Read on Twitter
The #InDefenceOfMarkLawrence blog post is a bad take for several reasons (which I'll come to) but not least because it again holds V.E. Schwab up as a target for toxicity and abuse from his fans. Notably, this was the very issue that Schwab called out in her 25 June tweet. [1/14]
![The #InDefenceOfMarkLawrence blog post is a bad take for several reasons (which I'll come to) but not least because it again holds V.E. Schwab up as a target for toxicity and abuse from his fans. Notably, this was the very issue that Schwab called out in her 25 June tweet. [1/14]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcGSdgEWsAIphM3.png "The #InDefenceOfMarkLawrence blog post is a bad take for several reasons (which I'll come to) but not least because it again holds V.E. Schwab up as a target for toxicity and abuse from his fans. Notably, this was the very issue that Schwab called out in her 25 June tweet. [1/14]")
Firstly, it's disingenuous to use Schwab's 2014 tweet and a search c. the same date to try showing that "nobody was calling her bitch or cunt, let alone encouraging it." This operates on the flawed assumption that any/all abuse was/remains public, which is rarely the case. [2/14]
Regardless, since we're looking at previous tweets, a search of Mark's for the same period shows an unsurprising pattern of engaging with his fans in targeted negativity. [3/14]
https://twitter.com/search?q=(from%3AMark__Lawrence)%20until%3A2014-08-25%20since%3A2014-08-23&src=typed_query
https://twitter.com/search?q=(from%3AMark__Lawrence)%20until%3A2014-08-25%20since%3A2014-08-23&src=typed_query
There are a lot of thinly veiled references to "that review", tropes, representation of women, etc. You could argue that none of these reference Schwab directly, and in the end you'll need to draw your own conclusions, but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck... [4/14]
![There are a lot of thinly veiled references to "that review", tropes, representation of women, etc. You could argue that none of these reference Schwab directly, and in the end you'll need to draw your own conclusions, but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck... [4/14]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcGinZHWAA8V4ST.png "There are a lot of thinly veiled references to \"that review\", tropes, representation of women, etc. You could argue that none of these reference Schwab directly, and in the end you'll need to draw your own conclusions, but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck... [4/14]")
![There are a lot of thinly veiled references to "that review", tropes, representation of women, etc. You could argue that none of these reference Schwab directly, and in the end you'll need to draw your own conclusions, but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck... [4/14]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcGja3TXQAM5igY.png "There are a lot of thinly veiled references to \"that review\", tropes, representation of women, etc. You could argue that none of these reference Schwab directly, and in the end you'll need to draw your own conclusions, but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck... [4/14]")
This thread from 25 August 2014 is especially illuminating, wherein Mark and a number of others, including two male SFF authors (Luke Scull and Richard Ford) have a bit of a kick off about gripes like "fake victim culture" [5/14] https://twitter.com/Mark__Lawrence/status/503812818479898624
It's here that the "cunt" comment comes up from one of the authors in question. Again, no names, but unless Lawrence was under public scrutiny from several angles (which, if true, should still concern you) it's likely this refers to Schwab's tweet and associated comments. [6/14]
![It's here that the "cunt" comment comes up from one of the authors in question. Again, no names, but unless Lawrence was under public scrutiny from several angles (which, if true, should still concern you) it's likely this refers to Schwab's tweet and associated comments. [6/14]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcGmHsBXkAAVGGf.png "It's here that the \"cunt\" comment comes up from one of the authors in question. Again, no names, but unless Lawrence was under public scrutiny from several angles (which, if true, should still concern you) it's likely this refers to Schwab's tweet and associated comments. [6/14]")
It's not a smoking gun, but Lawrence's responses here, and the fact that he's cultivated a space in which his fans/peers feel comfortable making these comments, suggest a pattern of willingly toxic and damaging behaviour. [7/14]
The post goes off the rails a bit here, segueing into Agnes' feeling forced to unfollow JK Rowling (weird flex, but okay) before referencing "profuse apologies". These, it emerges, weren't levied at Schwab and relate to an entirely separate incident. [8/14]
