Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 150

Thread: Tipping the Scales ... the wrong way?

  1. #1
    libertine librarian sandwitch's Avatar
    Type
    intp
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    flyover territory
    Posts
    1,356

    Question Tipping the Scales ... the wrong way?

    Thread intended for "feminist conversation" turns into male-dominated debate on women's responsibility to fully communicate to men around her that she isn't as horny as they are.

    Ptah: This thread started with posts split from "little rants" which seem to merit a distinct discussion thread. For the betterment of the thread in question and the forum itself, perhaps?
    Last edited by Ptah; 05-09-2014 at 03:36 AM.

  2. #2
    Amen P-O's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    667
    You might even say that they raped the thread
    Violence is never the right answer, unless used against heathens and monsters.

  3. #3
    libertine librarian sandwitch's Avatar
    Type
    intp
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    flyover territory
    Posts
    1,356
    Quote Originally Posted by P-O View Post
    You might even say that they raped the thread
    No, I wouldn't.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by sandwitch View Post
    Thread intended for "feminist conversation" turns into male-dominated debate on women's responsibility to fully communicate to men around her that she isn't as horny as they are.
    The majority of the people posting there are women and nobody has said that.

  5. #5
    dormant jigglypuff's Avatar
    Type
    xxxx
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    zone 10a
    Posts
    5,909
    Quote Originally Posted by sandwitch View Post
    Thread intended for "feminist conversation" turns into male-dominated debate on women's responsibility to fully communicate to men around her that she isn't as horny as they are.
    i'm disappointed, too.

  6. #6
    Minister of Love Roger Mexico's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    New World
    Posts
    3,238
    INTPx Award Winner
    Quote Originally Posted by sandwitch View Post
    Thread intended for "feminist conversation" turns into male-dominated debate on women's responsibility to fully communicate to men around her that she isn't as horny as they are.
    I don't know. It makes me honestly wonder what the prospects of success are for threads like that if conversations like the present one there are going to be ruled somehow out of bounds. That is to say, I truly don't understand what's supposed to be "un-feminist" about that discussion. No one is in there denying that women should have the same rights as men, or even denying that there's a need for collective sociopolitical effort to effect that. By my count there are at least as many women as men participating, so I don't see how the discussion is "male-dominated" either.

    Someone brought up an anecdote related to a general conceptual topic under discussion, and now people are discussing how each of the individuals involved in that situation exercised their agency. All of that relates to someone in the story making a claim that is, by most people's understanding of the terminology used, highly spurious. Accordingly, the discussion has now moved on to the subtopic of deconstructing the semantic meaning and connotations of the language used. That seems like a logical direction for that conversation to go, if you ask me. Stuck's point in even bringing it up seems to have been that consent and coercion can be more complicated issues than one might think, and to an extent I agree--however, what's happening in response to that point being made is people stating and responding to thoughts about the complexities of the issue which was introduced as complex.

    Why is that a problem?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ptah View Post
    No history, no exposition, no anecdote or argument changes the invariant: we are all human beings, and some humans are idiots.

  7. #7
    Sysop Ptah's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    4,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Mexico View Post
    I don't know. It makes me honestly wonder what the prospects of success are for threads like that if conversations like the present one there are going to be ruled somehow out of bounds. That is to say, I truly don't understand what's supposed to be "un-feminist" about that discussion. No one is in there denying that women should have the same rights as men, or even denying that there's a need for collective sociopolitical effort to effect that. By my count there are at least as many women as men participating, so I don't see how the discussion is "male-dominated" either.
    This.

    Someone brought up an anecdote related to a general conceptual topic under discussion, and now people are discussing how each of the individuals involved in that situation exercised their agency. All of that relates to someone in the story making a claim that is, by most people's understanding of the terminology used, highly spurious. Accordingly, the discussion has now moved on to the subtopic of deconstructing the semantic meaning and connotations of the language used. That seems like a logical direction for that conversation to go, if you ask me. Stuck's point in even bringing it up seems to have been that consent and coercion can be more complicated issues than one might think, and to an extent I agree--however, what's happening in response to that point being made is people stating and responding to thoughts about the complexities of the issue which was introduced as complex.

