Now they are burning Junot Diaz at the stake.

Forums: Feminism, Metoo
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Junot Diaz is a brilliant writer and an important voice for the Hispanic immigrant community. He is also a man.

The charges.

1. He tried to kiss a woman.
2. He wrote a fictional character who disrespects women.
3. He disagreed with a woman, and yelled back at her when she heckled a book event.

This witch hunt is causing real damage to people who have made great contributions. I was upset when they came after Louis C.K, and Aziz Ansari. But this is far more damaging.

When does this end?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 3 • Views: 2,734 • Replies: 64

Carmen Maria Machado
✔
@carmenmmachado
Junot Díaz is a widely lauded, utterly beloved misogynist. His books are regressive and sexist. He has treated women horrifically in every way possible. And the #MeToo stories are just starting. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

2 Replies

@edgarblythe,

I am curious, Edgar. Have you read his books? Me and my family love his writing for its portrayal of immigrant life. His creative portrayal of of the rich language of Spanglish is wonderful.

Of course, people are entitled to their own opinions, but the attempt to drag him through the mud and destroy his career is a little excessive. There are lots of great literature that modern feminist believe are "regressive and sexist". So what?

The witch hunt isn't justified.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

He has treated women horrifically in every way possible.

This is a pretty ridiculous statement.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Well, men authors are not the only ones who get heckled. Here we have a famous TV actress who was raised in The Family, which was a sex cult-we have a whole section for people from that background at A2K. She went onto fame and wrote a book about it, and she got heckled by someone at
barnes & Noble in New York. So it goes both ways:

1 Reply

@Blickers,

It isn't the heckling, it is the fact that it was used as tinder to burn Junot Diaz at the stake. He was rude to his heckler, a woman, and that is now a crime.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

When does this end?

Personally, when liberals try to hit me with their phony outrage, I just make fun of them.

I'd say it ends when everyone else responds to liberal phony outrage the same way that I do.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

There is a difference between you and Junot Diaz.

He is a public figure whose reputation has a direct economic imact on his career. When they come after Junot Diaz, it is not only national news, but he starts losing opportunities.

These public attacks are hurting him in a real way. And when a public figure faces the angry mob of feminism... there is no way to win. Anything you say will be portrayed as misogyny, ignorance or worse. That is why the people facing these attacks almost always accept their public shaming; they go silent after a brief politically current apology (it is the smartest thing to do).

I don't think you have to worry about that (I certainly don't).

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

If I were in that situation, I'd sue them for defamation/libel/slander/whatever.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

... and you would lose, after significant damage to your career from the public shaming. That's how a witch hunt works; the witch never has a chance.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Why would I lose if they really were unjustly defaming me?

Hire a lawyer, take them to court, take all their money.

I don't believe that the witch never has a chance. I believe you can stand up to witch hunts and win.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

This is a silly tangent, but I will play since no one else is saying anything.

Defamation cases are incredibly hard to win in the US (as they should be). If I call you a misogynist and you lose your job for it you have no legal resource. The term "misogynist" has no legal definition... it is an opinion, and therefore proving that it is false in a legal sense is impossible. You are probably going to argue this because you have very simple view of "truth" that we have bumped heads over in other threads. But this isn't about your "truth", it is about what is legally provable.

If you want to argue what "should be" find some else. Arguing over what "should be" is meaningless to me. In real life, these cases never win.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

If I call you a misogynist and you lose your job for it you have no legal resource.

File a wrongful termination lawsuit against your former employer.

maxdancona wrote:

The term "misogynist" has no legal definition... it is an opinion, and therefore proving that it is false in a legal sense is impossible. You are probably going to argue this because you have very simple view of "truth" that we have bumped heads over in other threads. But this isn't about your "truth", it is about what is legally provable.

I confess to not knowing much about these types of lawsuits. However, in the case of a widespread coordinated campaign to pressure everyone to sever ties with the targeted person, I would have thought there would be a case that could be made in court if the claims were untrue. That's a bit more than someone simply saying "I think that guy is a misogynist" in a public forum.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

File a wrongful termination lawsuit against your former employer.

I can give you lots of people who have been fired for being politically incorrect. I can't think of one example where someone has won a lawsuit against a former employer, can you?

An employer is allowed to fire an employee that they consider sexist, or racist or otherwise politically incorrect. And when there is public pressure they will. The employer doesn't have to prove anything.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

I can't think of one example where someone has won a lawsuit against a former employer, can you?

Steve Moore, former FBI agent, was fired as head of security at Pepperdine University for speaking out in defense of Amanda Knox:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/amanda-knox-exclusive-former-fbi-agent-fired-by-school-for-speaking-out-on-knox-case/

Pepperdine fired him due to an organized campaign to identify and demonize Amanda Knox supporters that was quite similar to the campaigns that feminist nutcases direct against their victims.

He sued:
http://pepperdine-graphic.com/moore-files-lawsuit-over-termination/

Pepperdine settled because they were going to lose badly:
http://injusticeinperugia.blogspot.com/2011/07/steve-moore-vindicated-in-lawsuit-with.html

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote max:

Quote:

3. He disagreed with a woman, and yelled back at her when she heckled a book event.

This witch hunt is causing real damage to people who have made great contributions.

He's a writer. He gets money from selling books and public appearance fees. People find what you have to say inspirational, you get a lot of money. People find what you have to say not so inspirational, you don't make as much money. Either way, the people who disagree with you have just as much right to make their point as the writer has the right to make his.
Maybe his hecklers have a point as well.

2 Replies

@Blickered,

True, but if someone loses a lot of money because of an organized campaign of people saying untrue things about them, and if they can prove that, I advise them to sue.

I'm a bit foggy on the differences between libel, slander, and defamation, but I'm sure a lawyer would know.

Are you having account problems again???

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Yes, I've contacted management earlier, they have yet to get back to me. I'm sure it will be fixed soon, so I just started up a new account with a name similar to my real account name so people know who I am.

I'm not sure on the differences between libel and slander myself. I do know there is a big difference between famous people and not famous people. If you make nasty statements against a person not famous, they have a much easier time proving they were harmed by your words than the person who was already considered a public figure. The courts have ruled that public figures have to take a lot of grief before they can say it's over the line

So if Díaz is a famous author he would be a public figure, and much harder for him to sue.

1 Reply

@Blickered,

Just generally, libel is written and thus, easier to prove. Slander is verbal. Perfect defense against either tort is truth. If I call someone a son of a bitch and his mother is really a dog (bitch) your claim will be denied.

I believe there is also a tort called Public Disclosure of Private Information - or something like that.

Also, the offended usually has to show a monetary loss, if I remember correctly. That standard seems to have been applied fairly loosely in the past.

PS: don't quote me to a lawyer.

1 Reply

@roger,

I didn't mean this to be a legal seminar.

My understanding is that if someone calls me a "son of a bitch" it is well understood that they aren't actually making a comment on the species of my mother. It is an expression of an opinion that I am a person of undesirable character or value as a human being.

No court is going to examine whether this claim is true or not, it is clearly an expression of opinion on the part of the speaker. But I want to get back to what is happening to Junot Diaz.

0 Replies

Now they are burning Junot Diaz at the stake.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know