Jump to content
Roderick

Feminism

Recommended Posts

The "traditional" idea of being an adult is nonsence. It is also eurocentric. Were "adults" the same all over the world? I don't think so.

 

Let's go back in time to Europe-pre-printing press. What as an "adult" life like then? if you were a female adult you were probably doing whatever your husband made you do, had gone through childbirth multiple times and had a child or two die. If you were a man you were probably working all day in a field or something but even then the notions of work and play weren't as seperate as they are now. Fordism and Taylorism hadn't been invented yet so there was no idea of maximizing productivity. Then there was the fact that most people were illiterate.

 

If anything the notion of "adult" is a temporary one."Childhood" as a concept is only a few centuries old. (If you don't have a concept of childhood how can you have the opposing notion of adulthood?) Hell, the notion of a teenager didn't even exist until around the post-WWII era. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the fact that the attitudes surrounding "adulthood" and "maturity" is relative to a time and place makes it any less valid as a construct. It's still inevitable that people go through social and psychological changes as a result of natural biological processes while growing up. The problem is when the beliefs are rooted in dogmas and political structures that serve the few people in power rather than the core idea of adulthood being what does it mean to be a good person in the world? For example I do think there are some fucked up attitudes towards adulthood that comes from being a part of a capitalist society that - for good or worse - basically runs on appealing to peoples greeds and vices. The problem is when this is turned into an cultural ideal where "real adults" must be solely independent and serve their so-called "rational self interest" whilst any form of co-operation in something greater than oneself that can't be achieved through self-serving means is seen as a weakness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anything the notion of "adult" is a temporary one."Childhood" as a concept is only a few centuries old. (If you don't have a concept of childhood how can you have the opposing notion of adulthood?) Hell, the notion of a teenager didn't even exist until around the post-WWII era.

 

This is a general argument that I've been trying to make for years, that so much of what we think we know (in America) about society has it's origins in starting around 1940.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I created another thread about these questions about age and adulthood since I think it's a good discussion, but getting off topic at this point. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weird thing - as I began following more and more feminists on Twitter as this whole GG thing started, I've also accidentally followed a few misandrists along the way. I've actually kept a handful of them in my timeline, because I honestly think the articulate ones have a very interesting point of view on modern societal issues. I feel like it's kinda easy to hate men when men probably make 99% of the major decisions in the world and you are victim to those decisions. Their view has been really informative to me, kinda like have a fully raw and unvarnished women's perspective (this is not to say that misandrists speak for all women, but I feel like we get fully raw and unvarnished opinions from men all the time so the reverse is interesting).

 

Also, one of my favorite things is when men speak up to misandrists who just shut them down. A lot of them clearly feel that they're not the kind of guys that misandrists should hate because they're good people. The funny thing is, if you really thought you were an unharmful man who respected women's opinions you could probably just let misandrists do their thing. Instead, you just have to speak up and say "no you're wrong, I AM someone you should listen to" which proves their point entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's pretty much where the "not all men!" meme comes from. Well okay, in part.

 

I've had to ask two friends now where I stand in their life because of their outright hatred toward men. Which I get their reasons and don't argue against it. I just didn't want to be a target. One was good about receiving that and letting me know she doesn't mean folks like me. The other stopped talking to me.

 

Noooooo idea what I did right or wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So apparently Vivian James (the woman gamer 4chan invented to agree with them) wears a green and purple jumper in reference to a picture of Krillin from Dragon Ball Z raping Vegeta. Yes, the character design has a rape joke embedded in it.

 

As bad as gamers have been, it seems like it's even rougher to be a prominent atheist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other day I saw someone on Twitter suggest that the values of the internet-revolution have largely been determined by the wealthy libertarian ideologies of the Silicon Valley. Then I was reading this cyberpunk manifesto and I was struck by the conflation of libertarianism and the Left.

http://streettech.com/bcp/BCPgraf/Manifestos/CutandPaste.html

There is an assumption in the manifesto (and probably in many similar ones) that freeing information will take down oppressive power-structures, but no consideration that those who oppose the normalized patriarchy of the populous will get all their personal information publicized to create a loose-cannon threat. Is this a lack of intersectionality? I want to know what an intersectional feminist cyberpunk would look like. Anyone have links?

Edit: Why hello there. Don't mind if I do.

http://futurefire.net

They are currently running a indiegogo campaign to fund an anthology of speculative fiction that understands disability as a social construct and imagines futures that we can all participate in. Submissions if stories about science-fiction "cures" to disabilities are discouraged. This is what I'm talkin' about!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bristle at the conflation of libertarianism and the "left", because it's so completely alien to my lived experience and it's usually presented as being utterly uncontroversial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bristle at the conflation of libertarianism and the "left", because it's so completely alien to my lived experience and it's usually presented as being utterly uncontroversial.

