Feminism

[Salacious Snake]

Sorry this was rant.

This was a good post. It's easy for us dudes to forget just how constant and fucking exhausting this stuff can be, and we all need a reminder sometimes.

[miffy495]

Twig, one thing that confuses me about your position is that you seem dismissive of humour that doesn't offend, as if it isn't possible for it to be funny. I'm curious as to why this is for two reasons:

first, because we're not talking about humour that doesn't offend, but about humour that doesn't have a target. If you're offended by scatalogical humour and someone makes a poop joke, that's not really on the teller of the joke. The only target in that joke is poop. If someone makes a sexist/racist joke, the target of that is a human being, and one who is at a noticeably different level on the power hierarchy of our society, thus being pushed down further. If a white man is telling this joke, even the most unbiased white man in the world (though I doubt he'd even think about telling it), it really is still society continuing to push down on the target group. And yes, this joke is also awful if the member of the target group is the one telling the joke as it makes white dudes think it's ok to keep telling these jokes themselves ("What? They see it too!"). This also shows why the problem as I see it doesn't lie solely with the teller of the joke either. Their intent becomes sort of moot when you consider that the people laughing interpret it however they want. When you tell the most innocently intended racist/sexist exaggeration-for-the-sake-of-comedy type thing, know that someone believes it for real, and they may be listening to you at that very moment and are actively having their beliefs validated. You don't mean to do harm, and I definitely understand wanting to believe that the world is at a point where no one could genuinely believe what you're saying thus it is obviously a joke (hell, I did for the longest time), but that's not the case. You are doing harm.

Second (and a much more minor point) : There is plenty of shit that is hilarious that doesn't have to offend. Several years back when I started to learn about this stuff and started to cut terms/jokes from my vocabulary (starting, interestingly enough, in the the exact same way that you say you've stopped using "gay" as an insult), I found that I'd accidentally challenged myself to become a much wittier person. I've become far more creative, and really far more funny, because I decided to stop making casually racist/sexist jokes. They really are the easy way out. It's a byproduct of how ingrained this shit is in our society that all you have to do is say "this minority, amirite?" to get a cheap laugh and feel like a funny person. The laughs I get now are from legitimate creativity and cleverness, and as a joke teller I have to tell you they're infinitely more rewarding. If you want to feel truly funny, cut the easy jokes and challenge yourself to actually be funny. I'm not saying that you're not, nor that anyone who goes for the easy offensive jokes isn't, I'm saying that we don't know yet because they haven't really tried.

EDIT: Oh goddamnit I got accidental-smiley-ed by the forum. I'll leave the crying face up anyway because it makes it seem like I'm sad my second point is less important.

[Twig]

Twig, one thing that confuses me about your position is that you seem dismissive of humour that doesn't offend

I'm not! There's plenty of inoffensive stuff that I find hilarious. That doesn't mean I'm going to suddenly for no reason believe that all humor should be inoffensive.

And, I'm sorry, but you're not going to convince me that I'm wrong.

[miffy495]

I'm not! There's plenty of inoffensive stuff that I find hilarious. That doesn't mean I'm going to suddenly for no reason believe that all humor should be inoffensive.

See point one: "potentially offensive" is different from "targets and (hopefully unwittingly) promotes the further marginalization of a marginalized group". I don't think any of us has a problem with the former.

[Twig]

I don't consider uh poop jokes to be offensive! Stupid, probably. Rude or crude, sure. Offensive, no, not really.

[miffy495]

I don't consider uh poop jokes to be offensive! Stupid, probably. Rude or crude, sure. Offensive, no, not really.

Someone may. Since when has this been about what any one of us personally finds offensive? You said earlier that everything funny could possibly be offensive to someone. I'm just trying to point out that the problem with those jokes isn't that they are possibly offensive, it's that they definitely have a human target. I'm going to stick my neck out here to illustrate my point. Also, trigger warning for those reading: I will be talking about the subject of abortion. You talked about abortion jokes earlier, so I'm going to use that example at the risk of offending someone. I will tell an abortion joke and accept abortion jokes (a certain class of them at any rate, ones which do not target the potential mother) in the presence of people whom I know believe as I do, that a foetus does not count as a person at least until it's out of a womb. If you disagree with this, I'm not trying to start that argument: that's just what I believe. In my mind, those jokes are harmless because the target of them (again, I am referring specifically to jokes where the target it the foetus, not the woman) is not fully a human being. Also for that reason, I will not make (or even really tolerate) these jokes in the presence of someone who's views on this matter are unclear to me. This is because it may be wildly offensive to them or hurtful if they have gone through a traumatizing experience. I'm certainly not going to make a joke on the matter on a public forum such as this. To reiterate, I find abortion jokes permissible with a very select group of people because I do not believe a foetus qualifies a person and am certain that they believe likewise. This matter is still up for debate in society at large. What is not up for debate is that other races, sexual preferences, or genders are people. In order to find jokes which target them acceptable, I think that a similar attitude would have to be adopted. That is, to reject the premise that the group under fire qualifies as people. Even feigning this is still remarkably harmful to that group and encourages those who unironically espouse those views to continue to have them. That's my problem with what you were saying.

