Anonymous wrote:I have a story like this from my life that I started to type out to share but it's much more wildly unbelievable, despite being true, and too many of the details are too accessible on the internet, and, frankly, I'm afraid of my nemesis because a reporter from her country contacted me a few years ago and told me she might be a serial killer responsible for the deaths of several middle-aged white women tourists.

It's possible (probable even) that the "reporter" was the author herself, but that doesn't make it better. According to google, the murders did happen.

Writing communities are weird. And genre fiction groups can make MFA writers look like shrinking violets. Meanwhile, there is one nation on this earth I will never ever visit. Just in case a serial killer who hates me is waiting there. I know how that sounds. But it was an unnerving experience. The writer in question also has a very public internet history that involved threats to others. Had she not, I might have been less concerned.

Regarding Larsen and Dawn: my sympathies are with Dawn. It's not a crime to be annoying and needy on Facebook--for which we should all be thankful. Larsen's invocation of "white savior" as a slur is pretty pathetic. Like others here I'm startled to see well-laureled friends of mine in publishing taking her word for this. Then again, look at how much hysteria ensued in this thread when someone claimed Larsen colonized Dawn's story.

Which, I'd argue is true: she did. Of course, I'd also argue that sticking the term only to white people (and apparently to all white people, from all times, even before they had a notion they were white people) is sloppy history and pathetic criticism, but many people are invested in the literary theory they learned in college, and apparently, that was the recent thing.

Of course, I'd also argue that most of what fiction writers do is some form of appropriation, since the creation of a narrative involves playing with characters and events. Inspiration from real life creates works of their time, and I suspect Larsen's story (which I haven't read) will indeed be an exemplary one for its time and place. Although, perhaps, not in the fine literary way that she'd hoped for.

And, while I have been a mean girl in the writer's group, I understand the tribal nature of these things. There are still a few writers out there that I wish I had been nicer to (not the serial killer), but there should always be a point for all of us where we check our actions, and right our wrongs.

Anonymous wrote:I went deep on this on twitter last night. I read some of the full text manuscripts and in one place one of the "chunky monkey" testers (named Alison) suggested that Sonya should post her story in the GrubStreet Writers of Color that way if Dawn came after her they would, per the text, "Draaaaaaaaag her." So not only was the plagiarism real, as evidenced before, the deliberate tactics to tinge the plagiarized author's objections with racism is what's shocking. I can't believe that was not front and center in the NYTimes story because it's really terrible. I think it sets everyone back a mile. I have to say, I was curious if DCUM would have more defenders for Larsen because of some of the mean girl shit that happens on this site but you all seem mostly aligned with me. We probably all have a friend like Dawn, we've probably all been Dawn to some degree and we've probably all been Sonya in terms of the mean girl texting - which might start as feeling somehow uncomfortable with a friends' posting, where any social awkwardness, need, or obnoxiousness is just amplified x100000000. And the irritation can turn into a vent, and then the pile on begins and suddenly the injured parties - those who felt they couldn't tell Dawn to her face that they found something "off" about her motives and the way she was expecting congratulations, just became extremely, terribly vicious. That itself crosses a line I feel like most of us (maybe? hopefully?) would not make with someone in our real lives. But then to actually steal her work, post to multiple other authors that you are doing it, and may or may not stop doing it ("I know I should change her letter which I grabbed verbatim, but it was just too good") I mean that's all there is too it. To write a derivative of someone's life is something that can reasonably be called art but what Sonya did is plagiarism, then encouraged by her friends, many of whom are white themselves, she deliberately positioned herself to look like someone who was injured by white tears. The entire writing group sounds so self-congratulating, insular and just fat off their own quasi famous, it's revolting. Celeste Ng comes across terribly - she's the only one I know of in the group. I have loved literature all my life, but I can't really find literature I like these days and maybe this is why. Who wants to be led on an emotional journey by people with shit for hearts?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Facebook analytics showed Larson was clicking on and reading every post. A mutual acquaintance told Dorland that Larson had read a story about kidney donation and that he’s assumed it was about or inspired by Dorland. The entire time, Larson said nothing, and lied for years to Dorland.

I'm in agreement with people on this thread that what Larson did was super sketchy and gross and that she is trying to cover it up now by claiming "Art" and trying to say Dorland has white savior complex (which we hav evidence that she does).

But we take a moment to acknowledge that yet again, Facebook is a major part of the problem. It's actually not great that Dorland was able to see that Larson was viewing posts in the group, because that led her to wonder why she was reading them and not commenting. Which led Dorland to reach out to Larson to basically say "Hey, how come you aren't commenting on my Facebook posts?" Which, yes, seems totally insane on its face. But now that I know that she was motivated by the fact that she could see Larson was reading the posts, it doesn't sound as crazy to me. She still shouldn't have reached out to ask about it, and she should have recognized that it would come off as weird. But I've been in that situation before with Facebook -- noticing that a friend always likes all our mutual friend's posts but never likes mine. I would never call someone out on it, but it's one of those things where you think "It would be super great to not have to see or notice this, so that I wouldn't have to suspect that this person maybe doesn't like me very much." It sucks to have that thought planted in your mind.

