Feminism

[ThunderPeel2001]

Hrm, no. I'm talking about the concept of race in the context of human culture and how its existence cannot be denied. It's a part of us much like nationality or religion whether we like it or not.

Hmm. I've rewritten this post four times, and I still don't understand what we're talking about. Didn't Dan's post already answer this?

I could never deny that social concepts of race exist.

Edited August 14, 2011 by ThunderPeel2001

[brkl]

From the post I initially replied to you seemed to be very particular about the sense in which the word should be used (the biological definition). But perhaps we have been talking around each other.

[ThunderPeel2001]

From the post I initially replied to you seemed to be very particular about the sense in which the word should be used (the biological definition). But perhaps we have been talking around each other.

I think so. Happy to put this while thing to bed, too!

[miffy495]

I am somewhat reluctant to revive this thread given how heated the discussion became at points, but this article I found through the RPS Sunday Papers was a phenomenal read. Part 5 was particularly meaningful for me, as it describes with remarkable similarity something that I went through with my own partner a couple of years ago, and set me on the path to being unashamed to self-identify as "feminist" (which really has only come to fruition in the last year, give or take). It's definitely worth a read, and I hope that a bunch of people who read it will have one of those eye-opening "oh shit, is that really how the games industry/community treats women?" moments thanks to a few of the things it discusses. Check it out, yo.

[twmac]

Was coming here to post about the same thing.

It was a great article (just ignore most of the comments thread) and it wasn't so much an eye opener for me, I work in the games industry I see how bad it is almost every day.

What it did for me was re-examine a lot of my early writing which walks a very thin line between misogyny and nihilism. The aim with the writing was for the latter but the pieces picked apart by commenters has made me rethink how I would, in future, word the same articles to avoid misinterpretation for the former.

Only warning I would give to anyoen reading it, make sure you aren't at work and you aren't hung over, the post is too long to read in a lunch break and too heavy for a fragile mind.

[Gwardinen]

Interesting letter. There was some stuff in there that made me look at things from a slightly different perspective. I don't share precisely his viewpoint on everything, but he's definitely showing the careful consideration and desire to work from a lack of preconceptions that I appreciate in all forms of thought - particularly these ones that regard entrenched viewpoints.

I happened to read the article in question a while back, and I didn't like it then and still don't. I also wondered at the time, and still do, what the hell it was doing on Gizmodo. The most virtuous motivation I can think of is that the editor(s) that approved it wanted to try to shake things up there and make a point about how even publications that focus on a particular community need to have outside perspectives sometimes. Somehow, though, I suspect it was published because they knew it would probably garner quite a lot of attention. Hits mean advertising money, and if anyone can understand a little financial incentive right now it's me.

There was a strip and a sort of mini-editorial posted within a webcomic series I read that talked a little about how some things at Gawker Media might be viewed from the outside. Fair warning: some of the strip and editorial themselves are kind of misogynistic. Not a great surprise given the letter we've just read, but the fact remains that there can be some fishy goings on at Gawker occasionally, and one has to wonder how planned certain events really are.

Edited September 18, 2011 by Gwardinen

[Ben X]

I think his future daughter's first words are going to be "tl;dr".

[miffy495]

I think his future daughter's first words are going to be "tl;dr".

Hahaha. Fair point. Still, I thought it was worth a look.

[Ben X]

I thought it was pretty dreadful. I'm falling asleep now so I can't elaborate too much, but I want to quickly jot down my reactions so I don't lose them:

patronising (the 'to my daughter' gimmick doesn't excuse this, it makes it worse)

over-written and over-long

author is blind to the fact that he's exchanged one set of prejudices for another - I wouldn't be surprised to find out he drew that "gamers are all teenage losers, I'm having anal sex and base-jumping every day" comic.

[Nachimir]

Oh, it's badly written alright, but the content is stellar. Some standout bits:

To many male gamers, feminist just means “someone who will not tolerate the only jokes I know how to make.”

My point is that one man's fulfilling, depression-alleviating friendship machine is another woman's giant red flag.

^ He's dead on about this not necessarily being prejudice.

"Women don't want to get into a relationship where they're playing second fiddle to an obsession. They shouldn't be required to and shouldn't be made to feel guilty for it either."

The bonus material section provides a pretty breathtaking example of this.

I think people are being oversensitive about that basejumping and kinky sex comic too. It's obviously hyperbolic, but has a point: There are loads of better things to do than get called "fag" by some teenager in a game. I love playing games, but when I'm forced to mix with those kind of people, that's exactly where I lose interest and go do something else.

[Gwardinen]

I don't know if I've seen the comic you're referring to.

[Ben X]

It was in the Comical Pictures thread, and I think it was only me that slagged it off!

[ThunderPeel2001]

It was in the Comical Pictures thread, and I think it was only me that slagged it off!

*cough*

(Although I may have removed my slagging because I was afraid I was being too negative too often. For the record: I hated that comic.)

[ThunderPeel2001]

Ok, I got to Chapter 6, I think I've got the gist and I can't be bothered to read any more. I apologise in advance if that's not enough to formulate the opinion below.

I don't think it's a bad article at all (although it probably doesn't need to be that long and it is a little preachy). I liked parts of it. For example, I remember seeing my favourite things through the eyes of my (then) wife when I was 23. Suddenly realizing how crappy women were generally portrayed, and then feeling embarrassed by things I hadn't before... (Women in hip "guy" comedies are nearly always either, totally crazy or spoil the guys' fun by being super-uptight -- ever notice that?)

But that's got nothing to do with someone writing a deliberately mean article, nor has it anything to do with mob mentality.

1. If the girl mentioned in the article did publish a horrible account of their date, negatively judging a man entirely by his hobby, then it is not unreasonable to judge her as shallow. And mean.

2. There is a limit to how far bashing someone should go. Even on the internet. When a point has been made, and it's been understood, then it's time to move on.

This second point is just maturity, but neither of these things have anything to do with personal revelations about how women are portrayed/treated by society.

The same goes for the reaction to that horrible programmer code on the Steam forums, but what's worse is that the author has taken these dregs of the internet (you know who I mean -- they tend to flock to high profile sites that don't employ good enough moderation: IMDB, YouTube, BBC, etc) and given them far more credibility than they deserve. Their vitriol is no more about being anti-women than it is about being anti-everything.

For example, I remember seeing a video on YouTube of a disabled young man who had apparently, against all odds, garnered respect from major players in the music industry for his abilities as a DJ. It was an incredibly heart-warming thing. It was I home video, as I recall, posted by the kid's father to proudly show to the world what his son had achieved. The first comment beneath the video said, "Fuck off and die you fucking retard".

Ah, YouTube. *wipes nostalgic tear*

There is nothing to learn from these angry and bitter people. They are isolated freaks who make a lot of noise when they're given a soap box and allowed to congregate. They're most likely people in very dire situations who use the internet to vent their frustrations. Probably teenagers, too (and so all the more powerless, and without life experience to boot). At least that's my guess.

One thing I know for sure, you can't use them as an example of anything but themselves.

So ultimately, despite some nice bits where I was reminded of how it felt to suddenly see the world from a different perspective, the article seemed pointless to me.

*tosses his 2c into the jar*

Edit: I see that once again BBX and I have more or less agreed, but put it in slightly different ways.

Edited September 19, 2011 by ThunderPeel2001

[ThunderPeel2001]

This guy managed to put across everything I want to say in a paragraph. The bast.

"Some will dismiss me, too entrenched in the perceived righteousness of their ways." That sentence should not be published in a persuasive piece. A sentence in the form "If you disagree, it's because of your personal flaw" is just one of the many problems with this article. Another main flaw is that the specific examples just aren't necessarily representative of the community at large, and the article doesn't do the work of explaining why they are representative rather than isolated.

[brkl]

But the people he quotes are largely dudes he knows. People he follows on Twitter! That isn't the dregs of internet. The "funny pictures", sure, but the Twitter quotes resonate more strongly to me (in a negative way...).

[ThunderPeel2001]

But the people he quotes are largely dudes he knows. People he follows on Twitter! That isn't the dregs of internet. The "funny pictures", sure, but the Twitter quotes resonate more strongly to me (in a negative way...).

Quote: "The same goes for the reaction to that horrible programmer code on the Steam forums, but what's worse is that the author has taken these dregs of the internet..."

[DanJW]

I agree that the article comes across more as a Bereznak apologist piece rather than anything serious about feminism, let alone anything useful to his hypothetical daughter.

And yes, he then massively generalizes and degrades his audience, while intimating his superiority to them (much like Bereznak).

The apparent crux of the justification - that geeks are bad for women because their obsession means they cannot commit, or something - is flawed anyway. 'Traditional' men exhibit exactly the same behaviour when it comes to prioritizing sport, or cars, or whatever else over their spouse.

He does have a few good lines (and well done for laying out in clear terms that gendered insults are bad) but they tend to be wasted by the following paragraph. He comes close to saying something valuable and interesting but then doesn't. I did recognise some of the more pertinent observations in my younger self, but he squanders the opportunity there too. For instance, when it comes to socially ostracised young males coming to resent women: rather than attempting to heal this rift, the author actually seems to cement it, telling the audience of geeks how inadequate and deluded they are and that women are correct to avoid them. Way to fix the problem (this is sarcasm).

So yes, I wasn't that impressed. I mark it down as a near miss.

[vimes]

It might be a bit divorced from the current debate, but I'm largely uncomfortable around the subject of feminism : it feels like an idea which belongs entirely to women and any man calling himself feminist/pro-feminist today always ends up sounding very patronizing and manipulative to me.

Maybe it's because of the etymology of the word itself : I know it really translates to equality between men and women - which is a complete given to me and I'll promote it where it isn't - but it sounds like it's aiming at forging a single vision for woman as a social group... which sounds rubbish, since my female friends don't have a lot in common when it comes to their aspiration; if you exclude the fact that, like any human being, they want to be able to do whatever they want.

Maybe it's also because I never witnessed them being victim of any sort of institutionalized sexism and that we were ready to brush off or counter the occasional stupid sexist remark from individuals.

In any case, when they needed some kind of moral support in their endeavors, they needed it as one coming from a friend to another, rather than me 'as a man' toward them 'as women'. And writing that, I already feel very patronizing.

[subbes]

Maybe it's also because I never witnessed them being victim of any sort of institutionalized sexism

Never compared wages, then?

[vimes]

Ah, yes. 17.5% in EU? That's a big thing for me to not know. I knew it existed but I expected it to be around 7% and decreasing.

But yeah... comparing wages with friends isn't something I usually do.

edit : missing linking words.

Edited September 21, 2011 by vimes

[brkl]

This is not exactly institutional, but it seems like my girlfriend always gets treated like shit at the social security office, whereas I've never had a bad experience apart from having to wait.

[Roderick]

Women have smaller brains than men. It's science.

[ThunderPeel2001]

Never compared wages, then?

I was about to post the same thing, but I didn't want to start another big argument. I'm glad somebody said something.

[twmac]

Working minimum wage for most of my life means that everyone got paid shit money.

However, I do know that it gets bad as soon as you go into middle management where the difference between wages can differ by a couple of thousand dollars, at least.

There is an anti-discrmination law in this province but there are several 'get out' clauses in it which allow for individuals to 'negociate' their pay at a certain level.

So yeah, that certainly sucks.