Jump to content
Roderick

Feminism

Recommended Posts

Joy is a star (note how she looks when she throws her arms out, which she does a lot, including on the poster), Sadness is a teardrop, Fright is a raw nerve, Anger is a fire brick and Disgust is broccoli.

I like that being presented as though "fire brick" is a common everyday thing or idiom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've realized that the "Disgust is broccoli" thing is a pretty strong argument for the idea that the other characters haven't had their emotions thought through. Riley's Disgust has a personal reason to look like broccoli, but everyone's Disgust looks that way. Surely not everyone hates broccoli, especially the girl at the broccoli pizza place. Given that, it seems pretty clear to me that they designed Riley's emotions, then for the other characters said "Now here's the dad version of the emotions, they all look like dad" "Here's the emo pizza girl version of the emotions", etc.

 

Maybe all toddlers hate broccoli and that's when disgust is formed :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I ever had a problem with broccoli. I had a problem with mushrooms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I ever had a problem with broccoli. I had a problem with mushrooms.

 

Oh eff yeah. Mushrooms and, weirdly, black olives. I had some weird food hangups as a kid that I'm glad to have grown out of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note: Author of the article is Kimberle Crenshaw, the originator of the "intersectionality" concept. But all the points are absolutely true: while I believe it was a feint for his beliefs given that he also killed black women, Dylann Roof was acting very much in accordance with racist beliefs about "savage" black men. It's something that white women have been complicit in as well - many black men were lynched for even looking at white women and white women have claimed to be hurt or raped by black men in order to have them jailed or killed. The delicacy of white women is something that is entangled up in white supremacy whether it's white men feeling they need to "protect" white women from them or white women using it as a guise for racist beliefs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought I'd let everyone know "The Sarkeesian Effect" had its grand opening to an audience of... 9 people. At $120k it was about $13.3k a ticket. This is including one of the guys that made it, I think, btw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I guess a couple of weeks ago there was a hashtag trend concerning my alma mater and a recently released dark comedic novel by a former student called Bennington Girls Are Easy. The author was apparently inspired by her own time at Bennington and her subsequent adjustment to New York after graduation. She seems to have gone to the college at roughly the same time as me, because it references at least one real life event (more on that later).

 

Now, it's not clear to me that any of the current or former Bennington students who were reacting negatively on social media (or through the novel's Amazon reviews) were necessarily doing so based on the content of the book rather than the title, but obviously that's not something for me to judge, particularly when I was told as a college-bound eighteen year old by multiple people that I should look forward to going to Bennington due to its traditionally disproportionately female student body and how "free love" the campus is. I'm certainly willing to hear any argument that regardless of whatever context that book may or may not provide, such a title is an irresponsible message to direct at a group of young women.

 

This cool thing ended up getting made, though, I guess, even though at first I wilted from it because it seemed like the school itself was just trying to get some viral marketing out of the publicity, and even still, I'm more into hearing about the stories of successful independent women than I am about the whole school spirit theme which has never been my jam.

 

The biggest reason I thought this was worth talking about, though, is that more than one alumni on Twitter took the time to attend and live tweet an audience Q and A the author was giving at a release event for the book, and I took the time to Storify the most comprehensive account of this because it really made my stomach churn.

 

As mentioned above, in the very first chapter, the book references an actual event from the college: the death of a student when she and a friend fell from a second story window while practicing in a dance studio. I'm really sensitive about invoking real details like this in works of fiction, and to do it with such frivolity and that you have a character ask with an author's preciousness "How can someone dance themselves to death?" is pretty fucking gross! (The Twitter user Storified above plainly asked her if she felt it was appropriate to use this incident in a "comedic" novel - as you can read, the author simply avoided the question.)

 

That's not why this is in the Feminism thread, of course. While I recommend everyone check out Charlotte Silver's myriad thoughts on the art of writing, such as: "Solitude and sitting...this is why so many writers are alcoholics or otherwise destructive," "To me, tone, as a writer, is really important," and, concerning the book's controversial title, "It's a novel. None of it is meant to be taken that seriously," what's most important are the truly compelling reasons she had for choosing to write about young adult women:

 

"I think the girls in this book are relentlessly unlikable, every one of them."

 

"The girls in this book are pretty grasping and avaricious, right...but I hope it's entertaining."

 

"These hothouse female environments...all girls school, boarding school, offices with too many women in them..."

 

"This book needs some men in it, right?"

 

Anyway, I guess this is one of those times I've been working on a post for so long it feels like I've lost the thread, and now I'm just piling on to the point of likely victim blaming someone for their own internalized misogyny. I just couldn't believe what a font of asininity I'd stumbled onto when I discovered this Twitter timeline earlier today and thought it was interesting enough to share.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Meme-ification of Misandry - this is a really good article that lines up with some discussions from earlier in this thread about things like "male tears." Well worth reading.

