|
What kind of crazy first world paradise do you guys have going where you can sit down on a bus. =( edit: that's a pic of the old buses. The new ones are much...newer...I guess...if not much nicer... but are somehow more crowded.
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 17:43 |
|
|
silence_kit posted:There's no need to do this. In other words, what you are saying here is 'by virtue of being a man, your opinion is wrong.' Or 'a woman/multiple women said it, therefore it is right.' Surely, you have an argument stronger than that for the ubiquity of 'man-splaining'. A person's account of their own experience is infinitely more valuable than another person's feelings about their experience. It has nothing to do with men being inherently wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
botany posted:Then that's the reason you can't sit like that, not the fact that you have testicles. Well, no, the testicles are what make it uncomfortable. My legs work fine. Still very curious as to what publication is dubbing slouching in your office chair and staring at the ceiling while wearing sandals "high-power posing" OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 18:44 on Jan 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
Sethex posted:And woefully ineffective at achieving tangible political goals.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:There's no need to do this. In other words, what you are saying here is 'by virtue of being a man, your opinion is wrong.' Or 'a woman/multiple women said it, therefore it is right.' Surely, you have an argument stronger than that for the ubiquity of 'man-splaining'.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:How so? Equality doesn't win every battle, but there's been a consistent upwards trend. I agree generally, but I find some of the things fueling the trump camp is a hyperbolic characrature of feminists, an in a sense it does exist. That said women's rights in a lot of developing areas has gone backward.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
Women should unironically sit like this imo, it looks boss.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
Exmond posted:I see someone who is maybe way too into anime and wants to explain it to people , regardless of gender. also i missed this bit. there's a distinction between "overly talkative and bad at social cues" and "assumes lack of knowledge because of apparent gender" like yeah, some nerd could drone on and on about evangelion, or really want to find someone to discuss the latest batman movie, so they just dont shut up or tell people things they clearly dont want to hear about. this isn't mansplaining, this is just being a bad conversationalist mansplaining is when you assume someone (most often a woman) doesn't have some knowledge specifically because they are a woman. a few years ago, my wife and i were trying to find a mechanic in our neighborhood. my wife used to work at a mechanic, so she knows way more about cars than i do - i know the basics, and that's it. we went to a local independent mechanic and asked him to diagnose a check engine light. when he was explaining the problem he would not talk to my wife, even though she was asking him questions - she would say "is it the bobbin nut?" or whatever and he would respond directly to me, despite me saying nothing. this was how he dealt with a woman talking to him about car things, which she shouldn't know about. he wouldn't even look at her. we went to a different mechanic silence_kit posted:There's no need to do this. In other words, what you are saying here is 'by virtue of being a man, your opinion is wrong.' Or 'a woman/multiple women said it, therefore it is right.' Surely, you have an argument stronger than that for the ubiquity of 'man-splaining'. woah yall watch out, the guy who never stops complaining about mod censorship is offended that someone said he may not have correct opinions, all of the time! woah! got a live one here!
