We hold these truths to be self-evident: That people *like* to read, and hear and watch Stories.
That Story should come before Message, but message is okay if that floats your boat.
That Books which put Message before Story are fine too, even if boring and tedious and pedantic. .
That for Freedom of Speech (and Written Word) to be free, that Freedom must be sacrosanct, nothing is off limits, nothing is too offensive
That Freedom of Speech does not mean freedom not to be Offended, nor to impose your Offense on behalf of others.
That Freedom of Speech comes with consequences and others may Consequence your nose if you are too offensive.
That Writers must be free to write what they please and that no one has the right to tell them they may not or should not.
That likewise Readers have a right to read whatever they damn-well please and no one may say them nay.
That anyone who likes Science Fiction – written Word, spoken Word or Dramatic Presentation – is a Science Fiction Fan.
In short, read what you like, and we’ll do the same.
Just quit telling us we’re wrong, or homophobic, or transphobic or whatever-the-latest-PC-phobic is for enjoying rousing action tales with lots of hot babes and explosions.
Kay?
Otherwhere Gazette 
So say we all!
LikeLiked by 2 people
INDEED. PS my definition of hot babe may differ from yours. Viva le differance!!!
LikeLiked by 2 people
This post is clearly cisnormative and fascist. It’s oppressing photons and stuffs on the intarwebz. You should all die in a fire.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Hot Fudge Thursdae!
LikeLiked by 3 people
which comes on a Tuesdae this week as we all know.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I do love a crowd that knows their lines!
But apparently for Brad it’s every day this week. He’s supposed to be writing, and only show his face online on Sundaes. I think I’ve seen him on every day this week.
LikeLiked by 5 people
[…] always interesting Pat Richardson over at Otherwhere Gazette has it […]
LikeLike
Where do I put my JOHN HANCKOCK?
LikeLiked by 1 person
[…] https://otherwheregazette.wordpress.com/2015/02/18/a-sad-puppies-manifesto/ […]
LikeLike
[…] not going to slow the class down) The Beautiful Cedar Sanderson covered a fair part of this in: https://otherwheregazette.wordpress.com/2015/02/18/a-sad-puppies-manifesto/ And the wonderful Sarah Hoyt hit it some more in: […]
LikeLiked by 1 person
I prefer my babes kicking butt and taking names, but if they’re hot, too, that’s okay.
LikeLiked by 1 person
[…] noreply@blogger.com (Vox) The Otherwhere Gazette releases the Sad Puppies Manifesto:That for Freedom of Speech (and Written Word) to be free, that Freedom must be sacrosanct, nothing […]
LikeLiked by 1 person
So, according to your last comment, I do not have freedom of speech to comment on a story you like, because if I say a work is sexist, or racist of homophobic, you find that offensive? We’re not being very consistent, are we? Because of course you can read/write a rousing story with hot babes (of all sexes) and lots of explosions without being racist, sexist, homophobic or transphobic, with a little bit of work.
LikeLike
I agree and disagree, Elizabeth… Sure, the post is a little confusing and contradictory at first glance. But can you really write a story with hot babes of all sexes, genders, and orientations without being sexist? You would have to have a representative number of ugly folks as important characters, or else you’re being uggophobic. And you have to have the majority of the romantic interests involve plain, slightly chubby people, which isn’t really good escapism. Because if there’s something wrong with making all the main characters giant Nordic barbarian men, then there’s also something wrong with making all the main characters hawt.
In short, the only way to write a good story without marginalizing people is to make no mention of any defining characteristics like race, gender, attractiveness, ableness, or innate intelligence. I think Ancillary Justice makes some good progress toward that goal.
LikeLike
“In short, the only way to write a good story without marginalizing people is to make no mention of any defining characteristics like race, gender, attractiveness, ableness, or innate intelligence. I think Ancillary Justice makes some good progress toward that goal.”
You are correct, Ancillary Justice makes good progress towards writing a story that is bland and unappealing.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Harrison Bergeron was never intended to be an instruction manual.
You are such a bigot for thinking that anyone other than a hot white male is so insecure as to be “marginalized” by stories that feature hot white males.
This whole fetish for “inclusivity” via lower standards for the favored alleged victim groups is nothing more than real bigotry wrapped in pretty words.
To whit: there is no functional difference between someone who believes that “women aren’t as good as men”, and someone who believes that “women need lower standards so they can achieve what men can” – because the only reason women would need lower standards is that they aren’t as good.
Replace men and women with whites and blacks, gays and straights or – just for shits and giggles – Christians and Jews.
The true bigots are the ones who favor “representative” and “not marginalizing” people because they’re the ones who are doing everything in their power to stop other people achieving on their own merit. And a good story where people achieve something on their own merits will not alienate anyone except bigots who want so desperately to believe that nobody can do anything without their say-so.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Of course you have that freedom, I have not said you don’t, I merely suggest there is room for all of us. You have a problem with that idea or are you not inclusive?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Actually, I find calling a story sexist, racist, homophobic or whatever irrelevant and ridiculous.
You have the freedom to write whatever you wish, it is when you(the royal you, encompassing all those wonderful SJW types) try to tear down an author for writing an entertaining story that doesn’t try to put the characters race, religion, gender or sexual preference at the fore front is where we have the problem.
That is what the problem is. That is what the problem has always been. Why is that so hard to understand?
Write whatever you wish. Expect criticism on if it was an entertaining story or not. Expect criticism if it pushes some social agenda. Attack an author for writing a story about exploding space ships, high adventure or whatever trope that doesn’t push a social agenda, and expect people to fire back. Criticize the story all you want, for legitimate reasons.
You didn’t enjoy the story, okay, tastes vary. Now, when a story is criticized because there weren’t enough gay/women/transgender/whatever type characters, or it was the improper representations of *insert group here* in the story based on some preconceived checklist that is where the problem arises.
Understand?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Because of course you can read a rousing story with hot babes (of all sexes) and lots of explosions without calling it racist, sexist, homophobic or transphobic, with a little bit of work.
But then you wouldn’t get to condescend to people and posture and show the world how much better you are the everybody else, and also you’d not have an excuse to lecture us all and tell everybody what to do all of the time at every moment.
LikeLiked by 3 people
“Because of course you can read/write a rousing story with hot babes (of all sexes) and lots of explosions without being racist, sexist, homophobic or transphobic, with a little bit of work.”
Who specifically gets to decide if our works reach that exacting standard, how did they earn that position, and what happens if we disagree with their opinions?
LikeLike
No,it’s because “racist”,”sexist”,and “homophobic” have no objective meaning. They are not intended to convey information about the subject, only to poison the well and smear the subject by providing a hollowed-out umbrella term which the public is conditioned through repetition to respond to with horror or disgust.
And no one’s saying you don’t have the freedom to do it. They’re telling you not to do it because it’s the equivalent of purposely crapping your pants in someone’s car,which you also technically have the freedom to do.
LikeLike
[…] And They Have a MANifesto […]
LikeLike