Living on the central east-coast of the United States around 1997 as a young white cis-male in a wealthy enough family, I was first getting interested in politics. This conflation was the norm. Republicans and Democrats were seen as two faces of the powerful elite and D.I.Y. libertarianism was seen as the only thing that could kill the monster. At the time, I didn't consider that true equality meant that a state was necessary to help the dispossessed return to a just standard of living. The ideology/mythology in zines and early internet was that if we all just took the state down, everyone would be free and live as equals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was first introduced to Dawkin's work, it was amazing and he rapidly shot up to be one of my personal heroes.  The older he gets, and the more he talks, the less and less relevant he makes himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ugh, every time Richard Dawkins says anything it makes me feel ill. I feel embarrassed by him in the same way I presume religious people feel embarrassed when a fundamentalist Christian talks about God hating fags. And I'm not even an atheist! I'm agnostic! I just hate the idea that anyone of faith would look at him and think that, as a non-religious person, I share his opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel quite the same as you, Bjorn. Dawkins really opened my eyes when I read The Selfish Gene. It's to this day one of the most important, shaping books I've read. But I've grown very wary of the militant side of atheism, and Dawkins strangely regressive attitude towards abuse and, apparently, feminism?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I needed somewhere to go with this. I haven't been much to the forum but am an avid reader of the podcasts. This relates directly to feminism but could be its own thread, as it is also about gamer/nerd "culture".

 

@pixiejenni has been someone who has been quite diligently engaging with the GG crowd to collect actual statements (something they have not been able to organize themselves, which I think is in itself already telling). That can be found here: http://pixietalksgamergate.wordpress.com/ (and is quite interesting but not what this post is directly about).

 

She posted some conclusions she came to, today and I had a longer conversation that spiraled out of that.

 

Starting point was the need for critiques of games. After the first quarter of back and forth I thought maybe this guy actually has some interesting insight into how games criticism is lacking. But as the conversation continues it becomes clear this is about something completely different. Then, two thirds in he shows what he is really about.

 

Here is the Storified version of the conversation:

http://sfy.co/sg1H

 

Now, the way he argued makes it seem he is genuinely convinced, not "just" of institutionalized male oppression by feminism but of how this relates/is opposed to "nerd culture" (whateverthatisexactly).

I find this radicalized nerd identity is a weird form of extremism--it's the first time I've come across it in person, not just MRA itself but born out of this kind of identification.

 

Weird and troublesome how such extreme right thinking has found fruitful ground for recruitment there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, geez. I love the way he completely led himself to the anti-men angle with absolutely zero prompting, took immediate offence to every barely implied insult, then basically flat out stated "nerds rule cool kids drool" as his closing statement. This is totally not someone who lets deep-seated insecurities and paranoia rule his life!!!

 

I'm actually surprised with how much gamers are willing to identify themselves as a marginalised group through this whole thing. I've gotten into discussions with people about this who are happy to downplay harassment of industry women as "overblown" and "just a misdirection" (one person seriously suggested that women were quitting the industry to play up their own sociopolitical agenda, what the actual fuck), and yet any perceived slight against gamers constitutes a systematic attack on gamer/nerd culture which somehow goes to the roots of the journalism industry. It doesn't matter that plenty of non-gaming sites are criticizing this movement as well, these people will not fucking budge, and conversations like the one you posted demonstrate why. It's such a weird thing to see for me, as someone who was pretty nerdy all through school at a time when being interested in computers was still kind of taboo, seeing people who are still so attached to that identity like it's a hard-won status they have to protect. It's kind of weird and unsettling, actually. I have to wonder what else is going on with them that they're so suspicious of outside influence.

 

Also, why does storify hate chrome so much. Had to open it in firefox just so it wouldn't hang constantly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whenever times are hard, people look for scapegoats. I think this is in many ways just another manifestation of the economic crunch. These guys are looking at 'SJW's the way that right-wing pundits look at illegal immigrants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people who feel marginalised are prone to picking up dangerous ideas. If they're isolated enough, they never really get set straight.

 

You started to see a lot of that once 'nerd' got separated from 'loser' about 10 years ago, but it's only gotten more intense now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

I needed somewhere to go with this. I haven't been much to the forum but am an avid reader of the podcasts. This relates directly to feminism but could be its own thread, as it is also about gamer/nerd "culture".

@pixiejenni has been someone who has been quite diligently engaging with the GG crowd to collect actual statements (something they have not been able to organize themselves, which I think is in itself already telling). That can be found here: http://pixietalksgamergate.wordpress.com/ (and is quite interesting but not what this post is directly about).

She posted some conclusions she came to, today and I had a longer conversation that spiraled out of that.

