There are many people who see Metafilter as sexist, a boyzone.... December 8, 2004 3:04 PM Subscribe
There are many people who see Metafilter as sexist, a veritable boyzone of aggression and braggadocio. What can be done to address these concerns?
quonsarian spoiler, MY DICK IS BIGGER THAN YOURS.
Sorry.
What can be done aside from yet another MetaThread to discuss it where the most grevious of offenders will never see it? I get your point and agree that there's a problem but I don't see how it can easily be fixed without #1 getting all itchy-trigger finger on everyone. And he's got other things on his mind right now.
I'm a boy so most of the semi-flame activities don't really bother me. But I do get tired of the near incessant thread derailments, especially when they devolve into more lame pissing matches.
posted by fenriq at 3:11 PM on December 8, 2004
Sorry.
What can be done aside from yet another MetaThread to discuss it where the most grevious of offenders will never see it? I get your point and agree that there's a problem but I don't see how it can easily be fixed without #1 getting all itchy-trigger finger on everyone. And he's got other things on his mind right now.
I'm a boy so most of the semi-flame activities don't really bother me. But I do get tired of the near incessant thread derailments, especially when they devolve into more lame pissing matches.
posted by fenriq at 3:11 PM on December 8, 2004
Make repeated naval-gazing threads about it, even when Mr Haughey deletes them.
Boyzone, liberalzone, Jewzone. We've all been called this. Bitching about it won't help.
I wrote a long comment in the original AskMeta thread, and I don't feel like repeating it. If you are offended don't sit back and be bitter. Tell them. I really doubt anyone here is a true barefoot-and-pregnant guy. Without the non-visual cues that we tend to pick up on during real-life conversation, Internet and any form of written conversation will severely lack in the, Someone Said Something Wrong department. Without anyone calling people out (we're about self-governance right?) then the person making the comment simply won't know what they did is wrong. They don't see your scowl, your gasp, your disapproving look. Perception and intention are huge things in communication, both of which are severely lacking in the monotone environment of written language.
Threads like these only polarize and segregate boys and girls. Look how you framed it: aggression and braggadocio. Two words with negative connotations. How can one seriously debate this topic now? You're actually hindering and further polarizing the community by making people take a position.
There's no black and white where joking is concerned. Sometimes a flippant comment can be funny, sometimes it can be offensive, and a lot of the times it can be both to different people. How does one walk this line in a very public and open community like Metafilter? I don't believe total sterilization is the answer, as it would just make us dull. The only way to walk this fine line is to be vocal if something offends you. And don't yell the cliche "you pig" or any derivative thereof.
I think a fine example is in my recent thread [1]. Jonson brought up a good point [2]. The woman would not be in a position she is in if she had not kept having children. This touches on a lot of issues that no one has answers on, namely personal responsibility and societal responsibility. I'm sorry to say he did not bring it up correctly. The topic is just to bring in a one-liner and leave it at that. He should have brought in supporting evidence. Likewise, equipose brought up the retort [3]. In my opinion equipose did an okay job, but turned it too much into a personal attack. This does nothing for the situation. When you attack someone personally and not their statement, they cannot be in a position to come back and agree with you. Labels such as sexist, misogynist, and Jew do not help this.
Wow, I really didn't mean to make it that long. And I don't mean to pick on jonson and equipose, they were just the most accessible comments I had on hand.
posted by geoff. at 3:21 PM on December 8, 2004
Boyzone, liberalzone, Jewzone. We've all been called this. Bitching about it won't help.
I wrote a long comment in the original AskMeta thread, and I don't feel like repeating it. If you are offended don't sit back and be bitter. Tell them. I really doubt anyone here is a true barefoot-and-pregnant guy. Without the non-visual cues that we tend to pick up on during real-life conversation, Internet and any form of written conversation will severely lack in the, Someone Said Something Wrong department. Without anyone calling people out (we're about self-governance right?) then the person making the comment simply won't know what they did is wrong. They don't see your scowl, your gasp, your disapproving look. Perception and intention are huge things in communication, both of which are severely lacking in the monotone environment of written language.
Threads like these only polarize and segregate boys and girls. Look how you framed it: aggression and braggadocio. Two words with negative connotations. How can one seriously debate this topic now? You're actually hindering and further polarizing the community by making people take a position.
There's no black and white where joking is concerned. Sometimes a flippant comment can be funny, sometimes it can be offensive, and a lot of the times it can be both to different people. How does one walk this line in a very public and open community like Metafilter? I don't believe total sterilization is the answer, as it would just make us dull. The only way to walk this fine line is to be vocal if something offends you. And don't yell the cliche "you pig" or any derivative thereof.
I think a fine example is in my recent thread [1]. Jonson brought up a good point [2]. The woman would not be in a position she is in if she had not kept having children. This touches on a lot of issues that no one has answers on, namely personal responsibility and societal responsibility. I'm sorry to say he did not bring it up correctly. The topic is just to bring in a one-liner and leave it at that. He should have brought in supporting evidence. Likewise, equipose brought up the retort [3]. In my opinion equipose did an okay job, but turned it too much into a personal attack. This does nothing for the situation. When you attack someone personally and not their statement, they cannot be in a position to come back and agree with you. Labels such as sexist, misogynist, and Jew do not help this.
Wow, I really didn't mean to make it that long. And I don't mean to pick on jonson and equipose, they were just the most accessible comments I had on hand.
posted by geoff. at 3:21 PM on December 8, 2004
As I've said in 3 thread now today, I think that the thing to do is take on front page posts that have some sexist tone in them. Just call them out as they happen and try to get them deleted.
It's much more complicated to change the people themselves, and we don't have an effective filter for managing comments in threads. But if we can get Matt to set a higher standard for posts, perhaps it will have a trickle down on people's behavior in general. In any case, it's all you can do.
Alternately, all the women could get pissed and leave. But I think that wouldn't help so much.
posted by scarabic at 3:21 PM on December 8, 2004
It's much more complicated to change the people themselves, and we don't have an effective filter for managing comments in threads. But if we can get Matt to set a higher standard for posts, perhaps it will have a trickle down on people's behavior in general. In any case, it's all you can do.
Alternately, all the women could get pissed and leave. But I think that wouldn't help so much.
posted by scarabic at 3:21 PM on December 8, 2004
I really doubt anyone here is a true barefoot-and-pregnant guy.
Ha! Odds are pretty damn close to 100% that you're right about that.
posted by scarabic at 3:22 PM on December 8, 2004
Ha! Odds are pretty damn close to 100% that you're right about that.
posted by scarabic at 3:22 PM on December 8, 2004
I think Mark Burnett should decide if the women stay or leave.
posted by Smart Dalek at 3:24 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by Smart Dalek at 3:24 PM on December 8, 2004
And as I've said in three threads today, just putting it on women to speak up doesn't work because this is generally how the process goes.
1. There are plenty of small unwelcome-making comments that, on their own, aren't much. Like the whole "Girl blood is gross" response when there were a few menstrual threads. Or "jokes" that some find rude.
2. Because of this, when something kinda shitty comes up, it feels a lot worse.
3. When someone points out this shitty thing, people who are not sensitive to the general air don't see why it's so bad.
4. Not all feminists and women agree on what is bad. Combined with three, there emerges a sense that most people don't think it's all so bad.
5. Whoever called it out is attacked/branded oversensitive.
The bonus is that people then don't bring things up or are particularly shrill when it does come up. At least that's how it seems to me.
Yes, I cut and pasted. But that's what happens when you make two threads about the same thing.
posted by dame at 3:28 PM on December 8, 2004
1. There are plenty of small unwelcome-making comments that, on their own, aren't much. Like the whole "Girl blood is gross" response when there were a few menstrual threads. Or "jokes" that some find rude.
2. Because of this, when something kinda shitty comes up, it feels a lot worse.
3. When someone points out this shitty thing, people who are not sensitive to the general air don't see why it's so bad.
4. Not all feminists and women agree on what is bad. Combined with three, there emerges a sense that most people don't think it's all so bad.
5. Whoever called it out is attacked/branded oversensitive.
The bonus is that people then don't bring things up or are particularly shrill when it does come up. At least that's how it seems to me.
