Argobot

The trigger warnings that Chait is referencing extended beyond trying to protect victims of abuse. Over the summer, students on different college campuses tried to get trigger warnings added to different works of fiction (trigger warning for classism in the Great Gatsby and trigger warning for racism in Things Fall Apart), with the intention that if a student didn't want to be triggered by those topics, they could elect to ignore that content in the class. That to me is such an abuse of the original intention of trigger warnings -- creating a safe space on feminist blogs for women to discuss their abuse -- and opens the door for people to simply ignore or hide from anything they find even remotely challenging, which is the entire point of getting an education. Roxane Gay wrote a much better explanation for why these Trigger Warnings are ultimately useless: http://therumpus.net/2012/08/the-illusion-of-safetythe-safety-of-illusion/ Going back to callout culture, Ariel Levy wrote a great piece in the New Yorker that examined both sides of the Steubinville rape case and the role that social media played. The conclusion isn't a definite 'social media is bad and callout culture is toxic' but it isn't necessarily positive either. Really worth a read. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/08/05/trial-by-twitter

I see your point on it raising awareness and I shouldn't have downplayed that part of it. I'm glad that there were people who were able to come out of it with better attitudes to the culture and how it treats women. But those two guys still hold the same dumb positions that they always did, unless they've had a massive change of heart over the past few months. So while I can admit that this kind of awareness raising call out culture is great for people who are already on the fence about an issue, I still really believe that it does little or nothing to move those with more extreme views closer to a better understanding.

[citation needed] anecdotes are not data, but feminists calling out Penny Arcade is the only reason I have any exposure to feminist thinking. Call-out culture forces people, at least a little, to be afraid of what they say, and that's a definite improvement over the world where people could say whatever they wanted without having to think whether it could hurt someone. And to be honest it's not hard to get people to back off: you step back, you listen and acknowledge you understand social justice things, because it's largely enflamed not by the first instance but by fucking up the response and demonstrating that you're dismissing. Call-out culture is a proxy battle because the attitudes and people they actually care about are protected and defended by people who won't see the problems, particularly amongst their friends and family. (This is the problem Archie Bunker was intended to symbolise - a loving family man who's also really, really racist.) I also think it's harder for people who can't pass for acceptable as easily as Chris can. A lot of people don't get to outgrow the thoughtlessly cruel comments, so they don't get the opportunity to let it go. Being able to live normally without being political is not a privilege everyone gets. The other thing, about the Natasha Allegri thing, is this: do you agree that sexism is everywhere? If so, then it's not unreasonable that someone would use a poor example to argue that sexism is everywhere. Here is some evidence of the entrenchment I was speaking of. Also, by your own admittance that call-outs induce a sense of fear instead of a sense of thoughtfulness or reflection is enough to show what might be the core problem here. What did any of the Penny Arcade call outs achieve? Those who already disliked that website continued to dislike it, and the people in charge of the website have continued to double, triple, quadruple down on their beliefs. Maybe they have less social capital online now, although I cannot judge that accurately because to me they were never important in the first place, but the people making mistakes continue to do so with no incentive to change. Citations: http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/rolling-stone-uva-reporting-rape http://www.slate.com/articles/life/culturebox/2014/12/the_year_of_outrage_2014_everything_you_were_angry_about_on_social_media.html http://www.people-press.org/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/ http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/ http://www.reddit.com/r/gamerghazi http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119412/feminisms-future-debate http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119674/lena-dunhams-not-kind-girl-and-burden-female-celebrity http://www.theawl.com/2012/05/when-trigger-warning-lost-all-its-meaning I don't agree with everything in Chait's argument, but as you say, there's a kernel of truth at the center that lines with my way of thinking on this issue. So if having a complex, if slightly favorable, reaction to an article is another version of being in the echo chamber, than that word no longer means anything to me. Because I do have an incredibly complex reaction to this issue. I often am afraid that the views I hold are somehow a betrayal of the values that matter to me. But I am so tired and bored of how predictable the script is on twitter and response articles to any instance of someone raising an objection to this current culture. I'm tired of it and yet still susceptible to that line of thinking, because I know how tempting it is to be a part of a group of people who will not question what you're saying as long as you're staying within acceptable territory. The most recent example of that was with the UVA rape case. When Hanna Rosin raised her initial concerns over how Rolling Stone reported on that case, I was livid. I was absolutely furious that anyone, let alone a feminist woman, would dare to question a rape victim's story. But as more information emerged regarding the clear mishandling of reporting on this story, and other articles were written on how we have potentially failed rape victims by creating the kind of culture where seeking any kind of truth is met with hatred and vitriol, I started to come to what I hope is a more nuanced view of how we discuss rape and work to protect rape victims in this country. None of this is easy to talk about, but at least we can all hopefully assume that everyone here is starting from a reasonable place, in that we all believe society is unequal and needs changing. And I really do believe that they way to achieve progress, to reach people who are not already starting at that good baseline, is to fight against this easy calcification of ideals.

