Non-SJW science fiction

>sci-fi's always been kind of sjw

Exploring uncomfortable themes is not SJW wtf are you on about.

SJW and PC means getting awards and praise based on the author's gender and colour of skin plus the sex preferences and "diversity" of his characters NOT based on the quality of the novel.

k

[email protected]

Good post, thankyou for the information.

Sent

social justice has been a thing longer than the internet, babby. a lot of sci-fi was concerned with it, to the extent it was already such a meme that when james tiptree jnr started writing sci-fi, she decided to never fucking tell people she was a grill

>science fiction

I got it, but there was no file. Maybe it's the service. Try this one plz

[email protected]

There is avast difference between social justice and SJW cancer permeating sci-fi today

Since it sounds like you're already familiar with older stuff:
Larry Correia
Give Vox Day's SF a try I guess.
John C. Wright
Tom Kratman
Gene Wolfe

"To stage as astronomer, So long as thou feelest the stars as an ‘above thee’, Thou lackest the eye of the discerning one" -N

All scientist types are highly prone to the effeminate and anti-egoistic social movements that demand total compromise. And since tradition is a source of pride it will be attacked.

Go home sad puppy and take your reactionary memes with you
There is no agenda in sf
There's just a couple of hack writers butthurt they aren't popular

Correia, Vox, and wright are the worst neckbearded fedora tipping rightwing losers on the planet

>When I click on a goodreads suggestions list 90% of the new novels are women who write romance thinly veiled as sci-fi, it is disgusting. I tried some of them, but it has nothing to do with sci-fi.
If I don't like it, its wrong.
>disgusting SJW garbage without any merit
As above so below
>Anne leaking given awards because she is a woman
The hugos are a popularity award
What is popular wins
She wrote a space opera
Space opera is popular amongst sf readers
>passing everything through an ideological purity test
And you're complaining about other people's alleged bias that seems to consist of writing things you don't like?

>if someone who is a skin color or gender I don't like wins an award they have won it purely because of their color or gender
Wonderful

Heinlein was writing about free love and bashing organised religion back in the 1960s.
SF has always pushed boundaries. It has always had a liberal/left/libertarian bent to it in its writers and readers.
Someone writing something you don't like is not an agenda.

>non-SJW
>ian m banks
Socialist
>dan Simmons
Has the temerity to try to force down our throats a so-called good Muslim, and a Palestinian at that! And then worst of all is all the S.E.X. he engages in trying to shame the white readers with his prowess!

How can you be so blind to the liberal agenda?!

Vox Day's your man and a hero. In fact, he's actually fighting the SJWs tooth and nail for you. Make sure to get his books in hardcover. New. None of that ebook shit. He deserves your money.

>awards are given only to black women authors with gay and ttans characters, white male authors are banned
>no agenda

Lol ok

>Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

I enjoyed Cinder Spires. Couldn't tell you if Jim Butcher's an SJW or not because I don't keep track of this stuff. But if you're looking for airships you might enjoy it.

You are a special kind of retarded. I pity you.

>The hugos are a popularity award
>What is popular wins
>She wrote a space opera
>Space opera is popular amongst sf readers

That would be true if it had any literally merit. Her books are complete garbage, but quite politically correct.

You must be lobotomized to not see it.

not really, you just want to pretend you're fighting a harder battle now because then you can feel more heroic.
everyone's always convinced it was worse now than ever before, but the Romans bitching about women taking over with their bacchanal sex cults isn't much different to Schopenhauer or Nietzsche complaining that feminized society was causing ruin to culture etc etc. forty years from now kids will be doing the same things Socrates was bitching about more than two millennia back like kids had suddenly got disrespectful around 500BC.

Jack Vance, Robert Heinlein, Samuel Delaney, you stupid weeb.

So because cultural decline has happened in the past that means it isn't also happening now?

no, just everyone thinks their time's cultural decline is something newer and bigger. maybe this one really is the big one, but throughout the course of history it usually turns out to be the same shit as before so i don't think it has good odds.

Technology has changed that. Degenerates have a way to spread their cancer now.

>not really

Subverting scifi with romantic novels packaged as scifi and changing the whole genre into a place for political expression is wrong. Forcing feminism and transgender abominations into novels for no reason that makes logical sense is slowly killing the genre. Sales are dropping, people like the OP are running away.

Scifi is avout the story and the characters not what they have between the legs or what religion the writer has.

We literally have diversity quotas now... scifi is dead

Shit should be called shit regardless of its size.

Can I have it as well?

