The radical idea that women are people

Things that don't belong anywhere else. (Check first).

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Quixotess
No. Cookies.
Posts: 3243
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 7:26 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Quixotess » Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:16 pm UTC

Keep in mind we're not arguing that this applies to our society, or not right now we aren't. This is hypothetical UberPatriarchy society, or actually probably Past Society When All Women Were Bought And Sold.
Raise up the torch and light the way.

User avatar
Moo
Oh man! I'm going to be so rebellious! I'm gonna...
Posts: 6438
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:15 pm UTC
Location: Beyond the goblin city
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Moo » Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:18 pm UTC

If I'm right, these last few posts are all under the discussion of radical feminism, and not necessarily being advocated - just an intellectual exercise.
Proverbs 9:7-8 wrote:Anyone who rebukes a mocker will get an insult in return. Anyone who corrects the wicked will get hurt. So don't bother correcting mockers; they will only hate you.
Hawknc wrote:FFT: I didn't realise Proverbs 9:7-8 was the first recorded instance of "haters gonna hate"

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby bigglesworth » Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:32 pm UTC

Oh, I realise that.

Although I have since changed my mind, considering that ancient Athens had very low amount of freedom for women, but greater freedoms for men. I was thinking of a patriarchal society that was also feudal or something, with lower freedoms for men as well. Whereas Athens had greater intellectual freedom for men, so I think that your hypothetical point might stand by itself.
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

User avatar
Moo
Oh man! I'm going to be so rebellious! I'm gonna...
Posts: 6438
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:15 pm UTC
Location: Beyond the goblin city
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Moo » Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:41 pm UTC

A, aha, ahahaha. Don't you just hate when you respond to what you thought was the last post in a thread but it turns out it was just the last post on that page?

I was just pointing it out to crowey, as I didn't know if Quix was awake (what you doing awake girl??) but turns out she ninja'd me and I didn't even know (because, you know, I'm a dumbass).
Proverbs 9:7-8 wrote:Anyone who rebukes a mocker will get an insult in return. Anyone who corrects the wicked will get hurt. So don't bother correcting mockers; they will only hate you.
Hawknc wrote:FFT: I didn't realise Proverbs 9:7-8 was the first recorded instance of "haters gonna hate"

User avatar
Belial
A terrible sound heard from a distance
Posts: 30450
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:04 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Belial » Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:45 pm UTC

crowey wrote:I don't like the implication that any choice a woman makes is only a product of the patriarchy and nothing to do with her own thoughts, but any choice a man makes is just his choice.
Maybe I misunderstood the analogy... :?


Which is, in fact, one of the problems with that model. Unless you're willing to buy a pretty serious and nonsensical double standard (that society controls women entirely, but men are free to do whatever they want), then *everyone* is just a mindless tool of the patriarchy, and the only way out of it is to do the exact opposite of what the patriarchy wants.

Which would make you a mindless tool of the patriarchy, just the other way.
addams wrote:A drunk neighbor is better than a sober Belial.


They/them

User avatar
Quixotess
No. Cookies.
Posts: 3243
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 7:26 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Quixotess » Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:46 pm UTC

Moo wrote:(what you doing awake girl??)

<.<
>.>

I keep oversleeping and missing my classes, so the new plan is to stay up all night, go to class, act like that was the end of the day, then go to sleep. Being nocturnal, basically. It's probably the worst idea ever, but I can always reorient myself on the weekend.

Ha ha! This is general and I can be off-topic. I feel so renegade.

Moo wrote:turns out she ninja'd me and I didn't even know (because, you know, I'm a dumbass).

Always good to have reinforcements.
Raise up the torch and light the way.

lauredhel
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 11:00 pm UTC

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby lauredhel » Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:48 pm UTC

If I'm right, these last few posts are all under the discussion of radical feminism, and not necessarily being advocated - just an intellectual exercise.



This is also not a belief that is essential to radical feminism in any way, shape or form. Lest people think the two are synonymous or something.

And the people who the "all heterosexual sex is rape" statement is typically attributed to, Catharine Mackinnon and Andrea Dworkin, didn't say it.

http://radgeek.com/gt/2006/02/19/misquotation_in/

User avatar
Quixotess
No. Cookies.
Posts: 3243
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 7:26 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Quixotess » Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:53 pm UTC

On a related note, Intercourse was probably the best book I've read all year. Not saying I agreed with Dworkin on everything, but shit that woman could write. You all should read it.

(Also, hi lauredhal! You're here again and that's neat!)
Raise up the torch and light the way.

