It's called "If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love."
It's very short, you can read it in about five minutes. (Spoilers, I voted for it.)
Okay, once you've read it, you can scroll down through the comments on that page, if you like -- most people are saying how much they like it. One or two Right-Wing people are commenting negatively on it, because (as you might not know if you didn't keep up with the insider-baseball of last year's Hugo Awards) last year we had the minor unpleasantness of Vox Day and his Flying Monkeys, who put together a list of fairly awful SF stories and novels and got a few of them onto the ballot.
Anyway, after their "sad puppies," as they called them, lost, these Sad Monkeys went around pissing on the winners in every way they could.
It's the final comment, though, that intrigues me, because of the way in which it leads us into the labyrinth of madness they're building up around themselves.
Here's the comment, from "Doubting Rich,"
I read it, and I was amused and confused. Being thoroughly familiar with Swirsky's story, I could not think what this "Doubting Rich" was even trying to say. What "working people" was he talking about? What did skin color have to do with anything?
The mention of Hoyt gave me a clue, though. I followed a pingback in the links below to a fairly incoherent review done by Sarah Hoyt, in which Hoyt seems to assume that those doing the hate-crime in Swirsky's story are (1) working class and (2) foreign language speakers. Where she gets that idea, I cannot say. It's clearly not from the story itself.
Also, you will be pleased to know, Hoyt could have written a much better story herself when she was twelve years old.
No doubt she also, like "Doubting Rich," also went to a much better university than any leftist.
*edited b/c I am an ijit! Thanks for the correction, Nikki! It's John Chu who won the Hugo, of course, for his wonderful "Water That Falls on You From Nowhere"; Swirsky was nominated, though!