You accuse me of not reading what you wrote, and then ALL CAPS something into my mouth?
I never once told you to read any cite. And I have read all the MZB Darkover books, possibly excepting a few anthologies.
Furthermore I’ve stated I don’t give a damn whether or not you or anyone else wants to keep reading MZB books. My viewpoint is that people should be informed of questionable content in her books and be able to make up their own minds as to what opinion to hold, without the information being minimized or opinions shouted down by someone like you.
In what way is MZB “getting away with it” and NOT receiving criticism? We’ve had two threads full of criticizing MZB, not to mention providing all manner of links to skeevy things she did or was involved with.
Except no one here is saying it’s unimportant. Of course it’s important. The dividing line is between those who feel the only acceptable response is a boycott of the books and those who do not. And it’s a slice of the pro-boycott party that want to impose their viewpoint on everyone else.
I’m not going to burn books to prove to you that I think child abuse is disgusting, immoral, and criminal. My saying so should be sufficient. I don’t see where you get to dictate which of my possessions to sacrifice to appease your sense of justice, or which books I am or am not allowed to read. I’ll make my own choices, thank you very much.
And this creepy Cult of Bradley is part of why Greyland said she never came out with it before. Bradley throwing tantrums and threatening to walk out of conventions if her rapist husband was excluded and discrediting the victims is repeating itself here.
Sure, Greyland MIGHT be lying, because…hey…she’ll get…what? Fame? For someone who’s kept in the background for years? Smears and calls of “liar” from people who’ll grudgingly admit it’s barely “possible” for a child-rapist enabler to also be a child rapist herself? Hey! I’ll bet that Moire left home in her early teens JUST to set up MZB for her accusations. What a cunning little plotter!
I’m glad we have people who can ferret out the idea that MZB only “possibly” raped her daughter given that MZB is 100% guilty by her own admission of procuring victims for her animal of a husband (she invited Victim X to stay live with her, knowing full well that Breen had been raping boys prior to that), of lying for him to cover his crimes, to (possible) perjury in one of the earlier court cases against him.
In my book, her obvious crimes, her lack of caring about the little boys Breen raped, the help in procuring them for him and so forth, make it extremely likely that she was also a child rapist.
Y’know, your arguments would be much easier to understand if you read and responded to what people wrote rather than the voices in your head. Lightray wrote nothing of the sort. At all. He wrote nothing even vaguely close to what you’re saying the voices in your head told you he said. As a matter of fact, the only person in the thread who’s even been even the tiniest bit close to what you’re ranting against is MrDibble who’s made it 110% clear that he thinks it’s relevant to a “Should I read this author?” discussion to mention that they’re a child-rapist and he’s gone out of his way to say that he wouldn’t stop anyone from reading her stuff. So the person in the thread that’s the closest to what you’re arguing against is still 180[sup]o[/sup] opposite to these invisible mystery people who are trying to ban you from reading your precious Darkover books.
Sorry - granted, it wasn’t you who kept exhorting me to read the cites in the OP, presuming I hadn’t. That was Fenris. I had shifted to a more general “you” without making that explicit.
And yet, those of us who say that the personal conduct of an author (or other artist) does not impact on our enjoyment of the work keep getting told to read the cite, how it’s impossible that the artist’s morality isn’t reflected in the work, that somehow our opinion means we don’t care about child rape, and so on.
What it comes down to is that there are certain people who say it’s OK for others to think or react differently but who don’t really mean it - if you don’t fall into line with them they’ll attack you as immoral or ignorant or both.
I’m not minimizing information, I’m pointing out that in the Darkover series one book out of 50 has an older man raping a young boy, and he’s one of the villains in the tale. That’s hardly an overwhelming part of her work on that series. That’s not minimizing real life rape, it’s pointing out that this was in no way a major theme in that series.
Sorry - granted, it wasn’t you who kept exhorting me to read the cites in the OP, presuming I hadn’t. That was Fenris. I had shifted to a more general “you” without making that explicit.**
I did that one time. And that’s when your post made it clear that you were completely unfamiliar with what we were talking about. Since you were making the bullshit hairsplitting distinction between someone who rapes a boy 30 seconds before he grows his first pubic hair and 30 seconds after, it was telling that you were unaware that Victim X was 10 years old.
Suggesting that you should read the cites one time is hardly “kept exhorting” you.
Once again, please argue with what I wrote, and not the voices in your head.
I’m not and never have been part of a “creepy cult of Bradley”.
There have been false accusations of child rape in the past. They aren’t particularly common but it does happen. Remember all that Satanic abuse that supposedly occurred, “proven” by “recovered” memories that later turned out to be false?
Sure, it’s possible MZB raped her own daughter. It’s also possible she was “just” an enabler for Breen. While the accusations about Breen have been proven in a court of law this recent statement by Moira is a new accusation. Quite possibly true, yes, but as I said it hasn’t been proven to the same extent the Breen accusations were.
I know little to nothing of Moira Greyland, or what sort of person she is, or how reliable she is. While I’m inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to her and believe her I wouldn’t feel comfortable repeating what she claims as a fact. An accusation, yes, but not an indisputable fact.
It would be nice to have more corroboration but, sorry, I don’t assume anyone is guilty merely because they’ve been accused of a crime. I’m sorry you don’t take the notion of “innocent until proven guilty” to heart.
While she is indisputably an accessory to what Breen did unlike Breen it has never been proven that she herself raped anyone. If more victims come forth, or corroborating evidence could be supplied (perhaps her brother has something to say, or someone who was familiar with the family at the time) then it starts to approach certainty. If that doesn’t happen it doesn’t mean her statement is untrue, either.
Yes, but it doesn’t prove that she is, or don’t you understand the distinction between accusation and proof?