 

From the article:

 

But women of color have repeatedly pointed out that “kill all men” takes on a grotesque dimension when put in the context of our country’s racial reality. Black feminist Zoé Samudzi agrees that “misandry — like reverse racism — isn’t possible,” but “‘kill all men’ — even in jest — is a reminder of the historical role white women play in white masculine violence against men of color.”

Is this a joke? I would assume it's a joke, but the article goes on about it at length. It's like saying "The statement 'I hate everyone' is troubling because there's a history of hating black people." I don't know how to engage with an article that spends so long taking such an absurd notion completely seriously. I would comment on other parts of the article, but I genuinely can't tell if there`s some big elaborate joke I'm missing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Kill all Men" is certainly an absurd statement (and not really feminist), but it does strike me as a pretty useless phrase to toss around. I don't see it as harmful, necessarily, but it does come across as weak or even idiotic given actual gender issues in the world. As someone who was definitely guilty of using ironic misandry in the past, I now look at that language for what it is; a bad joke that feels subversive but actually accomplishes nothing. It doesn't help that it was mostly white women I saw (like myself) engaging in the "kill all men," "misandry" craze, which gives some weight to the race connections this article raises. I'm sure that Zoe Samudzi understands that no one really wants to "kill all men," but she's not wrong in pointing out the weirdness of a privileged white woman saying that given the history of black men being murdered in this country because they were suspected of or accused of having relations with white women.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what the article is trying, in part, to do is point out that "white feminism" ignores the impact of race on Women of Color, but also the power that White Women can wield in a society that values the purity of WW over the lives of Men of Color.

 

Like Emmett Till is a murder that happened to protect the purity of white womanhood over the life of a Black child. 

 

I think it makes a compelling argument about how couching the justified anger of the less privileged in humor does the frustration a disservice. 


I mean you don't have to buy the argument that using #misandry and #killallmen isn't as useful as it might appear at first glance, but I don't think these are unreasonable arguments.

 

^^Also what Sarah said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the article:

 

Is this a joke? I would assume it's a joke, but the article goes on about it at length. It's like saying "The statement 'I hate everyone' is troubling because there's a history of hating black people." I don't know how to engage with an article that spends so long taking such an absurd notion completely seriously. I would comment on other parts of the article, but I genuinely can't tell if there`s some big elaborate joke I'm missing.

 

I think you're misunderstanding the premise of the article: that many feminists online ironically say things like "kill all men" in something of a double-parody, where, since "men's rights activists" claim that feminists do in fact want to kill all men, feminists say it as a joke to prove the absurdity of the statement. When you see somebody saying "kill all men" online, at least part of the message is "it is ridiculous to think that feminism is about killing men, especially when there are so many legitimate complaints." But the absurdity is less funny when you consider that in specific historical contexts, there were aspects of feminism that did seek to harm certain populations of men.

 

It's a bit of a complicated argument, since it relies on a few layers of irony, but I think Shane does a really good job in this piece teasing out all the aspects of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're misunderstanding the premise of the article: that many feminists online ironically say things like "kill all men" in something of a double-parody, where, since "men's rights activists" claim that feminists do in fact want to kill all men, feminists say it as a joke to prove the absurdity of the statement. When you see somebody saying "kill all men" online, at least part of the message is "it is ridiculous to think that feminism is about killing men, especially when there are so many legitimate complaints." But the absurdity is less funny when you consider that in specific historical contexts, there were aspects of feminism that did seek to harm certain populations of men.

 

No, I got the "kill all men is a joke" thing. It's just that the subsequent "kill all men is racist" thing also struck me as absurd to the point of a joke. And looking at the responses above, Jesus, people take it seriously. I don't know how to deal with that because it is crazy. It is exactly as crazy to me as saying that "I hate everyone" is problematic because some of the people you're hating are black.

 

I realize this may sound disparaging, but I swear I'm only attempting to communicate the magnitude of my befuddlement. This is like I've walked into a thread where a bunch of people earnestly talk about the Earth being flat. I can imagine no way to productively engage with this, so I guess I'll just back out of the discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Racist Patriarchy: "Hey let's kill some black men and justify it because white women"

White Woman: "Kill All Men LOL"

 

 

 

I'd say it's at least insensitive. I don't think anyone's arguing a causal relationship there, but pointing out that within the context of the intersectional conflicts of feminism and anti-racism it's really tone-deaf and not that funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I got the "kill all men is a joke" thing. It's just that the subsequent "kill all men is racist" thing also struck me as absurd to the point of a joke. And looking at the responses above, Jesus, people take it seriously. I don't know how to deal with that because it is crazy. It is exactly as crazy to me as saying that "I hate everyone" is problematic because some of the people you're hating are black.