    Why is that a problem?
    And that, too.

    In my opinion, all or almost all of the posts in that thread are good-faith attempts to engage in discussion, sharing their thoughts and opinions in an intended-to-be respectful, constructive fashion.

    Have I missed something?

  8. #8
    Sysop Ptah's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    4,140
    @tele, @MuseedesBeauxArts, @sandwitch, @gator, @Resonance

    Analysis, from my perspective.

    Respectfully....

    Quote Originally Posted by Resonance View Post
    This is a group blog intended for discussion of women's issues, minority issues, and systems of privilege/oppression.
    By and large, people seem to have been discussing just such things.

    Have I missed something?

    Before entering discussion here, first interrogate your arguments, terms, and intentions with the considerations of Intersectionality:

    • Intersectionality (or Intersectionalism) is the study of intersections between forms or systems of oppression, domination or discrimination.
    • The term originates in black feminism, which argues that the experience of being a black woman cannot be understood in terms separating being a woman from being black; sexism, racism, and class oppression interact and reinforce each other.
    • The concept was named by Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989, though discussion of it can be traced back to the 19th century.
    • Intersectionality holds that the classical conceptualizations of oppression within society, such as racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and belief-based bigotry including nationalism, do not act independently of one another; instead, these forms of oppression interrelate, creating a system of oppression that reflects the intersection of multiple forms of discrimination...

    (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersectionality )
    I haven't seen much of anything which specifically addresses so as to contradict/deny that.

    Have I missed something?

    The goal of this group blog effort is not to exclude members or their opinions. Rather, we seek to open a safe space (as adapted from the Habermasian concept of third place) for discussion that members may not feel comfortable voicing in the wider forum.
    So @sandwitch and @tele... you are disappointed so as to post a rant here for what exactly, in reference to the above proviso?

    If it is suggested that your approach is oppressive, please pause before reacting. We are here because these topics matter to us, and our objections may not immediately make sense to you. Take a moment to review the considerations of intersectionality.
    I've seen nothing which denies intersectionality, nor have I seen anything which promotes or even defends the oppressive, nor have I seen any "oppressive approach" whatsoever.

    Have I missed something?

    Questions are welcome, but when the topic involves terms or ideas you haven’t encountered, it is appropriate to perform cursory research. We’re here to do our thing, and while education is great, we aren't here to educate others.
    Questions and answers have happened, mostly everyone playing nice with each other.

    Heck, the thread seems quite popular and constructive, or at least earnestly intended to be so by those who are posting there, whether they agree or not. Mostly even on-topic in the sense that the posts have a flow of discussion about them, exploring this bit and that angle, etc.

    Again. Have I missed something?

    So...

    What's the problem? What would you rather to have be the case?
    Last edited by Ptah; 05-09-2014 at 01:17 AM.

  9. #9
    Hasta Siempre Madrigal's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Mañana
    Posts
    7,207
    INTPx Award Winner
    Personally I think one of the problems with my dragging my backwardness into discussions (ha) is not just the content of what I say but the way I polarize things; I just can't really discuss something without becoming adamant and (at least) rhetorically hyperbolic about it. I don't mind my folly being explained to me, and can change my mind very quickly if I suddenly "get" something - I hate wasting time on being wrong - but my natural mode is kind of confrontational. I've been wondering whether I should practice some self-moderation, but that always ends up in just silence. In any case I just wanted to say that I don't think my personality is very suited for certain types of discussions, like that one.
    Everything under heaven is in utter chaos; the situation is excellent. - Mao

  10. #10
    dormant jigglypuff's Avatar
    Type
    xxxx
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    zone 10a
    Posts
    5,909
    idk, really. i'll just say i see it as more of a culture thing than something that just started with any particular discussion, & that i was feeling that way before sandwitch even said anything. if people are going in there dropping hints that some thread of discussion is kinda shitty for assault survivors, i'm gonna take that seriously.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 01-29-2014, 06:31 PM
  2. What do you think is wrong with modern education?
    By Randall in forum Academics & Careers
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 01-22-2014, 02:01 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •