Thursday, June 28, 2018
In Memoriam: Harlan Ellison, 1934-2018
Harlan could be an incredibly prickly, combative individual - almost to the point of self-parody at times, especially when some of the fights were ones he probably shouldn't have picked - but he was also one of the SF authors who kept my interest in the genre going during my teenage years, and his short fiction (which was almost all of his output, since he wrote only a handful of novels) was easily some of the best I've ever read.
F*ck "civility"
There are professional columnists and more prominent bloggers who can say what I want to (and they will - see the links below) with far more politeness than I can muster right now, but the amount of gut punches that I took with a series of Supreme Court rulings this week - and practically all of them by an ideologically lock-stepping 5 to 4 vote - pissed me off to the point where I wanted no part of social media because I knew exactly how I would initially react on it. The title of this post is certainly more than a tipoff as to my sentiments, but let's face it: I knew that things would get bad if Trump had his way with the courts, and "bad" may be an understatement. We now have a much more restrictive, corporatist, downright elitist political landscape to deal with, and it's all because a idiotic Foghorn Leghorn cartoon made human flesh from Kentucky refused to even give a previous nominee the courtesy of a straightforward "no" vote in the Senate.
There are a lot of people out there who are now calling for "civility" towards an alleged President who shows none towards an incredibly wide-ranging group of others: domestic political opponents and allies alike, members of his own administration, foreign allies, you name it. The nicest he's been lately is to a Stalinist retread (third of a continuing series!) who leads the government of one of the worst human rights violators in Asia, if not the entire world. And then there's his esteemed Russian friend, of course. He can't ever not give him a thumbs-up for being such a great role model, right?
So before you ask me for civility directed at someone like that, ask yourself this - why should I? Or anyone else, for that matter? Especially when you know returning the favor (what we used to call "civil discourse" in a previous day)would never be considered?
Feel free to peruse the following pieces by Ed Brayton, Charles P. Pierce, Heather Digby Parton and Jordan Weissman for more on the events of the week.
There are a lot of people out there who are now calling for "civility" towards an alleged President who shows none towards an incredibly wide-ranging group of others: domestic political opponents and allies alike, members of his own administration, foreign allies, you name it. The nicest he's been lately is to a Stalinist retread (third of a continuing series!) who leads the government of one of the worst human rights violators in Asia, if not the entire world. And then there's his esteemed Russian friend, of course. He can't ever not give him a thumbs-up for being such a great role model, right?
So before you ask me for civility directed at someone like that, ask yourself this - why should I? Or anyone else, for that matter? Especially when you know returning the favor (what we used to call "civil discourse" in a previous day)would never be considered?
Feel free to peruse the following pieces by Ed Brayton, Charles P. Pierce, Heather Digby Parton and Jordan Weissman for more on the events of the week.
Wednesday, June 20, 2018
Monday, June 11, 2018
Running Through Hugo's Back Yard 21: The Fifth Season
Hugo winner: The Fifth Season, 2016, by N.K. Jemisin
My take: I had real trouble finding a copy of it around the time the 2016 vote for the Hugos came up, and there's a reason for that. Had a certain unpleasant incident involving the SFWA not happened, TFS might've been considered solely on its considerable literary merits without any outside controversy concerning issues involving racism in professional SF circles. Yes, there's tons of angst. Shitloads of it, in fact. But the angst fully flows from the plot and narrative and isn't ginned up for any easy sympathy with the characters on the business end of the book's events. I'll definitely get around to the two sequels.
Nuggety? Despite the fact there's plenty of action and more than a few nerve-wracking moments this just doesn't fit Torgersen's criteria. There's too much literary sensibility and not enough (or even any) kowtowing to supposedly traditionalist (read: space opera) SF conceits, which essentially means that TFS is far more a book about 21st century sensibilities than even some of the shiniest Bright New Future predictions of golden age SF. And like it or not, that's progress.
My take: I had real trouble finding a copy of it around the time the 2016 vote for the Hugos came up, and there's a reason for that. Had a certain unpleasant incident involving the SFWA not happened, TFS might've been considered solely on its considerable literary merits without any outside controversy concerning issues involving racism in professional SF circles. Yes, there's tons of angst. Shitloads of it, in fact. But the angst fully flows from the plot and narrative and isn't ginned up for any easy sympathy with the characters on the business end of the book's events. I'll definitely get around to the two sequels.