And as an aside, "I'm sorry but you're not going to convince me that I'm wrong" reads as a very insincere apology and comes across in a way I'm sure you don't want it to.

[Twig]

It is kind of insincere, and intentionally so. It wasn't really an apology, except in the sense that I'm apologizing to you for wasting your time. You and others keep trying to tell me I'm wrong to believe the way I do! As I think I've displayed, I hold to these beliefs very strongly. Nothing thus far has changed my mind, and you're now only repeating what's already been said, but in a slightly different way. EDIT: And, hah! Thinking on it more, if nothing else, this debate has only further cemented my beliefs.

I make fun of my roommate for being Asian all the goddamn time. I've called him a third-world savage (even though he's obviously not), and made fun of his language skills (even though he speaks perfect English and, in fact, English is one of Singapore's four official languages), and etc. He, likewise, mocks me for being a fat, lazy American. I mean, none of these things are really that... funny. I'll be the first to admit. We're just friends mocking each other. Yet, we're also both undeniably people. If you find this kind of, uhm, "humor" acceptable, I'm going to assume it's because we're friends and that makes it okay. Yet another arbitrary line, much like the one you draw for abortion.

[James]

While you might not necessarily agree with it, you can't accuse Miffy's line of being arbitrary. He established a very clear distinction between what's OK and what's not OK: whether the target of the joke is a person. This is undeniably a meaningful distinction; even if you don't agree with it as a dilineator for acceptable humour, it obviously reflects something of substance and relevance. The (partial) definition of personhood (that to be a person the human organism must have left the womb) is more contentious. It provides a clear and measurable indicator, but the relevance of that indicator I'm could be questioned. Miffy acknowledges that this is the case, and is deliberate and cautious about avoiding accidental collateral emotional damage.

You don't have to agree with Miffy's stance, but to dismiss it as arbitrary is unfair.

[Twig]

I mean it's arbitrary in the sense that everyone's line is different. I thought this was clear, since I said that probably an annoying number of times in one of my posts somewhere. I stand by what I said, although I apologize for any confusion.

[Nachimir]

I don't like at all the idea of 'normalising' ideas; I think it's very dangerous. What needs to happen though, is that everybody should have the responsibility to engage in the dialog that emerges from what they say.

I think in principle I agree. There have always been a handful of friends with whom I could swap really sick jokes, and the makeup of that group has changed over the years: The ones who can't reflect on the significance of what they're doing and how it might affect others have generally become former friends. For every person I've met who can enquire even remotely like the guys in that video above, there's half a dozen more who'll snigger at some heinous and crap racist joke around the dinner table, simply because, tee hee, they're violating a taboo.

There's no goodness and little awareness behind that, and despite what they do, those people have a self-concept of "I'm not racist". The most hurtful shit usually starts with "I'm not [prejudiced], but…", and everyone who is uses that, right up to the most bigoted. It's a phrase about maintaining a fictitious self image rather than any realistic reflection (Twig: I'm not accusing you of that). Even those at the milder, more ignorant end of that scale make those with more extreme prejudices feel at home and further empowered. This is what I mean by giving the worst parts of our cultures a platform.

There's a handful of friends I might share sick jokes with, including a couple of former girlfriends who find them hilarious, but those relationships are a very safe and trusting zone. Even in that area, we tend not to. They're not something we're fans of, and we don't sit reading sickipedia to get more*. A major turning point for me with rape jokes in particular was meeting a woman who (trigger warning)

was a prostitute in the 1970s, and spent a significant chunk of her life being beaten up in hotel rooms whilst having "whore", "slut", "bitch" and "cunt" screamed at her

. Hearing the last of those four words still angers and upsets her. That's not her fault, and her skin isn't too thin: She's deeply traumatised.

It's a problem when that word is so normalised among my friends (regardless of gender). Not that we're in the wrong to use it ever, but that I was very wrong to use it around that woman, despite having no clue what kind of trigger it was until after I'd triggered it. Not knowing how traumatic it would be for her was not an excuse; I owed and gave her a massive apology.

* The idea of strangers anonymously sharing sick, prejudiced or transgressive jokes with each other troubles me because I think it indicates those strangers are naïve at best, actually prejudiced at worst. It's a chunk of culture I really dislike.

My own approach to bullying has always been to grow thicker skin, but it only works up to a point. A former boss of mine bullied me for three years. I thought each instance was lame enough, and he a big enough tosser, that I could just ignore it. It was only near the end of those years I realised that, despite no single incident really bothering me much at all, in aggregate it had worn me down and my motivation to work was lower than ever.

That was a small problem, between straight white guys, that I could leave behind at the office. When you're in a discriminated against group, entire great swathes of the world can wear you down like that, with no malicious intent or verbal content to them. That in turn is especially dispiriting, because there's no clear antagonist, simply: "Just about everything", and little escape. I'd again urge anyone who hasn't to read The Invisible Backpack.

[Gwardinen]

Several years back when I started to learn about this stuff and started to cut terms/jokes from my vocabulary (starting, interestingly enough, in the the exact same way that you say you've stopped using "gay" as an insult), I found that I'd accidentally challenged myself to become a much wittier person. I've become far more creative, and really far more funny, because I decided to stop making casually racist/sexist jokes. They really are the easy way out. It's a byproduct of how ingrained this shit is in our society that all you have to do is say "this minority, amirite?" to get a cheap laugh and feel like a funny person. The laughs I get now are from legitimate creativity and cleverness, and as a joke teller I have to tell you they're infinitely more rewarding. If you want to feel truly funny, cut the easy jokes and challenge yourself to actually be funny. I'm not saying that you're not, nor that anyone who goes for the easy offensive jokes isn't, I'm saying that we don't know yet because they haven't really tried.

I'm not really going to weigh in on the jokes thing in general, partly because I'm not sure what my stance is on many of the points that have been raised and partly because those I do know how I feel about have mostly already been communicated. I wanted to quote this, however, as I have found the particular effect of cutting really base-level, dumb stereotypes out of my joking vocabulary to be beneficial as well. Again, I'm not really referring to anything to do with giving offence, but I do feel like I make better jokes if I don't rely on this stuff, and Twig has also mentioned how a lot of these jokes are just stupid and he tends to ignore them, even if not offended by them, so I think there's common ground for most of us here.

Interestingly it's largely playing Lords Management games that has brought me to this conclusion. Over the past couple of years I've been playing a lot of League of Legends, and now Dota 2, and as most of you know the communities surrounding these games are... imperfect, shall we say. There is a hell of a lot of racism and sexism in them, but the most obvious and prevalent issue is jingoism or xenophobia or however you would like to describe the constant belief in and use of national stereotypes. Since these games attract players from many different countries (particularly when playing on European servers as I tend to), there are a lot of anti-whatever-country insults and stereotypes flying around at all times from many directions. You would think us all having to play these games together would make us more aware of how these other people are actually human beings who we probably have a fair number of shared interests with, judging by the fact that they're apparently spending time doing the very same thing we are! Yet, no, I continue to see pretty aggressive attitudes towards those of other countries at all times, and the continuing use of the tired old stereotypes and "jokes" that come with that have made me lose all taste for them.

So, as a result, I now use them a lot less, even though I only ever used them with people who would not be offended anyway and within the context of being a multi-national, bilingual European myself. One of the side-effects of this is that I feel when I do comment or make jokes about other players or trends in the game, I think it's generally funnier, because I stop for that extra few seconds to wonder if I'm actually saying anything more insightful than than Germans are boring, French are cowardly or Russians are drunk.

[Salacious Snake]

Some of this has made me think about a more basic issue which is divorced from sexism, racism, nationalism (as Gwardinen touches on), etc.

"Razzing" among friends is something that I left behind at some point. I don't even know when it happened or what changed me, but I never bust on people for anything anymore, and I have very little tolerance for other people doing it (to me or anyone else). It's pretty much never funny, and I find that people generally don't like the person whose go-to way of relating to people is making fun of them.

Even the gentlest ribbing tends to be pretty dumb and uncalled for. It has become very normal in certain areas of our culture, but not everyone appreciates it. There's the stereotype of "snarky" geeks who sit around coming up with new ways to insult each other, and I've known people like that. When they're outside of that kind of circle and they still fall back on those tactics with new people, they come off really badly, and nobody wants to deal with them.