Yes, I cut and pasted. But that's what happens when you make two threads about the same thing.
posted by dame at 3:28 PM on December 8, 2004
Oops, I should have added that this does not apply in the case of *very* obvious shit, like rape haiku.
posted by dame at 3:30 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by dame at 3:30 PM on December 8, 2004
i suggest collecting a whole pile of examples on the wiki. maybe if seanyboy (and jonmc) saw how often crap "jokes' like that are posted he'd get a clue.
posted by andrew cooke at 3:36 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by andrew cooke at 3:36 PM on December 8, 2004
boyzone. that sounds hot. but seriously, i feel your pain. but i have learned, in some recent event that escapes me at the moment, that you cant change an internet community. whatever trends you notice are basically the rules, for better or for worse. the only people with the power to change things are moderators. so my suggestion is start your own community blog and moderate it. if you build it well, they will come, and say it doesnt suck. i guess the thing that keeps tripping people up is the assumption that we are the same kind of people in real life as we are on the internet. personally, im a cat in real life.
posted by GleepGlop at 3:38 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by GleepGlop at 3:38 PM on December 8, 2004
orange clock, thank you for reposting the issue. That other thread is becoming a gooey nightmare of "the AskMe shouldn't have been deleted", "Delete only in the manner I wish", and "Goddam, do we have to talk about this?". This thread might actually become a discussion (I hope).
posted by Wulfgar! at 3:41 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by Wulfgar! at 3:41 PM on December 8, 2004
I don't actually think MeFi is sexist. It has a mainly male population which contributes to a male perspective, but on the same hand it also has a large number of Apple owning liberal geeks, and that makes a difference too. I don't see the aggression thing as being sexist either. Things could be a lot more caring and sharing, but the place wouldn't be half as much fun.
I think the thing to do is to highlight each specific example as they turn up, and to deal with them individually. Either with a conter-comment, a quiet email or a full on MetaTalk complaint. Even though I'd never have believed it at the time, I've been spouting sexist nonsense most of my life, and its only through gentle nudging, raised eyebrows and disapproving commentry that I've managed to crawl this far up the non-sexist ladder. I'm not perfect, but I'm better than the 18 year old I used to be who thought he didn't have a sexist bone in his body.
posted by seanyboy at 3:43 PM on December 8, 2004
I think the thing to do is to highlight each specific example as they turn up, and to deal with them individually. Either with a conter-comment, a quiet email or a full on MetaTalk complaint. Even though I'd never have believed it at the time, I've been spouting sexist nonsense most of my life, and its only through gentle nudging, raised eyebrows and disapproving commentry that I've managed to crawl this far up the non-sexist ladder. I'm not perfect, but I'm better than the 18 year old I used to be who thought he didn't have a sexist bone in his body.
posted by seanyboy at 3:43 PM on December 8, 2004
seanyboy:
I think the thing to do is to highlight each specific example as they turn up, and to deal with them individually.
You could start by getting into the kitchen and making my dinner.
would you prefer the "aggressive" version or the "caring and sharing" version?
posted by pikachulolita at 3:46 PM on December 8, 2004
I think the thing to do is to highlight each specific example as they turn up, and to deal with them individually.
You could start by getting into the kitchen and making my dinner.
would you prefer the "aggressive" version or the "caring and sharing" version?
posted by pikachulolita at 3:46 PM on December 8, 2004
1. "girl blood" is gross. So is other blood, urine, fecal matter, spit, sweat and just about anything else that can ooze, seep or secrete out of you. People who are uncomfortable with it are likely to try to joke it away, and you'll never ever change that, so don't worry about trying.
2. Something shitty like what? The Girls = Evil thread?
3. Yeah, I don't think the girls = evil thread was bad or misogynistic or anything more than a silly and immature little joke.
4. OK, so then it's all subjective
5. Ergo - if your subjective measure is out of whack with the norm, then you may in fact have to come to terms with the idea that maybe you are in fact oversensitive and that when people point that out, they aren't attacking you.
People who are religious or overweight or just generally conservative have a lot more reasons to be offended by this site than people who have two X chromosomes. People are going to say stuff that you're going to find offensive. The more people there are, the more likely it's going to be that everybody is going to be offended. That's OK. Deal with it or hide from it, but don't expect the world to bend to your delicate sensibilities.
posted by willnot at 3:47 PM on December 8, 2004
2. Something shitty like what? The Girls = Evil thread?
3. Yeah, I don't think the girls = evil thread was bad or misogynistic or anything more than a silly and immature little joke.
4. OK, so then it's all subjective
5. Ergo - if your subjective measure is out of whack with the norm, then you may in fact have to come to terms with the idea that maybe you are in fact oversensitive and that when people point that out, they aren't attacking you.
People who are religious or overweight or just generally conservative have a lot more reasons to be offended by this site than people who have two X chromosomes. People are going to say stuff that you're going to find offensive. The more people there are, the more likely it's going to be that everybody is going to be offended. That's OK. Deal with it or hide from it, but don't expect the world to bend to your delicate sensibilities.
posted by willnot at 3:47 PM on December 8, 2004
andrew: They're either crap jokes, or they're "jokes". You can't have it both ways. And I'll have you know that the joke in question has a fine pedigree and is hilarious to boot.
posted by seanyboy at 3:47 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by seanyboy at 3:47 PM on December 8, 2004
to me this is an issue like diversity in college admissions. would you guys like women around to answer your askmefi questions about what we look for in your bedrooms? then maybe driving away women because they're "oversensitive" to comments like "boyzone. that sounds hot" isn't such a good fucking idea.
posted by pikachulolita at 3:49 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by pikachulolita at 3:49 PM on December 8, 2004
pikachulolita: caring and sharing usually works for me.
And heh, If I'm not allowed to make sexists comments in a thread about sexism on a website called Meta,
well, what's the world coming to.
posted by seanyboy at 3:49 PM on December 8, 2004
And heh, If I'm not allowed to make sexists comments in a thread about sexism on a website called Meta,
well, what's the world coming to.
posted by seanyboy at 3:49 PM on December 8, 2004
okay, caring and sharing, here goes.
comments like that might be funny and meta and whatever you want to call it, but it's those very comments that make metafilter feel sexist to me. it's not a question so much of sexist posts as it is the snarky little jokes that go without much comment. when women do comment on those jokes, they are seen as whiny or oversensitive and THAT's when the sexism comes to light. by asking women to call out individual offenses and then responding to my call-out of your individual offense with a "mellow out", you are perpetuating the idea that when women are offended by the countless snarky asides y'all make a good portion of the time, we are being granola-crunching ani-listening patriarchy-hating feminazis.
and i don't appreciate it.
posted by pikachulolita at 3:54 PM on December 8, 2004
comments like that might be funny and meta and whatever you want to call it, but it's those very comments that make metafilter feel sexist to me. it's not a question so much of sexist posts as it is the snarky little jokes that go without much comment. when women do comment on those jokes, they are seen as whiny or oversensitive and THAT's when the sexism comes to light. by asking women to call out individual offenses and then responding to my call-out of your individual offense with a "mellow out", you are perpetuating the idea that when women are offended by the countless snarky asides y'all make a good portion of the time, we are being granola-crunching ani-listening patriarchy-hating feminazis.
and i don't appreciate it.
posted by pikachulolita at 3:54 PM on December 8, 2004
Nothing can be done about it other than appealing to the decency of the people who make the comments, which by the Grand Unifying Equation of the internet (Normal Person + Anonymity + Audience = Total Fuckwad) won't always work. Appealing to Matt shouldn't be considered an option since it won't prevent the problem in the future.
Before you make a comment, imagine the list of all people who would say what you're about to say and see if that's a list you'd like to be on. I'd imagine the list of people who would say what seanyboy said isn't particularly appealing. The important factor here is that people on Metafilter are not your friends. They don't know that you're really a sensitive Foucalt-reading guy or whatever, and when you say something like that they're probably picturing the source as a general caricature from that list. If you don't care, that's fine, but not acknowledging the inherent alternate realizations of you that will result from your comments is just naive.
posted by j.edwards at 3:59 PM on December 8, 2004
Before you make a comment, imagine the list of all people who would say what you're about to say and see if that's a list you'd like to be on. I'd imagine the list of people who would say what seanyboy said isn't particularly appealing. The important factor here is that people on Metafilter are not your friends. They don't know that you're really a sensitive Foucalt-reading guy or whatever, and when you say something like that they're probably picturing the source as a general caricature from that list. If you don't care, that's fine, but not acknowledging the inherent alternate realizations of you that will result from your comments is just naive.
posted by j.edwards at 3:59 PM on December 8, 2004
Really, willnot? So when anti-Semitism was the norm, Jews were just oversensitive? I'll keep that in mind. Something being the norm doesn't give it any moral weight.