Nuggety? Despite the fact there's plenty of action and more than a few nerve-wracking moments this just doesn't fit Torgersen's criteria. There's too much literary sensibility and not enough (or even any) kowtowing to supposedly traditionalist (read: space opera) SF conceits, which essentially means that TFS is far more a book about 21st century sensibilities than even some of the shiniest Bright New Future predictions of golden age SF. And like it or not, that's progress.
Repulsive
...is exactly what you can call this new Federal policy towards certain classes of Asylum seekers:
The policy (US Attorney General) Jeff Sessions took aim at lies at the heart of an area of immigration law that has been hotly contested over the past two decades. During that time, advocates for victims of domestic violence have succeeded in winning cases that liberalized the law to protect victims of abuse or extortion whose home governments couldn’t or wouldn’t protect them. Many of the immigrants granted asylum as a result were fleeing Central American nations that offer little protection to victims of domestic abuse and gangs.
The government does not appear to keep statistics on exactly how many asylum claims fall into the categories Sessions is now excluding, but advocates estimate that domestic violence victims seeking asylum number in the tens of thousands each year. A large share of those requests have been successful, as a result of several administrative rulings and court cases during the Obama administration.
“There are many, many Central American women and women from other parts of the world who have been able to obtain protection,” said Denise Gilman, director of the immigration clinic at the University of Texas Law School in Austin. “Many women sitting right now in detention under these claims might lose their right to obtain protection and be deported to dangerous situations.”
The United Nations High Commission on Refugees had urged Sessions against changing the asylum rules. It warned that such action would violate international agreements the U.S. has entered into concerned refugees and would subject victims to being returned to situations where their lives are in danger. The American Bar Assn. warned that ending the asylum eligibility for victims of domestic violence “would further victimize those most in need of protection.”
So, yeah, trouble all around: both for former (and, to be perfectly blunt about it, possible future) victims affected by this policy change, but also in terms of our living up to those inconvenient little things called "international agreements" as well. And a humanitarian one that most sane people wouldn't argue with in the first place, to boot.
Then again, international agreements? Even among formerly close allies? Who the hell needs those these days?
The policy (US Attorney General) Jeff Sessions took aim at lies at the heart of an area of immigration law that has been hotly contested over the past two decades. During that time, advocates for victims of domestic violence have succeeded in winning cases that liberalized the law to protect victims of abuse or extortion whose home governments couldn’t or wouldn’t protect them. Many of the immigrants granted asylum as a result were fleeing Central American nations that offer little protection to victims of domestic abuse and gangs.
The government does not appear to keep statistics on exactly how many asylum claims fall into the categories Sessions is now excluding, but advocates estimate that domestic violence victims seeking asylum number in the tens of thousands each year. A large share of those requests have been successful, as a result of several administrative rulings and court cases during the Obama administration.
“There are many, many Central American women and women from other parts of the world who have been able to obtain protection,” said Denise Gilman, director of the immigration clinic at the University of Texas Law School in Austin. “Many women sitting right now in detention under these claims might lose their right to obtain protection and be deported to dangerous situations.”
The United Nations High Commission on Refugees had urged Sessions against changing the asylum rules. It warned that such action would violate international agreements the U.S. has entered into concerned refugees and would subject victims to being returned to situations where their lives are in danger. The American Bar Assn. warned that ending the asylum eligibility for victims of domestic violence “would further victimize those most in need of protection.”
So, yeah, trouble all around: both for former (and, to be perfectly blunt about it, possible future) victims affected by this policy change, but also in terms of our living up to those inconvenient little things called "international agreements" as well. And a humanitarian one that most sane people wouldn't argue with in the first place, to boot.
Then again, international agreements? Even among formerly close allies? Who the hell needs those these days?
Thursday, June 7, 2018
Wednesday, June 6, 2018
Signal boost: New York Times, "Grifters Gonna Grift"
The Trump administration at "work". From the Times, June 5th, 2018:
This is shaping up to be another red-letter week for Draining the Swamp.
On Monday, Paul Manafort, President Trump’s former campaign chairman, splashed back into the news when members of the special counsel Robert Mueller’s team accused him in court papers of witness tampering. Swamp-watchers will recall that Mr. Manafort is facing a smorgasbord of charges related to tax, lobbying and money-laundering violations. Prosecutors now say that he has been using his free time while awaiting trial to try to contact some former European business associates in order to coach them into lying about his work on behalf of pro-Russia political interests in Ukraine. Mr. Manafort’s secret lobbying scheme is alleged to have been impressively elaborate — as, also, efforts to cover it up. But the straightforward phrase that leaps out from this latest court filing comes from a witness telling the F.B.I. that Mr. Manafort had tried to “suborn perjury.” Such an effort would qualify as a definite legal no-no.
