Feminism

[clyde]

This article was introduced to me as controversial.

http://www.thenation.com/article/178140/feminisms-toxic-twitter-wars

[clyde]

A revealing perspective on the implications of language

Why did you post this. I want to just insult it, but I figured that you may have a sincere confusion that you want to discuss. I couldn't get very far because it's so obviously angled to belittle racial injustices and the disparity of power in our society based on race.

The dude says that the English language has a "supposed" racial bias, sarcastically; as if there are no racial biases in the English language. He sounds like a racist denier.

Edit:I tried to read it again. I find it so incredibly frustrating. I haven't read the author to whom he is responding, but I have a hard time imagining that anyone could have been making the argument that he is responding to. An attempt to remove inherent racial or sexist biases from a language is neither silly or absolute. He's trying to make it appear as both.

[Twig]

I didn't read the whole thing (in fact I only read a small portion of it), but the beginning, at least, seemed like it was implying that words DO have meaning, by replacing all "man"s with "white"s and "sexism"s with "racism"s to emphasize that, just because it's about gender doesn't make it any less bad.. It was really long though so I wanted to get back to it later. U:

[clyde]

I'm hoping that the dude's pen-name being "Satire" is foreshadowing how things go after the first four paragraphs. I really can't get through it, it feels like I'm in a room of noxious fumes as I try.

This must... Be... My..... Kryptonite...

[Bjorn]

I think Twig got it.  It also struck me as just an incredibly long form satire piece showing how ridiculous many of the things people say about sexism/feminism are when they are recontexualized to be talking about race. 

[Problem Machine]

Why did you post this. I want to just insult it, but I figured that you may have a sincere confusion that you want to discuss. I couldn't get very far because it's so obviously angled to belittle racial injustices and the disparity of power in our society based on race.

The dude says that the English language has a "supposed" racial bias, sarcastically; as if there are no racial biases in the English language. He sounds like a racist denier.

Edit:I tried to read it again. I find it so incredibly frustrating. I haven't read the author to whom he is responding, but I have a hard time imagining that anyone could have been making the argument that he is responding to. An attempt to remove inherent racial or sexist biases from a language is neither silly or absolute. He's trying to make it appear as both.

Perhaps this piece shocks you. It is meant to. The entire point of it is to use something that we find shocking as leverage to illustrate the fact that something that we usually close our eyes to is also very shocking. The most effective way I know to do so is to develop an extended analogy with something known as shocking and reprehensible. Racism is that thing, in this case. I am happy with this piece, despite-but also because of-its shock value. I think it makes its point better than any factual article could. As a friend of mine said, "It makes you so uncomfortable that you can't ignore it." I admit that rereading it makes even me, the author, uncomfortable! Numerous friends have warned me that in publishing this piece I am taking a serious risk of earning myself a reputation as a terrible racist. I guess I cannot truly believe that anyone would see this piece that way. To misperceive it this way would be like calling someone a vicious racist for telling other people "The word 'nigger' is extremely offensive." If allusions to racism, especially for the purpose of satirizing racism and its cousins, are confused with racism itself, then I think it is time to stop writing.

[James]

Why did you post this. I want to just insult it, but I figured that you may have a sincere confusion that you want to discuss. I couldn't get very far because it's so obviously angled to belittle racial injustices and the disparity of power in our society based on race.

The dude says that the English language has a "supposed" racial bias, sarcastically; as if there are no racial biases in the English language. He sounds like a racist denier.

That's the complete opposite of the point. It's a satirical piece about people who doubt the gender bias in language; by substituting "white" for "man", Hofstadter intends to illustrate the absurdity of the claim that English isn't sexist. The argument is supposed to be unconvincing, in that it's a mockery of people who make the same arguments about sexism in language.

 

If you really can't manage the first section, though, hop down to the section "Post Scriptum". It starts thus:

Perhaps this piece shocks you. It is meant to. The entire point of it is to use something that we find shocking as leverage to illustrate the fact that something that we usually close our eyes to is also very shocking.

 

Completely tangentially, Douglas Hofstadter wrote Gödel, Escher, Bach, a fascinating book exploring the nature of self by way of neuroscience, Zen Buddhism, number theory, and myriad other subjects. Crazy stuff, but not much to do with feminism (although he does explain in an author's foreword that he regrets his use of gendered language).

EDIT: Oops, too slow by not one but two posts. How embarrassing.

[BagelMage]

Hey all, this thread is fantastic. I'm new here, and I am glad to see so many enlightened views and understanding of race/gender/sexuality issues on a game-centric site. Not to belittle gamers in the least, I love the community as a whole, but even on other sites centered around adults in the hobby who should have a more nuanced view of these issues I find that most seem to be befuddled when presented with them. Great stuff. 

[Merus]

Yeah, I was wondering where it was going, but then in the second paragraph the word 'chairwhite' was presented as if it was a real word. When it started inventing its own racially-charged abbreviations for things, I realised how golden it was. Don't worry Problem Machine, I thought it was great.

