Aubrey Sitterson keeps on with his victimology tactics

The awful blabbermouth of a writer who got canned by IDW because of the bad PR and low sales on GI Joe resulting from his rabid politics has taken to making jumbled, dishonest accusations against his critics, proving he vehemently refuses to learn any lessons:

Seeing a lot of folks who previously were very proud of getting the Scarlett's Strike Force G.I. Joe book canceled bc of my leftist politics & Salvo being a Samoan woman, now pivoting to claim that the decision was solely due to low sales on issue #1…

— BIG CHUCK SITTERSON AND HIS TAKES (@aubreysitterson) January 23, 2018

…First off this is a typical troll tactic, one used by GamerGate (which should come as no surprise, as these folks also use SJW as an insult and even call the whole ordeal "ComicsGate"). It's deliberate obfuscation…

— BIG CHUCK SITTERSON AND HIS TAKES (@aubreysitterson) January 23, 2018

Second…of course SSF #1 didn't sell well. It's what happens when you launch a new title with no explanation to retailers, muzzle the writer, send out no press releases, set up no interviews, features or previews and cancel it before final orders are in. Self-fulfilling prophecy.

— BIG CHUCK SITTERSON AND HIS TAKES (@aubreysitterson) January 23, 2018

Yawn. Tell us more please; it makes a great cure for insomnia. We knew the premise - Scarlett leads a special team of her own in a premise drawing from the TV cartoon approach of the mid-80s. A book that's supposed to put a whole silly emphasis on changing Salvo from man to woman, namely, an overweight lady of Samoan background, and the artwork seems to hammer the readers with the disgusting SJW belief in "body positive", to say nothing of "realism", when ultimately, it's not (the military particularly expects its field members to be in shape). All that aside, what really angered everybody was when Sitterson couldn't keep his mouth shut with degrading, repellent views about 9-11, and even antagonized the Joe fandom on a notable fansite's forum, accusing them of being homophobes because they didn't think the artwork was any good. And indeed, what turned up inside the covers certainly wasn't. Unlike Marvel, IDW at least had the brains to confront Sitterson and make clear he'd embarrassed them and jeopardized sales. Why, who knows now how much longer they'll have the license for the Hasbro-owned properties they're adapting?

And it's not like we're truly happy when some dreadful writer loses the gig. We just believe it's a terrible shame people like him take such a narrow view of life and the fans of pop culture, and despise everything the products and fans stand for to the point they'd make a mess out of them, rendering them utterly unappealing. However, it's entirely possible that when the medium collapses and implodes, people like him are going to walk away smiling and grinning gleefully that they succeeded in destroying what was once considered a fine medium, all for the sake of their repellent politics. That's why, in the end, we can't feel very sorry he lost the job. What we do feel sorry about is his inability to come to terms with why he got dismissed, or admit he went overboard.

And the reason for those decisions being made by the publisher? You got it: It was far right outrage due to my leftist politics and a little-known G.I. Joe character, who had not appeared in our continuity, being reimagined as a woman of color. Don't let them obscure the facts.

— BIG CHUCK SITTERSON AND HIS TAKES (@aubreysitterson) January 23, 2018

Translation: if the story involves gender transformation, it's totally above criticism in every way. Of course, I'd found clues on the Hiss Tank fansite even liberals were turned off by his outrageous comments and visions. Don't let Sitterson obscure the facts.

Another bit of obfuscation going on: The claim that my work on G.I. Joe was leftist propaganda. Outside of being diverse, inclusive and aspirational – which are cornerstones of the Joe brand – there's nothing remotely liberal about the book, much less truly leftist.

— BIG CHUCK SITTERSON AND HIS TAKES (@aubreysitterson) January 23, 2018

Point: whether or not it was leftist propaganda, quite a few of the people espousing the visions and beliefs he is happen to be very leftist themselves. Oh, did it occur to him a lot of the leftists of his caliber are also shutting conservatives out of comicdom?

Last bit of rhetoric: The claim that I provoked the fanbase. If you search for what I actually did, you'll find that I dared to write a book with a cover deemed too gay, introduced a WOC character, used lasers instead of bullets and had Quick Kick beat up Snake Eyes. Scandalous.

— BIG CHUCK SITTERSON AND HIS TAKES (@aubreysitterson) January 23, 2018

As noted before, he did more than what he claims here; he antagonized the fanbase as nothing more than homophobes on a Joe fansite board. When somebody notes he called GI Joe the "crown jewel" of Hasbro, he said:

Right? They'd have you believe that I hate G.I. Joe so much that I outright said it was the best Hasbro property and then pushed for that claim to be emblazoned on every single cover. What a monster I am! https://t.co/Nd0Iw4MdQp

— BIG CHUCK SITTERSON AND HIS TAKES (@aubreysitterson) January 23, 2018

Well gee whiz, if you don't, then don't go miles out of your way to make nasty cracks about September 11, 2001 on your Twitter feed, sonny. He's basically somebody who wants to believe he cares about the creations, but if he did, he wouldn't go miles out of his way to foist such negative views on the products, nor would he be so hostile to the fanbase because they had negative views of the artwork and/or story. Then, when another poster argues he shouldn't give attention to the people he disagrees with, he said:

You're not wrong. But it's a fine balance between not drawing attention to guys like this, but also letting folks know what I get hammered with. Also, as the last few months have taught me, if you stay silent, someone else defines the narrative. https://t.co/fv4iG8uZRV

— BIG CHUCK SITTERSON AND HIS TAKES (@aubreysitterson) January 23, 2018

And that somebody else is the conservative movement, I presume? He fails to think of how it helps to maintain a thick skin, making him little different from Dan Slott, one of the most leading examples of victimologists in comicdom. Needless to say, should Marvel/DC hire Sitterson for a job after what he did, that'd be perfect grounds to call for a boycott of whatever he's assigned to script, because there's still every chance he'll only use it as a platform for his screwed up visions, and the Big Two could still fully allow it, given that many of the same store clerks are still there. I've said before, and will again - unless the bad gatekeepers like Quesada and DiDio are let go, they'll never be fully free of the bad influence they've had on comicdom.

I don't know if Sitterson's on his way out of the industry, but he certainly won't be missed if he is.