Maybe I'm just getting old, but I don't think pointing out the faults (real or otherwise) of another person is particularly endearing.

edit: Didn't mean for this to come out sounding so lofty, like I've ascended to some higher level of enlightenment. It came out like that because I only just realized that I feel this way now while I was writing it, so this post catches me mid-revelation.

[ThunderPeel2001]

Just to add 2c: "Nationalism" = racism. They are one and the same. Races don't really exist. I know this has been covered in massive detail here before, but it's my own little crusade to make people aware that traditional stereotypes surrounding race don't really exist, and they're no different than saying, "British people are drunken maniacs".

[Iosef Stalin]

But British people are drunken maniacs!

I've read like half of this thread, but I ran out of stamina. But it's an interesting topic, and one I was thinking about recently actually. Here's what I don't get about feminism, if we accept that the goal is for women to be equal to men, and not superior to them. If you're a 'feminist writer' who spends half her time writing about women in games or society etc, it doesn't seem to me like that's being equal. I mean most male writers don't spend most of their time talking about what it is to be male, right? Maybe that's because males are dominant in society, a white male is the default mode/character for fiction or whatever, but still.

"I think men and women should be no different. Now excuse me while I spend most of my time talking about how different they are." Huh?

It's just, I don't know, maybe I can't see it because I am white, male from a middle-class background, not grinding poverty etc. But it just isn't interesting to me at all, the whole subject. I'd rather hear about things other than gender and race and so on, by all means tell a story that has those included, but don't make it the whole story. There's a couple of journalists that come to mind here, Leigh Alexander and Laurie Penny. They're really good writers, really interesting to read, but the constant pieces on feminism and about being a woman just turn me the fuck off as a reader. It isn't interesting. Why can't they talk about what it's like to be a person in society rather than being a woman?

I mean I don't identify myself first as a MAN in society, i'm just you know, a guy, a person who is male. I go back to how my favourite novelists, authors are male. Is that because i'm sexist? I don't think so, I think it's because women by and large don't write about the things i'm interested in. Maybe I need to look harder, but generally there aren't that many women writing sci-fi or adventure epics, or good comic books or even interesting character pieces. They all seem to come at it from the perspective of being a woman first, rather than a person looking to write an interesting story.

[Salacious Snake]

You answered your own question:

Maybe that's because males are dominant in society, a white male is the default mode/character for fiction or whatever, but still.

That's not the whole of it, but it's significant.

Historically, even scientific fields like psychology are approached from a distinctly male perspective, using the healthy male psyche as the norm and extrapolating from there. The "female perspective" is in dire need of voicing and exploration on its own.

I'm sorry it turns you off, but Leigh's job isn't to turn you on. It's important stuff, even if you don't personally find it interesting.

[Chris]

Just to add 2c: "Nationalism" = racism. They are one and the same. Races don't really exist. I know this has been covered in massive detail here before, but it's my own little crusade to make people aware that traditional stereotypes surrounding race don't really exist, and they're no different than saying, "British people are drunken maniacs".

I don't really think that's quite true. People can change their national allegiance and identity in a way they can't change their ethnic heritage or skin color. Obviously from a scientific point of view, claims about the relative abilities or qualities of people based on their nationality or their ethnicity are of equal merit (that is to say, none), but I don't think that makes them the same thing in all respects.

[Sal Limones]

If you're a 'feminist writer' who spends half her time writing about women in games or society etc, it doesn't seem to me like that's being equal.

Well somebody has to do it. Men often do not realize what it is like to be a woman, white men often don't realize what it's like to be black/asian/hispanic/whatever, but EVERYBODY knows what it's like to be a white man, because mainstream media is chock full of them, their troubles, their voices, their goals, and their aspirations. Things written from other points of view tend to be automatically categorized as "niche". I will elaborate more on this in a second:

I mean most male writers don't spend most of their time talking about what it is to be male, right? Maybe that's because males are dominant in society, a white male is the default mode/character for fiction or whatever, but still.

[...]

I mean I don't identify myself first as a MAN in society, i'm just you know, a guy, a person who is male.

[...]

Why can't they talk about what it's like to be a person in society rather than being a woman?

This is because you are the default. You are the everyman. You're what is "normal", and everything that deviates from white male is exotic. It's like that question about why there isn't a white history month or a men's history month: it's because you already have the entire year.