Beyond that, there are pretty simple refutations to the rest of your inane response, but as it's clear that I was explaining my understanding as to why something doesn't happen as opposed to justifying it, and you were incapable of getting that, it would be pretty useless, wouldn't it?
posted by dame at 4:00 PM on December 8, 2004
Beyond that, there are pretty simple refutations to the rest of your inane response, but as it's clear that I was explaining my understanding as to why something doesn't happen as opposed to justifying it, and you were incapable of getting that, it would be pretty useless, wouldn't it?
posted by dame at 4:00 PM on December 8, 2004
The minute you start collectively characterizing any group of people -- for example, saying 'Metafilter is...' -- you've lost me.
Communities of any size are collections of individuals, and individuals vary widely in both their behaviours and their tolerance for the behaviour of others.
You behave in a way you see fit, and if your tolerance towards what you perceive to be the unpleasant behaviour of others (or your tendency to adhere to or attempt to enforce emergent or rule-bound community standards) inclines you to do so, you point it out when someone's being an asshole. This is a small wave slapping against the side of the supertanker, of course, and that's all it need be.
Of course you 'you cant change an internet community', GleepGlop. You can't really change any community other than through being a part of that community.
This is (in my mind) what 'self-policing since 1999' means, for the most part.
Saying Metafilter is this or that is just self-indulgent jaw (finger) exercise, I reckon. Not entirely unwelcome, given our collective predilection for it, but not especially useful, either.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:03 PM on December 8, 2004
Communities of any size are collections of individuals, and individuals vary widely in both their behaviours and their tolerance for the behaviour of others.
You behave in a way you see fit, and if your tolerance towards what you perceive to be the unpleasant behaviour of others (or your tendency to adhere to or attempt to enforce emergent or rule-bound community standards) inclines you to do so, you point it out when someone's being an asshole. This is a small wave slapping against the side of the supertanker, of course, and that's all it need be.
Of course you 'you cant change an internet community', GleepGlop. You can't really change any community other than through being a part of that community.
This is (in my mind) what 'self-policing since 1999' means, for the most part.
Saying Metafilter is this or that is just self-indulgent jaw (finger) exercise, I reckon. Not entirely unwelcome, given our collective predilection for it, but not especially useful, either.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:03 PM on December 8, 2004
wait. i'm sorry, i missed the part where the men of mefi rounded up the women and gassed 'em in the showers, could you show me that thread, dame?
posted by keswick at 4:06 PM on December 8, 2004 [1 favorite]
posted by keswick at 4:06 PM on December 8, 2004 [1 favorite]
Actually I was JUST thinking that ask.me in particular has had lots of chick-centric, unflamed posts lately, and I was congratulating the new ladies in the house for making themselves right at home.
I think of jerks who make comments like *exposes himself* as that drunk geek who gets brave enough to drop by your table just as you're really starting to enjoy an all-girl conversation; an object of brief pity and then ignored for juicy gossip.
posted by pomegranate at 4:08 PM on December 8, 2004
I think of jerks who make comments like *exposes himself* as that drunk geek who gets brave enough to drop by your table just as you're really starting to enjoy an all-girl conversation; an object of brief pity and then ignored for juicy gossip.
posted by pomegranate at 4:08 PM on December 8, 2004
So when anti-Semitism was the norm, Jews were just oversensitive?
HINT: when you're comparing the mild tang of testosterone on MeFi to the persecution of Jews in pre-WW2 Germany, you are:
a) being oversensitive to MeFi
b) not sensitive to the holocaust
c)just an idiot.
All answers are correct.
Fuck. And you call willnot's response inane?
posted by eyeballkid at 4:08 PM on December 8, 2004
HINT: when you're comparing the mild tang of testosterone on MeFi to the persecution of Jews in pre-WW2 Germany, you are:
a) being oversensitive to MeFi
b) not sensitive to the holocaust
c)just an idiot.
All answers are correct.
Fuck. And you call willnot's response inane?
posted by eyeballkid at 4:08 PM on December 8, 2004
And how is "boyzone. that sounds hot" a misogynistic comment? If anything it sounds like "Hmmm. Boyzone. Hot Boys. Naked. Oiled. Hmmmm"
Not the sort of comment you'd hear in a male locker room.
I'm not asking women to call out individual offenses, I'm asking people to call out those offenses. And I'm asking them to do that because I don't know better. This has actually happened in here before, and I've (happily) moderated my usage of specific phrases as a consequence.
I'm not actually asking you to mellow out, I'm telling you that I'm more willing to change my opinion if confronted in a calm rational way. There's a difference.
There's a wider issue of whether snarkiness is used to keep women in there places, or whether its used to remonstrate against perceived whining. I think we're both probably too close to the issue to take a definitive view on this, but I tend towards the latter.
In answer to j.edwards. Slightly off topic, but I know the list of people I'd make my kitchen comment to, and they're all people (men and women) who would vehomently oppose that level of sexism, and they're also usually people who know me well enough to know my feelings on the matter. There is a list of people I wouldn't make the comment to, but I generally don't like those people.
They don't know that you're really a sensitive Foucalt-reading guy or whatever
Context is everything. If I'm being naive it's only in the sense that I'm overestimating the MeFi readership.
posted by seanyboy at 4:09 PM on December 8, 2004
Not the sort of comment you'd hear in a male locker room.
I'm not asking women to call out individual offenses, I'm asking people to call out those offenses. And I'm asking them to do that because I don't know better. This has actually happened in here before, and I've (happily) moderated my usage of specific phrases as a consequence.
I'm not actually asking you to mellow out, I'm telling you that I'm more willing to change my opinion if confronted in a calm rational way. There's a difference.
There's a wider issue of whether snarkiness is used to keep women in there places, or whether its used to remonstrate against perceived whining. I think we're both probably too close to the issue to take a definitive view on this, but I tend towards the latter.
In answer to j.edwards. Slightly off topic, but I know the list of people I'd make my kitchen comment to, and they're all people (men and women) who would vehomently oppose that level of sexism, and they're also usually people who know me well enough to know my feelings on the matter. There is a list of people I wouldn't make the comment to, but I generally don't like those people.
They don't know that you're really a sensitive Foucalt-reading guy or whatever
Context is everything. If I'm being naive it's only in the sense that I'm overestimating the MeFi readership.
posted by seanyboy at 4:09 PM on December 8, 2004
Can we still call members of the female population "chicks"? It saves so much typing.
membersofthefemalepopulation... Ugh. Too many notes.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 4:09 PM on December 8, 2004
membersofthefemalepopulation... Ugh. Too many notes.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 4:09 PM on December 8, 2004
Yes, dame, making callouts invites backsnark. But here are two questions. What else can we do? Can't we fend off / stand up to a little backsnark? I think that perhaps posting a MeTa callout against something really bad, with lots of the "little things" also referenced somehow, would be more convincing. The effect you describe is quite real. But as I said to agregoli, you've got to get ahead of the curve and start nipping things as they come up - and not just save it all up for one big explosion of gender frustration (which, naturally, others will see as a disproportionate reaction).
Small steps and steady. Start bookmarking stuff.
good god this conversation feels disjointed. this is our third location today. talk about disenfranchisement!!! lol
posted by scarabic at 4:13 PM on December 8, 2004
Small steps and steady. Start bookmarking stuff.
good god this conversation feels disjointed. this is our third location today. talk about disenfranchisement!!! lol
posted by scarabic at 4:13 PM on December 8, 2004
dame, pikachulolita, et al -- if simply being direct in a thread or e-mail or metatalk post about what comment specifically is offensive does not work, then what does? Obviously threads like these aren't going to change anyone's perspective significantly. Why? Seanyboy sums it up perfectly:
"I'm not perfect, but I'm better than the 18 year old I used to be who thought he didn't have a sexist bone in his body."