User avatar
PictureSarah
Secretary of Penile Nomenclature
Posts: 4576
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 8:37 pm UTC
Location: Sacramento, CA
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby PictureSarah » Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:57 pm UTC

I can understand the thought that any choice I make is influenced by the patriarchy, but really, I feel somewhat insulted by that. I want to be given more credit than that. Honestly, I've been sitting here racking my brain for decisions I make, both small and large, trying to find actions that were a direct result of or influenced by any pressure or opression that I've felt from a man/men/male-driven society...and there are some. Small and large. But for *most* of them, that isn't a factor. In fact, the older I get, the less it is a factor. Especially any recent sexual decisions I've made. Generally I'm the one initiating sex, and consent is not even a question. When it is a question (for either party) "No" is stated clearly, and accepted immediately.
"A ship is safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."

crowey
That's DOCTOR Crowey, to you
Posts: 1603
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 10:52 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby crowey » Thu Nov 06, 2008 1:36 pm UTC

Quix and Moo, I realise it's a hypothetical extreme (presumably made originally to illustrate the point that we are all creations of the systems we live in), but I still dislike the argument, it doesn't make any logical sense to me:

Belial wrote:Which is, in fact, one of the problems with that model. Unless you're willing to buy a pretty serious and nonsensical double standard (that society controls women entirely, but men are free to do whatever they want), then *everyone* is just a mindless tool of the patriarchy, and the only way out of it is to do the exact opposite of what the patriarchy wants.

Which would make you a mindless tool of the patriarchy, just the other way.


I don't understand how even if the woman thinks she is making a decision for herself she isn't, but if a man makes any decision it is purely his own.

Monty40xi
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:55 pm UTC
Location: Iowa, USA

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Monty40xi » Thu Nov 06, 2008 1:38 pm UTC

Quixotess wrote:
Monty40xi wrote:You don't have to believe a stereotype's at all valid in order to tell someone they're reinforcing it. It can be a well-known but completely false stereotype.

OK. Let me try this again.

How about the stereotype that all feminists are fat and hairy-legged?

Do you see what's problematic about even telling me, as a fat feminist, that I am reinforcing that stereotype? Even if you claim not to believe it? Do you see how you're buying into that frame? Do you see how even addressing the frame in any other context than "this is a completely bogus frame wtf is wrong with you?" reinforces that frame? Do you see how you're playing the other person's game? What about telling a thin feminist you're glad she's a feminist, because it will help debunk that stereotype? Do you see how you're still playing the other person's game?

And do you see how kinigget's statement only works because it is a frame that most people buy into? How I can't really say Pandercolour is helping prove that all men are hateful ignorant bigots, because there's not a narrative for that and everyone can immediately see how ridiculous that statement is? Because it is accepted that you can generalize all feminists from one feminist, and it is not accepted that you can generalize all men from one man. Do you see how even saying that is contributing to the pressures that I personally feel to say "I'm a feminist, but not one of those feminists"? And how messed up that is?

If it was a physical stereotype (and "feminists are fat" is a new one to me), then that's different. There's no way someone could accuse you of perpetuating a physical stereotype without it meaning that they believe it's completely true in your case, so for those I'll agree with you.

But for stereotypes of actions and attitudes, I still say you can tell someone "you're perpetuating stereotype X" while believing stereotype X is crap. In fact, when it's coming from a fellow member of the stereotyped group, it almost always means you believe the stereotype is crap and you're sick of dealing with the misconception from the rest of the world day after day. It's like a mainstream Christian telling someone with a "God hates Fags" sign that they're perpetuating a stereotype of hate-spewing sign wavers. It's like the mixed group of white and Arab Americans at a McCain rally a few weeks ago who told a megaphone-toting Koran-basher that he was perpetuating a stereotype of right wing racism. The whole reason the people in those examples even mention a stereotype is because they're sick of the misconceptions and want to end them.
Occam's Quandary: any idea can be made to sound like the simpler one.

User avatar
Quixotess
No. Cookies.
Posts: 3243
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 7:26 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Quixotess » Thu Nov 06, 2008 2:50 pm UTC

Monty40xi wrote:But for stereotypes of actions and attitudes, I still say you can tell someone "you're perpetuating stereotype X" while believing stereotype X is crap.

Ah, I see you missed my second paragraph there, wherein I assert that no matter how much you *say* you think a stereotype is bunk, you can't accuse someone of reinforcing it without reinforcing it yourself. And by doing so, you're erasing the oppressor's role in creating that stereotype, as if the stereotype would go away if there were no man-hating feminists.

Quixotess wrote:And do you see how kinigget's statement only works because it is a frame that most people buy into? How I can't really say Pandercolour is helping prove that all men are hateful ignorant bigots, because there's not a narrative for that and everyone can immediately see how ridiculous that statement is? Because it is accepted that you can generalize all feminists from one feminist, and it is not accepted that you can generalize all men from one man. Do you see how even saying that is contributing to the pressures that I personally feel to say "I'm a feminist, but not one of those feminists"? And how messed up that is?


(Funnily enough, there is a discussion of immediate relevance on the comment thread of this post at Shakesville re: media criticism of Michelle Obama's dress.)
Raise up the torch and light the way.

Monty40xi
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:55 pm UTC
Location: Iowa, USA

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Monty40xi » Thu Nov 06, 2008 3:18 pm UTC

Quixotess wrote:
Monty40xi wrote:But for stereotypes of actions and attitudes, I still say you can tell someone "you're perpetuating stereotype X" while believing stereotype X is crap.

Ah, I see you missed my second paragraph there, wherein I assert that no matter how much you *say* you think a stereotype is bunk, you can't accuse someone of reinforcing it without reinforcing it yourself. And by doing so, you're erasing the oppressor's role in creating that stereotype, as if the stereotype would go away if there were no man-hating feminists.

Quixotess wrote:And do you see how kinigget's statement only works because it is a frame that most people buy into? How I can't really say Pandercolour is helping prove that all men are hateful ignorant bigots, because there's not a narrative for that and everyone can immediately see how ridiculous that statement is? Because it is accepted that you can generalize all feminists from one feminist, and it is not accepted that you can generalize all men from one man. Do you see how even saying that is contributing to the pressures that I personally feel to say "I'm a feminist, but not one of those feminists"? And how messed up that is?

I saw your assertion, and I disagree with it. Telling someone to knock off a behavior before other people judge both of you negatively by it is not a reinforcement of it. It is not erasing the oppressor's role, either - it's the necessary second half of ending the stereotype. Half one, provide fewer examples of it. Half two, get other people to realize it's not valid. It's not that the stereotype of man-hating feminists will instantly disappear if there are none, it's that the stereotype can't disappear as long as there's a certain critical mass of highly visible ones.

I'm a fraternity alum, and I'm bothered by the stupid drunk fratboy stereotype. However, I know that the stereotype's never going to go away as long as ~10% of fraternity men get stupid and drunk around other people. When I tell T-Bone to put down the beer, turn down his collar and stop being such an idiot, I'm not absolving anyone of their mistake in judging me by his behavior, but I don't realistically expect them to change their minds as long as still see a jerk like T-Bone once in a while.
Last edited by Monty40xi on Thu Nov 06, 2008 3:36 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Occam's Quandary: any idea can be made to sound like the simpler one.

User avatar
Noc
Put on her robe and wizard hat ALL NIGHT LONG
Posts: 1339
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:36 pm UTC
Location: Within a 50 mile radius.
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Noc » Thu Nov 06, 2008 3:35 pm UTC

Monty40xi wrote:I saw your assertion, and I disagree with it. Telling someone to knock off a behavior before other people judge both of you negatively by it is not a reinforcement of it. It is not erasing the oppressor's role, either - it's the necessary second half of ending the stereotype. Half one, provide fewer examples of it. Half two, get other people to realize it's not valid. It's not that the stereotype of man-hating feminists will instantly disappear if there are none, it's that the stereotype can't disappear as long as there's a certain critical mass of highly visible ones.

What? No. That's not how it works at all.

The reason you get stereotypes in the first place is because you're generalizing the actions of a group from the behavior of a small sample size. It's essentially a unfounded logical leap thats unsupported by any real evidence. And simply by how things work, the most visible samples of a group are likely to be the most vocal, or the most angry, or the most destructive . . . or the most unusual. Which you will always get, and will always be more visible than their more subdued counterparts.

You get rid of stereotypes by providing counterexamples, to expand the sample to include examples that are better indicators of the group as a whole, and explaining how unfounded the conclusion they're drawing is.

Example: "I'll stop thinking black people are all latent criminals if they stop mugging me." It's clearly an unfounded conclusion in the first place, and there will always be a level of criminality among any demographic. So, the way to combat stereotypes of criminality for black people is not to, you know, increase police presence in predominantly black neighborhoods to try and make doubly sure that they can't hurt anybody. For what should be obvious reasons.
Have you given up?

Monty40xi
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:55 pm UTC
Location: Iowa, USA

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Monty40xi » Thu Nov 06, 2008 3:41 pm UTC

Noc wrote:Your method is basically akin to saying "I'll stop thinking black people are all latent criminals if they stop mugging me." It's clearly an unfounded conclusion in the first place, and there will always be a level of criminality among any demographic. So, the way to combat stereotypes of criminality for black people is not to, you know, increase police presence in predominantly black neighborhoods to try and make doubly sure that they can't hurt anybody. For what should be obvious reasons.

No, you don't combat the stereotype by filling the neighborhood with cops. But you also don't blame the guy who tells his friend "put down the knife, I'm not letting you mug that guy" for somehow contributing to the stereotype. We're demonizing the person who's trying to minimize the negative stereotypical behavior, and that's silly.
Occam's Quandary: any idea can be made to sound like the simpler one.

User avatar
Quixotess
No. Cookies.
Posts: 3243
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 7:26 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Quixotess » Thu Nov 06, 2008 3:43 pm UTC

Monty40xi wrote:but I don't realistically expect them to change their minds as long as still see a jerk like T-Bone once in a while.

Here's where you buy into the stereotype. "How could anyone look at T-Bone (by the way, wtf?) and not see a drunken frat boy? How could anyone not identify him as a frat boy above all his other identities?" That's your internalized attitude. Perhaps it is not "realistic" to expect everyone to change their attitudes, but that is in no way the responsibility of T-Bone, drunken lout though he may be.
Raise up the torch and light the way.

User avatar
Noc
Put on her robe and wizard hat ALL NIGHT LONG
Posts: 1339
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:36 pm UTC
Location: Within a 50 mile radius.
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Noc » Thu Nov 06, 2008 3:49 pm UTC

Monty40xi wrote:No, you don't combat the stereotype by filling the neighborhood with cops. But you also don't blame the guy who tells his friend "put down the knife, I'm not letting you mug that guy" for somehow contributing to the stereotype. We're demonizing the person who's trying to minimize the negative stereotypical behavior, and that's silly.

Ummm.

Attacking someone once they have already made an impression doesn't keep them from having made that impression. If someone tries to mug me, and Batman drops out of nowhere and prevents him, that guy still tried to mug me. I am still going to remember that I was about to be mugged by this fellow, and I'll be just as likely to draw the conclusions I would whether he'd succeeded or not. There may be less pure psychological impact; less behaviorally reinforced fear, for instance. But stereotypes are issues of sample size and generalization, and attacking the sample in question during and after the fact is not going to prevent them from being used as a sample.

This is a good thing, because I'm not being mugged. But saying that Batman saving my ass from a mugger is going to help me not assign criminality among the mugger's ethnicity is a little silly. In the same way, attacking and demonizing the radical elements of any group is not going to combat the negative stereotypes based on their behavior.
Have you given up?

Monty40xi
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:55 pm UTC
Location: Iowa, USA

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Monty40xi » Thu Nov 06, 2008 3:59 pm UTC

Quixotess wrote:
Monty40xi wrote:but I don't realistically expect them to change their minds as long as still see a jerk like T-Bone once in a while.

Here's where you buy into the stereotype. "How could anyone look at T-Bone (by the way, wtf?) and not see a drunken frat boy? How could anyone not identify him as a frat boy above all his other identities?" That's your internalized attitude. Perhaps it is not "realistic" to expect everyone to change their attitudes, but that is in no way the responsibility of T-Bone, drunken lout though he may be.
Responsibility or not, I'm well within my rights to tell him to knock it off because I'm sick of dealing with the consequences of his actions. I don't care whether it's really his job, or my job, or the bystander's job to change the stereotype - I'm in a position to do something, so I will.

(if your "wtf" was for the name, we tend to give each other official nicknames for fun. Sometimes they're really that bad, and sometimes they're slightly more sensible, like, say, "Monty.")

Noc - are you then going to be mad at Batman if he told the mugger "you're making Gotham City look bad"? That's what we're talking about - whether the person who's directly confronting the stereotypical behavior as it occurs is also doing something wrong. Whether it's wrong to tell someone "your behavior is reflecting badly on both of us."
Last edited by Monty40xi on Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:04 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Occam's Quandary: any idea can be made to sound like the simpler one.

User avatar
sophyturtle
I'll go put my shirt back on for this kind of shock. No I won't. I'll get my purse.
Posts: 3474
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 4:19 pm UTC
Location: it's turtles all the way down, even in the suburbs
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby sophyturtle » Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:06 pm UTC

That leads to a question I have.
What about feminists is really that bad? DO we have 'man hating' feminists running round with baseball bats and megaphones yelling and beating up people? The worst you have is someone telling you to look at what you are doing right? Introspection is so offensive we become a hated part of society?

I realize no one likes being judged. But guess what? I am judged every day. And so are you. When someone points out a fault of mine that is actually a fault and not just a less socially desirable physical trait I will be fucking thrilled! It will mean I will have moved up from being in the social position of ornament to something closer to a person. Being complimented physically and being complimented for good parts of my personality happen in a ratio I dislike. To the point I can remember the time a stranger complimented how I was acting (by giving up my seat on the train 3 times in one ride) vs the many 'compliments' on my physical appearance (which at times are sexual harassment).

SO when I finally say "STOP!" to a world that has been on my ass my whole life how am I really doing harm? Because the drunk guy? Big drunk guys have tried many times to do bad things to me and my friends. That's why I avoid groups of them. Actually, I avoid groups of men that I don't know as a rule. I am *literally* less safe there.
Why is this stereo type of angry women so fucking offensive and so fucking hard to shake? Because frat boys are reclaiming their image and if you are afraid of racial minorities you are racist. You can be a black man and be president, but women are 'power hungry' when they even try to run.
Why are women so easy to marginalize? Because in the past, it was because we did not stand up for ourselves. Now it seems it is because we stand up for ourselves.
I want to get to a place where I am neither conforming nor rebelling but simply being.

User avatar
dubsola
Posts: 2325
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 11:55 am UTC
Location: Sunny Snakeville

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby dubsola » Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:11 pm UTC

Quixotess wrote:(Funnily enough, there is a discussion of immediate relevance on the comment thread of this post at Shakesville re: media criticism of Michelle Obama's dress.)

I don't quite see the relevance of the comment thread, granted I've only read up to the comment at 8:26 AM.

But I *did* notice a newspaper article here in the UK writing about her dress, and hereby express distaste for said article. The good thing is I noticed it without having been prompted to do so, which may well mean that this stuff is sinking in. It's a pretty decent newspaper as far as journalism goes (The Independant, for anyone in the UK), which makes it pretty disappointing to see that article. Think I should write them a letter?

User avatar
Quixotess
No. Cookies.
Posts: 3243
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 7:26 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Quixotess » Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:11 pm UTC

Monty40xi wrote: Responsibility or not, I'm well within my rights to tell him to knock it off because I'm sick of dealing with the consequences of his actions. I don't care whether it's really his job, or my job, or the bystander's job to change the stereotype - I'm in a position to do something, so I will.

No! Bad! This is where you're wrong, and why I was right to say you do buy into that stereotype no matter how much you say you don't. That stereotype is in no way the consequence of the actions of any drunken frat boy. To pull it back to the original issue, the stereotype of manhating feminists is in no way the consequence of any man-hater, distateful though their actions are. It is the consequence of society pulling one trait and identifying it with one group of the infinite groups every person belongs to and saying, hey, this is a correlation! You're still buying into this arbitrary, wrong framing. Your ire is directed in entirely the wrong direction, and for that I do hold you accountable.

And not only are you putting the responsibility for the stereotype on the shoulders of man-haters, you are also putting the burden on me as a feminist to not do anything that might even appear man-hating, despite the fact that people will try to fit in my behavior with the stereotype no matter whether it fits or not, because of all the people reinforcing it. These people include you! See?
Raise up the torch and light the way.

User avatar
Noc
Put on her robe and wizard hat ALL NIGHT LONG
Posts: 1339
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:36 pm UTC
Location: Within a 50 mile radius.
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Noc » Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:29 pm UTC

Monty40xi wrote:Noc - are you then going to be mad at Batman if he told the mugger "you're making Gotham City look bad"? That's what we're talking about - whether the person who's directly confronting the stereotypical behavior as it occurs is also doing something wrong. Whether it's wrong to tell someone "your behavior is reflecting badly on both of us."

For the record: "Will you be mad at" and "Will this help to combat the stereotype" are two different questions. I will answer them both!

- No, I will not be angry at Batman for saving my ass from being mugged. I will not be angry at him whether or not he makes a little patronizing speech towards the offender during the process. I am generally glad not to be mugged, and he's the goddamn Batman.

- And yes, the claim that injecting this little speech is somehow helping to get rid of the stereotype is unfounded. It's silly, and smacks of rationalization.
Have you given up?

User avatar
Quixotess
No. Cookies.
Posts: 3243
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 7:26 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Quixotess » Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:34 pm UTC

To pull another example, imagine if some man on these fora confessed to raping a woman and feeling great about it. Let's imagine this is a bizarro world where such a statement is not deleted fucking immediately. Now I come in and tell this guy "shame on you! for reinforcing the belief that all men are rapists!"

Edit to make my point more explicit:

How many men jump on me IMMEDIATELY? "How fucking dare you associate me with this scum?" they say.