Meanwhile, Scott Pruitt, head of the Environmental Protection Agency, has once again burnished his reputation as the Trump administration’s biggest grifter. On Monday, Democrats on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee asked the committee’s chairman, Representative Trey Gowdy, to subpoena the E.P.A. for documents relating to Mr. Pruitt’s “multiple abuses of authority in using agency staff for his own personal purposes.”
Specifically, Democrats want to know more about Mr. Pruitt’s reportedly asking his agency scheduler, Millan Hupp, to handle various tasks for him, including finding him a new place to live last summer — a monthslong, labor-intensive process — and trying to help him buy a used mattress from the Trump International Hotel in Washington.
The mattress caper was, at least, more exotic than Mr. Pruitt’s usual shopping misadventures — the nearly $10,000 to decorate his office, the dozen customized fountain pens for $1,560, the $43,000 soundproof phone booth. It even could be seen as a positive sign that he has abandoned his spendthrift ways. No matter: By Tuesday, Mr. Pruitt’s furnishing needs became old news when it was revealed that he had also asked an aide to help his wife, Marlyn, procure a Chick-fil-A franchise. Calls were arranged and the application process begun, but Mrs. Pruitt never did open a restaurant.
Now, as delicious as Chick-fil-A may be, using the agency’s staff to run one’s personal errands is, of course, a breach of ethics rules. Which may explain in part why, as The Washington Post reported, Mr. Pruitt took it upon himself to contact the C.E.O. of Concordia, a nonprofit in New York, to scare up work for his wife. According to its chief executive, Matthew Swift, Mrs. Pruitt received a few thousand dollars to help organize Concordia’s annual conference last year.
And so Mr. Pruitt continues to dazzle with his inventive capacity for misusing his position.
To be fair, the E.P.A. chief is hardly the only official in Washington who’s been testing ethical boundaries. Just a few days before he announced last week that he would not seek re-election, Representative Tom Garrett, a Republican from Virginia, was publicly accused by former aides of turning his staff into “personal servants.”
Likewise, Mr. Manafort is not alone in playing fast and loose with lobbying rules. One of the more enlightening aspects of his indictment, in fact, was how it revealed the extent to which the K Street crowd dismisses as a joke the Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, which requires Americans lobbying on behalf of foreign entities to disclose who is paying them. Mr. Manafort’s experience prompted nervous chatter among his fellow lobbyists as to whether his high-profile case would bring greater scrutiny of, and a crackdown on, FARA abuses more broadly.
More often than not, however, such misbehavior stays in the shadows. Or, when it comes to light, it’s shrugged off as politics as usual. It takes something — or someone — pretty special to cut through the white noise of cynicism that surrounds Washington. Which is precisely what the Trump era is providing: a breathtaking, overly vivid circus of conflicts of interests, abuses of office, ethical lapses and breaches of democratic norms that has captured the public’s attention with its audacity.
Some of this stems from the Russia investigation. In examining how Mr. Trump’s inner circle operates, Mr. Mueller is uncovering all manner of questionable dealings — some of them illegal, others merely appalling.
That said, the Trump Effect extends beyond the Mueller inquiry and into the shameless, often hapless characters with whom this president surrounds himself. Let’s not forget, among others, Tom Price (private jets), John McEntee (financial crimes) or Rob Porter (spousal abuse) — and down, down the drain they go.
When candidate Trump vowed to drain the swamp, he most likely didn’t do so with the thought of targeting his own cadre of aides and advisers. But whatever his intentions, the Trump era is proving to be a master class in the many ways to abuse power — and the many ways to get busted for it.
This is shaping up to be another red-letter week for Draining the Swamp.
On Monday, Paul Manafort, President Trump’s former campaign chairman, splashed back into the news when members of the special counsel Robert Mueller’s team accused him in court papers of witness tampering. Swamp-watchers will recall that Mr. Manafort is facing a smorgasbord of charges related to tax, lobbying and money-laundering violations. Prosecutors now say that he has been using his free time while awaiting trial to try to contact some former European business associates in order to coach them into lying about his work on behalf of pro-Russia political interests in Ukraine. Mr. Manafort’s secret lobbying scheme is alleged to have been impressively elaborate — as, also, efforts to cover it up. But the straightforward phrase that leaps out from this latest court filing comes from a witness telling the F.B.I. that Mr. Manafort had tried to “suborn perjury.” Such an effort would qualify as a definite legal no-no.