And Facebook/Instagram have so many features like this. It's actively bad for interpersonal relationships. It would be a lot easier if we were all more in the dark about how other people feel about us. I sure as hell do not want to know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of what I don't understand here - we're supposed to mock Dawn for donating a kidney then talking about it?!

The kidney donors I know talk about it both because they are proud and also to try to raise awareness and encourage others to do it. Was she supposed to donate the kidney and then... not talk about it?

I've seen so many cruel tweets and comments about this suggesting that somehow her kidney donation - a selfless thing to do - was BAD, and I am just struck by this insane up is down judgment.

She was supposed to do it in a twitter mob approved way, right hashtags and all. Otherwise she might make someone uncomfortable.

It's one thing to donate a kidney and talk about it and raise awareness. It is quite another thing to add people to your FB group, then email them because they hadn't commented. And it is not ok to go to a conference and say. "No one asked about my missing kidney!"

That said, Larson is also terrible. As are her writer friends.

Interesting. So you’ve never been part of a Caring Bridge? I think people are uncomfortable that Dawn picked up on the fact that something odd was going on and wasn’t afraid to confront people about it. Because it wasn’t just the lack of likes or comments that bothered Dawn - it was the fact that Larsen was reading her posts and not bothering to comment. She had a gut instinct that something was up and she wasn’t wrong. Larsen was reading, not engaging and simultaneously mocking her. She could have simply removed herself from the group or hidden it so she didn’t see updates. But she didn’t do that. She read what was posted and then took it back to her friends to trash Dawn. That is sick. The fact so many are uncomfortable that someone had the audacity to (albeit awkwardly) call them out tells you a lot.

Exactly. The fact that she was reading these posts but never commented or liked anything, then pretended like she didn’t know is so shitty

What? Not to harp on what's a minor point in a much larger story, but now reading FB posts and not commenting or liking is considered rude? I read lots of things on FB and do not comment on or like them. I don't like doing that on FB, and I don't think I'm obligated to. Maybe I'll bring it up with you later, maybe I won't. If you voluntarily put it out on FB, you don't get to demand that people react to it in a certain way. I would find it very creepy and self-absorbed if someone messaged me directly to ask me why I hadn't commented on their post.

And I thought you couldn't see who read your stuff on FB anyway, is that wrong?

We aren’t talking about a general FB feed, we are talking about a private group with 30 or so members, where Dawn shared private information.

Dawn even initially offered to REMOVE Sonya from the group when she noticed Sonya was not engaging.

Yeah, but when you're a part of a FB group, generally the way that posts show up to you is in your own "general" feed. Setting aside Sonya's group chats and mockery, it's just simply weird and needy to be like, "hi, you've never commented on the thing I put on FB, you know I did the thing, right?"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of what I don't understand here - we're supposed to mock Dawn for donating a kidney then talking about it?!

The kidney donors I know talk about it both because they are proud and also to try to raise awareness and encourage others to do it. Was she supposed to donate the kidney and then... not talk about it?

I've seen so many cruel tweets and comments about this suggesting that somehow her kidney donation - a selfless thing to do - was BAD, and I am just struck by this insane up is down judgment.

She was supposed to do it in a twitter mob approved way, right hashtags and all. Otherwise she might make someone uncomfortable.

It's one thing to donate a kidney and talk about it and raise awareness. It is quite another thing to add people to your FB group, then email them because they hadn't commented. And it is not ok to go to a conference and say. "No one asked about my missing kidney!"

That said, Larson is also terrible. As are her writer friends.

Interesting. So you’ve never been part of a Caring Bridge? I think people are uncomfortable that Dawn picked up on the fact that something odd was going on and wasn’t afraid to confront people about it. Because it wasn’t just the lack of likes or comments that bothered Dawn - it was the fact that Larsen was reading her posts and not bothering to comment. She had a gut instinct that something was up and she wasn’t wrong. Larsen was reading, not engaging and simultaneously mocking her. She could have simply removed herself from the group or hidden it so she didn’t see updates. But she didn’t do that. She read what was posted and then took it back to her friends to trash Dawn. That is sick. The fact so many are uncomfortable that someone had the audacity to (albeit awkwardly) call them out tells you a lot.

Exactly. The fact that she was reading these posts but never commented or liked anything, then pretended like she didn’t know is so shitty

What? Not to harp on what's a minor point in a much larger story, but now reading FB posts and not commenting or liking is considered rude? I read lots of things on FB and do not comment on or like them. I don't like doing that on FB, and I don't think I'm obligated to. Maybe I'll bring it up with you later, maybe I won't. If you voluntarily put it out on FB, you don't get to demand that people react to it in a certain way. I would find it very creepy and self-absorbed if someone messaged me directly to ask me why I hadn't commented on their post.