And I say "But I'm saying it's a false stereotype!"

And they say "yeah, okay, no one was even thinking that until you brought it up. You are the one who made the association, and for no good reason."

And they also say "dude, your biggest problem with a rapist is that he's playing into some sort of stereotype? how fucked up is that? How about the problem is that he raped somebody?"
Raise up the torch and light the way.

User avatar
Toeofdoom
The (Male) Skeleton Guitarist
Posts: 3446
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:06 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Toeofdoom » Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:39 pm UTC

Took me a while to catch on to what your side of the argument was, quix (probably because I skipped pages 10-13), but I think another way to put it is this: You shouldn't be telling that guy not to mug people because he's "reinforcing a stereotype". You should tell him not to mug people because he shouldn't fucking mug someone.

So basically the best way to remove a stereotype is not to refer to it at all, or remind anyone that it exists. Slowly they'll forget about it or overwrite it with information that disproves it.

Ah, it appears I was ninjaed a bit, but I shall post anyway.
Hawknc wrote:Gotta love our political choices here - you can pick the unionised socially conservative party, or the free-market even more socially conservative party. Oh who to vote for…I don't know, I think I'll just flip a coin and hope it explodes and kills me.

Website

Monty40xi
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:55 pm UTC
Location: Iowa, USA

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Monty40xi » Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:44 pm UTC

Quix, sorry for missing your point. After my last post I had to run a little errand in another part of the building, and as I was walking it dawned on me that you're saying there's a problem with the fact that I could have thought T-Bone reflected badly on men, or on Americans, or on his family, but I chose to see it as a fraternity thing. With a scenario as ambiguous as what I gave, you're right.

Context matters, and there are some contexts where I wouldn't have seen it as a fraternity thing. If he and I were in Berlin and we weren't wearing anything with Greek letters on it, I wouldn't be worried about fraternity stereotypes and I wouldn't interpret his actions the same way. I'd be worried about American stereotypes in that situation. But, yeah, you're right that when we're in a situation where any given person can be seen in a dozen different lights, it's a bad sign to lock onto one specifically as I did.

In our original case, we're talking about this specific forum thread, dedicated to a discussion of feminism, and in that context what we say is going to reflect on our genders and on our ideologies about gender. In this specific thread at this specific time, it's not a ridiculous leap to say people's words are going to be seen as part of their views of feminism. If this was a different thread - say, one about political parties - and Pandercolour was talking about the need to bust some heads, then it would be irrational and wrong to interpret that as violent feminism.

EDIT: The mugging/rape metaphors shouldn't be taken too far because those are crimes, and more than reputations are being damaged. Of course the proper reaction to THOSE ought to be about the fact that they're not something we can allow from anyone.
Last edited by Monty40xi on Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:51 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Occam's Quandary: any idea can be made to sound like the simpler one.

User avatar
Noc
Put on her robe and wizard hat ALL NIGHT LONG
Posts: 1339
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:36 pm UTC
Location: Within a 50 mile radius.
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Noc » Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:50 pm UTC

Toeofdoom: No, you need to talk about stereotypes when they become relevant. Because stereotyping is something that you're doing, and it's something that you're doing wrongly, and you need to examine it to be able to deal with it.

But the point is that the root issue with the stereotype isn't the people who are "perpetuating" it by acting accordingly. The fact that people do those things is a problem, but it's a problem of its own and needs to be addressed on its own terms. The problem is that the act of stereotyping is something that the person doing the stereotyping does. If someone thinks that all men are basically rapists, or that all black people are basically criminals, then the problem is that they are making an unfounded generalization based on an insufficient or misleading sample size. The problem is not rape, or criminality in minorities; these are problems, but they are different problems from the stereotype.

So to address the problems, you address the problems and the people performing them. And to address the stereotype, you address the people holding the stereotype. If you're stereotyping that all black people are criminals, you are doing something wrong regardless of whether criminality among minorities is a problem or not.

[Oh, I was ninja'd too. I'll edit in a response once I've read the relevant post. And had breakfast, probably.]
Have you given up?

User avatar
Quixotess
No. Cookies.
Posts: 3243
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 7:26 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Quixotess » Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:51 pm UTC

Monty40xi wrote:But, yeah, you're right that when we're in a situation where any given person can be seen in a dozen different lights, it's a bad sign to lock onto one specifically as I did.

Hooray!

Monty40xi wrote:In our original case, we're talking about this specific forum thread, dedicated to a discussion of feminism, and in that context what we say is going to reflect on our genders and on our ideologies about gender.