[email protected]

i'm not opposed to calling it, it's just making out it's the biggest thing ever isn't true, not even in sci-fi's history alone which is pretty short if you count it from mass market publishing forward.
I see your problem but you're packaging it wrong. Sci-fi has always been more prone to feminism and queerdom in general because setting it in outer space/inside the world/in the future gives you much more room to get past the censor. It used be what the industry thrived on. the difference now is that it's not being designed for the freaks who were willing to read genre, and therefore probably women or other degenerates, but it's designed for normies who would like to read about freaks and women, which produces a very different effect to getting the actual freaks and women to write it.

2001 Space Odyssey used be famous for treading the line between HAL is just a computer, and HAL is a jealous bitch homo who will kill the only man he loves to kill his love rival

Lost Horizon invented the modern idea of ShangriLa but what made it big news when it was published was that men found themselves in a community of pathenogenically reproducing women and the only men who got on well there were the ones who submitted

She Who Must Be Obeyed was another trope taken out of early sci-fish books, from when first wave feminism was going, and Rider Haggard adds in race and religious questions of the day too, in case it just being set in a lost part of the real world wasn't fantastical enough.

It's not new that these things happen in sci-fi and a lot of them are foundational to it. What is new is that the people who made genre fiction so eminent are no longer the outsiders that Clarke et al were, but people who are made eminent --because they are making themselves outsiders-- rather than in spite of it. It's the normie vomit of what freaks look like. Before the gay shit used be subtle, or the feminism drove a plot, or the character was multigendered as a comment on eugenics going too far and losing its humanity, but now it's a 5"x3" glossy author photo on the back to let you know even if the content is crap, you're reading a so called freak's work.

AC Clarke hid his sexuality as best he could with a live in boyfriend, precisely because if you think only the queer reading of HAL works then it would make his work less. Now people insist on gender reversals of fucking Twilight because otherwise it might be bigoted.

>tl;dr- it's not feminism or trans, it's fucking normies REEEE

What really gets me is the fact that I can read older books from authors whose politics are heavily social justice-leaning (like The Left Hand of Darkness or The Handmaid's Tale) and appreciate them as literary works, which is not something I'm able to do with new SJW crap.

shit, I'm confusing Herland and Lost Horizon. fuck

Simmons is SJW, to be honest

A work of fiction should be judged based on its quality as such not based on the number of affirmative action minority inserts it has.

How much sf does a person need to read to deplete the good ones? 150-200 novels?

Well, let's see. Strugatsky, Bradbury, Lem, some Asimov, some Simak and some Heinlein. Plus maybe Sterling. That's less than 100, I think, if you don't count short stories.

pls send
:3

[email protected]

And how do you have problems with finding the good stuff again?
Or do get triggered by any left leaning elements?

I am not OP. Maybe he read all the classic sci-fi, or maybe he's too stupid to look it up.

I think L Ron Hubbard's science fiction novels are pretty doom and gloom with ironic humor.

Remember how shitty people felt after seeing the film version of Battlefield Earth?

Probably the second.
There's a lot of quality sf and its even pasted in the general thread (actually good list, unlike the fantasy minefield chart)

>starship troopers
heheheheh

ok, i sent you and the others a copy. i just woke up. cheers

You keep using these words, I do not think they mean what you think they mean

>if you disagree with me you're a retard
>it is highly offensive to me that people should write things I disagree with

>if a black author wins it is because she is black
>The only proof for this is that she is black which is proof enough she couldn't have written something of merit
Watch out we got Sherlock Holmes in the thread
You people are fucking pathetic, this shit is the ultimate case of stop liking what I don't like

>That would be true if it had any literally merit. Her books are complete garbage, but quite politically correct.

The Hugoes ARE NOT a literary award
The Hugoes ARE a popularity contest

You are conflating the two and getting confused

Look at the number of users who possess her works on librarything or goodreads or check the sales figures compared to the other nominees from that year. She outranks them by a mile.

And you want to talk about literary merit, where's the literary merit in Correias fucking Monster Hunter books? Genre trash.

And lets not forget that one of the puppy complaints is that too many high falutin literary works are being pushed in the Hugoes, not enough fun old timey sf

So which is it? Too literary? Or not literary enough?

Why does the argument change so much when one or the other point is raised?

And if there was an agenda being pushed then why didn't Kim Stanley Robinsons 2312 win?

What we have here is a couple authors who are not very successful and have been thoroughly indoctrinated by the rightwing noise machine to believe they are good and right and represent the silent majority of real Americans
So when they see they are not succeeding in their chosen field of writing they look for reasons that make sense to them
And they see that authors they don't like who write things they don't like are successful and they look for reasons that make sense to them
And the rightwing noise machine tells them its not because of a lack of merit in their work, its because of der libruls
Der libruls undermining traditional values, pushing their atavistic chaotic social beliefs, stopping the true people from reaching their potential

And so we get these fallacious arguments that someone has been nominated for, or god forbid actually won, an award because of their gender or race and the only proof for this is the fact of their gender or race. That's all the proof. They're a woman and they won, obviously they only won because they're a woman - what more do you need?

And we get these disingenuous rationales that first try to claim its about a lack of literary merit in the nominated works, only to then turn around and argue that too many literary works are being pushed. Utterly internally inconsistent. But consistent with the reactionary thinking of these people.

What we have here is a couple authors who are not very successful and have been thoroughly indoctrinated by the rightwing noise machine to believe they are good and right and represent the silent majority of real Americans
So when they see they are not succeeding in their chosen field of writing they look for reasons that make sense to them
And they see that authors they don't like who write things they don't like are successful and they look for reasons that make sense to them
And the rightwing noise machine tells them its not because of a lack of merit in their work, its because of der libruls
Der libruls undermining traditional values, pushing their atavistic chaotic social beliefs, stopping the true people from reaching their potential

And so we get these fallacious arguments that someone has been nominated for, or god forbid actually won, an award because of their gender or race and the only proof for this is the fact of their gender or race. That's all the proof. They're a woman and they won, obviously they only won because they're a woman - what more do you need?

And we get these disingenuous rationales that first try to claim its about a lack of literary merit in the nominated works, only to then turn around and argue that too many literary works are being pushed.

Simultaneously arguing that their works are underrepresented and people should be more open minded, while denouncing anything that doesn't pass their extreme ideological purity test.

Utterly internally inconsistent. But consistent with the reactionary thinking of these people.

Read westerns instead.

The proof is that the works if the SJWs SUCK all around, but get awards for their inclusion on nongender specific pronouns or because the author is a minority/female.

Past awards have always been excellent works of fiction proven across the ages to be monumental not gay dinosaurs fucking each other. COMPARE PAST WINNERS TO RECENT ONES. It's a big SJW circle jerk giving awards to itself. Sales have been falling for years, no one wants to read that crap.

OP clearly states he has read all the good old stuff and wants new ones.

>There's a lot of quality sf

Yeah old sf, what about new? I want to read new ones as well, can't re-read Asimov and Clarke for all of my life. Your argument sucks "lol just read the old stuff"

I got it man, will push it up the reading queue after I finish Seveneves, half way through.

Give me a temp email and I'll send you book 1 of my space opera series

>The proof is that the works if the SJWs SUCK all around
This is only proof that you don't like them
Other people do like them as seen by the sale figures and ranking on cataloging websites and vote for them in a POPULAR AWARD ANYONE CAN VOTE IN WITH NO QUALIFICATIONS
>but get awards for their inclusion
That's why it won? Not that people liked the book?
>Past awards have always been excellent works of fiction proven across the ages to be monumental
People have always complained about the Hughes being either too literary or too popular
>dinosaur short story
Oh look shifting the goal posts, changing tact. Are you complaining about politics of works and the gender/race of authors or some random bizarro short story? Different matters. Which you conflate.
>compare past winners to recent ones
What is the difference between recent novel winners of the Hugoes and winners from 10-15-20 years ago?
I've looked. They're all still mostly white American men. They're largely apolitical, the last I can think of with politics in would be the Mars books. Through the 90s there was a trend towards Crichton-esque techno thrillers.

You simply don't like Ancillary Justice. Thats fine, you dont have to like everything. And see its popularity as a conspiracy. Which is bizarre and childish. You complain about "SJWs" and their safe spaces and being triggered - and look at your response to work that contains some things you don't like.
I didn't much like it either, but I see its success due to the fact that it is a space opera which will win it a lot of points with readers and that most of sf has a liberal/left/libertarian bent so they're not going to have a problem with and find interesting a ship ai that can't discern gender
>sales have been falling for years
Indeedy, and when you look at the winners you see they have sold well. Suggesting they might be, you know, popular.
And what's what this all comes down to, isn't it? Sales. Hacks like Correia and Wright can't figure out they're just not very good so concoct elaborate persecution complexes to explain their poor performance.

And you didn't answer my question: if there is an agenda then why didn't 2312 win?

Just look at your argument and the evidence you present: the proof that there is a plot is that works you don't like, possibly written by women or blacks, have been nominated or won a popular award.
They won, that's proof there is a plot. It is inconceivable that works about things you dislike could win.
Its inconceivable that a work by a woman or a black, or god help us a black woman, could be nominated let alone win.
So if this does happen, that's all the proof you need.

Go through the list of Nebula and Hugo winners and read what you haven't already
Read Gardner Dozois Years Best SF short story collections and make a note of authors you like

>Through the 90s there was a trend towards Crichton-esque techno thrillers.

The reason for this is it was popular and sold well. So editors went looking for more or suggested to their authors they have a go at it.
Because this is a business and operates in a market.
If editors went out of their way to select works that had an agenda and sold poorly because readers rejected them they'd quickly be having meetings with their boss to discuss the poor performance of their recent selections with a strong suggestion they pick up their game.
And if they continued to select agenda driven works that nobody wanted to read and continued to lose the publisher money, then they'd be out of a job.
Because this is a business out to make money and the market self corrects.

As someone who has read the majority of the Hugo and Nebula winners and has covered the nominee list since 2012, I don't know what you're about m8.

There has been plenty of shit nominated for both for as long as they've been around. Occasionally you'll get a streak of outstanding books where they agree on the winner and it becomes canon (ie. 74-76) but mostly you get hit or miss. This is visible in recent years as well--Redshirts was pulpy trash which was fine as just a minor homage to ST but not "the best scifi book of the year". 2312 was interesting and sure it had a more libtard bent but can you show me how it was all about that rather just incorporating things like hermaphroditism?

Ancillary Justice won both and it's hard to say it didn't deserve it. The (potentially unreliable) narration from an AI, capable of multiple bodies is fascinating to explore as is the emperor god at war with herself. Did the fact that the gender pronouns were mostly she for a race that is only semi-human rustle your jimmies?

Annihilation and the Three Body Problem? The best weird fiction and hard scifi in a decade? Not exactly SJW fare.

Keep your cuckvision sharp my fellow e/lit/ists

Redshirts won because there are a lot of sf readers who are *gasp!* Star Trek fans!

2312 didn't win because its core story of journeying around the solar system for a murder mystery was weak and Robinson tried way too hard to shock people with his genetic punk.

>Did the fact that the gender pronouns were mostly she for a race that is only semi-human rustle your jimmies?
Y-You forgot the w-worst part, the author was a-a w-w-woman!

>SJW and PC means getting awards and praise based on the author's gender and colour of skin plus the sex preferences and "diversity" of his characters NOT based on the quality of the novel.

Literally two posts above you there is an user saying every single new novel written by a woman is garbage.

Hmmm. Maybe it's the puppies who are assigning literary merit based on gender.

>the only proof that this is occurring is the fact that I don't like it

You are trying to justify the existence of garbage presented as something good and it shows. Your position us untenable and your arguments non-existent.

No matter how hard you try to justify it the truth shines through.

Past winners - fundamental science fiction works that could be read and enjoyed by anyone at any point of recent history and enjoyed. Gender of the author doesn't matter, neither do the sex preferences of the characters UNLESS it is needed by the story.

Contemporary winners - minorities/women, FORCED (not needed by the story) affirmative action characters, DULL and BORING stories (you can't have interesting stories without strife and anything that would cause it is strictly forbidden in the SJW era, books must be safe spaces full of non-gender specific pronouns, God forbid someone feels triggered by a book)

Recent winners have been women and minorities in the vast degree, strictly forbidden to be men nowadays, quality of the works doesn't matter, it's all about agenda.

Even worse - most writers are hacks absolutely not interested in sci-fi (thus the romance novels masquerading as such) who are there only to fill the affirmative action quota. Some of them have a single book with no desire to write more since no one buys them!

You can run through the mental hoops and strawmen arguments again, that is fine, but read the next sentence carefully and think for a second before typing:

Virtue cannot be achieved by forcing it, "good" is objectively such only when achieved in freedom. Adding affirmative action characters of bizarre sexual orientation and pronouns when the story does not require it is pursuing an agenda. An agenda that has no place is a genre like science fiction. You cannot defend a contrary position logically.

even for literary fiction its so hard to find REAL recommendations online. Quality reviews are swamped by all of the trite literary criticism lefties try and push out

[email protected]

>waaaaah, SJWs are ruining everything

It's like you people whine for a living. I bet yoiu haven't read 90% of the authors you're complaining about. Oh, and if you decide that all books written by women authors are automatically trash, you're being just as dumb and dogmatic as the people you think you're against.

>It's like you people whine for a living
>dat SJW projection

>the people who made complaining their goal in life are trying to scold me about complaining

lmao

Legend of Galactic Heroes. A Japanese epic series about a war between the Galactic Empire and the Alliance of Free Worlds, primarily told from the point of view of the leading military strategist of each side. Reinhard von Lohengramm and Yang Wen Li, respectively.

Almost all the characters are dudes, and it gets pretty deep into the problems that the various governmental structures have, including democracy.

