|
ErIog posted:I only got into label-policing-policing because Defenestration was openly advocating for label-policing. I still would like to know how Defenestration feels about trans feminists. ah you're only being stubborn because of your reaction to what one person said, on the internet yes this is fertile ground for discussing labels and is in no way an ironic commentary on the idea that people really like to talk about themselves and their experiences sometimes to the exclusion of others
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 09:00 |
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:ah you're only being stubborn because of your reaction to what one person said, on the internet Stubborn about what? That policing labels is stupid? VitalSigns posted:Hi I am here because I believe in addressing the serious issues of gender discrimination that plague our society. VitalSigns posted:Hi I am here because I believe in addressing the serious issues of gender discrimination that plague our society. ErIog fucked around with this message at 03:37 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:31
|
|
Some women are discriminating against me by denying my recognition as a feminist.
|
Nolanar posted:I thought you were just making fun of the "what about men" feminism posts until it took that sharp turn into Elders of Zion territory. Where did you dredge that up? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
ErIog posted:Nothing would change besides the semantics.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:37
|
|
|
The very fact that there is contention revolving around who can use the label is a good reason for some people (those with a distaste for that flavor of contention, principally) not to want to use the label, while nonetheless subscribing to those things which it is generally agreed the label is about. Once it starts becoming about who has the most Problem PointsTM, and what precisely you can redeem those Problem PointsTM for at the OppressionMartTM then you end up with things like the Occupy movement's progressive stack and everyone ends up with a bad taste in their mouth regardless. Fortunately I haven't seen too much of that sort of circlejerkery in academic feminism.
Quorum fucked around with this message at 03:51 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:48
|
|
|
ErIog posted:Stubborn about what? That policing labels is stupid? Wait wait, which issue are we discussing here? Are we talking about trans-women who are excluded by TERFs, or are we talking about men who are fighting for their rights to get labels.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:50
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Wait wait, which issue are we discussing here? Are we talking about trans-women who are excluded by TERFs, or are we talking about men who are fighting for their rights to get labels. The same arguments people are using here to defend the label-policing are the same arguments TERFs use to label-police trans feminists. If you think trans women calling themselves feminists is okay but that men calling themselves feminists is out of bounds then it just shifts the fight to policing the "trans" label. This is why label-policing is really stupid, and in the context of feminism the label-policing will always lead back to some version of gender discrimination or essentialism. ErIog fucked around with this message at 03:59 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:54
|
|
|
We should call male feminists "femanists".
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 04:24
|
|
|
fymanists
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 04:27
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:fymanists Unless you're an objectivist feminist. Then you can be a FYGManist. The G is silent.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
Empire State posted:Unless you're an objectivist feminist. Then you can be a FYGManist. The G is silent. Is such a thing possible? Given Rand's thoughts about rape (sorry, surprise sex), I can't imagine endorsing that philosophy and still being a feminist in any way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
Jurgan posted:Is such a thing possible? Given Rand's thoughts about rape (sorry, surprise sex), I can't imagine endorsing that philosophy and still being a feminist in any way. I'm pretty sure feminists would have a thing or two to say about almost all (or actually all, I forget which) of Rand's darling Mary Sue captain of industry characters being male. Randism is just flat out incompatible with feminism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 04:52
|
|
|
I see now it wasn't a particularly good joke.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
I didn't say any of you numbnuts couldn't call yourselves feminists. Clearly I'm not going to stop you. I'm suggesting that maybe the concept of whether or not we put out a Welcome mat and agree with male desires that we do XYZ things to make you feel "included" has nothing to do with the goals of feminism, nor should it. If you're going to throw a poo poo-fit about whether you can call yourself feminist without meeting the slightest, mildest bit of criticism asking you to, hey, maybe think about what you're doing here, without taking your ball and storming off, then I guess you weren't that committed to the cause to begin with. Good riddance. Nor are you going to catch me out on some TERF bullshit so save the concern trolling. Basically this: Popular Thug Drink posted:
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
I normally just go with "feminist/ally". I've never had anyone complain.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 05:08
|
|
|