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Women should unironically sit like this imo, it looks boss. Not sure you could be more wrong tbh. Guy on the left looks like a huge dweeb and guy on the right looks like he's trying to crack one off without making any noise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:A person's account of their own experience is infinitely more valuable than another person's feelings about their experience. It has nothing to do with men being inherently wrong. I wish we could come to some kind of general agreement about subjectivity. When someone is talking about their lived experience, the right response is to listen respectfully and not argue. This is almost always the time to STFU and listen. Who are you to contradict them? When someone is talking about their lived experience then launches into "and therefore let me tell you all about how white/black/asian/female/rich/poor/whatever people do...", it's ok to speak up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
I going to disagree with you there, someone's 'lived experience' can absolutely be filled with bullshit you get to attack, that the evidence doesn't support. I.e. if someone has the 'lived experience' of being abducted by aliens, are you required to unconditionally accept what they say? Nope, gently caress that noise. In general it's bad form to accuse people of lying, that's not usually the case, but there's cases of things like projection or misinterpretation that you can pick apart. I feel like your example here is just straight up disrespecting your wife, when someone speaks to you you're supposed to speak back. I don't like mansplaining as a thing because I've seen in used in a lot of 'anecdotes' where the problem just seems to be social awkwardness, or just people trying to make conversation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
rudatron posted:I feel like your example here is just straight up disrespecting your wife, when someone speaks to you you're supposed to speak back. I don't like mansplaining as a thing because I've seen in used in a lot of 'anecdotes' where the problem just seems to be social awkwardness, or just people trying to make conversation. why would he disrespect my wife in this very specific way though
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
Because he's sexist? Like I don't doubt that, but what value is being added by the term 'mansplaining' here?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
Because that term describes a specific form of disrespect which occurs with sufficient frequency to merit a term to communicate it concisely.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:I do believe that it is not really your place to tell women (who are the ones who invented that word) that your feeling that it's not that widespread trumps their experience that it really is. I get to express my opinion, just as you get to say "No you are wrong". So yes, I do get to criticize your belief and your theory. From what I have seen on man-splaining, most of the evidence is ancedtoal based and very hard to prove that "Men are explaining things to women because they don't think women know about X subject". Man-splaining is very hard to prove. Edit: I think its hard to prove because you need the person explaining to prove that "they were explaining because they thought the women didn't understand due to HER BEING A WOMEN" not "She wasn't in uniform" or "I really like the subject and got overly enthuased".
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
rudatron posted:I going to disagree with you there, someone's 'lived experience' can absolutely be filled with bullshit you get to attack, that the evidence doesn't support. I.e. if someone has the 'lived experience' of being abducted by aliens, are you required to unconditionally accept what they say? Nope, gently caress that noise. In general it's bad form to accuse people of lying, that's not usually the case, but there's cases of things like projection or misinterpretation that you can pick apart. I mean...the proper course in that case is probably to listen, go "cool story, bro(ette).", and change the subject. But in general if people are talking about poo poo that is going on with them, what are you going to accomplish by trying to contradict them?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Because he's sexist? Like I don't doubt that, but what value is being added by the term 'mansplaining' here? why does any term exist, really Exmond posted:I get to express my opinion, just as you get to say "No you are wrong". So yes, I do get to criticize your belief and your theory. why does it require being proven? is this a court of law? a friend of mine used to work at an electronics store, every once in a while she'd get some guy who refused to listen to her explanations of video cards and would look for a male salesman instead to get the same advice. gendered knowledge and people's sexist expectations warping their views of reality is widely prevalent i'd say if you're insisting on ironclad proof of someone's intentions then uh i think that's mostly just a technique that allows you to discount what people are saying because that's a pretty unrealistic expectation in interpersonal communication. it would be like believing someone selling you a miracle cure unless you recieve proof that they are decieving you for profit. or that without proof, you can't really prove someone is a racist just because they're always talking about the media ignoring black on black crime. humans lie, often to themselves, we have the motivation to discern people's true intent and mindset from contextual clues. someone flatly refusing to talk to a woman, or saying way too much specifically to a woman, is very likely to have some sort of sexist underpinning boner confessor fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Jan 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
Exmond posted:I get to express my opinion, just as you get to say "No you are wrong". So yes, I do get to criticize your belief and your theory. you mean this thing women keep saying happens to them is based on their anecdotes of what happens to them? really pulled the curtains back on that one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Because that term describes a specific form of disrespect which occurs with sufficient frequency to merit a term to communicate it concisely. wateroverfire posted:I mean...the proper course in that case is probably to listen, go "cool story, bro(ette).", and change the subject. But in general if people are talking about poo poo that is going on with them, what are you going to accomplish by trying to contradict them?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:No that's normal, if difficult, I mean this: Oh weird, it looks like almost exactly the same pose. I wonder why one looks normal one one looks like an idiot. I can't think of any possible reason.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
 We could all learn a thing from Jarl Idgrod Ravencrone imo. I was taught bus manners as a child so I try to take up only one seat. Perhaps some dudes could learn some etiquette and recognize that we are all just trying to get somewhere with a minimum of hassle?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
Exmond posted:I get to express my opinion, just as you get to say "No you are wrong". So yes, I do get to criticize your belief and your theory. Well, your position is hard to support in this case because you base it on your feeling that it's not that prevalent. Mine is based on countless testimonies, by women, of men explaining to them what they already know, and often know better. Your standard of proof is ridiculous in this instance because all of this is based on anecdote. Countless anecdotes. And your definition is wrong, because bias does not work that way and is almost never acknowledged. No one is going to say "Yeah I explained it to her because I assumed she didn't know, and I assumed she didn't know because she is a woman." That is absurd.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
Exmond posted:I get to express my opinion, just as you get to say "No you are wrong". So yes, I do get to criticize your belief and your theory. Imagine, for a moment, the anti-feminist movement deprived of its anecdotes - "I saw a thing on Tumblr" or "This girl called me fat" or "I work way harder than her, why did she get the raise?" Would it still exist? Skippy Granola posted:
We should all have such fine wall-mounted mudcrabs. Personally I keep to myself in public spaces because the feeling of accidental contact with strangers is awkward 100% of the time. Deified Data fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Jan 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
"Hi, is this seat taken?" ** person moves their legs / bag ** "Thank you."