They made a cartoon out of it, here's a clip to give you an idea

youtube.com/watch?v=78juY_OcxrI

What is the solution? I am tired of this crap. Impossible to find unbiased reviews ffs.

Is it a book? In English?

Please leave, your kind is not welcomed here, fucking SJW human garbage. Go to reddit or wherever you swell and spread your cancer.

A book series. the first volume was just released in English recently, the second comes out later this month, I thinl

>what I hate about SJWs is they make everything about their politics
>book has some gay characters, maybe deals a little with being black or trans or whatever
>TRASH WOULDN'T READ

Fucking hell can you idiots shut up? You're as cancerous and dogmatic and idpol-infected as the 'SJWs' you hate. Some of us just like reading about fucking science and shit, not worrying about whether the book we're reading is going to hurt us with political ideas we don't agree with. I bet fucking Heinlein would give you spastics palpitations.

ted chiang
william gibson
gene wolfe
jeff vandermeer
m john harrison

i really have no idea what you mean by sjw though. you saying if it's a male writer with a female protagonist it's sjw? some people are oversensitive to these things but the above writers have never seemed like opportunists to me.
china mieville is probably "sjw" by your descriptions but his writing stands up. same with ursula le guin.

Exactly senpai. SJW cram unwanted shit into scifi, that's why we are complaining.

Non-SJWs like the reasonable people here, you, me, the other anons, want to read about "science and shit" normal scifi.

Normal writers will never cram wanted shit into their works.

You sir are an anti-SJW without even knowing it.

Well shit, I didn't even know this existed, thank you user, just downloaded it (pic related).

Does it compare to a western series or is it its own thing?

>Normal writers will never cram unwanted shit into their works.

fix'd, fucking phone

I'm anti-SJW and anti-puppy or whatever you idiots call yourselves now. Yeah, there's too much dumb "THIS BOOK NEEDS MORE BLACK PEOPLE" criticism out there, but the way to fight that isn't "THIS BOOK HAS TOO MANY BLACK PEOPLE". Sometimes SJW scifi can be interesting too. I liked Ancillary Justice as a space opera. It was okay. Science fiction is about imagination and possibility, so if some people want to use that to explore politics (either left or right) then that should be allowed. Starship Troopers isn't fascist propaganda and AJ isn't some kind of leftist-feminist conspiracy spearhead. The whole field needs to grow the fuck up.

handmaidens tale

>Sometimes SJW scifi can be interesting too
>so if some people want to use that to explore politics (either left or right) then that should be allowed

Only when it is not forced. Today it's nothing but forced.

I want normal sci-fi without forced agenda senpai, just like you.

Not sure what puppy is.

I can't think of a comparison. It's hard military sci-fi but it's also got a grand space opera scope and a lot of focus on politics and different political systems

Maybe the Foundation series crossed with the Aubrey-Maturin series?

The 'puppies' were the guys who tried to sabotage the Hugos because they were sick of SJW shit. Again, being as bad as the crazy idpol-leftists just makes the situation worse. I mean, what is 'forced'? I liked the gimmick in Ancillary Justice. It added something to the novel's tone and wasn't preachy about it, OH THIS IS THE BEST WAY TO TALK ABOUT GENDER DIE CIS SCUM sort of stuff. Yeah, the political climate today means there's more of this liberal idpol stuff present in literature, and some of it is forced and awful (most of it, to be honest), but it's just more obvious to you because you don't agree with it and because it happens to be the coded language of the genre's current talentless hegemons. There's just as many shitty right-wing novels with 'forced' politics out there.

>There's just as many shitty right-wing novels with 'forced' politics out there.

Hardly as many and no one is forcing the agenda when ti comes to awards, giving them to talentless hacks belonging to the flock.

I see. Good to hear someone is fighting back.

Sounds like Weber's Honorverse?

So why should there be a leap from 'bad authors use cheap political themes in their novels' to 'any novels that try to take those same political themes seriously are SJW trash'? Isn't that being just as intolerant as the people who bitch about too many white people in SF?

Because for one - it is forced by publishing houses and the powers that be. It is mandatory to include affirmative action and politically correct bullshit in your novels or they don't get published. Google it. There are many first hand descriptions of author who were rejected and had to go independent or just give their books for free, because they were not 'progressive" enough.

....and two - the criclejerk gives awards to the same crappy novels written by idiots with no talent who conform to the agenda thus contaminating the history of the awards forever.

Plus, it si completely one sided, there is no such agenda from the other side, if there is another side at all. There are the SJWs and then there are the normal authors.

>Sounds like Weber's Honorverse?
sorry, I haven't read any of those