The majority of sexist comments are made by people who do not actually stand behind the comment but use it simply as a joke. They are making fun of the people who use the joke. It's a *deep sigh*, metajoke of sorts. They simply need to be told they are not being funny and they are being offensive. There is no need to change someone's mind, to reorient their perspective. Metafilter men are not Ralphie Cifaretto ("She was a fucking whore, Tony!"). If the problem exists, then it is really your burden to take care of it and not wish it away. I don't mean that condescendingly, but you may have to risk being labeled as "oversensitive" in order to get things done.
posted by geoff. at 4:13 PM on December 8, 2004
"I'm not perfect, but I'm better than the 18 year old I used to be who thought he didn't have a sexist bone in his body."
The majority of sexist comments are made by people who do not actually stand behind the comment but use it simply as a joke. They are making fun of the people who use the joke. It's a *deep sigh*, metajoke of sorts. They simply need to be told they are not being funny and they are being offensive. There is no need to change someone's mind, to reorient their perspective. Metafilter men are not Ralphie Cifaretto ("She was a fucking whore, Tony!"). If the problem exists, then it is really your burden to take care of it and not wish it away. I don't mean that condescendingly, but you may have to risk being labeled as "oversensitive" in order to get things done.
posted by geoff. at 4:13 PM on December 8, 2004
I don't feel that Meta/AskMe are boyzones of aggression. I can't say that about Mefi because I don't read as high of a percentage of the FPPs, thus I don't have enough info to make an informed decision.
I said this in the first thread and I'll say it again here . . . If you want serious advice on a female topic without comments from men there are better sites to post a question or concern. Posting on a site where the majority of users are men about things like I'm a 40J where can I buy bras? Or, if I don't wear a bra to bed will I sag? Or, any other questions that pertain to women's breasts, vagina, menstrual cycle or sexuality in general are bound to get some sort of snarky comment.
I know what the AskMe guidelines are, but I really do believe that if you want a "safer" place to post female-oriented questions without the chance of snarks, they should be posted on a women's health site. Or a site where the majority is female.
I also find that the examples given by the original poster were not misogynistic. That is not to say that misogyny doesn't occur here, I've just not witnessed it.
posted by Juicylicious at 4:13 PM on December 8, 2004
I said this in the first thread and I'll say it again here . . . If you want serious advice on a female topic without comments from men there are better sites to post a question or concern. Posting on a site where the majority of users are men about things like I'm a 40J where can I buy bras? Or, if I don't wear a bra to bed will I sag? Or, any other questions that pertain to women's breasts, vagina, menstrual cycle or sexuality in general are bound to get some sort of snarky comment.
I know what the AskMe guidelines are, but I really do believe that if you want a "safer" place to post female-oriented questions without the chance of snarks, they should be posted on a women's health site. Or a site where the majority is female.
I also find that the examples given by the original poster were not misogynistic. That is not to say that misogyny doesn't occur here, I've just not witnessed it.
posted by Juicylicious at 4:13 PM on December 8, 2004
d) being hyperbolic to make a point
e) talking about anti-Semitism (you know, like in America or England) not the Holocaust
posted by dame at 4:14 PM on December 8, 2004
e) talking about anti-Semitism (you know, like in America or England) not the Holocaust
posted by dame at 4:14 PM on December 8, 2004
I know the list of people I'd make my kitchen comment to
I was more thinking of the other people who would make that comment, not those whom you would/wouldn't say it to.
Context is everything. If I'm being naive it's only in the sense that I'm overestimating the MeFi readership.
That's exactly the problem, there is no context. People here don't care enough (and certainly don't have the time) to learn about someone before forming an opinion of you based on one's comments. A reasonable course of action, then, is to make comments that would be unlikely to be misinterpreted -- if you don't want to do that, that's fine, but don't act surprised or offended when people take you to task for something you didn't mean.
posted by j.edwards at 4:15 PM on December 8, 2004
I was more thinking of the other people who would make that comment, not those whom you would/wouldn't say it to.
Context is everything. If I'm being naive it's only in the sense that I'm overestimating the MeFi readership.
That's exactly the problem, there is no context. People here don't care enough (and certainly don't have the time) to learn about someone before forming an opinion of you based on one's comments. A reasonable course of action, then, is to make comments that would be unlikely to be misinterpreted -- if you don't want to do that, that's fine, but don't act surprised or offended when people take you to task for something you didn't mean.
posted by j.edwards at 4:15 PM on December 8, 2004
Just call them out as they happen and try to get them deleted.
I would disagree with this, as it's essentially taking the position of being a heckler. It's like saying when some mysogistic pig goes to make a speech, we should all yell until they shut up, even though that makes both the speaker and the audience look like fools.
It's messed up, and something should be done about it, but there's no easy answer. I do what I can and make sure the worst stuff doesn't stick around (I just deleted 3 or 4 crap jokes here), but I think a good start would be collecting examples on the wiki. Things we could point folks to so they know it is not tolerated or appreciated.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 4:15 PM on December 8, 2004
I would disagree with this, as it's essentially taking the position of being a heckler. It's like saying when some mysogistic pig goes to make a speech, we should all yell until they shut up, even though that makes both the speaker and the audience look like fools.
It's messed up, and something should be done about it, but there's no easy answer. I do what I can and make sure the worst stuff doesn't stick around (I just deleted 3 or 4 crap jokes here), but I think a good start would be collecting examples on the wiki. Things we could point folks to so they know it is not tolerated or appreciated.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 4:15 PM on December 8, 2004
...the mild tang of testosterone on MeFi...
I think it's more a musky tang.
One suggestion may be for all of us to bring more women in here--membership is finally open, and it's a perfect time. (and it's a cheap, but potentially valuable, gift, too)
posted by amberglow at 4:16 PM on December 8, 2004
I think it's more a musky tang.
One suggestion may be for all of us to bring more women in here--membership is finally open, and it's a perfect time. (and it's a cheap, but potentially valuable, gift, too)
posted by amberglow at 4:16 PM on December 8, 2004
"If you want serious advice on a female topic without comments from men there are better sites to post a question or concern. Posting on a site where the majority of users are men about things like I'm a 40J where can I buy bras? Or, if I don't wear a bra to bed will I sag? Or, any other questions that pertain to women's breasts, vagina, menstrual cycle or sexuality in general are bound to get some sort of snarky comment."
but they shouldn't get those snarky comments, i think that's what we're trying to argue. until matt says otherwise, askmefi is there for women too, and relegating those "women's issues" to "more appropriate forums" is kind of an exclusionary thing to do.
also, you could say the same of practically every askmefi thread about tech support. are there better forums? yes. so why do people post them here? because they trust the mefi readership and would like to know what they suggest. there are so many smart women here on mefi, i'd hate to not be able to make contact with them about "female topics" without getting a whole crop of snotty responses.
posted by pikachulolita at 4:22 PM on December 8, 2004
but they shouldn't get those snarky comments, i think that's what we're trying to argue. until matt says otherwise, askmefi is there for women too, and relegating those "women's issues" to "more appropriate forums" is kind of an exclusionary thing to do.
also, you could say the same of practically every askmefi thread about tech support. are there better forums? yes. so why do people post them here? because they trust the mefi readership and would like to know what they suggest. there are so many smart women here on mefi, i'd hate to not be able to make contact with them about "female topics" without getting a whole crop of snotty responses.
posted by pikachulolita at 4:22 PM on December 8, 2004
i really hate getting my comments deleted, especially when they are not sexist. in fact, it really pisses me off. wtf, matt.
posted by keswick at 4:24 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by keswick at 4:24 PM on December 8, 2004
That's right dame - Because sexism exists, then naturally all things labeled as sexist naturally are.
I think there are some things or comments that are clearly anti-Semitic, and I think that there are some things or comments that some people see as anti-Semitic while other people look at it and think - you're crazy. And, if you can't even get all Jews (or other sub-group that is oppressed) to agree then there's a good chance that you are wrong.
So, if we're denying Jews jobs, or taking their property or sending them to gas chambers, then I'm going to join the chorus of people saying this is f'd up. But, if somebody is branding Hogan's Heroes anti-Semitic because they are making light of WWII and thus diminishing the horror of the holocaust (and I promise you that I can find somebody who has made that argument in all earnestness), then I'm going to look at that person and say you're just being overly sensitive.