Meanwhile, Scott Pruitt, head of the Environmental Protection Agency, has once again burnished his reputation as the Trump administration’s biggest grifter. On Monday, Democrats on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee asked the committee’s chairman, Representative Trey Gowdy, to subpoena the E.P.A. for documents relating to Mr. Pruitt’s “multiple abuses of authority in using agency staff for his own personal purposes.”
Specifically, Democrats want to know more about Mr. Pruitt’s reportedly asking his agency scheduler, Millan Hupp, to handle various tasks for him, including finding him a new place to live last summer — a monthslong, labor-intensive process — and trying to help him buy a used mattress from the Trump International Hotel in Washington.
The mattress caper was, at least, more exotic than Mr. Pruitt’s usual shopping misadventures — the nearly $10,000 to decorate his office, the dozen customized fountain pens for $1,560, the $43,000 soundproof phone booth. It even could be seen as a positive sign that he has abandoned his spendthrift ways. No matter: By Tuesday, Mr. Pruitt’s furnishing needs became old news when it was revealed that he had also asked an aide to help his wife, Marlyn, procure a Chick-fil-A franchise. Calls were arranged and the application process begun, but Mrs. Pruitt never did open a restaurant.
Now, as delicious as Chick-fil-A may be, using the agency’s staff to run one’s personal errands is, of course, a breach of ethics rules. Which may explain in part why, as The Washington Post reported, Mr. Pruitt took it upon himself to contact the C.E.O. of Concordia, a nonprofit in New York, to scare up work for his wife. According to its chief executive, Matthew Swift, Mrs. Pruitt received a few thousand dollars to help organize Concordia’s annual conference last year.
And so Mr. Pruitt continues to dazzle with his inventive capacity for misusing his position.
To be fair, the E.P.A. chief is hardly the only official in Washington who’s been testing ethical boundaries. Just a few days before he announced last week that he would not seek re-election, Representative Tom Garrett, a Republican from Virginia, was publicly accused by former aides of turning his staff into “personal servants.”
Likewise, Mr. Manafort is not alone in playing fast and loose with lobbying rules. One of the more enlightening aspects of his indictment, in fact, was how it revealed the extent to which the K Street crowd dismisses as a joke the Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, which requires Americans lobbying on behalf of foreign entities to disclose who is paying them. Mr. Manafort’s experience prompted nervous chatter among his fellow lobbyists as to whether his high-profile case would bring greater scrutiny of, and a crackdown on, FARA abuses more broadly.
More often than not, however, such misbehavior stays in the shadows. Or, when it comes to light, it’s shrugged off as politics as usual. It takes something — or someone — pretty special to cut through the white noise of cynicism that surrounds Washington. Which is precisely what the Trump era is providing: a breathtaking, overly vivid circus of conflicts of interests, abuses of office, ethical lapses and breaches of democratic norms that has captured the public’s attention with its audacity.
Some of this stems from the Russia investigation. In examining how Mr. Trump’s inner circle operates, Mr. Mueller is uncovering all manner of questionable dealings — some of them illegal, others merely appalling.
That said, the Trump Effect extends beyond the Mueller inquiry and into the shameless, often hapless characters with whom this president surrounds himself. Let’s not forget, among others, Tom Price (private jets), John McEntee (financial crimes) or Rob Porter (spousal abuse) — and down, down the drain they go.
When candidate Trump vowed to drain the swamp, he most likely didn’t do so with the thought of targeting his own cadre of aides and advisers. But whatever his intentions, the Trump era is proving to be a master class in the many ways to abuse power — and the many ways to get busted for it.
Saturday, June 2, 2018
In Memoriam: Gardner Dozois, 1947-2018
Dozois was considered was a giant of science fiction just in terms of his editing work, but this further elaborates how much of a giant:
He had a long career as an author and was one of the most influential editors the field has seen, publishing Year’s Best anthologies for more than 35 years, serving as the editor of Asimov’s Science Fiction from 1984-2004, and editing or co-editing several original anthologies with Jack Dann, George R.R. Martin, and others.
He served as reprint editor for Clarkesworld Magazine and reviewed short fiction for Locus Magazine. A week before his death, Dozois received the Solstice Award from SFWA.