Chait has an unfortunate history and it's totally fair to bring in his other writing as a way to evaluate his overall mindset and worldview, but I don't believe it detracts from the central point of his article, which to me is not about white men being upset about the presence of formerly marginalized voices, but the larger issue of unconsidered criticism and overblown infractions that are so common among the Left now. Honestly, that strain of having an opinion is something I only observe in white liberals, who have the privilege to take a lofty, if pointless, position on a lot of these issues because ultimately they will never be as affected by them. The Pareene response (and Pareene is a writer I have followed and admired for years) brings up Ta-Nehisi Coates, a writer who often discusses challenging issues of race and class in a very complex way that never boils down to a simple I'm Right and Everyone Else is Wrong argument. That's different from what Chait is railing against and I think a lot of the criticism against this article is willfully ignoring that fact. Again, I wish the piece was written better (for instance, that Bill Maher anecdote felt extremely out of place and counter-productive) but the core point is something I find myself agreeing with.

Wow, really wish that the film of the Ben Horne/Maddy scene still exists somewhere. Edit: Also, to correct what was said on the podcast: I am really happy that FWWM exists. I think it's a great movie that gets a bad rep. If the movie was a little more ambiguous about the particular's of Laura's murder scene I'd be happy, that's all I meant.

Hey Chris, I think you're pretty great.

Chait is definitely not the 'right' person to write this kind of article (which I personally think says something bad about the state of discourse), but the larger point isn't just that white men can't say what they want, it's that everyone is subjected to this kind of unconsidered scrutiny. The atmosphere is too toxic and uninviting and I really do feel that it's a problem for progressive causes.

Jonathan Chait has an article in this week's NY Mag about a new strain of liberal having an opinion. There are a lot of missteps in the article and I wish anyone other than Chait had written it, but the central point is something that I really think feminists need to seriously talk about. The call out cultural that takes up a lot of space in current feminist discourse is something I am becoming more and more uncomfortable with. Of course I want to create a society where historically marginalized groups are given the respect and power they deserve, but not at the expense of supporting a knee-jerk culture that favors loudness and shallow snark over depth and consideration. Issues of equality are complicated and, I believe, are supposed to be challenging and hard to talk about. However, I see less and less of that thoughtfulness, especially online. Instead, there's a prevailing attitude of I'm Right and You're Wrong and here's the the clear, unquestionable line that separates us and anyone on the wrong side of the line is a traitor to liberalism. It fosters an uninviting atmosphere and does nothing but encourage those with less than ideal values to remain entrenched in there thinking. I don't have a real solution except asking that other liberals give each other the benefit of the doubt and honestly try to reason out issues instead of immediately raising to a smart twitter comment and then writing the whole situation off. Otherwise, I don't see how we will convince people who aren't starting from a more open place on these issues to ever change their minds.

This reveal is probably one of the better versions of a Shocking Episode I've seen in a TV show. Leland adjusting his clothes in the mirror is a great slow lead up so that when you finally see Bob's reflection looking back at him, you've already kind of guessed what's going on and feel devastated. I'm so glad this scene maintains the kind of weird humor that follows Leland around. It's grotesquely comedic in the same way as Laura's funeral scene and it pays off. Prior to FWWM, I liked that this scene is the only real glimpse you have into the violence of Laura's death. The movie gets rid of any ambiguity by actually showing Laura die and I really wish that it didn't. As much as I like FWWM, I much rather prefer the only insight into what happened to Laura be anything that you can infer from what Maddy goes though.

I absolutely agree that rape is mishandled in all media and is often used as a lazy shorthand to give the story a false gritty feel. If that disappeared as a storytelling method, I would be so happy. My hope is that as better and more thoughtful writing appears in games, there will either be less of a need to use sexual assault as a tasteless narrative or there will be more nuanced depictions that carry real meaning.