And if you really think that somebody who laughs at a mathematical proof of girls being evil is laughing because they hate women or think that women are evil, then I'm sorry, but in my view, you're being overly sensitive. And if you're really offended by an ironic sexist comment in a thread about sexism (see up-thread), then I think you're a humorless twit (making sure to type an "i" and not an "a" so as not to be branded a female-hating member of an oppressive patriarchy.
posted by willnot at 4:24 PM on December 8, 2004
I think there are some things or comments that are clearly anti-Semitic, and I think that there are some things or comments that some people see as anti-Semitic while other people look at it and think - you're crazy. And, if you can't even get all Jews (or other sub-group that is oppressed) to agree then there's a good chance that you are wrong.
So, if we're denying Jews jobs, or taking their property or sending them to gas chambers, then I'm going to join the chorus of people saying this is f'd up. But, if somebody is branding Hogan's Heroes anti-Semitic because they are making light of WWII and thus diminishing the horror of the holocaust (and I promise you that I can find somebody who has made that argument in all earnestness), then I'm going to look at that person and say you're just being overly sensitive.
And if you really think that somebody who laughs at a mathematical proof of girls being evil is laughing because they hate women or think that women are evil, then I'm sorry, but in my view, you're being overly sensitive. And if you're really offended by an ironic sexist comment in a thread about sexism (see up-thread), then I think you're a humorless twit (making sure to type an "i" and not an "a" so as not to be branded a female-hating member of an oppressive patriarchy.
posted by willnot at 4:24 PM on December 8, 2004
but they shouldn't get those snarky comments, i think that's what we're trying to argue.
I understand what you are arguing, I just don't see it as cut n' dry as you do. (intelligent minds can disagree)
posted by Juicylicious at 4:29 PM on December 8, 2004
I understand what you are arguing, I just don't see it as cut n' dry as you do. (intelligent minds can disagree)
posted by Juicylicious at 4:29 PM on December 8, 2004
don't act surprised or offended when people take you to task for something you didn't mean.
I'm not offended. I do think that people should choose their battles a bit more carefully, and I'm still working on the whole "Is it OK to say this when I know people know I'm not being serious" thing.
This recent Mefi Post says more on the issue than I'm capable of.
Plus - what amberglow said.
posted by seanyboy at 4:29 PM on December 8, 2004
I'm not offended. I do think that people should choose their battles a bit more carefully, and I'm still working on the whole "Is it OK to say this when I know people know I'm not being serious" thing.
This recent Mefi Post says more on the issue than I'm capable of.
Plus - what amberglow said.
posted by seanyboy at 4:29 PM on December 8, 2004
"if you're really offended by an ironic sexist comment in a thread about sexism (see up-thread), then I think you're a humorless twit"
aw, thanks, willnot! you're right, i totally hate humor.
it's just that we tolerate that shit ALL THE TIME and i would have hoped that in just ONE THREAD we could all be adults and not make snarky jokes about something that a number of members feel is a real concern. is that so "humorless" of me to ask?
posted by pikachulolita at 4:31 PM on December 8, 2004
aw, thanks, willnot! you're right, i totally hate humor.
it's just that we tolerate that shit ALL THE TIME and i would have hoped that in just ONE THREAD we could all be adults and not make snarky jokes about something that a number of members feel is a real concern. is that so "humorless" of me to ask?
posted by pikachulolita at 4:31 PM on December 8, 2004
Every female member of metafilter should get one other woman to sign up. We can repeat that as necessary until we no longer have this problem.
posted by Yelling At Nothing at 4:31 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by Yelling At Nothing at 4:31 PM on December 8, 2004
Please give me examples of offending FPPs and replies. Seriously because I'm starting to think that I'm missing something here.
posted by Juicylicious at 4:34 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by Juicylicious at 4:34 PM on December 8, 2004
"I do what I can and make sure the worst stuff doesn't stick around (I just deleted 3 or 4 crap jokes here)"
Hot bi babes is hardly a "crap joke". It's earned its place in internet lore through the most important qualities of humorous comments - timelessness and truth.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 4:35 PM on December 8, 2004
Hot bi babes is hardly a "crap joke". It's earned its place in internet lore through the most important qualities of humorous comments - timelessness and truth.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 4:35 PM on December 8, 2004
not make snarky jokes about something that a number of members feel is a real concern
I reserve the right to make snarky jokes AND feel that it's a real concern.
Now, who said men couldn't multi-task.
posted by seanyboy at 4:35 PM on December 8, 2004
I reserve the right to make snarky jokes AND feel that it's a real concern.
Now, who said men couldn't multi-task.
posted by seanyboy at 4:35 PM on December 8, 2004
"I understand what you are arguing, I just don't see it as cut n' dry as you do. (intelligent minds can disagree)"
yeah, we can definitely disagree. but i think from now on, in EVERY male-oriented thread on ask mefi, we ladies should get in on the snarky comment action. maybe a few well-placed comments about penis length. because, you know, there are better forums.
juicylicious: like i said, it's not so much FPPs (i hate that term and that may be where some of the confusion arises) but comments. little objectifying comments, or girls-are-icky comments, or the "women are oversensitive" comments. i don't think i'm arguing that y'all should stop doing it simply for moral reasons; i'm just saying that if you think metafilter benefits from its female readership, maybe it would be nice to acknowledge that contribution by listening to our complaints. i didn't see the previous thread, so i don't know if it was just a few members complaining about the boyzone feel or if it was a lot of members, but i've seen this conversation many a time on mefi and it seems to be a consistent concern of many women here. it wouldn't hurt anyone to just step back from the snarky comments and kneejerk "censorship!" reactions for just a few minutes and ask some questions to clarify what makes women feel a sense of unease posting here.
posted by pikachulolita at 4:41 PM on December 8, 2004
yeah, we can definitely disagree. but i think from now on, in EVERY male-oriented thread on ask mefi, we ladies should get in on the snarky comment action. maybe a few well-placed comments about penis length. because, you know, there are better forums.
juicylicious: like i said, it's not so much FPPs (i hate that term and that may be where some of the confusion arises) but comments. little objectifying comments, or girls-are-icky comments, or the "women are oversensitive" comments. i don't think i'm arguing that y'all should stop doing it simply for moral reasons; i'm just saying that if you think metafilter benefits from its female readership, maybe it would be nice to acknowledge that contribution by listening to our complaints. i didn't see the previous thread, so i don't know if it was just a few members complaining about the boyzone feel or if it was a lot of members, but i've seen this conversation many a time on mefi and it seems to be a consistent concern of many women here. it wouldn't hurt anyone to just step back from the snarky comments and kneejerk "censorship!" reactions for just a few minutes and ask some questions to clarify what makes women feel a sense of unease posting here.
posted by pikachulolita at 4:41 PM on December 8, 2004
in EVERY male-oriented thread on ask mefi, we ladies should get in on the snarky comment action
Go for it. Really. I think you'll find that most guys will shrug it off or retort in a similarly snarky way, which accomplishes nothing. The problem, as I see it, isn't necessarily that guys have thicker hides than women and can take a sexist snark better, but that, as pikachulolita points out, women have to deal with it a lot more in everyday life, and thus are more sick and tired of it.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 4:56 PM on December 8, 2004
Go for it. Really. I think you'll find that most guys will shrug it off or retort in a similarly snarky way, which accomplishes nothing. The problem, as I see it, isn't necessarily that guys have thicker hides than women and can take a sexist snark better, but that, as pikachulolita points out, women have to deal with it a lot more in everyday life, and thus are more sick and tired of it.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 4:56 PM on December 8, 2004
but i think from now on, in EVERY male-oriented thread on ask mefi, we ladies should get in on the snarky comment action. maybe a few well-placed comments about penis length.