Dozois began publishing in 1966 when his story “The Empty Man” appeared in If magazine. His first novel, Nightmare Blue, co-written with George Alec Effinger, was published in 1975. In 1977, he took over editing Best Science Fiction Stories of the Year from Lester del Rey and began editing original anthologies with Dann in 1980. In the 1970s, he worked as an assistant on several magazines, including If,Galaxy, and World of Tomorrow. He took over as editor of Isaac Asimov’s Science Fiction Magazine from Shawna McCarthy in 1984.
Although he published less short fiction after taking over the editorial reins of Asimov’s, he did continue to publish new works as well as his own collections. He only published one solo novel, Strangers, but after he resigned from Asimov’s, he published the novel Hunter’s Run, co-written with Martin and Daniel Abraham.
He was the editor Guest of Honor at the Millennium Philcon, the 59th World Science Fiction Convention and in conjunction with his appearance, Old Earth Books published Being Gardner Dozois, a book length interview conducted by Michael Swanwick.
Dozois and co-editor George R.R. Martin received the World Fantasy Award for their anthology Dangerous Women. Dozois and Jonathan Strahan received the Ditmar Award for the anthology The New Space Opera, Dozois won the Readercon Award for his book Slow Dancing Through Time and the Sidewise Award for the short story “Counterfactual.” He was inducted into the Science Fiction Hall of Fame in 2011 and received the Skylark Award in 2016.
He had a long career as an author and was one of the most influential editors the field has seen, publishing Year’s Best anthologies for more than 35 years, serving as the editor of Asimov’s Science Fiction from 1984-2004, and editing or co-editing several original anthologies with Jack Dann, George R.R. Martin, and others.
He served as reprint editor for Clarkesworld Magazine and reviewed short fiction for Locus Magazine. A week before his death, Dozois received the Solstice Award from SFWA.
Dozois began publishing in 1966 when his story “The Empty Man” appeared in If magazine. His first novel, Nightmare Blue, co-written with George Alec Effinger, was published in 1975. In 1977, he took over editing Best Science Fiction Stories of the Year from Lester del Rey and began editing original anthologies with Dann in 1980. In the 1970s, he worked as an assistant on several magazines, including If,Galaxy, and World of Tomorrow. He took over as editor of Isaac Asimov’s Science Fiction Magazine from Shawna McCarthy in 1984.
Although he published less short fiction after taking over the editorial reins of Asimov’s, he did continue to publish new works as well as his own collections. He only published one solo novel, Strangers, but after he resigned from Asimov’s, he published the novel Hunter’s Run, co-written with Martin and Daniel Abraham.
He was the editor Guest of Honor at the Millennium Philcon, the 59th World Science Fiction Convention and in conjunction with his appearance, Old Earth Books published Being Gardner Dozois, a book length interview conducted by Michael Swanwick.
Dozois and co-editor George R.R. Martin received the World Fantasy Award for their anthology Dangerous Women. Dozois and Jonathan Strahan received the Ditmar Award for the anthology The New Space Opera, Dozois won the Readercon Award for his book Slow Dancing Through Time and the Sidewise Award for the short story “Counterfactual.” He was inducted into the Science Fiction Hall of Fame in 2011 and received the Skylark Award in 2016.
Congress: it's what lunatics are having for breakfast these days
If you think that the U.S. House of Representatives is plagued with unpalatable politicians already, candidates like Bill Fawell and Nathan Larson will make you feel downright nostalgic for the likes of Paul Ryan in the exceedingly slim likelihood they get elected.
First, some quotable material about Fawell:
Bill Fawell, a real estate broker who is running against incumbent Democratic Rep. Cheri Bustos for Illinois’ 17th District, secured a spot on the ballot for November after an uncontested primary. The district voted overwhelmingly for Bustos in 2016 but also narrowly for Trump.
In rantings on blogs, as well as in a 2012 book, Fawell supported many popular conspiracy theories, including that 9/11 was an inside job. According to his arguments, a controlled explosion demolished the 7 World Trade Center tower in order to destroy secret CIA documents.
He also believes in the widespread practice of a satanist cult among those in power, along with a theory that contends that the illuminati run the country through powerful and influential public figures.
In a blog post in which he encouraged everyone to watch the Animal Planet Puppy Bowl instead of the Super Bowl—therefore withholding support for “godless” illuminati-associated Beyonce in the year she performed the halftime show—he called Madonna “the high priestess of Kabbala, that ever narcissist skank with the crooked teeth” and referred to Beyonce’s husband as “Beyonce’s cretin friend/manager/squeeze Jay-Z???”
In other posts, he laid out evidence that Michelle Obama is really a man; that New York City would be destroyed by the “U.S. Deep State government” to convince America to support war; and that Tony Podesta’s red shoes mean he is a satanist.
Think that's hinky? Read on about Larson. You ain't seen nuthin' yet:
An ex-con, self-declared racist with openly misogynistic views is running for Congress as an independent candidate in Virginia's 10th Congressional District.
In an interview with HuffPost on Thursday, Nathan Larson, 37, of Charlottesville, Virginia, was reportedly "open about his pedophilia" because he doesn't want to be constrained by political correctness.
"A lot of people are tired of political correctness and being constrained by it," Larson said. "People prefer when there's an outsider who doesn't have anything to lose and is willing to say what's on a lot of people's minds."
Larson admitted to HuffPost he was behind the websites suiped.org and incelocalypse.today, which no longer exist but provided forums for pedophiles and misogynists.
Though he never claimed to engage in sexual acts with minors in posts on these websites, Larson allegedly expressed a desire to do so. In his various writings, Larson also endorsed incest, kidnapping and rape.
In Larson's view, women are not "competent to make their own sexual decisions at any age."
Larson also admitted to Business Insider he once confessed to raping his ex-wife but said that was a "mistake" and he now wishes to "recant" that confession.
Meanwhile, Larson's campaign manifesto includes praise for Adolf Hitler and vehemently anti-feminist language.
He described Hitler as a "white supremacist hero" and in a section supporting gun rights stated, "Guns don't kill people - feminists do." Larson argued in order to prevent future school shootings "patriarchal" rule must be reinstituted in American families.
There's more, of course, but I figure that anyone who's read through all of the above will need to get a fresh air-sickness bag to read the rest.
First, some quotable material about Fawell:
Bill Fawell, a real estate broker who is running against incumbent Democratic Rep. Cheri Bustos for Illinois’ 17th District, secured a spot on the ballot for November after an uncontested primary. The district voted overwhelmingly for Bustos in 2016 but also narrowly for Trump.
In rantings on blogs, as well as in a 2012 book, Fawell supported many popular conspiracy theories, including that 9/11 was an inside job. According to his arguments, a controlled explosion demolished the 7 World Trade Center tower in order to destroy secret CIA documents.
He also believes in the widespread practice of a satanist cult among those in power, along with a theory that contends that the illuminati run the country through powerful and influential public figures.
In a blog post in which he encouraged everyone to watch the Animal Planet Puppy Bowl instead of the Super Bowl—therefore withholding support for “godless” illuminati-associated Beyonce in the year she performed the halftime show—he called Madonna “the high priestess of Kabbala, that ever narcissist skank with the crooked teeth” and referred to Beyonce’s husband as “Beyonce’s cretin friend/manager/squeeze Jay-Z???”
In other posts, he laid out evidence that Michelle Obama is really a man; that New York City would be destroyed by the “U.S. Deep State government” to convince America to support war; and that Tony Podesta’s red shoes mean he is a satanist.
Think that's hinky? Read on about Larson. You ain't seen nuthin' yet:
An ex-con, self-declared racist with openly misogynistic views is running for Congress as an independent candidate in Virginia's 10th Congressional District.
In an interview with HuffPost on Thursday, Nathan Larson, 37, of Charlottesville, Virginia, was reportedly "open about his pedophilia" because he doesn't want to be constrained by political correctness.
"A lot of people are tired of political correctness and being constrained by it," Larson said. "People prefer when there's an outsider who doesn't have anything to lose and is willing to say what's on a lot of people's minds."
Larson admitted to HuffPost he was behind the websites suiped.org and incelocalypse.today, which no longer exist but provided forums for pedophiles and misogynists.
Though he never claimed to engage in sexual acts with minors in posts on these websites, Larson allegedly expressed a desire to do so. In his various writings, Larson also endorsed incest, kidnapping and rape.
In Larson's view, women are not "competent to make their own sexual decisions at any age."
Larson also admitted to Business Insider he once confessed to raping his ex-wife but said that was a "mistake" and he now wishes to "recant" that confession.
Meanwhile, Larson's campaign manifesto includes praise for Adolf Hitler and vehemently anti-feminist language.
He described Hitler as a "white supremacist hero" and in a section supporting gun rights stated, "Guns don't kill people - feminists do." Larson argued in order to prevent future school shootings "patriarchal" rule must be reinstituted in American families.
There's more, of course, but I figure that anyone who's read through all of the above will need to get a fresh air-sickness bag to read the rest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)