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Fruit Smoothies posted:"Hi, is this seat taken?" ** person moves their legs / bag ** "Thank you." Wat. Next you'll be suggesting that haggling is not awkward, but instead cool and good. Deified Data posted:Imagine, for a moment, the anti-feminist movement deprived of its anecdotes - "I saw a thing on Tumblr" or "This girl called me fat" or "I work way harder than her, why did she get the raise?" As long as Amanda Marcotte is published, and posters like Tiny Brontosaurus are posting, there will be people who will look at that and go "Yeeeeeeeeah I kind of see where you're going, but no."
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Well, your position is hard to support in this case because you base it on your feeling that it's not that prevalent. Mine is based on countless testimonies, by women, of men explaining to them what they already know, and often know better. You know that I can go to another circle of people and get the same statement as your. My opinion is based off of countless testimonies that man-spreading isn't a thing, women say man-spreading doesn't happen. I can also come across and say your definition is wrong since you can't prove that this person spread there legs because they are sexist, you can only draw allusions to it and try to convince people. It's one of my complaints against these two terms, its very hard to prove and most of the arguments around it is people using ancedotes to try and tell you it is / isn't a thing. If you look at society at large you can get some useful facts, which leaves my mind open to "Men explaining things to women" being a thing. Here is another personal ancedote. Most of the time when women use the term man-splaining it seems to be used to shutdown discussion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:As long as Amanda Marcotte is published, and posters like Tiny Brontosaurus are posting, there will be people who will look at that and go "Yeeeeeeeeah I kind of see where you're going, but no." "my politics are informed not by evidence or reason, but by how much i personally like or dislike people who i identify as proponents of the movement. this, combined with my needless desire to seek out the opinions of people who annoy me, ensure that my perspective is well rounded and based on critical appraisals of society's problems" Exmond posted:It's one of my complaints against these two terms, its very hard to prove and most of the arguments around it is people using ancedotes to try and tell you it is / isn't a thing. If you look at society at large you can get some useful facts, which leaves my mind open to "Men explaining things to women" being a thing. it's not hard to prove at all, if you accept the proof. you're not accepting it, that's why it looks hard to you  disagree with the validity of mansplaining if you want, that's on you. but you look silly if you make claims like "it's not objective", like anything having to do with people's internal biases is objective
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:"my politics are informed not by evidence or reason, but by how much i personally like or dislike people who i identify as proponents of the movement. this, combined with my needless desire to seek out the opinions of people who annoy me, ensure that my perspective is well rounded and based on critical appraisals of society's problems" Alternately: "Hmmm a movement I could get behind. Who will be standing next to me?" "Uh huh.." "Oh I...see..." "Well..." *backs away slowly. Supports feminist things in isolation while refusing to join the movement. Is literally most people.*
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:Alternately: you're not most people, you're a guy who is way too invested in the internet culture wars. you actually posted threads in qcs to complain about bias in something awful moderation, this is how invested you are in internet culture wars
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:As long as Amanda Marcotte is published, and posters like Tiny Brontosaurus are posting, there will be people who will look at that and go "Yeeeeeeeeah I kind of see where you're going, but no." hahahahaha TB, singlehandedly causing the downfall of feminism. she should be ashamed!