Underline, yes. Bold, no. Anyone reading this thread can see that people of both genders have widely varying views on feminism and feminists, and that feminists have widely varying views on feminism and feminists, and therefore to take the views of any one "feminist" (scare quotes because I believe Pandercolour is a troll who only wants to derail productive discussions on feminism, probably because he hates women) or any man or any woman as reflective of all feminists, men, or women, is indeed stereotyping. Certainly what someone says can be taken to reflect their individual views, though.
Raise up the torch and light the way.

User avatar
Toeofdoom
The (Male) Skeleton Guitarist
Posts: 3446
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:06 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Toeofdoom » Thu Nov 06, 2008 4:59 pm UTC

Noc wrote:Toeofdoom: No, you need to talk about stereotypes when they become relevant. Because stereotyping is something that you're doing, and it's something that you're doing wrongly, and you need to examine it to be able to deal with it.


Okay, that makes sense, I wasn't thinking entirely outside the previous context of that situation where the stereotype is reinforced. I'll try thinking some more when it isn't 4 am :S
Hawknc wrote:Gotta love our political choices here - you can pick the unionised socially conservative party, or the free-market even more socially conservative party. Oh who to vote for…I don't know, I think I'll just flip a coin and hope it explodes and kills me.

Website

User avatar
kinigget
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:56 pm UTC
Location: the wild wild west

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby kinigget » Thu Nov 06, 2008 5:10 pm UTC

okay quixotess, I finally see your point. and yes I agree that it was a rather silly thing of me to do, but I ted to do silly things when I'm angry, maybe I should try just not letting it get to me?

p.s. it seems that since I complained about being ignored, nearly every post I make starts a major discussion, I don't think I'm going to be doing any more complaining anywhere in the future.
The Mighty Thesaurus wrote:I can tell from his word choice that he is using his penis to type.

Steax wrote:I think the courts are kinda busy right now. Something about cake and due process.

User avatar
Yuri2356
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 1:00 pm UTC

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Yuri2356 » Thu Nov 06, 2008 6:49 pm UTC

Quixotess wrote:So what I'm getting from this is that you feel terrible about the fact that you might rape someone without knowing it.

That about does it.
But it's still...sort of...feels like something you can fix?

Of course. But it still takes time to work the bugs out. Vigilance easily mutates into paranoia.

User avatar
sophyturtle
I'll go put my shirt back on for this kind of shock. No I won't. I'll get my purse.
Posts: 3474
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 4:19 pm UTC
Location: it's turtles all the way down, even in the suburbs
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby sophyturtle » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:00 pm UTC

I just heard about how not only do women get paid less, but we have to pay more for health insurance.
I wanted to raise a little awareness about it, since it seems to me that will be the first step in getting it changed.
I want to get to a place where I am neither conforming nor rebelling but simply being.

Monty40xi
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:55 pm UTC
Location: Iowa, USA

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Monty40xi » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:09 pm UTC

sophyturtle wrote:I just heard about how not only do women get paid less, but we have to pay more for health insurance.
I wanted to raise a little awareness about it, since it seems to me that will be the first step in getting it changed.

Hm. The article's got some people saying the cost difference is exactly in line with women's more frequent use of health care services, and it's got some people saying it's not. That's really not enough for me to take a position.
Occam's Quandary: any idea can be made to sound like the simpler one.

User avatar
sophyturtle
I'll go put my shirt back on for this kind of shock. No I won't. I'll get my purse.
Posts: 3474
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 4:19 pm UTC
Location: it's turtles all the way down, even in the suburbs
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby sophyturtle » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:14 pm UTC

a different of over 30% cannot be explained by maternity care and an annual pap.
Also, the idea that because women use insurance so we have to pay more for it? I see this as flawed.
Marcia D. Greenberger, co-president of the National Women’s Law Center, an advocacy group that has examined hundreds of individual policies, said: “The wide variation in premiums could not possibly be justified by actuarial principles. We should not tolerate women having to pay more for health insurance, just as we do not tolerate the practice of using race as a factor in setting rates.”

When they try to charge blacks more because of higher rates of heart disease and the like it is racism, but charging women more is okay? Do you see my point of irritation?
Last edited by sophyturtle on Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:23 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
I want to get to a place where I am neither conforming nor rebelling but simply being.

T-Form
Posts: 240
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 11:16 pm UTC

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby T-Form » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:22 pm UTC

Well, it might be possible to justify discriminatory rates within a neo-liberal/free market model, but to me it simply reveals that the model itself is unjust. As I understand it, men get screwed on vehicle insurance using a similar justification. Insurance should cost the same for everyone, regardless of supposed risk - especially in the case of health insurance, because that should be about providing a guarantee that you can get back to a "healthy" state, which is something that everyone should have fair access to.