We always get that from our own kind, actually, so it's nothing to restrain yourself from.
posted by Firas at 5:09 PM on December 8, 2004
We always get that from our own kind, actually, so it's nothing to restrain yourself from.
posted by Firas at 5:09 PM on December 8, 2004
We need more female republican trolls.
posted by angry modem at 5:12 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by angry modem at 5:12 PM on December 8, 2004
maybe a few well-placed comments about penis length
Quonsar's penis is long enough to catch a fish with.
posted by puke & cry at 5:12 PM on December 8, 2004
Quonsar's penis is long enough to catch a fish with.
posted by puke & cry at 5:12 PM on December 8, 2004
Please, please! Can't we all sit around me and have a civilized conversation for once?
posted by weretable and the undead chairs at 5:23 PM on December 8, 2004 [1 favorite]
posted by weretable and the undead chairs at 5:23 PM on December 8, 2004 [1 favorite]
I've cut back my participation in this sort of thread now because I always come out of it feeling like a shrill harpie who has overdefended my position. e.g. here and here, recently.
It's hard to articulate the issues sometimes, and it's tiring and numbing to be called oversensitive, reactionary, etc., or to just have people whose names you know and respect make snarky asides that belittle your pov, when you've been nothing but earnest throughout the discussion. At the same time, the initial post suggested that at least one woman who I don't think of as being especially nazi feminist or reactionary finds the atmostphere here hostile enough to consider leaving, so I guess it's important to grow a thicker skin.
Also, fwiw, I still have an old unrefreshed screen of the question in the green up on my computer. I'm willing to email the text to anyone if they want it; email in my profile. Seems like it was fairly well summarized, though.
posted by onlyconnect at 5:25 PM on December 8, 2004
It's hard to articulate the issues sometimes, and it's tiring and numbing to be called oversensitive, reactionary, etc., or to just have people whose names you know and respect make snarky asides that belittle your pov, when you've been nothing but earnest throughout the discussion. At the same time, the initial post suggested that at least one woman who I don't think of as being especially nazi feminist or reactionary finds the atmostphere here hostile enough to consider leaving, so I guess it's important to grow a thicker skin.
Also, fwiw, I still have an old unrefreshed screen of the question in the green up on my computer. I'm willing to email the text to anyone if they want it; email in my profile. Seems like it was fairly well summarized, though.
posted by onlyconnect at 5:25 PM on December 8, 2004
I would disagree with this, as it's essentially taking the position of being a heckler.
I don't see why. We do it this way for everything else. You catch a lot of stuff on your own but it helps to have people surfacing potential hotspots as well, no? Perhaps you're not hearing this clearly enough, but several of us are saying that you're *not* actually catching enough of the sexist stuff on your own.
But whatever. I give up. Please commence the "don't question Matt" drubbing I have coming now.
posted by scarabic at 5:46 PM on December 8, 2004
I don't see why. We do it this way for everything else. You catch a lot of stuff on your own but it helps to have people surfacing potential hotspots as well, no? Perhaps you're not hearing this clearly enough, but several of us are saying that you're *not* actually catching enough of the sexist stuff on your own.
But whatever. I give up. Please commence the "don't question Matt" drubbing I have coming now.
posted by scarabic at 5:46 PM on December 8, 2004
This makes me laugh in a sort of shaking-my-head-with-defeat way. The above comments from the guys boil down to :
Us? We're not sexist.
You? You're too sensitive.
Nothing can be done about it anyway.
On a day to day basis, I go with the flow. I sometimes sigh. I sometimes make Pfffing noises at the screen. The one time I saw red recently was in the thread about the bras. I knew as soon as I saw the question, that the guys wouldn't be able to stop themselves (if, indeed, they ever thought to try.) I knew that probably Mr. Crash Davis would be one of the ooglers..god love em- he does like the ladies. For one brief moment I thought about getting all school-marmish, but the moment passed.
But what really, really gets me mad is the idea that we shouldn't post female questions in the green if we are too sensitive. That is one of the most fucked-up things I have read in Metafilter in a long time.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:46 PM on December 8, 2004
Us? We're not sexist.
You? You're too sensitive.
Nothing can be done about it anyway.
On a day to day basis, I go with the flow. I sometimes sigh. I sometimes make Pfffing noises at the screen. The one time I saw red recently was in the thread about the bras. I knew as soon as I saw the question, that the guys wouldn't be able to stop themselves (if, indeed, they ever thought to try.) I knew that probably Mr. Crash Davis would be one of the ooglers..god love em- he does like the ladies. For one brief moment I thought about getting all school-marmish, but the moment passed.
But what really, really gets me mad is the idea that we shouldn't post female questions in the green if we are too sensitive. That is one of the most fucked-up things I have read in Metafilter in a long time.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:46 PM on December 8, 2004
But what really, really gets me mad is the idea that we shouldn't post female questions in the green if we are too sensitive. That is one of the most fucked-up things I have read in Metafilter in a long time.
I'll second that.
posted by dobbs at 6:01 PM on December 8, 2004
I'll second that.
posted by dobbs at 6:01 PM on December 8, 2004
MetaFilter: People whose names you know and respect make snarky asides.
posted by liam at 6:04 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by liam at 6:04 PM on December 8, 2004
ooh man, I hope you're wearing an asbestos codpiece, P_G.
(and yes, i got the reference.)
posted by keswick at 6:05 PM on December 8, 2004
(and yes, i got the reference.)
posted by keswick at 6:05 PM on December 8, 2004
So, matt, I hear you have a baby girl on the way. To think, one day this will all be hers. Congrats!
posted by dobbs at 6:20 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by dobbs at 6:20 PM on December 8, 2004
Assholery.
posted by Quartermass at 6:23 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by Quartermass at 6:23 PM on December 8, 2004
Amen, Secret Life of Gravy.
And geoff, while your earlier point was obviously made in a helpful, positive spirit, it's weak because your example is from your posted article about an appalling case of sexual predation on poor women. A discussion on rape and homelessness, yes, that's just when I want to hear some asshat drag out the "stop fucking, bitch" bon mot. There were plenty of other people in that thread who said "stop raping, bastard" instead, and that's good to see. But how hard is it to understand that someone making such an crude, ugly remark, especially in that context, is going to seriously offend? Some woman is living in a car with her kids thanks to her rapist landlord, but if the bitch just hadn't fucked in the first place, she'd have that much more room in her Vega this Christmas. You don't have to be a woman to recoil from that; a human being will do. If someone waves his rhetorical dick around this way, it is not Equipose's or anyone else's job to gently cite the supporting evidence to prove to him that he should put it back in his pants. He hauled it out in the first place, and he should have kept it tucked away if he didn't want to risk it getting a good sharp stomp.
It's not chivarly that people are advocating, it's civility. It's decency. Matt has promoted that here, and so have many of the most consistently interesting and thoughtful posters here, the people who made me want to join in the first place (languagehat leaps immediately to mind). It's not some radical concept. If Matt''s heard from women who would otherwise be here and commenting if it weren't for such ugliness, pay attention. I make a general point of civility, but I will not get earnest and high-brow with someone who is that gross. When someone insists on being an utter sexist jackass, especially in a thread addressing a horrific problem disproportionately affecting women to a vast degree, I have no qualms calling him on it, if I happen to be there to see it. And I will make every effort to do it smarter and funnier than he could, if only just to give myself and the other like-minded human beings here a laugh. And I hope agregoli and anyone else considering leaving sticks around and does the same.
PS. Pretty_Generic, I suggest you print off that banner, paste it into a scrapbook titled "Why Is It I Am Stinkweed To The Ladies, Again?," and keep it somewhere handy, like say the front of your pants, for frequent reference.
posted by melissa may at 6:36 PM on December 8, 2004
And geoff, while your earlier point was obviously made in a helpful, positive spirit, it's weak because your example is from your posted article about an appalling case of sexual predation on poor women. A discussion on rape and homelessness, yes, that's just when I want to hear some asshat drag out the "stop fucking, bitch" bon mot. There were plenty of other people in that thread who said "stop raping, bastard" instead, and that's good to see. But how hard is it to understand that someone making such an crude, ugly remark, especially in that context, is going to seriously offend? Some woman is living in a car with her kids thanks to her rapist landlord, but if the bitch just hadn't fucked in the first place, she'd have that much more room in her Vega this Christmas. You don't have to be a woman to recoil from that; a human being will do. If someone waves his rhetorical dick around this way, it is not Equipose's or anyone else's job to gently cite the supporting evidence to prove to him that he should put it back in his pants. He hauled it out in the first place, and he should have kept it tucked away if he didn't want to risk it getting a good sharp stomp.
