Do you have any intent to update Flash Fiction Online's submission guideline with a less opaque reference to your beliefs on this issue (i.e., one that that does not obscure the discussion by trying to use the right to bear arms as an example)?
Have you considered adding a line similar to that heavenscalyx suggested below, such as: "Stories which portray gay, lesbian and queer relationships in a positive light are not welcome
( ... )
I regret to say that I won't be able to respond to these questions today -- I'm at my day job now, today is my go-live date for the magazine, and Lord knows I need the time to be thoughtful about how I respond to questions like yours :) -- but I'll try to get back to it in a few days.
I think he's still an asshat, because I think anyone who objects to my legal marriage (or thinks that being gay/lesbian/bi is a bad lifestyle choice one can overcome) is an asshat, but first amendment, freedom of religion/opinion, his sandbox and his toys, blah blah blah.
It would be nice if he clarified his submission guidelines so no one would bother sending him stories that he'd shitcan out of hand. He doesn't need to do a song and dance about being a homophobe, but could just mention that "gay, lesbian, and queer topics are not welcome."
I bet his stance on transgender issues is similar, so a similar clarifier for that would be useful.
I wish Swirsky hadn't unconsciously equated "Christianity" with "anti-gay/pro-heterosexuality". But this is a secondary, or possibly tertiary, reaction to the rest of everything else.
I agree. There are Christian denominations which are welcoming, or at the very least fighting over whether to be welcoming with combatants on both sides. And there are many Christians disgusted by the anti-equality stance their particular denomination has taken
( ... )
Having been brought up Catholic and still identifying as such to at least some extent, I get irritated that we've allowed the entire religion to be hijacked by the anti-gay agenda. (Oh, I used the word agenda!)
Yeah. I've been thinking a lot lately about what I consider the obligations of group members to effect change within their groups is.
When do you take comfort from someone from the same group that just punched you coming up and saying, "I'm sorry, that person is wrong, and I disagree with them."
And when do you respond with, "Then why the fuck aren't you helping me fight them off?"
This goes for myself as well, as I am certainly on the "upper" half of a bunch of privilege equations, and should be calling out my own.
Although I also thought the "passing on advertising isn't the same as attacking" line was a bit skewed. Passing on advertising isn't the same as actively keeping a topic out of a magazine, either.
i like that point. refusing advertising has definitely become a very effective way to attack and disable a cause or group of people. If you own enough power (eg. clear channel or major magazines with massive readership) you can effectively slant an issue, very effectively, simply by scaring people from representing their true opinions in the things they are advertising. You can silence people; you can muffle dissent. It's not an attack in the sense of switchblade at the throat, but it is an attack in a more strategic and less transparent way. And, we all know, if the ideas you are contributing to the reinforcement of are helping people feeling more comfortable committing violence against groups of people, yes, as a member of that group, i feel somewhat threatened by it. True, if you are an underdog publisher, it is less the case, because the power differential between you and the people who might feel affected by those views is much more level. But, still, that tactic can and often is used as an attack, and as such, i have the
( ... )
Comments 27
Thank you,
Jake Freivald
Reply
Do you have any intent to update Flash Fiction Online's submission guideline with a less opaque reference to your beliefs on this issue (i.e., one that that does not obscure the discussion by trying to use the right to bear arms as an example)?
Have you considered adding a line similar to that heavenscalyx suggested below, such as: "Stories which portray gay, lesbian and queer relationships in a positive light are not welcome ( ... )
Reply
I regret to say that I won't be able to respond to these questions today -- I'm at my day job now, today is my go-live date for the magazine, and Lord knows I need the time to be thoughtful about how I respond to questions like yours :) -- but I'll try to get back to it in a few days.
Reply
Reply
It would be nice if he clarified his submission guidelines so no one would bother sending him stories that he'd shitcan out of hand. He doesn't need to do a song and dance about being a homophobe, but could just mention that "gay, lesbian, and queer topics are not welcome."
I bet his stance on transgender issues is similar, so a similar clarifier for that would be useful.
Thanks for the update.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
When do you take comfort from someone from the same group that just punched you coming up and saying, "I'm sorry, that person is wrong, and I disagree with them."
And when do you respond with, "Then why the fuck aren't you helping me fight them off?"
This goes for myself as well, as I am certainly on the "upper" half of a bunch of privilege equations, and should be calling out my own.
Reply
Which they're not.
Reply
Although I also thought the "passing on advertising isn't the same as attacking" line was a bit skewed. Passing on advertising isn't the same as actively keeping a topic out of a magazine, either.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment