Stop Apologizing to Social Justice Warriors. It Just Feeds their Sanctimony.

Laurie Forest’s first YA novel earned the kind of reviews most authors dream about. Social Justice Warriors (SJWs) swiftly transformed those raves into a woke nightmare. Yet Forest persisted, and overcame the mob. And other artists should, too, if they have any hope of surviving the next wave of unseemly politically correct attacks on their work.

Forest’s book, The Black Witch, is the story of a girl living in a world where her race is deemed superior to other creatures (think: wolf men and selkies). She slowly learns to shed those ugly social constructs as the tale moves forward. One reviewer hailed the book as “an uncompromising condemnation of prejudice and injustice.”

But that wasn’t enough for SJW blogger Shauna Sinyard, who decided to make it her mission to defame Forest and her work with a meandering, aggrieved, 9,000-word blog post, as New York magazine reported. “It’s the most dangerous, offensive book I have ever read,” Sinyard raged, suggesting she hasn’t read very widely if that’s the case. YA Twitter, along with a few other influential authors, spread Sinyard’s rant far and wide. Forest was called a Nazi sympathizer. SJWs demanded that Harlequin Teen, the book’s publisher, do something about this hateful story.

Here’s where the story took an interesting turn: The publisher didn’t back down. Nor did Forest. And as New York notes, despite the vicious campaign launched against it, The Black Witch “scored a No. 1 rating in Amazon’s department of ‘Teen & Young Adult Wizards Fantasy’ a few days after its release and has been overwhelmingly well-reviewed since.”

That’s a lesson for artists girding for the next battle in our larger culture war. Give in to SJW demands via a carefully worded apology and the matter may not resolve itself. Stand your ground, ignore the Twitter mob, and do your work, and chances are the SJWs will eventually move on to other, more “problematic” topics.

That doesn’t mean we should ignore the online revolt against Forest’s book, of course, which was deeply unfair. The incident, and other, nearly identical attacks, speak volumes about those who start and fuel them.

Sinyard’s initial post attacking Laurie Forest and her book snared the kind of traffic any blogger craves. Her followers clearly enjoyed piling on with an intense bout of virtue-signaling, so much so that many of them actually admitted that they hadn’t bothered to read the book in question. They didn’t need to; they knew it must be bad because someone on Twitter said so.

In other words: these days, being “woke” means never having to understand the issues you’re so “woke” about, evidently.

And it’s not just books. Take the outrage over William Shatner’s recent comments on Twitter. The eighty-six-year-old actor took on SJWs, as FoxNews reported, when he tweeted: “Why is it that SJW’s think they can align themselves with those that demanded social reform in the [’60s]?” He continued: “And this is your failure of logic. SJWs stand for inequality, where they are superior to any one else hence my use of Misandry and Snowflake.” Rather than engage the point Shatner was making (that today’s social justice campaigns are neither as compelling nor as serious as those of the Civil Rights Era), Twitter SJWs simply called him “elderly” and “privileged.” Shatner hasn’t responded to the angry virtual mob.

Actor Jamie Foxx also stood his ground when he caught heat for using made-up sign language gestures while appearing on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon. Select members of the deaf community called the bit outrageous. Foxx ignored them. The issue went away in short order. Compare that reaction to the one made by Chris Pratt, who looked absurd apologizing to the deaf community for a silly joke tied to an Instagram post.

The lesson in all of this for writers and artists, and even the previously safe liberal celebrities such as Amy Schumer and Tina Fey? Apologizing to the SJW crowd only emboldens it. Apologies are chum in the water for SJW sharks. Don’t feed them.

  •  
  •  
  •  
  • 22
  •  
  •  
  •  
  • 22
  •  

newsletter-signup
  • Recovering libertarian

    Scratch a bully and there is a coward underneath. A good punch in the nose works.

  • Evil Otto
  • Chuck Pelto

    RE: ‘Stand Your Ground’?

    But some judge just declared ‘Stand Your Ground’ was UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

  • Trebuchet

    Good book, and if the SJWs hadn’t whined about it I would never have heard of it.

    And (predictably) point of the story is the protagonist overcoming her prejudices.

  • Mimi

    Yeah, Milo made a mistake by apologizing and backing down, instead of punching back twice as hard (naming and shaming the actual pedophiles and their enablers on the other side).

    • ballybunion

      He didn’t have to use the SJW tactic of naming and shaming, he condemned pedos. He was arguing against statutory laws that state a person is a full-fledged adult capable of self determination on their 18th birthday, but helpless children unable to think logically the day before their birthday.

      Milo could have cited progressive icon Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who before becoming Associate Justice advocated reducing the federal age of majority to 13! She wanted to get statutory rape cases out of federal courts, but citing her would have put SJWs on their heels and opened up the issue to public debate, which was what he was trying to do.

  • I’ve almost finished reading The White Witch and it’s a beautifully written book by an awesomely talented writer … highly recommended on its own terms.

    I thought her conversion from being bigoted to multicultural was very well done. There is no way a reasonable person would think from her writing that the author shared her character’s views, so ironically enough the book actually expresses politically correct ideas and is apparently condemned for expressing them effectively.

    Weird

    • The critics apparently require that all artistic statements express their politics as subtly as theater productions in China circa 1970, in order to accurately perceive them.

  • ChandlerG

    Trump =.Mr. “No apologies.” Works really well as evidenced by the fact that he beat 16 other GOP rock stars, and beat Hillary, having never run for office before.

  • Marc DuQuesne

    Normal people seek apologies because they want to know that you feel bad about what you have done and that you will at least attempt to avoid doing it again in the future. When SJWs push you for an apology after pointing-and-shrieking at you, what they are seeking is a confession to bolster their indictment. They are like the police down at the station with a suspect in the interrogation room, badgering him to confess to the crime. And like all too many police these days, the SJWs don’t really care if you did it or not, they’re just looking for a confession that they can take to the prosecutor.

    From the highly pertinent SJW Attack Survival Guide

  • Zeke Clinton

    Good advice here. In that spirit I am offering a comprehensive, peremptory, “Get Bent” to all SJWs of all descriptions and regarding all topics. Please join me in this righteous and time saving campaign.

  • Swen Swenson

    Apologies of the ‘I’m sorry you are too stupid to understand what I wrote’ sort are still acceptable.

  • Pingback: Stand Up Against the SJW, and They Won’t Understand It | The Artisan Craft Blog — Dave Alexander & Company with David Edgren and Gus Bailey()

  • SheRa

    I wonder if Sinyard even read the entire book. Or did she cherry pick passages to be offended over? Or worse yet, did she decide because of the opinions expressed, this book should not see the light of day? Setting aside the intent of the book, which Sinyard obviously did NOT get, what’s more dangerous? Expressing opinions that are contrary to our beliefs (whatever they may be) or silencing those opinions?