 

The postscript does mention that he's having a particular shot at William Safire, who apparently would write very condescending columns about gendered language using similar arguments. So the vibe that clyde was getting from the piece was absolutely written into it.

 

It probably helps that I knew who the author was, and, like James, knew that he regretted the exclusion of females via his language in his first and best-known book. (He mentions in later forewords how happy he was when he found out foreign-language versions of his book flipped the gender of the Tortoise because in those languages 'tortoise' is feminine.

[Problem Machine]

To be fair, I could have provided some context, but I usually like to try to let things speak for themselves when possible. I guess that means once in a while being thought of as a guy who'd post reactionary pro-discriminatory-language screeds into a feminism thread, though

[SilentBtAmazing]

This fall 2013 Mindy Kaling quote is making the rounds again on Facebook

Which I love. It reminds me of your conversation about the satirical article and how deeply ingrained some if this stuff is.

That really stuck out to me this week when a young woman who I mentor was talking to me about career stuff this week. it turned out her husband had assumed that, after 8 years if putting him through medical school, she was going to quit her career and move to his home state (where she could not continue in the same field). It really stood out to me how if the sexes were reversed that would not have been the assumption at all - and FYI this is a really cool and generally progressive guy as far as I can tell

[clyde]

It says a lot about my surroundings and circumstances, that I can not easily assume that such a piece is satire. Making up words to help a racist argument is uncommon where I am, but certainly not unthinkable. Openly racist comments and attitudes are the norm once you get five miles outside the radius of the college here.

[clyde]

I found this guide useful:

http://www.xyonline.net/content/tools-white-guys-who-are-working-social-change%E2%80%A6-and-other-people-socialized-society-based-do

[Twig]

I found this guide useful:

http://www.xyonline.net/content/tools-white-guys-who-are-working-social-change%E2%80%A6-and-other-people-socialized-society-based-do

It's funny how almost none of that applies to me, even though I'm a straight white dude, because I'm so shy and insecure myself.

[agorman]

This isn't really contributing to the conversation in any significant way, but just found this terrific comic, and figured it might be appreciated here.

http://imgur.com/a/RmAjE

[Bjorn]

This isn't really contributing to the conversation in any significant way, but just found this terrific comic, and figured it might be appreciated here.

http://imgur.com/a/RmAjE

 

"...you run a sub-forum on reddit?" got a legitimate belly laugh out of me. 

 

Though that comic awkwardly hits home a little close.  I certainly spent a lot of years as one of those nice guys who lacked the confidence to pursue the women I was interested in until after establishing a "friendship" that was really based on my attraction to them. 

[SecretAsianMan]

"...you run a sub-forum on reddit?" got a legitimate belly laugh out of me. 

 

Though that comic awkwardly hits home a little close.  I certainly spent a lot of years as one of those nice guys who lacked the confidence to pursue the women I was interested in until after establishing a "friendship" that was really based on my attraction to them. 

 

I will confess to having done that before.  Though unlike comic guy, I was happy to be "just friends".

[clyde]

Nevermind.

[agorman]

"...you run a sub-forum on reddit?" got a legitimate belly laugh out of me. 

 

Though that comic awkwardly hits home a little close.  I certainly spent a lot of years as one of those nice guys who lacked the confidence to pursue the women I was interested in until after establishing a "friendship" that was really based on my attraction to them. 

Yeah I'm pretty ashamed to admit that I used to be one of those guys back in high school. Confronting that I was/still kind of am actually kind of an asshole is definitely one of the ways I've gone about trying to better myself on a person. As I believe JP LeBreton once said on twitter, "I'm on a never-ending quest to be less of a piece of shit."

[Stuart]

So, legit super surprised that this hasn't turned up in here. 

 

TRIGGER WARNING (sexual assault/abuse): Dylan Farrow's open letter about Woody Allen sexually abusing her as a child.

 

I had known about Allen's accusations of sexual assault on Farrow during the early 90s, but I'd had always shrugged it off because there was "no evidence". Since knowing about that, I had completely erased that moment of history from my mind and continued to enjoy Allen's films. But know, I feel horrified that I had ignored this. Right now, as someone who loves filmmaking, I feel deeply conflicted about this. Obviously, I am siding with Dylan and truly believe her because I'm not fucking insane, and I've resigned to ever watch one of Allen's films ever again, but...

 

I still like some of his old films. Now I feel gross by thinking about it and I find it hard to ignore his impact on filmmaking. Any can argue how good or bad of a writer and director Allen is, but one cannot ignore that his work has inspired and created multitudes of amazing filmmakers around the world. Is it wrong that I still enjoy some of his films? Now that I think about, I'm starting to not like those works I like because of this fact. 

 

This article on The Onion slightly sums up my feelings. Though obviously satirical, it makes a clear analysis of how most film people must feel right now. 