Quorum posted:The very fact that there is contention revolving around who can use the label is a good reason for some people (those with a distaste for that flavor of contention, principally) not to want to use the label, while nonetheless subscribing to those things which it is generally agreed the label is about. Once it starts becoming about who has the most Problem PointsTM, and what precisely you can redeem those Problem PointsTM for at the OppressionMartTM then you end up with things like the Occupy movement's progressive stack and everyone ends up with a bad taste in their mouth regardless. Fortunately I haven't seen too much of that sort of circlejerkery in academic feminism. None of this makes sense or follows in any way. Oppression points/problem points? What does any of this poo poo have to do with the conversation at all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 05:10
|
|
|
Most feminism in the Western World is dead anyway, at this point you guys are just arguing over the semantics of what to name the corpse your currently all looking at.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 05:12
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:None of this makes sense or follows in any way. I was going to make an effortpost explaining but meh. Discussing feminism on the internet is always a surefire way to ensure nobody goes home happy. Suffice to say it was an attempt at a lighthearted way to suggest that the refereeing of who can say what based on considerations of privilege and oppression, and arguments about that refereeing, are a weirdly Internet phenomenon and tend to just turn people off of the entire subject.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
Empire State posted:I see now it wasn't a particularly good joke. When it comes to political leanings and such I wouldn't be surprised if there are people running around spouting off about Randian feminism. I also assume those people are highly likely to be quite deranged. Perhaps I'm cynical but when somebody comes up with even a terrible idea as a joke my first response is to cringe and think "somebody, somewhere probably believes this and is recruiting."
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 05:48
|
|
|
Empire State posted:I see now it wasn't a particularly good joke. Oh, no, it was a fine joke, but after acknowledging it mentally my mind went off on the tangent of whether such a thing was literally possible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
Jurgan posted:Is such a thing possible? Given Rand's thoughts about rape (sorry, surprise sex), I can't imagine endorsing that philosophy and still being a feminist in any way. The President of my university's Feminist group identified as an objectivist and libertarian
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 06:37
|
|
|
Defenestration posted:I didn't say any of you numbnuts couldn't call yourselves feminists. Oh wow, you're right. I got you confused with peter banana. Defenestration posted:I'm suggesting that maybe the concept of whether or not we put out a Welcome mat and agree with male desires that we do XYZ things to make you feel "included" has nothing to do with the goals of feminism, nor should it. If you're going to throw a poo poo-fit about whether you can call yourself feminist without meeting the slightest, mildest bit of criticism asking you to, hey, maybe think about what you're doing here, without taking your ball and storming off, then I guess you weren't that committed to the cause to begin with. Good riddance. I agree with most of this, but "you can't call yourself a feminist if you're male!" is not actually a criticism. It's petty policing based in gender discrimination that I think is on its face counterproductive for the feminist movement. The rest of your criticisms about allies in movements needing to shut up and listen more I think is valid, and I agree with it. This problem is not just one of men within the movement not listening, either. Plenty of white women need to listen more to people of color within the movement. ErIog fucked around with this message at 07:00 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 06:51
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:The President of my university's Feminist group identified as an objectivist and libertarian How did she reconcile it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 06:56
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:How did she reconcile it? She just sorta didn't, it was like she wore two hats and just put on whichever was more convenient at the time. I was the VP of said group so I spoke with her a lot about plans and goals for it; She engaged with both philosophies at a really shallow level, and I'm pretty sure the only reason she was chosen as the president for the org was because she was insanely pretty and safe (her most radical stance was that female doctors would be cool things to have). The university I go to also has a very small liberal/leftist population and a very large "independent" one (iirc it was something like 45% conservative, 25% liberal, 30% independent), which is very much "I want to seem aloof and above partisan politics" code speak for Libertarian here. Hopefully my comment didn't come off as glib, I just thought it was a funny and relevant thing. Also, as the only Gender Studies student in the entire group, a rather frustrating one. e: The whole school is hosed up, to the point where most of the Social Work students I work with come from poor backgrounds and are often racial minorities, but still spew venom about all the welfare queens they have to deal with at the hospitals they work at. It's seriously awful. Countblanc fucked around with this message at 07:05 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 07:03