Minor Ben Horne spoilers, I guess (I don't really think it's a spoiler)

Remember a few years ago (2012?) there were rumors about new Twin Peaks episodes. That's what got me to watch the show in the first place. If anything, the long con was Lynch perfectly predicting the number of years to reach peak Twin Peaks nostalgia.

Had the great experience of this episode ending mid sentence and my podcast app immediately rolling into the next downloaded episode (Great Gatling Gunsby) to hear Jake finish the sentence with "farts, donkey cock." Thanks guys!!

I read a study on wage gaps that indicated men out earn women not because of ingrained sexism, but because women often drop down to part-time work after they have kids. That messes up their experience and contributes to why they earn less. The same study also showed that men get a salary bump when they have children I'm sure there's a lot more going on that can't be quantified, as is true with literally any social policy that you're trying to study, but it was interesting to look at numbers that show a potential cause of unequal pay.

It is my sole mission right now to get everyone around to me read the Ferrante's Neapolitan novels. They are incredibly emotionally powerful books and the writing is absolutely gorgeous and deserve all the praise they've received. So yeah, highly recommended! (Sidenote: Sorry if it appears that I wouldn't want to read novels that only deal with male characters. My objections are a little bit more complicated than not liking that a book only has male characters, but I'll try to be more articulate about that in the future than just saying 'this book has men and therefore I hate it.' Thanks for the Deep North talk!)

Ah, I've been wanting to read that book. Any more thoughts on it? I just finished All the Light We Cannot See, another 2014 book about WWII (pattern??) that I thought was pretty well done and worth checking out.

I'm pretty about those cat pics you post on Twitter.

I strongly dislike the Twitter echo chamber where it's often the loudest voice, not the most thoughtful or nuanced, that gets rewarded. There are clear delineations between communities on Twitter, and while I ostensibly share the same values as others in the Twitter community I belong to, I often have a hard time with the way issues are discussed. Largely because it's not a discussion; it's a contest to see who can make the fastest quip. The power that comes with having a group of supporters who are already predisposed to agree with you even if what you're saying is only a shallow observation of a more complex situation is incredibly intoxicating, and I know that I have fallen for it on more than one occasion, but the frequency and predictability of this Twitter flareups have definitely soured me to the whole experience at times. That said, many of my closest relationships were born out of Twitter connections (including, hilariously, my boyfriend). There's definitely space for having interesting discussions on Twitter that are not wholly dissimilar to what you can have in real life, as long as no one is trying to Win the conservation by saying the pithiest thing that will get the most faves, but wouldn't hold up to scrutiny if it were a real face-to-face discussion.

That's a bummer. The Slate Political Gabfest has become a regular source of interesting discussion that pushes a lot of the preconceived ideas I have about politics as a young progressive. I often disagree with what is said on the podcast (especially by David Plotz), but I always enjoy the conversation. It forces me to step outside this bubble of my own understanding how politics do or should work, and I always come away with what I hope is a more nuanced understanding of the issues. It's so easy and tempting to remain in the progressive echochamber that often crops up on Twitter, and I am really happy that something exists to pull me out of that space for at least one hour a week.

There's a good Joe Sacco piece on the use of satire in comics at the Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2015/jan/09/joe-sacco-on-satire-a-response-to-the-attacks

(This is about Laura's killer)

It just gets better and better: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/01/07/technology/intel-budgets-300-million-for-diversity.html?_r=0

Thank you to whoever sent Chris and me The Summer Book! It was a really sweet thought that will be much appreciated. I fully plan on taking it the next time I'm in San Francisco.

Sex positive/sex negative are holdovers from the 80s, when 'The Sex Wars' was a main focus of feminism. Some feminists were staunchly against pornography and even sided with conservative religious groups in an attempt to have it banned. That's the sex negative group. Today, most feminists have a more nuanced view of the issue and don't want a blanket ban of all pornography. That's why I feel sex negative is an outdated term because it doesn't describe the more complex attitudes that are present today. Unless a woman directly calls for the removal of all porn and sexual agency, I don't see how it's reasonable to label her as sex negative.

Selma is the most intense movie experience I've had in a long time. I will not spoil how, and I hope none of the reviews do either, but that movie does a brutal job of setting you up for the upsetting history of race relations in America. It's one of the few historical dramas that I think does a fair job of dealing with the subject matter on all sides.