It's not chivarly that people are advocating, it's civility. It's decency. Matt has promoted that here, and so have many of the most consistently interesting and thoughtful posters here, the people who made me want to join in the first place (languagehat leaps immediately to mind). It's not some radical concept. If Matt''s heard from women who would otherwise be here and commenting if it weren't for such ugliness, pay attention. I make a general point of civility, but I will not get earnest and high-brow with someone who is that gross. When someone insists on being an utter sexist jackass, especially in a thread addressing a horrific problem disproportionately affecting women to a vast degree, I have no qualms calling him on it, if I happen to be there to see it. And I will make every effort to do it smarter and funnier than he could, if only just to give myself and the other like-minded human beings here a laugh. And I hope agregoli and anyone else considering leaving sticks around and does the same.
PS. Pretty_Generic, I suggest you print off that banner, paste it into a scrapbook titled "Why Is It I Am Stinkweed To The Ladies, Again?," and keep it somewhere handy, like say the front of your pants, for frequent reference.
posted by melissa may at 6:36 PM on December 8, 2004
Scarabic & willnot: The point I would see as most vulnerable to change is not the reasonable people disagree point, but the one before it, where reasonable don't see the full awfulness of something because they are not sensitive to the general atmosphere. Maybe the answer is for one of us to compile a dossier, but maybe the answer is also to consider that when you consider complaints. It isn't that there is some backsnark but that it is doubled.
As for the "if everyone doesn't agree then you must be wrong" argument, willnot, I don't buy it and I never had. Big groups of people decide on stupid things all the time and other people are not my conscience.
Futher, I'll third what dobbs seconded. Women are part of this community and they should feel comfortable posting girlie questions. And pretty much everything SLoG, pickachulolita, dobbs, and onlyconnect said.
I'm not in this to make guys feel bad. I like men. But there is a consistent feeling that this place is unwelcoming to women on a certain level. And it might be nice if that was considered outside of a defensive counterreaction.
One more thing willnot: I'm not actually riled up about the Girls=Evil thing. I never brought it up. I'm speaking more generally.
And Scarabic, darling, I'll follow you through green & gray any day, as long as you promise we can argue when we get there.
posted by dame at 6:43 PM on December 8, 2004
As for the "if everyone doesn't agree then you must be wrong" argument, willnot, I don't buy it and I never had. Big groups of people decide on stupid things all the time and other people are not my conscience.
Futher, I'll third what dobbs seconded. Women are part of this community and they should feel comfortable posting girlie questions. And pretty much everything SLoG, pickachulolita, dobbs, and onlyconnect said.
I'm not in this to make guys feel bad. I like men. But there is a consistent feeling that this place is unwelcoming to women on a certain level. And it might be nice if that was considered outside of a defensive counterreaction.
One more thing willnot: I'm not actually riled up about the Girls=Evil thing. I never brought it up. I'm speaking more generally.
And Scarabic, darling, I'll follow you through green & gray any day, as long as you promise we can argue when we get there.
posted by dame at 6:43 PM on December 8, 2004
Exactly what Secret Life of Gravy said.
And: this is why we can't have nice things.
posted by equipoise at 6:48 PM on December 8, 2004
And: this is why we can't have nice things.
posted by equipoise at 6:48 PM on December 8, 2004
I think the bra question got singled out on the deleted ask.me post as well. Was it really that bad? Of 50 comments, the vast majority were by women, and aside from madman's and mr_crash_davis' (and, before determining that her name is Emily, equipoise's) none of them, to me, seem leer-y or crude (jonmc's and Pretty_Generic's don't answer the question at hand but I don't read them as being prurient). It's not like the ravening male hordes descended on it at the merest mention of BQQBIES.
posted by kenko at 6:52 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by kenko at 6:52 PM on December 8, 2004
Men: Please stop acting like such boys.
Women: Please stop acting like such chicks.
This is what we're saying, right?
posted by majcher at 6:53 PM on December 8, 2004
Women: Please stop acting like such chicks.
This is what we're saying, right?
posted by majcher at 6:53 PM on December 8, 2004
Change "learning her name was Emily" to "learning how to read" in my comment above, since it's actually clear from the rest of equipoise's comment that she's female.
posted by kenko at 6:54 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by kenko at 6:54 PM on December 8, 2004
You know, I have to point out that orange clock didn't really give any proof that there are many people who see Metafilter as a veritable sexist boyzone of aggression and braggadocio. I mean, hey, there are many people without their left leg that think that Metafilter is a place to find the best crackpipes, too.
But, for what it's worth:
Results 1 - 10 of about 678 from metafilter.com for penis. (0.31 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 192 from metafilter.com for vagina. (0.26 seconds)
Draw your own conclusions from that.
posted by angry modem at 6:55 PM on December 8, 2004
But, for what it's worth:
Results 1 - 10 of about 678 from metafilter.com for penis. (0.31 seconds)
Results 1 - 10 of about 192 from metafilter.com for vagina. (0.26 seconds)
Draw your own conclusions from that.
posted by angry modem at 6:55 PM on December 8, 2004
"I knew that probably Mr. Crash Davis would be one of the ooglers..god love em- he does like the ladies."
God bless you for noticing, S.L.O.G.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 7:06 PM on December 8, 2004
God bless you for noticing, S.L.O.G.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 7:06 PM on December 8, 2004
To chime in with dobbs, dame, Gravy, and equipoise--Juicylicious's statement that "if women don't like it, don't mention boobs or menstruation in the Green" is probably the one thing on this thread I find most upsetting.
It would be nice if people stopped being fucktards on MeFi. I myself am trying to be less of a fucktard. I challenge everyone to do the same (my hope is that they will have better results than I).
posted by Sidhedevil at 7:08 PM on December 8, 2004
It would be nice if people stopped being fucktards on MeFi. I myself am trying to be less of a fucktard. I challenge everyone to do the same (my hope is that they will have better results than I).
posted by Sidhedevil at 7:08 PM on December 8, 2004
For what it's worth:
boob (1-10 of 159 results) + boobs (1-10 of 232 results) + boobies (1-10 of 143 results) = 538 results
manboobs (1-3 of 4) + manboob (0 of 0 results) + manboobies (1-2 of 3) = 7
Draw your own conclusions from that.
posted by onlyconnect at 7:17 PM on December 8, 2004
boob (1-10 of 159 results) + boobs (1-10 of 232 results) + boobies (1-10 of 143 results) = 538 results
manboobs (1-3 of 4) + manboob (0 of 0 results) + manboobies (1-2 of 3) = 7
Draw your own conclusions from that.
posted by onlyconnect at 7:17 PM on December 8, 2004
Yeah. but most of those booby posts were about the waterfowl.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 7:22 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by Pretty_Generic at 7:22 PM on December 8, 2004
But what really, really gets me mad is the idea that we shouldn't post female questions in the green if we are too sensitive.
You shouldn't post questions on a web board with anonymous posters if you're too sensitive. No matter what the issue.
I really don't find the place to be boyzone-ish. I generally avoid the social commentary threads (anything involving politics, gender, religion, sex, weight, etc...) cause they almost always turn weird and/or mean. That might be why I don't notice it much.
The people here are strangers to me, and I'm a stranger to them. That makes it easier to make little comments and quips that people will find offensive. Lack of vocal inflection and body language cues doesn't help with interpretation. I guess what I'm saying is, I don't care. That's possibly a thick skin or possibly I'm too narcissistic to worry about what others here think.
Or matt could make a pony called fem.metafilter.com and refuse access to the lads. Just think of the bg colour options!
posted by Salmonberry at 7:30 PM on December 8, 2004
You shouldn't post questions on a web board with anonymous posters if you're too sensitive. No matter what the issue.
I really don't find the place to be boyzone-ish. I generally avoid the social commentary threads (anything involving politics, gender, religion, sex, weight, etc...) cause they almost always turn weird and/or mean. That might be why I don't notice it much.
The people here are strangers to me, and I'm a stranger to them. That makes it easier to make little comments and quips that people will find offensive. Lack of vocal inflection and body language cues doesn't help with interpretation. I guess what I'm saying is, I don't care. That's possibly a thick skin or possibly I'm too narcissistic to worry about what others here think.
