I was reading a bit about Nick Spencer and Captain America and there is a *lot* of commentary that begins with “I like Nick Spencer's work. He's not a bad author. But…”

I'm like… if I had to get paid to feel obligated to say what a good creator this person was, despite being work that causes harm / being a bigot / being a rapist/murderer…

I'd be very, very, very rich.

Like, I mean, is it that difficult to say, because this person has caused harm, I refuse to look at their work? I refuse to even put it into consideration?

What would be the consequences? Well, you'd not look at their work. And yeah, you've narrowed the field a bit.

But the field is so. Fucking. Broad. There are so. Many. Other. People.

You'll have to look harder to find worthy work, but… is that such a problem?


There have been people who've refused, on principle, for a year, to not read books by men, or by white people, or by straight people. What happened to them?

Well, they worked really hard, but then they discovered that there was a BROADER universe of things beyond the usual works that were considered canons. I recall reading testimonies of these exercises and they were like, “Hey, I really broadened by horizons. There's so much good work out there that doesn't get recognition.”

· · Web · 0 · 3 · 5

Like, and that's like LITERALLY cutting off, say, the majority. I'm not even proposing that. Just cut out the assholes. What's the harm?

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!