I am not a professional science fiction writer and consequently not a member of SFWA. As an avid science fiction reader, however, I've been following the controversies of the past year with steadily increasing concern. I believe they threaten both the quality and the commercial viability of the genre. I also believe they are deeply damaging to a fandom community that, in my understanding, used to pride itself on its civility and tolerance. Below, if you don't mind, I will discuss why.
To explain: Last summer thereabouts, the internal SFWA bulletin honked off the radical feminist faction of the fandom for two separate - though related - reasons. Number one, the cover of one edition featured a very pulpy illustration of a woman in a bikini. Number two, in a regular column reminiscing on the fandom at mid-century, two older male authors made some off-hand remarks regarding the physical attractiveness of a "lady editor" of the period (while also, it should be stressed, expressing deep admiration for her accomplishments at a time when sexism was still very much a problem). Unfortunately, instead of having a rational discussion about what offended them, said feminists kicked up a shit-storm that resulted in the resignation of the bulletin's editor.
Fast-forward to today. Apparently, SFWA has now posted job guidelines for a future replacement editor that suggest that said editor will supervised by an "advisory board" that will vet the bulletin and ensure that its contents "meet the standards of the organization." I don't blame my writer-acquaintances for being creeped out by this development. Given the aforementioned context, there is a very high likelihood that the "standards" in question will be the "standards" of the hard left. Will there be room for diversity of thought? Ha.
Of course, in these sorts of discussions, you can count on at least one supercilious "social justice warrior" to point out that the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution only covers the actions of the government and that, as a private organization, SFWA can police its members' speech however it wants. This is true technically, but I would submit that the rightness of a course of action shouldn't be determined solely by its legality -- and that, when heterodox writers no longer feel free to express their thoughts without being subject to mau-mauing, you lose something critical.
Echo chambers are inimical to creativity -- and no, it doesn't really matter to me which ideology the chamber in question is echoing. As conservative as I am politically, I am still deeply disappointed with the GOP. Why? Because with only a few notable exceptions, its representatives are unwilling to leave their "safe" spaces to talk to people who are currently voting the other way -- and as a result, the party's policy proposals and talking points have frozen in place. Meanwhile, as orthodox as I am religiously, intellectual honesty still forces me to admit that the books/movies/etc. produced for the Christian audience are often inferior to those produced for the secular market. What explains this? Again, uniformity of thought and an unwillingness to engage hostile audiences.
If SFWA continues on its present course, we will see the genre stagnate. As a matter of fact, we're seeing it already. Readership is dropping off; as a con volunteer, I see a "Why Aren't People Still Reading Science Fiction?" panel presented virtually every year. And no -- the answer to this decline is not more leftist-defined "diversity," for which people are plonked into convenient boxes based on their skin color and/or their naughty-bits. The answer may be more genuine diversity, for which people are treated as individuals whose unique life experiences matter more than where they fall on the race/gender/sexual orientation axes. But in order to pull this off, the fandom must come into contact with a wide variety of viewpoints and lifestyles -- something that won't happen if people continue to be bullied for having contrary opinions.
Additionally, echo chambers also threaten solidarity. I may have an excessively rosy impression of what the fandom used to be like in the days of Asimov/Heinlein/etc., but from what I've read, people used to be able to disagree without becoming disagreeable. Why have things changed? Well, as our society has become more and more stratified, our elite intellectual class - from which many of our writers and publishers now hail - has become more and more divorced from the rest of the population. They live in their own isolated, self-selected enclaves and consequently never learn how to politely react to opposing views. What's more, they never learn what those opposing views really are; instead, they are presented with cartoonish straw men. I don't know how many times I've encountered people of this class who've automatically assumed I'm racist/homophobic/sexist/classist/etc. simply because I happen to be a Republican. I also think there are many affiliated with the leftist faction of the fandom who have faced injustices of one sort or another but have been encouraged - by the above-mentioned elite - to dwell on their revenge fantasies instead of confronting those injustices in a constructive manner. Personally, I feel at least some compassion for the latter group; they have been profoundly misled by people who find their troubles convenient.
Regardless of its provenance, however, there is no question that the radical brand of "social justice" favored by the feminist "glittery hoo haas" (as Kate Paulk has tartly dubbed them) and their white knight male defenders - in which people are declared guilty of being "oppressors" based on external factors over which they have absolutely no control and authors who disagree (even mildly) are intimidated into silence - is a big part of the problem with SFWA as it operates today. And people in a position to confront this dysfunction and call it out for what it is - pure bigotry - need to do so, and they need to do so vigorously before science fiction fades into irrelevance.