![The post goes off the rails a bit here, segueing into Agnes' feeling forced to unfollow JK Rowling (weird flex, but okay) before referencing "profuse apologies". These, it emerges, weren't levied at Schwab and relate to an entirely separate incident. [8/14]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcGlCmJXkAIuYU1.jpg "The post goes off the rails a bit here, segueing into Agnes' feeling forced to unfollow JK Rowling (weird flex, but okay) before referencing \"profuse apologies\". These, it emerges, weren't levied at Schwab and relate to an entirely separate incident. [8/14]")
![The post goes off the rails a bit here, segueing into Agnes' feeling forced to unfollow JK Rowling (weird flex, but okay) before referencing "profuse apologies". These, it emerges, weren't levied at Schwab and relate to an entirely separate incident. [8/14]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcGnAWEXQAIj14T.png "The post goes off the rails a bit here, segueing into Agnes' feeling forced to unfollow JK Rowling (weird flex, but okay) before referencing \"profuse apologies\". These, it emerges, weren't levied at Schwab and relate to an entirely separate incident. [8/14]")
This is why the author agrees with Lawrence not issuing an apology - because it would "never be good enough if it didn’t serve the narrative." Which is... a touch ironic, considering we've just selectively referenced an unrelated (but also negative) incident. [9/14]
There's also reference to a subsequent Twitter storm in which Lawrence was called out for his attitude toward women. I'm not going to get into that (though, there's plenty to unpack based on those old tweets) except to say that, again, Schwab had nothing to do with it. [10/14]
What I -will- get into is the acknowledgement that Mark has historically dealt with criticism badly, which ties in with the accounts of multiple people coming forward to share their own experiences, and sort of undermines the argument that he has nothing to apologise for. [11/14]
![What I -will- get into is the acknowledgement that Mark has historically dealt with criticism badly, which ties in with the accounts of multiple people coming forward to share their own experiences, and sort of undermines the argument that he has nothing to apologise for. [11/14]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcGoYulX0AYJdtp.jpg "What I -will- get into is the acknowledgement that Mark has historically dealt with criticism badly, which ties in with the accounts of multiple people coming forward to share their own experiences, and sort of undermines the argument that he has nothing to apologise for. [11/14]")
![What I -will- get into is the acknowledgement that Mark has historically dealt with criticism badly, which ties in with the accounts of multiple people coming forward to share their own experiences, and sort of undermines the argument that he has nothing to apologise for. [11/14]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcGo2nSWoAAs8Mc.jpg "What I -will- get into is the acknowledgement that Mark has historically dealt with criticism badly, which ties in with the accounts of multiple people coming forward to share their own experiences, and sort of undermines the argument that he has nothing to apologise for. [11/14]")
The post ends by discussing how much Lawrence has allegedly grown, which might well be the case - but it's hard to tell, given his refusal to own his past mistakes and the way in which his behaviour has contributed to institutionalised misogyny within publishing. [12/14]
Agnes isn't totally wrong - we're all learning. But the drive for incidents like this to be "handled privately" is an attitude that's prevalent across a number of industries, and ultimately only serves to shield abusive men from the consequences of their actions. [13/14]
![Agnes isn't totally wrong - we're all learning. But the drive for incidents like this to be "handled privately" is an attitude that's prevalent across a number of industries, and ultimately only serves to shield abusive men from the consequences of their actions. [13/14]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcGqXrsXsAcQJS3.png "Agnes isn't totally wrong - we're all learning. But the drive for incidents like this to be \"handled privately\" is an attitude that's prevalent across a number of industries, and ultimately only serves to shield abusive men from the consequences of their actions. [13/14]")
Ultimately, it's only through empowering victims to speak out that we'll be able to effect a culture change within the publishing community as a whole, and if authors like Lawrence ARE invested in being better, they should be encouraging that, too. [14/14]