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
botany posted:hahahahaha "well, i WOULD support women's rights, but someone made fun of my penis on the internet once. sorry ladies, you had your chance. maybe if you werent all easily offended snowflakes i would care more"
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
Exmond posted:You know that I can go to another circle of people and get the same statement as your. My opinion is based off of countless testimonies that man-spreading isn't a thing, women say man-spreading doesn't happen. And here we hit the real nub of the issue, in your mind: a woman trying to get you to shut up and stop explaining poo poo she already knows. That's the real issue here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
Somfin posted:And here we hit the real nub of the issue, in your mind: a woman trying to get you to shut up and stop explaining poo poo she already knows. That's the real issue here. Nah, more like "A woman losing an argument resulting to gendered insults which will be uncritically supported by the current toxic supporters of feminism no matter what because tribalism is more important than everything".
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:Nah, more like "A woman losing an argument resulting to gendered insults which will be uncritically supported by the current toxic supporters of feminism no matter what because tribalism is more important than everything". Be honest: are you a person that actually cared about the concept of "gendered insults" ever at any time before this very second or if I looked in your SA history would I just find you using a bunch of them and defending that as totally okay?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
TB's kinda terrible and should be ignored but they absolutely never changed anyone's mind about feminism. Anyone who claims they were a feminist until someone hurt their feelings is either a liar or terribly confused.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Be honest: are you a person that actually cared about the concept of "gendered insults" ever at any time before this very second or if I looked in your SA history would I just find you using a bunch of them and defending that as totally okay? Am I the member of a cult that can't practice what I preach? That's the problem with many facets of modern activism, especially feminism. All kinds of rules for other people to live their life by that don't really apply to the in-group once they've been vetted as appropriately submissive. Gendered slurs, the emasculation of men using patriarchal norms, the stripping away of agency and "lived experience". All of these things are touted as bad by feminists and yet practiced by feminists constantly. Why should the people you're trying to foist this ideology on take you at face value when the majority of your adherents can't even live by their own principles?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
Deified Data posted:TB's kinda terrible and should be ignored but they absolutely never changed anyone's mind about feminism. Anyone who claims they were a feminist until someone hurt their feelings is either a liar or terribly confused.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
new phone who dis posted:Am I the member of a cult that can't practice what I preach? That's the problem with many facets of modern activism, especially feminism. All kinds of rules for other people to live their life by that don't really apply to the in-group once they've been vetted as appropriately submissive. Gendered slurs, the emasculation of men using patriarchal norms, the stripping away of agency and "lived experience". All of these things are touted as bad by feminists and yet practiced by feminists constantly. Why should the people you're trying to foist this ideology on take you at face value when the majority of your adherents can't even live by their own principles? Aren't you the one not living by your principles if you think gendered slurs are good and cool then are all upset and hurt someone used one against your gender? Why do your principals only apply to you and not them? If being consistent is important to you? Saying "because they say they follow X values" doesn't work, since your post history has you calling people pussies and stuff so your value is clearly that gendered slurs are alright. Who has to be consistent? you or them?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:A person's account of their own experience is infinitely more valuable than another person's feelings about their experience. It has nothing to do with men being inherently wrong. You don't believe in therapy?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 17:43 |
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Well, no, the testicles are what make it uncomfortable. My legs work fine. You know transgender women manage to sit without spreading their legs every drat day despite having a dick and balls. In fact, if transgender women sit with their legs apart and some creep takes a peek they run the risk of being attacked for having said dick and balls. Your dick and balls are not keeping you from sitting without hogging space. Instead, your inflated sense of the importance and sensitivity of your dick and balls, ingrained in you by patriarchal society, make you feel that you must prioritize the comfort of your dick and balls over the human beings around you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:28
|
|