If I were to talk about what it's like to be a person in society as myself, I'd be automatically exoticizing the experience without meaning to, to you. Because I am not a man nor am I white, my experience will differ from yours and you may feel that I'm harping on things that are different and that you can't relate to. It's going to stand out, because there isn't nearly as much media out there covering my experience as there is covering yours and the possibilities you have.

I would LOVE to just be a person in society! I strive to do that every day! Unfortunately I am constantly reminded of my status as "woman" when I get honked at by passing cars, cat-called, flirted with (and subsequently yelled at for not reciprocating), being referred to as "sweetie" or "honey" by complete strangers, and so on and so on. These things are all part of my experience and my life story, and removing them would be dishonest and incomplete.

"I think men and women should be no different. Now excuse me while I spend most of my time talking about how different they are." Huh?

Pointing out differences does not equal advocating those differences. If I talk about how certain situations are more difficult for women because of the way society is built, I'm most likely not just observing it for the sake of observing it; I'm pointing out that this difference should not be there, is problematic, or is unnecessary.

I go back to how my favourite novelists, authors are male. Is that because i'm sexist? I don't think so, I think it's because women by and large don't write about the things i'm interested in. Maybe I need to look harder, but generally there aren't that many women writing sci-fi or adventure epics, or good comic books or even interesting character pieces. They all seem to come at it from the perspective of being a woman first, rather than a person looking to write an interesting story.

Most of my favorite writers are men too. That's because there's A LOT OF THEM. Not many women in the fields you mentioned get published, but that doesn't mean they aren't there, or that they aren't good. This may have a lot to do with their automatic niche status; publishers may assume that their market would not be interested in reading stuff about women (even if they aren't actually about women).

I'm only well informed in Art History, so this is the only concrete example I can confidently give you, but: if you pick up an art history book at random, one that doesn't have a stated focus on women artists, you will find that an overwhelming majority of the artists are men. This is not because women are less good at art or less inclined to do it. It's because of the way the institution was and is built to favor men. If you dig a little you can find many women artists that were just as good or BETTER than their contemporaries, but did not make it into the spotlight of history simply because it wasn't deemed proper or, by virtue of them being women, didn't have as much merit or nobility.

Another quick example: Mozart's sister was just as good as he was at a young age, but "from 1769 onwards she was no longer permitted to show her artistic talent on travels with her brother, as she had reached a marriageable age."

One would like to think that these prejudices are gone now, but that is sadly not the case. Many women writers in fantasy and sci-fi use gender-neutral initials, or male pen names.

I recommend you read some Ursula LeGuin, if you haven't already. Her stories are really good, and are not all about being a woman.

[miffy495]

I mean I don't identify myself first as a MAN in society, i'm just you know, a guy, a person who is male.

That's mostly because you're a member of the one group that society is catered to. If you're not a straight white male, you get defined by the characteristics you have which are not those. We get to be members of society rather than female members of society or homosexual members of society or black/asian/whatever members of society. That's the problem. That those others get singled out and are so infrequently represented (or at least represented positively) is why it matters that people who are outside of that relate their experiences. The thing is, most male writers are, by and large, spending most of their time writing about what it is to be male. It just doesn't seem like it because that's the standard.

EDIT: ...and while I was writing Sal laid it out. Oh well, I'll leave it up anyway.

[Salka]

Losef, most female writers don't spend "most of their time" talking about what it is to be female, either. That is an odd misconception you seem to have there. Maybe you think that because the female writers you've taken notice of are the ones who are writing about feminism, because it annoys you? I'm not sure. If you want I can link you to an infinite supply of men writing about what it's like to be men, though. Or you can google for "The Manosphere" yourself and see for yourself. There are people on both sides who are interested in gender in both positive and negative ways, it's not just women.

As for the rest of your post, Wikipedia Brown pretty much pointed out that you answered it yourself. You don't find it interesting but that doesn't mean it's not important or relevant. A lot of people don't find politics interesting.

Similarly a lot of people write about politics as it's a point of interest for them. Different journalists/writers can specialise in different things; sometimes it's sport, sometimes it's war coverage, sometimes it's feminism, sometimes it's politics.

Sometimes people are unnecessarily nettled by the mention of feminism and just want people to shut up about it.

You don't feel you have to identify yourself as A MAN in society because the whole of our patriarchal society is structured around men and being a man anyway. I can't remember where I saw this recently (probably reddit) but a guy posted to say he had once overheard a straight guy and a gay guy arguing. The straight guy asked why gay people have their own clubs and pubs and stuff, and push their own identity so hard, and that he sees that as them segregated themselves from everyone else. The gay guy's response was that everything else in the world is marketed towards straight white males, and it's nice to have something that caters for them, or something a little more poetic than this. I have worded it way less awesomely.

I mean look at this bullshit: http://www.enewman.c...ot-a-girl-thing

This is totally fucking normal in our society. Do you understand how patronising that is?? You go into a toy shop and there's a pink aisle full of dolls for girls, and a blue aisle full of science stuff and lego for boys. This is why feminism is an important topic, because without people who pushed out new ideas and forced people to think and debate about this sort of thing, it would go unchecked. You don't like it, you don't have to read it, but I don't understand why people get genuinely annoyed when they have to skip over an article about feminism. Fucking typical women, having a moan about being patronised, oppressed and belittled in society, eh? Meanwhile there are a gazillion articles about everything else that you probably don't read either, but don't feel the need to be annoyed about just because they exist outside your area of interest. I'm sorry if this sounds abrupt and annoyed, I'm not annoyed, I'm just being very lazy about constructing my posts.

EDIT: Everyone just replied a lot more eloquently than me anyway.

[MrHoatzin]

I like how you stone cold called the dude a Losef.

[Salka]

Thanks for the link Nach. Interesting bit about white privilege too, I rarely have to think about that but it's totally comparable to the male privilege thing. Having to go that extra mile to prove yourself just because you're a woman, or people making assumptions about your abilities because you are... I've been in work at the guitar shop for about two hours now and already I've had one person incredulously ask if I can 'actually play' guitar

But yeah, crazy to think of that being a thing that also happens just due to skin colour. I remember reading about a test recently where people - average, non-racist people - were asked to press a button corresponding to 'good' or 'bad' when they were shown the photographs of the faces of black or white people. When asked to press 'good' for white and 'bad' for black, peoples reaction speeds were fast. However, when people were asked to press 'good' for black and 'bad' for white, they hesitated and their reaction speeds were noticeably slower. At an unconscious level, people were showing more difficulty attributing 'good' to black faces and 'bad' to white faces. I think this link has more on that study: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/background/faqs.html

Here's another awesome one regarding feminism that I recommend reading: http://mattgemmell.com/2012/04/20/misogyny/

Twig, you should give it a look as well. It's written by a guy so it highlights a lot of things that ordinarily might not come to mind because, as guys, you just don't get confronted with this stuff in the way that women do. It probably explains things far better than I ever could, and by a guy who is also a Feminist.

[BigJKO]

Here's another awesome one regarding feminism that I recommend reading: http://mattgemmell.c...04/20/misogyny/

That is an excellent article.

I wish I'd never seen those NSFW links, though. I can't say I'm surprised something like this exists on the internet, but seeing those reddit groups with my own eyes (and seeing them link to other equally disgusting communities) it just.. I have no words for how it felt. Physically ill.

[Iosef Stalin]

Alright, well I don't disagree on any particular point.

[Gwardinen]

Yeah that was mostly quite an interesting article. Two things that stuck out for me:

"My rights as a person end where yours begin." - That's a really neat, succinct way of putting it. I'm certain I could find a way in which it was flawed in some situation, but then all "golden rules" are. Still, it's a very elegant statement.

Those retro ads! Holy shit! Sometimes I forget how far we really have come in a comparatively short space of time. Some of those adverts are bizarrely aggressive and derogatory.

Also, yeah, BigJKO, I sat there and thought about it for 20 seconds or so before clicking on the first NSFW reddit link, and after I saw that one (the misogyny category) I decided I didn't need to see the other two, as they could only be worse. I originally decided to look at the first one because I think exposing myself to viewpoints I don't agree with is often a good thing, but firstly I already know that kind of stuff exists on the internet and secondly there isn't much "viewpoint" there to learn from. I had been hoping for some real communication that I could analyse, but that isn't really that kind of place.

[ThunderPeel2001]

I don't really think that's quite true. People can change their national allegiance and identity in a way they can't change their ethnic heritage or skin color. Obviously from a scientific point of view, claims about the relative abilities or qualities of people based on their nationality or their ethnicity are of equal merit (that is to say, none), but I don't think that makes them the same thing in all respects.

Yep, you're right, but I was referring to discriminating against someone because of their nationality. Someone who's going to do that is unlikely to change their mind about someone because they have a new passport, and such prejudices are equal to racism, scientifically speaking.