Vox Day Responds About Gallo Screencap

The June 6 roundup included a quote from Tor Creative Director Irene Gallo’s Facebook page, tweeted by Vox Day:

The quote generated a flurry of response (11 examples mentioned in the June 7 roundup).

There also were questions raised in discussion at File 770 about evidence that Gallo’s comment must have been screencapped soon after it was made on May 11, with people wondering why it had just come to light now.

On behalf of File 770 readers I asked Vox Day “(1) how long did you hold this before posting, and (2) what is the sinister plotting, er, reason behind whatever delay there was, if any?”

He answered:

I’ve held onto this since I had the screencap, which as you correctly note was made several weeks ago. As for the “sinister plotting”, I have long been in the habit of never using all of my ammunition at once, or pointing-and-shrieking for its own sake. I am a patient man and I didn’t strike back at TNH, PNH, or even John Scalzi right away either.

So it does seem to have been timed for release just ahead of Nebula Awards weekend.

187 thoughts on “Vox Day Responds About Gallo Screencap

  1. LostSailor:@XS: where is Vox a “child murder apologist”? That’s a new one. And I get it, you find anything you disagree with “reprehensible.” Noted. And, I can also leave what I get.

    No, I find words that express hatred for groups of people for the “crime” of being born reprehensible. I find people that say I and my loved ones have no place in SF/F reprehensible. I find a man who says it is natural for my best friend to be beaten to death with tire irons reprehensible.

    I get along with people that disagree with me quite fine. I’m a lesbian Christian that reads Terry Pratchett.

    What I don’t have time for is outright bigotry. Transhuman and Subhuman is full of that.

    Also, look up Anders Breivik. Look up how he murdered children.

    Then look up the glowing words VD had for him and his so called “stand against invaders and quislings”.

  2. It’s like “Vox Day is a lot of things but he’s not antisemitic” when he goes on about how Jewish people born and raised in other countries are never fully of that country and inevitably lead to social strife and should get out and sever their roots to move back to Israel but oh no, that’s not antisemitic. Oh goodness no!

    To be fair, that’s his view of every non-native ethnicity in every country. It’s a comically stupid position for which he should be roundly condemned. But it’s really doesn’t strike me as particularly targeted at Jewish people.

    That said, I think the game of “precisely characterize Vox Day’s views” is one that nobody really has any sort of obligation to participate in. I’m inclined towards “neo-fascist” over “neo-nazi” in referring to him, but there’s really very little reason why most people should care about this distinction.

  3. That you don’t take him seriously make you into a fool. And if you don’t understand why, I can’t help you.

    You can’t help anyone. You’re too much of a clown yourself to realize that Beale is nothing but a yelping fool.

  4. Jeffro Johnson: If you are tired of waging flame wars that maybe can’t even be won by anybody, please consider building a meeting of the minds in whatever neutral space it can happen in.

    The fact that you don’t appear to have the slightest idea what is wrong with that statement is, to me, very problematic.

    Non-Puppies are not the ones “waging flame wars”. The Puppies are. The Puppies are the ones who decided to start a war against a non-existent “enemy”. Non-Puppies have no interest in “winning” anything. They just want the Puppies to stop gaming the Hugo Awards (though ceasing the lameass lies and rhetoric that the Puppies have spouting non-stop would be a nice bonus).

    When the Puppies decide they are interested in “building a meeting of the minds”, ceasing the above activities is the first thing they will do. Until that happens, I don’t see why I or anyone else should feel compelled to try to persuade them to stop doing something they are clearly quite determined to continue doing.

    I also think it’s incredibly sad, for you, that you’re so focussed on the fantasy of the past that you clearly have not bothered to find out what sort of wonderful fantasy has been produced in the last 20 years. But that’s your loss.

    Also everyone, I understand the desire to lessen keystrokes, but when shortening his name, I would appreciate it if you would shorten it to “Jeffro” rather than “JJ”, kthxmch.

  5. @Meredith: Oh, I’m sure you found it an uninteresting question. And that your reason why is an indication of why. An honest answer would spoil the narrative.