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:She just sorta didn't, it was like she wore two hats and just put on whichever was more convenient at the time. I was the VP of said group so I spoke with her a lot about plans and goals for it; She engaged with both philosophies at a really shallow level, and I'm pretty sure the only reason she was chosen as the president for the org was because she was insanely pretty and safe (her most radical stance was that female doctors would be cool things to have). The university I go to also has a very small liberal/leftist population and a very large "independent" one (iirc it was something like 45% conservative, 25% liberal, 30% independent), which is very much "I want to seem aloof and above partisan politics" code speak for Libertarian here. As others have pointed out from personal experience, there's nothing stopping minorities from thinking of their own superiority and poo poo on those that they think are Others. 'gently caress you, got mine' is an attitude that transcends race. Hopefully they understand that even though people take advantage of the system, the system benefits a lot of people as well. I learned that my friend's wife had a child in her class that also had the classic 'welfare queen' archetype as a mother and she was incensed but he tried to calm her down by reminding her of people that use the system appropriately. Rick_Hunter fucked around with this message at 07:32 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 07:19
|
|
|
I think it's ultimately important to look at the different works of various women's rights advocates in order to really judge them. For instance, a women fighting against restriction of abortions in a red state has more righteousness than a rich white women who's angry about video games. For me I stopped caring about western feminism when western feminists decided to poo poo all over several women rights advocates in the middle east because said women rights advocates called the westerner's spoiled white women.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 07:32
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:For me I stopped caring about western feminism when western feminists decided to poo poo all over several women rights advocates in the middle east because said women rights advocates called the westerner's spoiled white women. Got an example of this? I don't feel like I've hated enough today.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 07:43
|
|
|
Quorum posted:I was going to make an effortpost explaining but meh. Discussing feminism on the internet is always a surefire way to ensure nobody goes home happy. Suffice to say it was an attempt at a lighthearted way to suggest that the refereeing of who can say what based on considerations of privilege and oppression, and arguments about that refereeing, are a weirdly Internet phenomenon and tend to just turn people off of the entire subject. Well duh it will turn people off, people don't like to face facts that make them have to look at themselves their lives in a different light. I don't see how that is something feminism should give a poo poo about. Those people weren't gonna join up in any meaningful way anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 08:07
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:Got an example of this? I don't feel like I've hated enough today. as usual it's just a lazy excuse to justify hating on feminism. "oh i'd like feminism if only feminists didn't do X" no you wouldn't. coward 
boner confessor fucked around with this message at 08:12 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 08:09
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:as usual it's just a lazy excuse to justify hating on feminism. "oh i'd like feminism if only feminists didn't do X" no you wouldn't. coward I'm not hating on feminism, I just don't give a poo poo about western feminism because it's A. unfocused at the moment, and B. isn't really fighting that many uphill battles compared to what people are facing in countries were FGM is common or women aren't allowed to even go to school. It is in fact possible to hold an opinion on something that doesn't involve hating it or loving it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 08:15
|
|
|
I don't see the big deal, you probably shouldn't call yourself something if your audience isn't comfortable with it unless your aim is to be an rear end in a top hat. It should be pretty obvious from your actions and words that you're a feminist and so the act of saying "I am a feminist" isn't very helpful. The only time I ever have to actually self-identify as a feminist is when I'm arguing with someone that thinks the very idea of feminism is bullshit anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 08:15
|
|
|
What's more telling about this picture isn't the blatant misogyny but the number of men that silently approve of such behavior because the woman needs to know her place. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 08:44
|
|
|
I'm not sure if it's a good thing or not that people like that don't know about International Men's Day. On one hand it gives me hope that the day hasn't been poisoned by MRA shitheadism yet, on the other, the day is supposed to (at least in part) be about good male role models and opposing toxic hypermasculinity, so the number of men who act like dicks and don't even know that the day exists might indicate a failure of promotion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 08:56
|
|
|
ErIog posted:Oh wow, you're right. I got you confused with peter banana. I get it, you probably feel pretty passionately about feminism and want to help it in a way you think it will be the most successful. In the past I've made the same argument you're making, and it just doesn't go well, because the instant you make it you're just proving their point. What's the difference between being an ally and being a feminist? To you, it shouldn't mean much if you're there to help anyway and already acknowledge that allies need to listen more and dictate less. To them, it evidently means a great deal and is a sensitive issue, so why not leave the point aside or defer to them when appropriate? Just remember there's a time and place for these conversations, and saying "I should be allowed to call myself a feminist!" at the wrong time isn't very different from saying "feminism isn't addressing men's issues!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 09:21