Starting point was the need for critiques of games. After the first quarter of back and forth I thought maybe this guy actually has some interesting insight into how games criticism is lacking. But as the conversation continues it becomes clear this is about something completely different. Then, two thirds in he shows what he is really about.

Here is the Storified version of the conversation:

http://sfy.co/sg1H

Now, the way he argued makes it seem he is genuinely convinced, not "just" of institutionalized male oppression by feminism but of how this relates/is opposed to "nerd culture" (whateverthatisexactly).

I find this radicalized nerd identity is a weird form of extremism--it's the first time I've come across it in person, not just MRA itself but born out of this kind of identification.

Weird and troublesome how such extreme right thinking has found fruitful ground for recruitment there.

I had a similar experience a couple of weeks ago and I'm still reeling from it. I think a lot of us (especially males) are discovering that a sizable quantity of men have been hurt deeply (in some circumstace that seems to be attributed to women in general) and have turned to gaming as a method of self-medicating. I keep seeing conversations like the one you shared where the real grievance that gets revealed seems to be anger towards women. It's really awkward to find out oh, I thought that you really were just confused about the value of games-criticism, but now I see that you actually are a misogynist. What the fuck am I supposed to say at that point? I feel like I'm luring the real reason for the passionate response out of these people, they show me something vulnerable (that they blame women for something that really hurt them), and then I'm like "Oh gawd, hide it again. I thought you were just stupid, now I know that you are a misogynist!" I don't know how to help these people. I don't feel good about engaging with them because I feel like I don't know what to do when I find the actual cause of anger, and I fear that I'm making it harder for someone to find it who does know how to treat it. Maybe we should make games that help them treat their own misogyny and put lots of boobs in it. That's the best I got.

Also there is a lot of discussion going on about this in this thread just in case you didn't know:

https://www.idlethumbs.net/forums/topic/9580-ethics-and-journalistic-integrity/page-32#entry315110

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, geez. I love the way he completely led himself to the anti-men angle with absolutely zero prompting...

 

Yeah, it was baffling for me. I had the weird feeling that he really needed to tell me that, although none of my replies (I think) would have indicated that I'd sympathize with it.

 

...oh, I thought that you really were just confused about the value of games-criticism, but now I see that you actually are a misogynist. What the fuck am I supposed to say at that point? I feel like I'm luring the real reason for the passionate response out of these people, they show me something vulnerable (that they blame women for something that really hurt them), and then I'm like "Oh gawd, hide it again. I thought you were just stupid, now I know that you are a misogynist!"

 

Yes, and I end up feeling half complicit by having had a civil conversation with them! It's truly a weird experience as I feel they engage in an actual discourse with me just because I'm a guy.

And it's not like I am avoiding confrontation, either (Twitter forces a certain directness, after all). I've had other experiences where they run out of big words to fling around, like from a few days ago: http://sfy.co/is9n (pls excuse the high-horse-ish remarks, some of the incredulity about it all gets to me and needs an out).

Those are the ones I am more hopeful about, though--unless they maybe run and cement their original justification for their anger like this other dude obviously did at some point.

 

I don't know how to help these people. I don't feel good about engaging with them because I feel like I don't know what to do when I find the actual cause of anger, and I fear that I'm making it harder for someone to find it who does know how to treat it...

 

I do also think about what the right thing to do is. I don't think you can 'fix' them... they need to do that themselves. I think it's okay to empathize but I'm wary of thinking of them as people who need (my) help.

Maybe it's more in making sure to squish the little misogynist acts/habits in everyday life; stuff like talking over other people (btw, I didn't read all the 192 pages but I assume this is a mixed crowd--one of the hardest things I've had (and still probably have to a degree) is getting the thing about safe spaces into my head).

 

Also there is a lot of discussion going on about this in this thread just in case you didn't know:

https://www.idlethumbs.net/forums/topic/9580-ethics-and-journalistic-integrity/page-32#entry315110

 

Ah, thanks. Perfect use of " there, too.

 

Also, why does storify hate chrome so much. Had to open it in firefox just so it wouldn't hang constantly.

 

Oh, it's a Chrome issue? The thing was really annoying to put together in Chrome, as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, chrome hung and froze and refused to load a bunch, wouldn't expand the "read more" comments. Chucked it in firefox and it worked straight away. :iiam:

 

Yes, and I end up feeling half complicit by having had a civil conversation with them! It's truly a weird experience as I feel they engage in an actual discourse with me just because I'm a guy.

 

One of the panelists in this video kind of echoes this. Basically, that male voices are needed in these discussions because other men may be more on guard when speaking to a woman. Hearing it said so clearly made me feel a renewed sense of responsibility... then I remembered I don't use twitter.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hearing it said so clearly made me feel a renewed sense of responsibility... then I remembered I don't use twitter.

 

 

Heh, I can assure you it's a lot easier done on twitter than in person... I suspect it has more effect in the latter, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×