    I am unaware of the situation you cite about Ms. Kowal, but I will say that if an editor publicly went off on an author they edit or their company published, there should be public professional consequences. Depending on the situation that could range from pubic reprimand, demotion, demand for apology, or, given the severity, dismissal.

    It’s about professionalism, and if you don’t get that, I don’t have the time to explain to you…

  6. Meredith on June 8, 2015 at 1:00 pm said:

    Where I come from nursing grudges is seen as a character flaw. Is it different in the USA?

    Remember that VD doesn’t live in the USA. He lives somewhere in Cloudcuckooland, which has very different social mores.

  7. It’s about professionalism, and if you don’t get that, I don’t have the time to explain to you…

    Actually, you don’t have the capability.

  8. No one I’ve seen (and please point it out if I’m missing something, I can’t read everything) has attempted to “cost Gallo her job.” I have seen people bringing the issue to the attention of Tor management as well as the management of the parent company Pan Macmillian.

    Responding to a comment you don’t like on Facebook by complaining to someone’s employer is an attempt to hurt their standing at their job or even get them fired. To suggest otherwise is the pinnacle of naiveté.

    I think most people here recognize what a dick move that is. When Lou Antonelli responded to an insult on Twitter by calling that person’s workplace, he was raked over the coals here — and quite deservedly so.

  9. RedWombat: Please keep us posted about Craig R! Tell him to recover swiftly, or we will compose filk about his condition and the only thing that rhymes with “aorta” is “Horta.”

    Well, that threat will no doubt have him up and around in no time.

  10. “But it’s really doesn’t strike me as particularly targeted at Jewish people.”

    Funny how he keeps harping on about Jews very specifically then, isn’t it?

    http://voxday.blogspot.com.au/2005/01/merits-of-anti-semitism.html

    I’d never understood how the medieval kings found it so easy to get the common people to hate the Jews in their midst. But if those medieval Jewish leaders were anything like the idiots running the ADL, the ACLU and the Council of Jews, one can see where the idea of persecuting them would have held some appeal.

    http://voxday.blogspot.com.au/2015/03/time-to-go.html

    There is no future for the Jews in Post-Christian Europe now that the great experiment in diversity and multiculturalism is ending. The various European nations trust the Jews no more than they trust the Europeans. What is happening in Europe now is going to be happening in the USA circa 2050, and I doubt the results will be any different.

    Europe no more needs Jews than Israel needs Eskimos or China needs Bantu tribesmen. And the Jews presently make it difficult for the Europeans to address their Muslim problem, just as they currently make it impossible for the USA to even begin to address its own immigrant invasion. That is why the sooner that the diaspora returns home, to the land they have fairly won in sweat and blood, the better it will be for them as well as for the nations they still presently inhabit. The French are not going to patrol their own streets indefinitely on behalf of those who are not, in the end, even French.

    Philip Sandifer? What I said in another thread about something being the essence of unexamined privilege? Your attempts to pretend VD is not being soundly, proudly anti-Semetic are another example of it.

  11. Jeffro Johnson: If you are tired of waging flame wars that maybe can’t even be won by anybody, please consider building a meeting of the minds in whatever neutral space it can happen in.

    The fact that you don’t appear to have the slightest idea what is wrong with that statement is, to me, very problematic.

    Non-Puppies are not the ones “waging flame wars”. The Puppies are. The Puppies are the ones who decided to start a war against a non-existent “enemy”. Non-Puppies have no interest in “winning” anything. They just want the Puppies to stop gaming the Hugo Awards (though ceasing the lameass lies and rhetoric that the Puppies have spouting non-stop would be a nice bonus).

    When the Puppies decide they are interested in “building a meeting of the minds”, ceasing the above activities is the first thing they will do. Until that happens, I don’t see why I or anyone else should feel compelled to try to persuade them to stop doing something they are clearly quite determined to continue doing.

    I also think it’s incredibly sad, for you, that you’re so focussed on the fantasy of the past that you clearly have not bothered to find out what sort of wonderful fantasy has been produced in the last 20 years. But that’s your loss.

    Also everyone, I understand the desire to lessen keystrokes, but when shortening his name, I would appreciate it if you would shorten it to “Jeffro” rather than “JJ”, kthxmch.

  12. Words have meaning, and I loathe it when people start loosening definitions to create idealized bogeymen. VD is a vile asshole, but that doesn’t mean he’s guilty of every type of vileness and assholery. The SPs and RPs do this systematically (“You disagree with me, therefore you’re a SJW, Marxist, feminist”), but I’d rather not respond in kind.

  13. Lostsailor: “I am unaware of the situation you cite about Ms. Kowal, ”

    A couple of years ago, a Tor staffer issued a number of specific insults, by name, about Mary Robinette Kowal, a Tor author, on a public discussion forum. Ms. Kowal was not a participant in the forum, she was being gossiped about there. The staffer made insulting remarks about her over the course of more than one post. And the timestamps on those posts suggested that unless the staffer was on leave or working extremely unconventional hours, these insults about a Tor author were apparently being made online while the Tor staffer was at work, rather than on personal time.

    The staffer’s comments were soon reposted in other forums, most notably in an article on The DailyDot. It got lot of attention and well over 1000 people shared the article on social media

    The Tor staffer threatened to sue everyone who had reposted those public remarks (which were reposted with attritbution and/or screencaps), as well as everyone who had shared The DailyDot article on social media. This, asyou may imagine, inspired many MORE people to read and share the screencaps, comments, and article. Thousands of people wound up reading and sharing the piece.

    Within a few days, the Tor staffer issued a public apology to the author. GO FIGURE.

  14. @XS (6:37): Nice rant, yet you have still to connect any of that with anything Vox has written. Prove that Vox approved of Breivik and then connect him with that reprehensible massacre. You’re claim of Vox being a “child murder apologist” is of your own making and all in your own head.

    @Aaron: To quote Mr. Scalzi: whatever. And you are quite correct. I do not have the capability of explaining anything to the willfully deluded. Nor will I try.

    @rcade: responding to a comment on Facebook where a publishing professional libels and insults authors of her own publishing company should be brought to the attention of that company. That’s a hella different than responding to a non-professional’s comment by calling their job, which I agree would be a dick move. You do recognize the difference, yes?

  15. LostSailor: Y’all still don’t get Vox. It’s not about the attention, though I can understand why you’d like to think that, it’s about the careful application of pain in a long campaign.

    Oh, we get what he’s doing, we just can’t figure out what applying pain and laying in wait to strike has to do with being a Christian. God tells the Beales some weird stuff.

  16. Glenn, then you actually don’t understand Vox. Or Christianity for that matter.

  17. To quote Mr. Scalzi: whatever. And you are quite correct. I do not have the capability of explaining anything to the willfully deluded. Nor will I try.

    You Beale hangers-on are all so cute when you try to act tough when it becomes apparent that everyone sees you for the clownish jokes you are. You don’t have the capability of explaining anything because you’re a clown. We’re laughing at you.

  18. Lost Sailor wrote:

    “So I ask, what would the response would be if an executive at, say, DAW, were to claim in a public post on Facebook that one of their authors was a “half-savage”? Would you accept the publishers response that such remarks are simply a private opinion? Would you dismiss such a comment as irrelevant or innocuous? Be honest. Because we all already know the answer.

    You can read my mind from whatever distance you are from me? Wow, as a Fan you are a Slan!

    You to the contrary, I neither accept nor dismiss the comment. I note it, and conjecture the reason it was worded as it was. I do not presume more than that as I have never met either Ms Gallo or Mr. Doherty, and they live and write 875 miles, more or less, from where I live and write. (The most specific thing I know about them is that they work in the Flatiron Building, Manhattan.)

    Such a comment from a DAW staff member would be, I would think, treated in much the same fashion by the primary owner.

  19. Really? Where in the Sermon on the Mount does Jesus counsel to strike back at anybody, even at TNH, PNH, or even John Scalzi?

    Sailor, you are indeed Lost.

  20. @LostSailor

    Look with your own damn eyes.

    http://www.donotlink.com/el5m

    Right after his usual double speak/plausible deniability bit he chooses to describe Breivik’s murders as a stand against “invaders and quislings”.

    Innocent people. Children. And he describes it like that.

    The man is vile. That you would bend over backwards to excuse him speaks pretty damn poorly of you.

    Oh, and on your earlier post: Bullshit. He said flat out that they could never truly be part of the nations they were born into. That is a slap in the face to every single one not born in Israel and that has no ties to Israel beyond ethnicity or faith.

  21. Glenn, then you actually don’t understand Vox. Or Christianity for that matter.

    No he’s pretty spot on there.

  22. Okay, as a churchgoer, I object strongly to the idea that applying pain is a thing Christians would want to do. Or laying in wait to strike. Jesus, last I checked, healed the sick, helped the poor, calmed a storm, and preached about turning the other cheek and peacemakers being blessed.

  23. responding to a comment on Facebook where a publishing professional libels and insults authors of her own publishing company …

    You’re making it sound as if she talked about specific authors by name. She did no such thing. She made a general and obviously hyperbolic statement about the Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies as groups and the outrage over her characterization is entirely opportunistic. Day has you well-trained.

    Prove that Vox approved of Breivik and then connect him with that reprehensible massacre.

    You’re sealioning here. We don’t need to prove anything to you about what Day thinks. Any proof we offered would be dismissed or ignored by you, so that you could continue spreading Day’s views here.

    The post about Breivik is on Day’s blog; you undoubtedly already read the post and know what it says.

  24. @ Lostsailor: “So I ask, what would the response would be if an executive at, say, DAW, were to claim in a public post on Facebook that one of their authors was a “half-savage”? Would you accept the publishers response that such remarks are simply a private opinion?”

    This strikes me as such a bizarre question, I don’t understand why it’s being asked. However, I know DAW well (I write for them), so here goes:

    There are only two executives at DAW, Betsy Wollheim and Sheila Gilbert, who co-own the company. They’re unlikely to be fired for anything they say, since this would involve firing themselves. There are 3-4 other DAW employees, as well as people who do some work for DAW but are not on daily staff.

    Some of the DAW people have a social media account on Facebook or Twitter. They list their job titles, but the accounts are clearly personal in nature. (There are also official DAW accounts on FB and Twitter which strictly post DAW news and information.)

    If one of them posted that one of their writers was a “half-savage,” I would assume that maybe one of the writers reached for the wine so fast at a DAW dinner that she tipped over the bottle. Then I would try to remember if -I- was the writer who had done that

    If anyone at DAW was, however, posted “half-savage” as an obvious racial slur, I’d call the offices immediately, ask for that person, and inform them that their social media account had been hacked.

  25. I wrote:

    “Before all of this, I really had no opinion of Mr. Beale/Day other than he wrote a relatively competent half-novel about a game….”

    alauda wrote:

    If you’re talking about The War In Heaven, I don’t consider that competent, unless competent means all the words are spelt correctly and he uses the right definitions.

    I honestly don’t remember the title. It had to do with a shoot-’em-up on Luna, if I remember correctly, and was based on a computer game he’d written. To my surprise the book ended half-way through the story with the promise that the other half would be published later. I don’t know if it was or not, although I infer that possibly it wasn’t as I bought the book in a dollar store off a rack of paperbacks which had been remaindered rather than pulped.

    It was around ten years ago. I bought it because I recognized the name “Vox Day” and wondered what kind of fiction he wrote.

  26. I agree strongly with Leonora Rose. My Church has no place for petty and drawn-out hate campaigns with more collateral damage than direct.

  27. Jim Butcher waded into the Irene Gallo today brouhaha in the comments to her original post on Facebook. He posted, “She said sorry. Leave it, guys.” When he heard from an apology critic (a common Internet fiend), Butcher replied, “She’s clearly said what she’s going to say. What is the point of hanging on to it? How does it profit anyone? How does it improve things for anyone? It’s nothing but vicious Facebook commenting at this point.”

  28. @Leonara and Meredith

    One of the biggest reasons I’m alive today is because a lot of Christians actually try to get it right, like you folks. 🙂

  29. Well, good for Jim Butcher. Its interesting to see him get involved with any of this directly, when his general policy has been to stay out of it. I guess he must work with (and like?) Gallo.

  30. “@jayn: Your request for mere information is more properly directed to Ms. Gallo. ”

    No, it ain’t. Ms. Gallo’s Neo-Nazi imputations allude to VD and his Rabid Puppies…and I happen to think that Beale’s racist, misogynist, xenophobic, antisemitic, and Breivik rim-job all help Ms. Gallo to say in her defense (if she’s ever actually sued for libel) that with all the shit VD has said on those subjects, he’s quacked enough like a duck to be reasonably mistaken for one.

    YOU’RE saying that she’s calling all the authors the Rabid Puppies’ nominated Neo-Nazis. So YOU show me where the authors nominated by the Rabid Puppies proudly call themselves Rabid Puppies. If they don’t, then you saying that Ms Gallo called those authors Neo-Nazis just ain’t true.

    IIRC, some of those authors nominated weren’t consulted as to whether they were to be the Rabid Puppies’ choice, and a few hastily scrambled right off the slate when they realized they might owe their triumph to a Breivik cheerleader like VD. On the whole, I’d say there would be few nominated authors at this point who’d stand proudly by Beale and proclaim themselves his fellow Rabid Puppy traveler.

  31. @XS

    I’m very glad you’ve had help from good people. 🙂

    I care a lot about my faith and seeing Day and his groupies drag it through the mud is upsetting. I don’t usually do being Christian-in-public (personal neuroses about rude and pushy street evangelism) but when the possible alternative is him and Wright being more visible than the rest of us, well, I have to lend my voice in case it makes a difference.

  32. @jayn

    As far as I’m aware while some (but not all) Sad Puppy nominees were on the slate with their permission, Day didn’t ask anyone before putting them on the Rabid Puppy slate. I don’t think I’d be confident about saying any of them personally identified as Rabid without a clear statement, so I’m very interested to see if you get a response to your request.

  33. @David K.M. Klaus: Asking a question is not reading your mind. And I note that at least you answered the question, though I doubt the veracity of your answer.

    @Glenn Hauman: Thank you for confirming that you have little to no understanding of Christianity. And I say that as someone who is not a Christian, though I’ve made a study of it.

    @XS: Yes, I read that post of Vox’s. Please demonstrate where in that post he endorses that massacre. The characterizations are willfully in your head. As is your understanding of Christianity.

  34. LostSailor: Thank you for confirming that you have little to no understanding of Christianity. And I say that as someone who is not a Christian, though I’ve made a study of it.

    You obviously haven’t studied it enough. Vox’s behavior is about as un-Christian as one can get.

    LostSailor: Yes, I read that post of Vox’s. Please demonstrate where in that post he endorses that massacre. The characterizations are willfully in your head. As is your understanding of Christianity.

    You apparently also have not studied English enough. Please refer to a dictionary for the definition of “apologism” vs. the definition of “endorsement”. VD is indeed an apologist for a child murderer.

  35. @XS: Yes, I read that post of Vox’s. Please demonstrate where in that post he endorses that massacre. The characterizations are willfully in your head. As is your understanding of Christianity.

    1. Learn how to read. Not once did I say VD endorse Breivik’s murders. I said he was a damned apologist for him.

    What else do you call casting his actions in a politically acceptable light?

    But then you’re just a sea lion. You’re not here to seek truth.

    2. I’ll take my understanding of Christianity over that of hatemongers like Beale and Wright from here to eternity.

  36. Please demonstrate where in that post he endorses that massacre.

    You might want to look at this part, where he says Brevik will be revered as a national hero and contrasts him with the “quislings” of his homeland:

    “Charles Martel, William Tell, and Winston Churchill are all seen as national heroes for their violent opposition to foreign immigration and occupation, so while some might find it very hard to believe now, it will not be terribly surprising if Anders Breivik is one day revered by Norwegians for his murderous stand against the invaders and quislings of his homeland.”

    Parse it all you want, Beale’s words speak for themselves. Your dodging and weaving on this tell everyone more than they need to know about your character.

  37. @Meredith

    Rest assured, it really does help. Thanks for doing actual good for others. 🙂

  38. XS wrote:

    http://www.donotlink.com/el5m

    “Right after his usual double speak/plausible deniability bit he chooses to describe Breivik’s murders as a stand against ‘invaders and quislings’.

    “Innocent people. Children. And he describes it like that.”

    Oh, my Deity…!

    I honestly didn’t know about that he’d written that, as I don’t follow his weblog.

    That’s horrifying, well beyond the pale, utterly unacceptable. Evil-with-a-capital-‘E’.

    If ever there were a reason to shun this man, this is it. He has no place in a society made up of decent people. He is anathema.

  39. XS wrote:

    http://www.donotlink.com/el5m

    “Right after his usual double speak/plausible deniability bit he chooses to describe Breivik’s murders as a stand against ‘invaders and quislings’.

    “Innocent people. Children. And he describes it like that.”

    Oh, my Deity…!

    I honestly didn’t know about that, that he’d written that, as I don’t follow his weblog.

    That’s horrifying, well beyond the pale, utterly unacceptable. Evil-with-a-capital-‘E’.

    If ever there were a reason to shun this man, this is it. He has no place in a society made up of decent people. He is anathema.

  40. @David K. M. Klaus

    The problem with shunning is it can also allow bad actors to attack vulnerable members of the community without the community at large being informed enough to support the victim and work to mitigate further damage.

    I’d certainly prefer never to hear about people like him, but sometimes its necessary.

  41. The problem with shunning is it can also allow bad actors to attack vulnerable members of the community without the community at large being informed enough to support the victim and work to mitigate further damage.

    Requires Hate/Benjanun Sriduangkaew/Winterfox might serve as an example of this in action. Having the spotlight taken from her hasn’t made her any less hostile, and she still has an assortment of vulnerable targets.

  42. @Laura Resnick: I’m going to be charitable. Of course I didn’t mean DAW specifically. It was just chosen at random. But your comment that if anyone at DAW (or Del Rey, Spectra, Orbit, etc.) posted something like that you’re first response would be to assume that they had too much wine. Your assumption that if wine was not the answer, their account would have to have been hacked is a willful missing of the point.

    If you’re serious about not understanding the question, well, no, I don’t believe you don’t understand the question. I have no doubt that Betsy or Sheila would ever publicly call out their authors as Neo-Nazis or “half-savages.” Because they are professionals. They wouldn’t do that even if they thought that, they would just not publish them.

    But I’m glad if someone at DAW (or Del Rey, Spectra, etc.) posted a “half savage” comment you’d take action. But I’m disappointed that you’d assumed the account was hacked. Do you assume Ms. Gallo’s account was hacked?

  43. @LostSailor

    I could be wrong, but I think the insinuation was that no-one at DAW is nasty or racist enough to call any of their authors a half-savage, regardless of professionalism.

    Unlike Day, who used the official SFWA twitter feed to call a fellow SFWA author a half-savage.

    You spend a lot of time defending Puppies while ignoring their sins. Are you familiar with a Christian story about removing the beam from your own eye?

  44. The problem with shunning is>… once you’ve excluded people from the “community” they can’t be shunned. And they may become the majority…

  45. @LostSailor

    If they’re not in the community they can’t be the majority. They can be a majority in some other community, but not the one they’ve been excluded from.

  46. >> But your comment that if anyone at DAW (or Del Rey, Spectra, Orbit, etc.) posted something like that you’re first response would be to assume that they had too much wine.>>

    No, it wasn’t. Your reading comprehension is terrible.

  47. @Meredith: Unlike Day, who used the official SFWA twitter feed to call a fellow SFWA author a half-savage.

    Untrue. Vox tweeted a link to a post on a non-official SFWA account.

    Are you familiar with a Christian story about removing the beam from your own eye? Yes, I am. are you? The issue is, where is the beam…

Comments are closed.