On the difference between inclusiveness and justice:

Chuck Wendig has a thing to say about Tor’s recent shaming of Irene Gallo. I will focus on this much, as it is especially important:

Regardless of whether or not you agree with what she said, the fact remains: her publisher publicly rubbed her nose in the mess, then threw her under a bus, then threw her body to a pack of wolves. Again: publicly. Not privately. Perhaps this was all part of some legal stratagem or even a legal necessity — but what it feels like is an entreaty by the publisher to appease folks who believe and opine about really horrible things. And any time you want to make sure that your “inclusiveness” includes the most awful amongst us, please understand you’re not creating a safe space for anybody but the abusers. It’s like putting up a sign in your flowerbed: POISON IVY WELCOME.

We like to talk about creating spaces in which “everyone” is welcome. Yeah, we welcome all kinds! Everybody come on in and make yourself at home!

It’s a great idea and I’m all in favor of inclusiveness, but only if we recognize the necessary limits of inclusion. This is something we’ve been debating in the atheist community (to the extent that an “atheist community” exists) in recent years: we can’t be inclusive to everyone. For example, we cannot be welcoming to feminists while also welcoming those who love to harass and threaten feminists. If the harassers are allowed in, then feminists aren’t welcome because the harassers make sure we feel unsafe. There’s no such thing as a welcoming environment when some people refuse to recognize the humanity of others.

Sometimes, the most inclusive and welcoming thing to do is to recognize which elements need to be kept out.