I just scanned through the whole thread.

Sorry. I've been on the internet since 1990, and I've seen my share of flamewars, and then some. This isn't a flamewar of the usual kind, fed by two factions not willing to give an inch.

The crowd at that blog comes across as mean spirited, combative, dismissing, pompous. They sport an oversized sense of entitlement and make up rules that just do not exist.

The blogger publicly criticized somebody else (which is, of course, her right). Now "someone" actually dares to comment on that. But instaed of arguing their pints, one attack now leveled against the women from Seal is actually they then "invaded a private space". Incredible nonsense. Blog comment threads are not private space - the blogger specifically has them to invite comments from the public, and that includes people he chooses to attack. Isn't the blog thing *about* communication?

Moreover, the blog crowd does not even in the slightest to the attempt to open a dialog, they just dismiss, attack, offend and play offended.

I agree the Seal editor(s) made one error: after round one of the hatefest, they should have just shaken the dust off their feet and went away, letting that hateful bunch of hyenas stew in their own juice, which they so obviously prefer.

Nobody has a right to be published, and nobody has a right to expect that publishers will come to them.

As a published but still aspiring writer, I know that if I want to be published, I need to contact as many publishers as possible. After all, the competition is only around 6 billion other wannabes.

Instead of whining to Seal Press and playing the damned race card, these WOC writers should either start their own publishing house, or do what the rest of us do and get their asses to work finding someone to publish them.

Bunch of immature little brats. Gimme gimme gimme, by name is Jimmy!

What is the market for WOC writers? The whole, entire world is not locked into some pre-conceived box stereotype - so the market is simply HUGE! If the debate is getting published, then the answer is YES or NO by any small publisher - reasons unnecessary.

If the argument is that being a WOC is extremely difficult, and let's just take this reality into the publishing world, then Affirmative Action out to be applied, but will NEVER be due to the obvious nature of both small and big business: they do what they want because they are legally permitted to.

If someone is serious about getting published, then getting noticed is not a bad way to go. Getting hammered may even be superior to being ignored. Entitlements occur among most of the privileged groups around the globe - even if the world is supposedly flat - what makes it all go 'round is debate, force and strength of argument to persuade those rich money people.

Why shouldn't this be headline, mainstream news instead of just another murder or condemnation of THEM vs. US?

It really really is not about being Right - it's about what it takes to succeed in a sexist domain. This is a good start... .

How is Seal Press being "victimized" by lack of capital? I can see them being hindered or stymied by lack of capital, but "victimized'? Who is doing the victimizing? If you want to argue that Seal Press is having a hard time going up against the big publishers, fine, but crying victimization simply because people with a lot of money aren't forking it over to Seal Press is a charge without merit.

My sister complains that nobody wants to give her $50,000 so she can stay home and write her novel instead of going to work every day. Hey Sis, join the club.

The idea that any visual artist, dramatist, songwriter, novelist - whatever - would expect galleries, theaters, the recording industry, or publishers to chase after them. Sorry, it just doesn't work that way. The road to success is hard and often lonely - while no doubt racism and sexism play a role in the process. However, by attacking a small, independent publisher - one that is more likely to publish the work of "non-traditional" authors - Seal Press' detractors are only hurting themselves.

I'm thoroughly surprised to see this here. Not because I don't think it's a big deal -- it is when two people from a publishing house decide to challenge one person over a statement that only indicates dismissal (if you read Black Amazon's most recent entry where she breaks down the anatomy of "fuck X," you'll see why). And there's a long history in the blogosphere of why Seal Press is no longer relevant as a feminist press to a lot of people, why people wouldn't trust them with collecting shit from the asscrack of their manuscripts, and why it doesn't seem to be a particularly ideal venue to write about women of color.

I think it's disgusting that people think when a publishing house comes to your place and accuses you of being a hating shrew, your answer is to present them with your work and your ideas instantaneously to help them solve their underrepresentation problem. For one thing.

For another, the whole thing about companies and publishers and agencies not seeking out people with talent and asking them to work with them is total bullshit. If they're really coming up with this dearth of a certain type of media they want to present, some companies put the word out that they're looking for more of that type of work (something Seal has not done) and they even send scouts to look for great talent in those areas (and this effort certainly wasn't a scouting one).

Are you seriously expecting to be greeted with kindness and light after you tell somebody that if they don't help you, you're a hater in their eyes? What kind of attempt at pulling rank is that shit? The key thing about this situation was:

1) A person made an off-the-cuff statement of a company and expected it to be the end of it. Someone even mentioned it's just a small blog.

2) Two people, who are high on the managing end of this company, expected to pull their clout and challenge this person, in the hopes that at seeing them come to defend the company and demanding something that was more acquiescent and useful to them, they'd get it and this person would be quiet next time about any dislike she had for that company.

3) The person and others saw what was happening and properly dismissed it as bullshit.

I mean, seriously. If you're running a small blog of your thoughts about food, unpaid-for, unsolicited, and you write about a restaurant experience and write the words, "Fuck Coca-Cola," do you expect the CEO of the Coca-Cola company to come to your blog and challenge you under the threat of them never seeing you or validating you again? Who gives a shit about them seeing you again? You don't care about Coca-Cola. You clearly said "Fuck Coca-Cola," not, "If Coca-Cola was here I'd tell them how to improve and work for their company; otherwise they suck."

It makes no logical sense. At all. If it's a company of two people or a company of millions, it makes no goddamned sense.