I think the thing that bothered me most about the premise of Ariel was that bicycles no longer worked, either. That was the point where the book was flung, for me.

Still reeling from Walking Dead. "Don't come back, Shane!" indeed.

Heinlein's "Magic Incorporated" was very funny and pretty convincing too. Set in our world, after some engineers are caught muttering spells to keep a nuclear reactor running, and it turns out that science has been a fraud all along

That is not in the plot of Magic, Inc.

Magic, inc. is a story from the POV of a local contractor and building materials provider. He uses magic in the everyday workings of his life, like most other people. His livelihood is threatened by a "magical mob" takeover of the magic business in his state, which is spearheaded by a demon.

As far as the racism and sexism, I can only say that in historical context of other works of the time, RAH was slightly ahead of the curve. Not as bad as some of the period, better than some others. He was also writing for mainstream American publishing at the time and was quite the libertarian.(Although he would have laughed at the Tea Party "patriots")

Amanda Jennings was a fairly strong female character in that story.

That is not in the plot of Magic, Inc.

Yes it is. Right toward the beginning, tossed off causually not in an "as you know jack" way, but there. And mentioning the racism and sexism was there mainly for warning. I'm reccing the book as entertainment, but I don't want someone to hit it unwarned if they are already living with enough of it that it will more than neutralize any pleasure they would otherwise get out of it. One difference between Heinlein and many others on sexism is that he takes the trouble to rationalize it. It may actually say something good about him that he was not just taking it for granted, but it might make more unpleasant for a woman who encounters it unexpectedly. The way Chesterton's thoughf out and explained anti-semitism hits me harder than other stuff from the same period that tosses it off causally.

One difference between Heinlein and many others on sexism is that he takes the trouble to rationalize it. It may actually say something good about him that he was not just taking it for granted

Not to speak for all women, but the fact that he wrapped his sexism in evo-psych bullshit was one of the many MANY reasons he ceased to appeal to me after about age 17.

Hence the rest of the sentence you quoted and the following sentence

but it might make more unpleasant for a woman who encounters it unexpectedly. The way Chesterton's thoughf out and explained anti-semitism hits me harder than other stuff from the same period that tosses it off causally.

Being Human US is 2/3 rapey right now. It's not fun. It's not engaging me. Everything is so miserable and exploited.

It's not fun at all. I am still watching out of my compulsive need to find out what happens in a plot I've started following, mostly.

It does include Heinlein's usual attitude towards women, plus a bit of racism he thinks is tolerance. So not without eyerollingness, But the premise gets points for me for sheer chutzpah .And if you can ignore the stuff you pretty much always have to ignore with Heinlein, it is quite entertaining.

OMG HEINLEIN I ROLL MY EYES FOREVER AT YOU.

Yeah, it's why I keep eyerolling to infinity whenever I see the commercial for John Carter of Mars. The books are INCREDIBLY misogynistic and full of gratuitous sex between John Carter and various slave girls.

Yeah, it's why I keep eyerolling to infinity whenever I see the commercial for John Carter of Mars. The books are INCREDIBLY misogynistic and full of gratuitous sex between John Carter and various slave girls.

Those are the Gor books, right? I remember reading John Carter of Mars in high school and going, huh, that was icky, and then I read another Gor book which was even worse, and had to read the whole thing because I was mesmerized by horror at the blatant hatred of women. I still haven't been able to erase that disgusting book from my memory.