And I thought you couldn't see who read your stuff on FB anyway, is that wrong?

We aren’t talking about a general FB feed, we are talking about a private group with 30 or so members, where Dawn shared private information.

Dawn even initially offered to REMOVE Sonya from the group when she noticed Sonya was not engaging.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of what I don't understand here - we're supposed to mock Dawn for donating a kidney then talking about it?!

The kidney donors I know talk about it both because they are proud and also to try to raise awareness and encourage others to do it. Was she supposed to donate the kidney and then... not talk about it?

I've seen so many cruel tweets and comments about this suggesting that somehow her kidney donation - a selfless thing to do - was BAD, and I am just struck by this insane up is down judgment.

She was supposed to do it in a twitter mob approved way, right hashtags and all. Otherwise she might make someone uncomfortable.

It's one thing to donate a kidney and talk about it and raise awareness. It is quite another thing to add people to your FB group, then email them because they hadn't commented. And it is not ok to go to a conference and say. "No one asked about my missing kidney!"

That said, Larson is also terrible. As are her writer friends.

Interesting. So you’ve never been part of a Caring Bridge? I think people are uncomfortable that Dawn picked up on the fact that something odd was going on and wasn’t afraid to confront people about it. Because it wasn’t just the lack of likes or comments that bothered Dawn - it was the fact that Larsen was reading her posts and not bothering to comment. She had a gut instinct that something was up and she wasn’t wrong. Larsen was reading, not engaging and simultaneously mocking her. She could have simply removed herself from the group or hidden it so she didn’t see updates. But she didn’t do that. She read what was posted and then took it back to her friends to trash Dawn. That is sick. The fact so many are uncomfortable that someone had the audacity to (albeit awkwardly) call them out tells you a lot.

Exactly. The fact that she was reading these posts but never commented or liked anything, then pretended like she didn’t know is so shitty

What? Not to harp on what's a minor point in a much larger story, but now reading FB posts and not commenting or liking is considered rude? I read lots of things on FB and do not comment on or like them. I don't like doing that on FB, and I don't think I'm obligated to. Maybe I'll bring it up with you later, maybe I won't. If you voluntarily put it out on FB, you don't get to demand that people react to it in a certain way. I would find it very creepy and self-absorbed if someone messaged me directly to ask me why I hadn't commented on their post.

And I thought you couldn't see who read your stuff on FB anyway, is that wrong?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Part of what I don't understand here - we're supposed to mock Dawn for donating a kidney then talking about it?!

The kidney donors I know talk about it both because they are proud and also to try to raise awareness and encourage others to do it. Was she supposed to donate the kidney and then... not talk about it?

I've seen so many cruel tweets and comments about this suggesting that somehow her kidney donation - a selfless thing to do - was BAD, and I am just struck by this insane up is down judgment.

She was supposed to do it in a twitter mob approved way, right hashtags and all. Otherwise she might make someone uncomfortable.

It's one thing to donate a kidney and talk about it and raise awareness. It is quite another thing to add people to your FB group, then email them because they hadn't commented. And it is not ok to go to a conference and say. "No one asked about my missing kidney!"

That said, Larson is also terrible. As are her writer friends.

Interesting. So you’ve never been part of a Caring Bridge? I think people are uncomfortable that Dawn picked up on the fact that something odd was going on and wasn’t afraid to confront people about it. Because it wasn’t just the lack of likes or comments that bothered Dawn - it was the fact that Larsen was reading her posts and not bothering to comment. She had a gut instinct that something was up and she wasn’t wrong. Larsen was reading, not engaging and simultaneously mocking her. She could have simply removed herself from the group or hidden it so she didn’t see updates. But she didn’t do that. She read what was posted and then took it back to her friends to trash Dawn. That is sick. The fact so many are uncomfortable that someone had the audacity to (albeit awkwardly) call them out tells you a lot.

Exactly. The fact that she was reading these posts but never commented or liked anything, then pretended like she didn’t know is so shitty

What? Not to harp on what's a minor point in a much larger story, but now reading FB posts and not commenting or liking is considered rude? I read lots of things on FB and do not comment on or like them. I don't like doing that on FB, and I don't think I'm obligated to. Maybe I'll bring it up with you later, maybe I won't. If you voluntarily put it out on FB, you don't get to demand that people react to it in a certain way. I would find it very creepy and self-absorbed if someone messaged me directly to ask me why I hadn't commented on their post.

And I thought you couldn't see who read your stuff on FB anyway, is that wrong?

She was reading them then pretending not to have read them.

It was weird, needy, and awkward for Dawn to have asked about it. I'm sure it felt intrusive to be asked. And at the same time that jerk actually WAS reading, paying attention, stealing, and mocking - mocking a kidney donation FB page! - and so as awkward as Dawn was, she was also right.