|
|
|
Cognac McCarthy posted:Let me try and explain what I think the disconnect is here. It's fine to think men should be able to identify as feminists. It might even be fine to think that it's counterproductive to tell profeminist men that they shouldn't call themselves feminists. But when a woman feminist tells you she doesn't think they would, you're presented with a choice between agreeing to disagree and focusing instead on being a good feminist/ally, or digging in and starting an argument over it. I'm not saying you go out of your way to bring this argument up, but it does happen a lot, and witnessing it is probably going to put off even women who have no problem calling men feminists. You know that whole "What's the difference between being an ally and being a feminist?" cuts both ways. Feminism is a movement, not an individual or even a group. If people gave a gently caress about the betterment of the community they wouldn't waste time on a stupid loving witch hunt on who's really what. If you want the movement to succeed, as with any other before it, it is an inclusive movement. Save this ally bullshit for the GLBTA where it actually makes a loving difference. I consider myself a feminist but refrain from labels specifically to avoid getting dug into a wasteful and resentful argument. I don't consider feminism to be a loving social club support group with loving member standings. it's supposed to improve the world. What improvement is there in making sure the people who want to support you to feel excluded and unwanted? Follow the example of occupy if you wish, where each special snowflake gets a chance to push a meaningless symbolic gesture that ends up so twisted and weird it alienates everyone until the whole thing falls apart. The graveyard of failed progressive movements is littered with those who splintered and gave way. Don't be the person at an occupy protest refusing to let the free donated pizza in for everyone because the pies weren't vegan/gluten-free. Edit: this is not carte blanche for men to seize the movement from themselves but quote:If you're going to throw a poo poo-fit about whether you can call yourself feminist without meeting the slightest, mildest bit of criticism asking you to, hey, maybe think about what you're doing here, without taking your ball and storming off, then I guess you weren't that committed to the cause to begin with. Good riddance. Hey, here's a chance to make a positive change in this persons life and really open their eyes. haha no wait gently caress that *fart* Is this a quote from somebody who gives a poo poo about a higher ideal or someone who just wants to feel superior? I know this is directed at a certain cliche but it's a destructive idea, not a constructive one. SlipUp fucked around with this message at 10:17 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 10:09
|
|
|
Okie doke. As I said I have no problem with men calling themselves feminists, nor do most feminists. I see far, far more men bringing the issue up than I do women, though. From a purely pragmatic point of view, the best way to convince women that men can be good feminists is by not making a big deal out of it when the women who do object to men using the label say they have a problem with it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 10:23
|
|
|
No disagreement there. I just wanted to illustrate the dangers of identity politics. Edit: Context: This was in the news yesterday and the level of dedication that women put into trying to destroy that trans women's life left a super bad taste in my mouth all day. e2: Like it's the perfect loving mess. They both agree to a particular solution (unisex stalls) but the whole identity war leading to that has effectively trashed whatever cooperation could've existed. SlipUp fucked around with this message at 11:03 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 10:43
|
|
|
MC Eating Disorder posted:I don't see the big deal, you probably shouldn't call yourself something if your audience isn't comfortable with it unless your aim is to be an rear end in a top hat. I assume you'd make an exception for a transwoman but I still think its bad progressivism to say that people shouldn't self-identify if it makes an audience feel uncomfortable. I dunno I think this is an interesting conversation but I don't think we'll all stop talking cross-purposes about it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 10:58
|
|
|
With the recent talk of replacing Jackson on the 20 with a woman, a guy at work will not shut the gently caress up about how replacing ONE dude means we might have to replace more, and why Jackson, huh? All of the old Presidents were horrible people. Jefferson owned slaves, Washington wanted to be a king, etc. And then he goes on screaming how there are no 'great American women' to put on money, because Amelia Eahart's biggest 'claim to fame' was that she failed and died in doing so, and no one wants a black woman like Rosa Parks on their money. At some point you just have to wonder what the gently caress a white man, who in this case is pretty wealthy, can bitch about next.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 11:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 09:00 |
|
|
Cowslips Warren posted:With the recent talk of replacing Jackson on the 20 with a woman, a guy at work will not shut the gently caress up about how replacing ONE dude means we might have to replace more, and why Jackson, huh? All of the old Presidents were horrible people. Sounds great. The English put Charles Darwin on their money, it owns. I overheard an American get really mad when she saw he was buried at Westminster Abbey when I visited years ago, that was hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 11:09
|
|