Oh, really? They why were exhorting me to read the cites in the OP over and over again? Or do you deny these words are yours:
It’s quite clear that your assumption is that I have never read the cites in the OP (nevermind I’ve known about them for years, except for the recent one from Moira) and that if I don’t draw the same conclusions you do I have some “weird emotional attachment” which, you know, is totally unbiased on your part :rolleyes: not!
I enjoyed the books. That doesn’t make me immoral and doesn’t mean I in any way support the misconduct of the author. Tossing out those books or refusing to re-read them ever again isn’t going to make one bit of difference to anyone - not to the dead, not to the still living victims, not to the person earning money from the MZB literary trust. I bought and paid for them years ago, some of them decades ago. Re-reading a book I bought in 1977 and have kept on the shelf all these years isn’t going to make a damn bit of difference to anyone living or dead.
There are people with public hair at the age of 10. In fact, I was one of them. If you want TMI at the age of ten I was physically mature to the point that I could have become pregnant and had a child by the age of 11 (thank Og nothing of that sort happened). Pedophiles are attracted to people who have not gone through puberty. Ephebophiles are attracted to those who are still extremely young, but have gone through puberty. 10 is an age where a victim could be either pre or post-pubescence.
I don’t think raping a 10 year old is any way acceptable, but it is marginally less horrific than, say, raping a three year old. At least to me.
Please stop implying that those who disagree with you are crazy.
I cannot dissociate what I know of a writer and what they choose to write; I’m not some kind of Platonic Ideal of a reader, I guess.
I like Stephen Donaldson as a writer quite a bit. He loves writing horribly flawed protagonists – the Thomas Covenant trilogy (and successive series) have a scene where the protagonist commits rape for [excuses] and the repercussions follow throughout all the following books. His Gap series has an even more rapey protagonist. Because Donaldson wants to explore what good might come out of such horrible people. Since I don’t know of any rape-or-other-crap background of Donaldson’s, I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt in reading along.
Steven King I also don’t know of any oogy stuff in his background, so when the main characters in It indulge in a life-affirming underage gangbang in a truly WTF moment, I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. (although, WTF, King. seriously.)
When I read Bradley originally, I didn’t know about the Breendoggle or other rumors/accusations. There were some dodgy storylines – Dyan Ardais, the relentless manhating Free Amazon storylines. I’m no longer willing to give her the benefit of the doubt as a reader. I don’t think she should be given the benefit of the doubt.
Oddly, I’m more conflicted about writers such as Anthony or Chalker. Their books have recurring digressions into what I can only view as personal fetishes, but from what I know of them they seem to be (or have been) fairly okay chaps. So if I re-read one of their books, it’s mostly with a lot of eyerolls and skimming through the fetish-fuel parts, but not with the animus I would have on a Bradley re-read.
And you keep trying to minimize their crimes by pretending that the 30 seconds before or after pubescence happens matters even slightly.
Or else why would you be tapdancing like crazy to avoid the word “pedophile” which, per at least three cites (below) says nothing of the utterly insane “10 seconds before puberty” definition you’re making up.
Cite 1 Miriam-Webster: “a person who has a sexual interest in children: one affected with pedophilia” Cite 2 Oxford Dictionary “A person who is sexually attracted to children.” (I can’t tell if these guys are associated with the OED or not–I don’t think they are) Cite 3 Cambridge dictionary: “someone who is sexually interested in children”
As an aside, “Ephebophile” isn’t in Cambridge or Miriam-Webster.
Nothing about your silly “pre/post pubescent” dodge.
Hell, even granting the word has any more value than “Pwnd” or “Lulz”, even Wikipedia says it primarily refers to 15-19 year olds.
I mean, it’s a cute tactic to try to avoid using plain, visceral words like “kiddie-rapist” by using made-up words and such, but it’s pretty damned transparent way to minimize the crime.
It’s not “those who disagree with me”, it’s “those who make up arguments and rant against them”.
Or were you the one who, in the your post before this one wrote
I assume the missing word is “You”. I repeat. Saying “read the cite” one time isn’t “over and over again”. I did it one time. If it’s supposed to be “they”, well…that’s just weird.
That isn’t what I asked! I asked if you could name someone else who is not being criticized, despite doing bad things of the same overall level.
You said we were singling Bradley out. If that’s true, there ought to be a list of other people who were doing similarly bad things, but not being criticized.
(I think we aren’t singling her out…because I think this particular case is pretty singular. There aren’t any other writers doing things this bad… Or are there?)
I would guess that everyone here would, with grave reluctance, agree. Some might even say that it’s more than “marginally” less horrific, but “substantially” less horrific.
It’s still goddam horrific! It doesn’t even begin to approach “debatable” status in our society and our collective morality.
Two seventeen year olds having consensual sex – that’s getting on toward debatable. Non-consensual sex is never even debatable: it’s morally abominable, always. And non-consensual sex with pre-teens? A moral atrocity.
That cite says nothing about what the rate is amongst non-abused people (and given the fact that most abusers claim not to have been abused, I’d have to think it is, in fact, higher): “Even the majority of studies found that** most adult sex offenders** said they had not been sexually abused during childhood”
Does she still have a positive legacy as an author and a person? Is she still the holder of a World Fantasy Award? Do all profits from her sales still go to her co-conspirator lover, not her victims?
If the rate of being committing sexual abuse among the general population is 2%, and the rate among victims of sexual abuse is 4%, then what I said is true.
It’s probably because I don’t do facebook myself, but I can’t seem to find any post of his where this is discussed. Do you have a more direct link.
As I said, if there is confirmation of what Moira says then I’ll accept it as true and comments by Mark would certainly qualify. Noted for future reference.
