Showing posts with label lobocracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lobocracy. Show all posts

Monday, September 9, 2024

Challenged

One reviewer of my multi-award-winning book Time for PsyQ challenged my use of the word 'blind' in relation to my character Kate, who appears with her guide dog Goldie and is extremely capable of managing her total absence of vision (even in the absence of her PsyQ gift). The reviewer said I should say 'visually challenged', and of course this was supported by many many 'politically correct' (PC) up votes. Conversely, another recent reviewer said Kate was her favourite character and liked how I "used characters with disabilities to show how incredible the brain is".

The USA's National Centre on Disability and Journalism quotes amongst other sources the Associated Press guidelines: 'Included in its “Disabled/Handicapped” entry, the stylebook describes 'blind' as “a person with complete loss of sight” and suggests using the terms “visually impaired” or “person with low vision” for those who have some sight', but it notes in relation to 'visually impaired' that 'some may object to it because it describes the condition in terms of a deficiency'.

In fact, 'legally blind' covers this dimension of visual impairment comparative to normal vision. Typically it means you have to be ten times or more nearer to see what a person with normal vision can see (with specific distances specified that can vary across jurisdictions, although in metric metres it is usually 6/60 vs 6/6 and in imperial feet it is often 20/200 vs 20/20). The term 'visually impaired' refers to this loss of visual acuity or peripheral awareness rather than total blindness. 

Of course, such legal definition is also to deny the PC offence at the word 'normal', without which it is impossible to characterize any ability, disability or normative distribution (substitutes like 'neurotypical' deny the central limit theorem pertaining to the normal distribution and confidence intervals of empirical measurements that relate to multiple underlying diagnostics and causes, and indeed other factors: technically nobody is exactly normal, that is precisely average in all respects).

The term 'visually challenged' itself is inaccurate and an offensive attempt at a euphemism: it is not recommended by any of the sources/standards/advisories I found. The etymonline entry for challenged is

challenged (adj.)

1570s, "having been called to a contest," past-participle adjective from challenge (v.). As a euphemism for "disabled," 1985.

And the core meaning of challenge is:

challenge (n.)

early 14c., chalenge, "something one can be accused of, a fault, blemish;" mid-14c., "false accusation, malicious charge; accusation of wrong-doing," also "act of laying claim" (to something), from Anglo-French chalenge, Old French chalonge "calumny, slander; demand, opposition," in legal use, "accusation, claim, dispute," from Anglo-French chalengier, Old French chalongier "to accuse, to dispute" (see challenge (v.)). The accusatory connotations faded 17c. The meanings "an objection" in law, etc.; "a calling to fight" are from mid-15c. The sense of "difficult task" is by 1954.

challenge (v.)

c. 1200, "to rebuke," from Old French chalongier "complain, protest; haggle, quibble," from Vulgar Latin *calumniare "to accuse falsely," from Latin calumniari "to accuse falsely, misrepresent, slander," from calumnia "trickery" (see calumny).

From late 13c. as "to object to, take exception to;" c. 1300 as "to accuse," especially "to accuse falsely," also "to call to account;" late 14c. as "to call to fight." Also used in Middle English with a sense of "claim, take to oneself." Related: Challenged; challenging.

 

The older meanings related to the word 'calumny' (lie/falsehood) are clearly inappropriate, as is the traditional usage of being called to a 'fight' or 'contest'. The broader modern sense of a difficult task or test, typically imposed by someone else, is also problematic. Indeed, to say someone is 'challenged' is to suggest that they have not managed to meet the challenge, and is thus derogatory.

Furthermore, this 'politically correct' usage tends to be extended in a 'humorous' way to anything else that may be true but would be impolite to call attention to. So when one does so, rather than being 'polite' (avoiding undue focus on the 'challenge' but offering to help without any deprecatory comment), a pseudo-PC insult is used instead (e.g. 'height-challenged').


As for the term 'politically correct' itself, the Wikipedia article on this oxymoron [viewed 9 Dec 2023] notes that it was first used to describe dogmatic adherence to and policing of ideology in relation to Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. As leftwing gender ideology started to rise in the 1970s it was used as a deliberately facetious irony, both by those traditionalists who objected to the pressure to change their language/grammar as well as as a self-deprecatory "in-joke among leftists used to satirise those who were too rigid in their adherence to political orthodoxy" (Wikipedia citing Hall, Stuart (1994): "Some 'Politically Incorrect' Pathways Through PC". S. Dunant (ed.) The War of the Words: The Political Correctness Debate. pp. 164–84.) 

So, in fact, the PC label was used as a deliberate oxymoron, knowing that it was 'political' rather than 'correct' and that the individual words were self-contradictory in this usage. However, it seems that the oxymoronic inconsistency of the term is not understood by the crowds of would-be 'do-gooders' who unthinkingly, one is tempted to say [oxy]moronically (which would not be PC), follow the path of PC ideology and attack those who don't. As in George Orwell's 1984, the 'thought police' win when you don't actually think about how they are controlling your thinking but just follow the other lemmings.

My characters Kate and Libby may be 'blind' and 'deaf', but hopefully my writing reveals truths rather than hiding them, an echo of Jesus' messsage to the 'woke' PC crowd of his day 2000 years ago: "This is why I tell stories: to create awareness, to nudge people awake... You have eyes but do not see, ears but do not hear and understand." 

It is not 'doing good' or being 'sensitive and honest' to break away from reality and science, denying the truth of being blind for euphemistic labels like 'visually impaired' — or the blatant imprecation of being 'visually challenged'. In general, 'rebels without a cause' have their own personal agenda of self-aggrandisment, seeking to be seen as better than others, champions of the causes of others, policing all in the name of protecting those who don't want their protection. I'm reminded of the boy scout who explained that he had already done his three good deeds already that day – despite the frenetic objections of the old woman he dragged across the road three times against her will.

It is worth taking a look at a 2009 National Foundation for the Blind reprint (and editorial) of an article concerning their 1993 resolution (Jernigan, 1993) to deplore such "euphemistic" alternatives to the adjective and/or noun "blind", calling the PC practice "a plague of awkward circumlocutions" with those who object or fail to obey "subject to sanction". The editorial also points (next) to a reprint of another contemporaneous article complaining about this "unholy crusade" (Vaughan, 1993), concluding: "But isn't it pretentious to make such convolutions the preferred or even the only acceptable constructions? Is this not rather the effort of some misguided professionals who, without listening, are trying to change the world of those they purport to serve?"

Living with disability is not about advertizing the disability, and calling it by new and supposedly euphonious terms, it is about accepting the person, supportively acknowledging what they can do, and humbly helping them with what they cannot. People with a disability know about their limitations, but they don't want their faces rubbed in it wantonly – which is precisely what we are doing when we try replacing correct accurate terminology, like 'blind', by confrontational, awkward and unwieldy, bad-taste, insulting and incorrect, malapropisms, like 'person who is visually challenged'. 


Marti


Availability of Time for PsyQ

Time for PsyQ is available from your favourite bookseller in print, ebook and audiobook form:


Note that the audiobook version on Google Play, Kobo and Audiobook.com uses 20+ distinct AI-generated voices to characterize the different characters (and is excellent), while Amazon/Audible and Apple use a single narrator (and are not as good in terms of pronunciation - IMHO).

See my separate blog post on the risks, ethics and pitfalls of using AI, and Putting the AI back into Fiction.

Awards for Time for PsyQ

Time for PsyQ won the Silver medal for Teen and Young Adult Sci-Fi Action & Adventure in the 2023 Global Book Awards. and is a finalist in the 2024 Wishing Shelf Book Awards and the Book Excellence Awards.

Reviews of Time for PsyQ

4.7/5 Amazon
5.0/5 Emerald
4.8/5 Goodreads 
4.0/5 OnlineBookClub
5/0/5 Readers Favorite
5.0/5 Reedsy

OBC Reviews


https://forums.onlinebookclub.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=379746  Shailesh Sarjerao Haladkar

★ ★ ★ ★ 

https://forums.onlinebookclub.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=490460  Merrit Fletcher
https://forums.onlinebookclub.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=384028  Surekhna Krishnakumar

https://forums.onlinebookclub.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=376706  Gerald Stewart

https://forums.onlinebookclub.org/viewtopic.php?f=178&t=612968 M Kashif Sunny

★ ★ ★ 


Major outlets for Marti Ward books



Contact Me


I'm also open to other comments on my books or my blog, or requests to be a proofreader or betareader for my books (although I get lots of email, not to mention a lot of spam - so it may be a few days before I reply). 

I can be reached on gmail.com as marti24ward. 

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, November 8, 2022

Minority Rule - an alien in my own country

If a dozen minority or single-cause lobby groups with a 5% or so representation band together then, even with overlaps, about half the population is covered. By the time 20 such 1/20 groups get together then over 60% of the population is covered (this is true for any larger K 1/K groups too, as mathematically, in the limit, 1/e = 38.2% of the 'silent majority' are missed). 

Hey! I'm a scientist, and my most cited paper is about doing statistics properly.

So how does this work out in practice?

The party-controlled caucusing subverts the democratic system as a few leaders representing a few minority causes can control the government, stack the courts, etc. The democratic system is about electing people in constituencies to represent their constituents. In the Westminster system, and other two-house variants, the lower house represents local areas while the upper house is able to represent larger and less geographically local interests. But in both cases, the representative is elected, not the party.

The party system allows for people with consistent views to work together and form a government, knowing that they have a large measure of common ground. But a caucus that forces party line voting with the threat of expulsion and punitive financial penalties... this is a travesty. A politician can still vote their conscience, cross the floor, and risk this — and some do,  and some do leave their parties one way or the other, but normally only in the case of parties that don't enshrine such punitive measures in a membership or preselection contract.

I call this system lobocracy — rule by lobby groups through lobotomized politicians who are not allowed to think for themselves.

But now it is worse still. The thought police of 'political correctness' are telling me what I can think and say and do and believe — and with the tools of mandated educational brainwashing, social media and cancel culture, these issues of minority lobbying have moved from the floor of the house to my livingroom, my children's school, my local hospital and my own workplace: the minority is always right.

I'm being told what I can and can't say to my students. I'm being told what I can and can't say in my books — even what characters I must include in my novels or my classes, and what words I can and cannot use. When I express my reservations about the political correctness bandwagons, or exercise my vote against them, I'm not told that I'm wrong — just that I'm brave. People who exercise their democratic right to speak and vote against various 'progressive' measures have their words turned against them, sometimes years later, some to the extent of losing their jobs, their livelihoods or their freedom -– not to mention massive fines. This move against traditional values and rights is anything but progressive — it is both regressive and repressive. Since 1984, free speech has been increasingly replaced by doublethink enforced by thought police.

We now live in a culture of fear: the cancel culture. 

We are told what to say and think and write. We are told to 'represent' certain classes of people and expected to promote corresponding political views in our stories, or to use examples that aren't us and aren't ours and don't fit. And the gatekeepers enforce this. The 'diversity' committees (enforcing discrimination for overrepresentation of minorities) wag the dog, and care more about such orchestrated regressive and repressive 'correctness' policies than good education, good training or good literature.

And if I don't use the poltically correct form, I am lambasted for it - even if the community concerned hates the 'woke' labels. And one of the worse is 'challenged'.

What happened to free speech?

The silent majority has been alienated, unwelcome in their own country.

Even the minorities whose causes have been taken on board can find themselves used, stereotyped and labeled in ways that they don't own. Even those who have recourse to the 'positive' discrimination of the diversity ethos, don't necessarily want it.

I don't want to be labeled or advantaged or disadvantaged because of my (so-called) indigenous or convict or conqueror heritage, because of my 'disabilities' or my 'beliefs' or my 'gender' or my inherited (and often rewritten) 'history' (or other 'challenges'). I want to be seen as myself, as how I am, through what I can contribute, in terms of my own abilities and capabilities, strengths and weaknesses.

I don't want to be silenced just because what I have to say doesn't push a lobocracy agenda!

Why should I have to start at a disadvantage because I'm seen as part of the underepresented majority?
Or because rebels without a cause of their own have ousted control of my minority group?

Why do I feel like I'm an alien in my own country?

Why do I keep silent about it?

Why am I afraid?


Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, April 19, 2020

Truth, Justice and Whey



Truth, Justice and the American Way* (Superman)
*substitute your own nationality
 - this was WWII (1942) and Cold War (1952-58) propaganda
 - early versions lack this (1941), others had "Tolerance" (1940-1951)

Why do we read? And how does this relate to the complementary question,
Why do we write?

The traditional view of traditional literature is that it serves a moral purpose, and the traditional criticism of popular work is that it does not, but serves only to entertain.

Looking deeper, what distinguishes literature from propaganda is not so much having a moral agenda, but having a depth of character that helps the reader understand and define themselves. From the perspective of the writer, the deep character drives the story without the need for artifice, coincidence or MacGuffin.

There is no need to create heros or villains – in moral literature they are emergent. Superheros and supervillains belong to a world of paper thin cartoon characters. Real heros and villains are driven by their own motivation and act in ways that they see as best. We need to be able to understand the bully and the criminal, we need to understand their situation, what drives them into the villain role.

Similarly there is no need for a comic relief or idiot character, itself an oxymoron that takes us to the comic strip level - but leads us to malign unfairly the comic and cartoon as a medium. The abbreviated nature of the medium properly allows us to caricature life, in contrast to the novel roman as encompassing the totality of life as situated in history (fictional realism even when dealing with alternate, predictive or fantastic histories).

The medium is the message (McLuhan, 1964)
The medium is the massage (McLuhan & Flore, 1967)

The use of a novel medium to make a moral point goes back to the folk tales and fables of earliest times, the dreams of Joseph, the lives and parables of the Prophets and indeed the works and work of Jesus. We should not need a key to open up the meaning of a parable, or reveal the true intent or target of a romance – although the more we are removed from that setting it is increasingly likely. Conversely, literature has been destroyed for many a student by forcing them to look for interpretations that may or may not have been in the conscious or unconscious mind of the writer.

The inventiveness of the novel is not so much its fictitious nature, but the massage of the medium to mean the message. We can control the pace of a novel with length of sentence and degree of description. We can focus through the eye of beholder, or we can charactize the character of the character. We can hide truth in plain sight, by hiding it behind true detail. We can amplify tension by diverting to the player who has no idea of the lurking danger. 

Create a setting and a situation, create a panoply of characters, and allow them to play out in the way that best exploits the medium.

In fables for children, or propaganda for the masses, it may be necessary to to give the key and spell out the moral. But the medium of parable and satire works best when we get the reader to chew on the problem themselves, to figure our what the character in the story has to do with them, to realize that anger and sympathy they feel in relating to the story's characters is inconsistent with their own attitudes and behaviours. 

Nathan's parable of the poor man and the lamb is the classic example here - and David just needed to identify himself with that man, he himself was the key to the cipher. (2Sam12)

In stories for adults, especially young adults, curds and whey are no longer appropriate.

By now you should have been on solid food, but you're still on milk. (1Cor3:2;Heb5:12)
Little Miss Muffett sat on a tuffet, eating her curds and whey... (Traditional)


My Paradisi Lost stories

Encounters with wormholes and asteroids, exploited, benign and catastrophically dangerous feature in the Paradisi Chronicles stories, including my Casindra Lost subseries, which also feature genetic engineering, an emergent AI 'Al' and a captain who is reluctantly crewed with him on a rather long journey to another galaxy - just the two of them, and some cats... There's another AI, 'Alice' that emerges more gradually in the Moraturi arc. It is not space opera, stories that could be set anywhere, or space fantasy, stories that are more magic than science, but stories where the science drives the story, and engineering provides the solutions. 

The stories aim to present real science in a way that will help us to think about our own planet, and to develop science and engineering that will conserve rather than destroy.

The Paradisi colonization aims to preserve the pristine ecosystems of New Eden, restrict mining to the other planets and asteroids of the system, and genetically modify people to suit the ecosystem rather than overwhelm it with introduced species - this is the mutliauthor Paradisi Universe my Lost Mission stories are set in: https://paradisichronicles.wordpress.com/

Casindra Lost
Kindle ebook (mobi) edition ASIN: B07ZB3VCW9 — tiny.cc/AmazonCL
Kindle paperback edition ISBN-13: 978-1696380911 justified Iowan OS
Kindle enlarged print edn ISBN-13: 978-1708810108 justified Times NR 16
Kindle large print edition ISBN-13: 978-1708299453 ragged Trebuchet 18

Moraturi Lost
Kindle ebook (mobi) edition ASIN: B0834Z8PP8 – tiny.cc/AmazonML
Kindle paperback edition ISBN-13: 978-1679850080 justified Iowan OS 

Moraturi Ring
Kindle ebook (mobi) edition ASIN: B087PJY7G3 – tiny.cc/AmazonMR
Kindle paperback edition ISBN-13: 979-8640426106 justified Iowan OS 

Author/Series pages and Awards


Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)