 

I realize this may sound disparaging, but I swear I'm only attempting to communicate the magnitude of my befuddlement. This is like I've walked into a thread where a bunch of people earnestly talk about the Earth being flat. I can imagine no way to productively engage with this, so I guess I'll just back out of the discussion.

 

Personally, I think that particular point in the article is pretty weak. I've heard it mentioned elsewhere that saying "Kill all men" tends to be treated differently when a white woman says it than when a black woman does; that point seems more believable to me and could just be pointed out to demonstrate the need for intersectional feminism.

To be honest the point that bothers me the most in this article is the assumption that a man repeating a feminist-joke with a rephrase is demeaning. I appreciate the author letting me know that they percieve it that way and that many others do, but it just makes me not want to have any interaction with folks who are demeaned by attempts at friendly responses (they seem to not want to interact with me so it works out well).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tbh it drives me fuckin' crazy when people do that to me and I'm the cis white male trifecta. Usually it involves them making the exact same joke but just one level more obvious and then thinking they're the one who made the joke. To be fair I've accidentally done it to people too, but yeah I think it probably happens way more often to ladies due to cultural presumption of non-funniness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tbh it drives me fuckin' crazy when people do that to me and I'm the cis white male trifecta. Usually it involves them making the exact same joke but just one level more obvious and then thinking they're the one who made the joke. To be fair I've accidentally done it to people too, but yeah I think it probably happens way more often to ladies due to cultural presumption of non-funniness.

 

Well, I've had some valuable interactions with you so that trumps my pet-peave. Where I come from, people rephrase jokes and repeat them to each other over and over again and enjoy the playfulness of the banter and mutual appreciation of the understanding of the joke so being demeaned by it is strange to me. To me, it's as if someone makes a joke and then gives the audience a grimmacing face of disapproval because they laughed at it while not being cool enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's pretty much my experience in real life, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the article does more than taking that notion seriously. I feel like it does a pretty good job laying out the reasoning behind its judgement, mainly the context that this wacky misandry ends up playing into. I don't know that I can lay it out more clearly, but I can try?

 

Think of it as an equality of opportunity vs equality of outcome issue. The former proposes that if you shut down explicitly discriminatory systems, things will improve on their own, the latter acknowledges that to make up for unconscious biases, structural discrimination, etc., we might have to give things a little push in the right direction, because there's all this garbage that folk face before they even get to the supposedly level playing field, and if you don't consciously try to counter that, you end up perpetuating those structures. This is how wind up with all these male-dominated companies that think their hiring is based purely on ability, because there's nothing stopping women from applying, is there (except a thousand microaggressions built into their culture, probably).

 

It's a similar thing with these generalizing attitudes, like hating everybody (although I've never met somebody who said that and actually hated all humans equally, but let's say hypothetically). From your point of view that may look like a pretty fair deal, you treat everybody equally after all, reserving equal scorn for each individual person. But their experience is gonna look much more varied: sometimes your attitude is going to hit somebody who doesn't really get that much hate in life, except maybe over personal things sometimes, and sometimes it's going to hit somebody who already gets a bunch of racist, misogynist or whichever other kind of hate, and your little contribution ends up compounding that issue.

 

 

To be honest the point that bothers me the most in this article is the assumption that a man repeating a feminist-joke with a rephrase is demeaning.

 

I think it's mainly an issue of scope, and just how often random men do that thing, especially if it's somebody with a sizeable following. And the explaining their joke back to them is probably still second to facetiously doing the jerky thing they were talking about. I also have trouble judging these situations though: sometimes people even make jokes that are intended to be picked up and continued, like with a novelty hashtag about replacing a word in the title of something, and then it feels like your joke being funny enough makes the difference between it being taken well or causing offense, and we've all overestimated our own sense of humor sometime or another.

 

I figure it's best just not to make jokes at strangers, maybe? Too much room for misunderstanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, jokes are how I primarily communicate, so that's like saying I should just not communicate.

Which I guess is fair enough given how often people get pissed at me for breathing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say jokes are fine and I enjoy your communication Twig like 99% of the times~

 

It's just that with strangers might be best to be ready to apologies in case of miscommunication.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think places like twitter facilitate a feeling of over-familiarity that can lead to easily crossing boundaries that one might not even be aware of.

 

For instance I see a lot of women on twitter complain about a behavior that annoys them and then men will reply to that tweet thinking it's a funny joke. Doing that to a friend can be funny, but doing that to a woman you don't know on twitter, when there are 3 dozen other chuckleheads doing the same thing to her probably isn't as endearing or original as you may have thought.

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

×