy." Some people are proud to identify themselves as queer these days, while I don't have a problem referring to queer studies, I don't think I'll ever be able to bring myself to call someone queer. And anti-racist? To me, it sounds like a petulant teenager shouting, "I'm not just not racist, I'm anti-racist!" Yeah, I know what it means, but I find it especially amusing when we apply the label to people that died many decades ago. But then historians very often apply modern labels that would have no meaning to the conteporaries they write about.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

Fox finally got around to reporting on the controversy today as a "woke liberals are eating their own" story on Hannity.

It must be a slow news week for them.

 

[Ryujin]

Nevermind. Sorry.

 

[MikeP]

So far, I've heard lots of speculating & abstract theorizing & still no indication that anyone has found out what was said, exactly. I have some inside info from someone who was watching the panel. Because I know this, I believe two things are likely to change if more people knew it, too: 1) Opinions will still be split; 2) The split will likely shift. In short, it does matter. You should know more of the context. The author's apology & explanation did not contain these specifics. Neither did the spouse's objections on Twitter. Here's what I heard. It's hearsay, when you hear it from me, but it's a quote from an eyewitness.

"She was describing what a great author he was, explaining how influential his work was, mentioned all the awards he got, etc. etc. and then said it was all the more remarkable because he had to overcome hardships because he was a colored author."

Now, I will make my comment, based on this. Admittedly, I'm interpreting. In this context the speaker is not quite saying precisely that this fellow author ought to be characterized as colored, but that the fact is that there were people who knew him & could have an opinion of him, and some of them would've considered him to be colored. In the past, that would've created various forms of bias, conscious or unconscious. That likely would've caused problems for him. Which we, seeing it, would consider to have been hardships to overcome. In light of which, we should see his accomplishments as even more laudable & worthy of our appreciation.

A perhaps more careful phrasing, with my interpretation, could've been "he had to overcome hardships because he would have, in the early part of his career, been thought of as a colored author."

 

[Myrdin Potter]

No change in SFWA statement or any clarification.

As I said, I do not expect any.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Disappointing.

 

[billd91]

No change in SFWA statement or any clarification.

As I said, I do not expect any.

Of course not. They have the honor and integrity of the organization to look out for. Think of what impact this would have on future presidents... sorry, directorates of the SFWA, if they were to publish some form of retraction or apology now. What does a little collateral damage mean compared to that?

 

[tomBitonti]

A perhaps more careful phrasing, with my interpretation, could've been "he had to overcome hardships because he would have, in the early part of his career, been thought of as a colored author."

Additional text omitted.

I dunno. I'd change the focus onto those who are creating impediments. The problem is not Delaney’s skin color; the problem is the prejudice of other people. But, I don't know if this is worth pointing out. Any successful artist had many challenges to overcome. Prejudice may or may not have been the greatest of these. The focus should be on the quality of Delaney's writing and his accomplishments.

Tom Bitonti

 

[MGibster]

I dunno. I'd change the focus onto those who are creating impediments. The problem is not Delaney’s skin color; the problem is the prejudice of other people. But, I don't know if this is worth pointing out. Any successful artist had many challenges to overcome. Prejudice may or may not have been the greatest of these. The focus should be on the quality of Delaney's writing and his accomplishments.

It sometimes strikes me that you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. If you recognize someone's race, well, you shouldn't focus on their race, you should focus on their accomplishments. But if you ignore their race, well, that's a problem as well. I was fortunate enough to meet Raye Montague when I was working at a historical archive many years ago and she was being interviwed as part of an oral history project. I chatted with Montague, an African American, and learned was a Naval engineer and was a pioneer in the use of computers to design ships. She was one of designers of the Eisenhower class carrier my sister served on. I commented that women were underrepresented in engineering today, and it seemed quite an accomplish for a black woman to have such a role back in the earlyt 70s. I didn't feel the least bit embarrassed or wrong about noting the extra bit of difficulty she must have encountered (including not being accepted into engineering schools because of the color of her skin). She mentioned that she got hired once just on the strength of her resume, and her new coworkers were surprised when a black woman showed up. Montague joked that they must have thought she was a Frenchman or something.

People and the situations we get into are complicated, but I think most of us don't have an issue recognition their identity or the challenges they faced because of it. Did Lackey make it all about race? No. Not from anything I've seen.