User avatar
sophyturtle
I'll go put my shirt back on for this kind of shock. No I won't. I'll get my purse.
Posts: 3474
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 4:19 pm UTC
Location: it's turtles all the way down, even in the suburbs
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby sophyturtle » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:25 pm UTC

Here they are not even talking about risk. How dare women use more preventative stuff so they are less likely to need big life saving (often more expensive) stuff. Charge them more!

And yes, car insurance inequalities are also unfair (it was my understanding that the rates were only higher for men through the teen years and equaled out some in the early 20's but I could be wrong). Still, this is for a luxury (owning a car vs owning a body). I don't even plan of having children. I had minor surgery to save me from that for the next 10 years. Still, I do not get a discount because I will not breed. This is a way for them to make more money, so they are doing it.
I want to get to a place where I am neither conforming nor rebelling but simply being.

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby bigglesworth » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:29 pm UTC

Personally I think it might be more to do with how women in general view risk - they're going to pay for health insurance whatever, whereas at the same price a man might not bother.
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

Monty40xi
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:55 pm UTC
Location: Iowa, USA

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Monty40xi » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:33 pm UTC

sophyturtle wrote:a different of over 30% cannot be explained by maternity care and an annual pap.
Also, the idea that because women use insurance so we have to pay more for it? I see this as flawed.

The idea that you pay more for something if you're statistically likely to use it more (not just for maternity and pap, but for regular sickness too) doesn't seem flawed to me. The whole idea of insurance is for the provider to charge everyone just slightly more than they'd pay on average if they were on their own. The amount of insurance you pay in a given year should be about equal to what you would have paid without insurance, plus a little more to pay for the security of a safety net in case a really huge unexpected expense comes up.
When they try to charge blacks more because of higher rates of heart disease and the like it is racism, but charging women more is okay? Do you see my point of irritation?

I used to pay more for auto insurance because of my age and gender. That was annoying, but understandable, because I knew that there was a real difference between the accident rate for teenage boys and other drivers. I would probably cost them more, so they charged me more. That's fair.

Maternity should be a special case. Like the article said, the cost for something that required both sexes and is a necessary part of continuing the human species shouldn't fall on women alone.
Occam's Quandary: any idea can be made to sound like the simpler one.

User avatar
sophyturtle
I'll go put my shirt back on for this kind of shock. No I won't. I'll get my purse.
Posts: 3474
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 4:19 pm UTC
Location: it's turtles all the way down, even in the suburbs
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby sophyturtle » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:39 pm UTC

Car insurance is different than health insurance. Equating the two is misleading and devalues health. I have no choice but to have a body. I have decided not to have a car. I am not more likely than you to be stupid with my body and say, break bones or need stitches.

Also, increasing routine checkups decreases the big emergency part and decreasing the amount of time actually spent sick. And men are more likely to need, say, their appendix removed. Men have their sicknesses and illnesses were they are a higher risk too.
So even if we go with the women STILL would cost more, we would cost almost 50% more in some cases? Really?
Last edited by sophyturtle on Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:48 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
I want to get to a place where I am neither conforming nor rebelling but simply being.

User avatar
Gunfingers
Posts: 2401
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 7:15 pm UTC

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby Gunfingers » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:48 pm UTC

I'm reasonably certain the decrease is pretty trivial, since most people even without regular checkups won't ever have a House-esque medical emergency, and everyone will end up sucking down thousands of dollars worth of pills once they cross the threshold into "old". Compared to the extra $50 (or whatever, i always go to a free clinic and have no idea how much a non-free would cost) you're dropping every time hypochondria calls you to the doctor (i'm pretty sure my doctors are tired of seeing me) i'm sure it's not that beneficial. Or not, i'm just going off of what seems logical to me. I don't even know if the initial premise "women get more checkups" is true.

User avatar
sophyturtle
I'll go put my shirt back on for this kind of shock. No I won't. I'll get my purse.
Posts: 3474
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2008 4:19 pm UTC
Location: it's turtles all the way down, even in the suburbs
Contact:

Re: Feminism (split from 'nfessions)

Postby sophyturtle » Thu Nov 06, 2008 7:51 pm UTC

And this does not include how we pay more since our prescriptions are less likely to be covered. I used to pay $40 a month for the pill because my insurance barely covered it. Some flat out don't.
I don't even know if the initial premise "women get more checkups" is true.

Thank you
I want to get to a place where I am neither conforming nor rebelling but simply being.


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 15 guests