 

But like I said, fuck Woody Allen. He is a monster and deserves jail, and if he happens to innocent (which I doubt), no blame should be put on Dylan but the people who influenced her. No matter what, she is a victim and needs support in all cases. I'll disdain from watching Allen's future film from now on, as well as his past work. I'll still be in conflict, though, about whether recognizing his impact in film is kinda siding with him or not, and if it is siding with him, I feel really gross then.

 

EDIT: Trigger warning and some grammer edits.

[Bjorn]

Yeah I'm pretty ashamed to admit that I used to be one of those guys back in high school. Confronting that I was/still kind of am actually kind of an asshole is definitely one of the ways I've gone about trying to better myself on a person. As I believe JP LeBreton once said on twitter, "I'm on a never-ending quest to be less of a piece of shit."

 

I embrace my assholery while trying to minimize or eliminate any harm it may cause. 

 

 

I will confess to having done that before.  Though unlike comic guy, I was happy to be "just friends".

 

Some I stayed friends with, some I didn't.  But thankfully the one that I was probably the most hung up on has ended up becoming one of my longest and best friendships. 

[Stuart]

So, legit super surprised that this hasn't turned up in here. 

 

TRIGGER WARNING (sexual assault/abuse): Dylan Farrow's open letter about Woody Allen sexually abusing her as a child.

 

I had known about Allen's accusations of sexual assault on Farrow during the early 90s, but I'd had always shrugged it off because there was "no evidence". Since knowing about that, I had completely erased that moment of history from my mind and continued to enjoy Allen's films. But know, I feel horrified that I had ignored this. Right now, as someone who loves filmmaking, I feel deeply conflicted about this. Obviously, I am siding with Dylan and truly believe her because I'm not fucking insane, and I've resigned to ever watch one of Allen's films ever again, but...

 

I still like some of his old films. Now I feel gross by thinking about it and I find it hard to ignore his impact on filmmaking. Any can argue how good or bad of a writer and director Allen is, but one cannot ignore that his work has inspired and created multitudes of amazing filmmakers around the world. Is it wrong that I still enjoy some of his films? Now that I think about, I'm starting to not like those works I like because of this fact. 

 

This article on The Onion slightly sums up my feelings. Though obviously satirical, it makes a clear analysis of how most film people must feel right now. 

 

But like I said, fuck Woody Allen. He is a monster and deserves jail, and if he happens to innocent (which I doubt), no blame should be put on Dylan but the people who influenced her. No matter what, she is a victim and needs support in all cases. I'll disdain from watching Allen's future film from now on, as well as his past work. I'll still be in conflict, though, about whether recognizing his impact in film is kinda siding with him or not, and if it is siding with him, I feel really gross then.

 

EDIT: Trigger warning and some grammer edits.

 

Sorry for reposting this, but since Bjorn's post seemed to have started a new page in the thread, I was worried no one would see this. I feel this is something that really needs to be discussed in some way.

[clyde]

I separate works from the creators. I don't appreciate Guernica because Picasso was a psychologically and physically abusive misogynist, and I don't dismiss Guernica because of it either. Despise destructive behaviors, appreciate benevolent behaviors, love people.

If someone who kills kittens for sport also buys and delivers groceries for elderly folk, are you going to say "Everything you do sucks!" or are you going to codemn their kitten killing habits? Now this can get kinda tricky. If people begin saying that kitten killing is ok as long as you buy groceries for elderly people, then you treat good deeds as currency; that's problematic. I would also have a problem with the kitten killer watching my cat while I'm on a trip.

Edit: I had to edit this a bit.

[Twig]

I understand the need for something like it, but isn't a "trigger warning" in and of itself basically a trigger? I feel like if something terrible had happened to me, and someone tried to warn me that what I was about to read was going to remind me of that terrible thing, I'd immediately be reminded of that terrible thing. I am not at all saying that we should just throw all conversation about everything around willy nilly or that trigger warnings are worthless, but it's something that's always sort of confused me.

 

Anyway, yeah, that's pretty terrible, but I'm with clyde. If I was going to condemn one man's work because he's done things I find disgusting, well, most of humanity has done something I find disgusting, so I pretty much wouldn't be able to enjoy any piece of art.

[Nachimir]

No, the term "trigger warning" is very different to reading an account that might be relating events very similar to traumatic experiences you've had. Without it, people can be dumped into, basically, an attack of PTSD without warning. The phrase may be a reminder of something, but it's better than that.

 

 

Sorry for reposting this, but since Bjorn's post seemed to have started a new page in the thread, I was worried no one would see this. I feel this is something that really needs to be discussed in some way.

 

I read that piece a few days ago, and don't have much to say except "Fuck Woody Allen". I saw mention of some people on twitter claiming the accusations were false. I think: You don't make up a story like that in a male dominated industry, that exists within a patriarchy.