1. Fun fact: lots of men have won Hugos in the last several years. Last year alone: Max Gladstone, James SA Corey (who counts as two), Neil Gaiman and John Picacio among others. Men are not notably underrepresented with rockets these days. 
2. Mind you, this person seems to think "The Hugos" are limited to only the Best Novel category; they're not. Also, that category has been amply represented by excellent works; it's hard to gainsay, from a creative or technical point of view, any individual finalist work.
3. This person lists authors whose novels they feel should be finalists, and finds it curious they weren't. The fact is, however, there are only six finalists in any year; there will always be worthy works that don't show up on the finalist list. It's the nature of awards.
4. The Hugos are not selected by cabal; literally anyone with $50 may purchase a membership to the WorldCon and nominate works. The finalists simply reflect the votes of the people who chose to vote. There's not much sinister about that, especially since 2016.
5. As it happens, I think in the last several years the Hugos have done a decent job of acknowledging the state of the SF/F field, which has become rather more diverse in its authors and audience. It's reflected in the finalist work, which, again, is of consistently high caliber.
6. Obviously men can and do still become finalists for the Hugos, said the finalist for Best Series. And they still win rockets! But they can't take those finalist positions or wins as a given anymore. The field is different now. And it's better. I say, bring it on.
/end
/end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