Or matt could make a pony called fem.metafilter.com and refuse access to the lads. Just think of the bg colour options!
posted by Salmonberry at 7:30 PM on December 8, 2004
Er, WHAT waterfowl?
posted by orange swan at 7:34 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by orange swan at 7:34 PM on December 8, 2004
If I'm being naive it's only in the sense that I'm overestimating the MeFi readership.
you're being naive in expecting other people who are already annoyed with a perceived level of sexism not to take the kitchen crack as anything other than a slap in the face. You are overestimating the ability of *any* audience to read your mind or join some widely-spread dots.
P_G, aren't you the same guy who was lamenting his continuing unlaidness today? We need to have a little talk, son.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 7:40 PM on December 8, 2004
you're being naive in expecting other people who are already annoyed with a perceived level of sexism not to take the kitchen crack as anything other than a slap in the face. You are overestimating the ability of *any* audience to read your mind or join some widely-spread dots.
P_G, aren't you the same guy who was lamenting his continuing unlaidness today? We need to have a little talk, son.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 7:40 PM on December 8, 2004
Boobies.
Apparently they kill their siblings even when there's a ready food supply.
posted by kenko at 7:42 PM on December 8, 2004
Apparently they kill their siblings even when there's a ready food supply.
posted by kenko at 7:42 PM on December 8, 2004
"...a veritable boyzone of aggression and braggadocio."
I am an old-style Steinem/Friedan equality feminist. Exhortations to "respect the ladies" gives me hives. The premise that aggression is masculine and women are naturally cooperative makes my blood boil. The assumption that all sexual talk is inherently objectifying of women and necessarily misogynist is repulsive. These examples and everything like them represent, to me, a topsy-turvy hell where feminism has been subverted by the archaic sexist ideals it had intended to destroy.
Perhaps MetaFilter should be a kinder, gentler place. Indeed, I would welcome it. But don't equate "mean and rough" with sexism or, worse, misogyny because that's a deeply contestable assertion and, more to the point and ironically, for some of us it's a sexist, antifeminist assertion.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:45 PM on December 8, 2004
I am an old-style Steinem/Friedan equality feminist. Exhortations to "respect the ladies" gives me hives. The premise that aggression is masculine and women are naturally cooperative makes my blood boil. The assumption that all sexual talk is inherently objectifying of women and necessarily misogynist is repulsive. These examples and everything like them represent, to me, a topsy-turvy hell where feminism has been subverted by the archaic sexist ideals it had intended to destroy.
Perhaps MetaFilter should be a kinder, gentler place. Indeed, I would welcome it. But don't equate "mean and rough" with sexism or, worse, misogyny because that's a deeply contestable assertion and, more to the point and ironically, for some of us it's a sexist, antifeminist assertion.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:45 PM on December 8, 2004
Are you suggesting I'm a failure with women because they have centipedes in their vaginas? Because I find that offensive.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 7:46 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by Pretty_Generic at 7:46 PM on December 8, 2004
P_G, aren't you the same guy who was lamenting his continuing unlaidness today?
If not today, he definitely has in the past. Some of us tried to help him get a date.
Personally, I hope he never gets laid again. No, really.
posted by dobbs at 7:48 PM on December 8, 2004
If not today, he definitely has in the past. Some of us tried to help him get a date.
Personally, I hope he never gets laid again. No, really.
posted by dobbs at 7:48 PM on December 8, 2004
What would that accomplish, exactly? (Maybe it would make him really bitter towards women?)
posted by kenko at 7:52 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by kenko at 7:52 PM on December 8, 2004
Why is that dobbs? Do you enjoy me whining about it, maybe?
posted by Pretty_Generic at 7:53 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by Pretty_Generic at 7:53 PM on December 8, 2004
PS. Pretty_Generic, I suggest you print off that banner, paste it into a scrapbook titled "Why Is It I Am Stinkweed To The Ladies, Again?," and keep it somewhere handy, like say the front of your pants, for frequent reference.
Well, this will come as no surprise, but I find this to be very amusing. I guess there really is no accounting for taste, sense of humor, etc. Similarly, I tend to laugh at much of what crash davis posts. Hey, upon much reflection (and a review of an email exchange I've had with equipose regarding the thread geoff cites above), maybe despite my best intentions I really AM a misogynist, at least when it comes to things that make me laugh. I'm opressing 50% of the populace with my sense of humor. But melissa may, don't rely on the old standby "this is why no women find you attractive," cause the truth is, misogynists do just as well with women as enlightened men, they just do well with a different type of woman, who doesn't share the same values, sense of humor/outrage, etc, as you.
posted by jonson at 7:53 PM on December 8, 2004
Well, this will come as no surprise, but I find this to be very amusing. I guess there really is no accounting for taste, sense of humor, etc. Similarly, I tend to laugh at much of what crash davis posts. Hey, upon much reflection (and a review of an email exchange I've had with equipose regarding the thread geoff cites above), maybe despite my best intentions I really AM a misogynist, at least when it comes to things that make me laugh. I'm opressing 50% of the populace with my sense of humor. But melissa may, don't rely on the old standby "this is why no women find you attractive," cause the truth is, misogynists do just as well with women as enlightened men, they just do well with a different type of woman, who doesn't share the same values, sense of humor/outrage, etc, as you.
posted by jonson at 7:53 PM on December 8, 2004
Oh, that waterfowl.
[unruffles feathers, wonders if she should have called herself orange booby as is catchier]
posted by orange swan at 7:56 PM on December 8, 2004
[unruffles feathers, wonders if she should have called herself orange booby as is catchier]
posted by orange swan at 7:56 PM on December 8, 2004
PG, no, I just think people should get what they deserve.
posted by dobbs at 8:01 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by dobbs at 8:01 PM on December 8, 2004
Please elaborate! Only through enlightenment can I become a better person.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 8:05 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by Pretty_Generic at 8:05 PM on December 8, 2004
dobbs + P_G: Both of you shut up. You're acting like stupid children playing a game of am not - are too.
Yes, this place is a boyzone. No, I don't find it overly hostile. Not until threads like these, where everyone gets their back up.
There are a lot of men here. Men in large groups act like their lowest common denominator. Women do this too. However, there are not a lot of women here.
Adding more women will not solve this. Calling the men on every little comment you find offensive will not solve this. Generating threads like this where people try to verbally stab each other will not solve this.
The only way to fix this lies with Matt, and since he cannot or will not, then either put up or leave. Being here is no worse than sitting around a bunch of guys in a bar.
posted by FunkyHelix at 8:16 PM on December 8, 2004
Yes, this place is a boyzone. No, I don't find it overly hostile. Not until threads like these, where everyone gets their back up.
There are a lot of men here. Men in large groups act like their lowest common denominator. Women do this too. However, there are not a lot of women here.
Adding more women will not solve this. Calling the men on every little comment you find offensive will not solve this. Generating threads like this where people try to verbally stab each other will not solve this.
The only way to fix this lies with Matt, and since he cannot or will not, then either put up or leave. Being here is no worse than sitting around a bunch of guys in a bar.
posted by FunkyHelix at 8:16 PM on December 8, 2004
"truth is, misogynists do just as well with women as enlightened men"
May or may not be true. Most women I know have a natural aversion to complete tools though. Just a thought.
posted by arha at 8:17 PM on December 8, 2004
May or may not be true. Most women I know have a natural aversion to complete tools though. Just a thought.
posted by arha at 8:17 PM on December 8, 2004
You're acting like stupid children playing a game of am not - are too.
No, dobbs is wishing me a lifetime of misery, whereas I have no idea what he is talking about. I mean, genuinely. No idea.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 8:19 PM on December 8, 2004
No, dobbs is wishing me a lifetime of misery, whereas I have no idea what he is talking about. I mean, genuinely. No idea.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 8:19 PM on December 8, 2004
You may be right, arha... I was only using the Girls Gone Wild Spring Break infomercial as evidence of my theory. Lord knows those drunken coeds see something in the frat boy alpha male unenlightened types.
posted by jonson at 8:26 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by jonson at 8:26 PM on December 8, 2004
P_G: You're rather stupid then.
posted by FunkyHelix at 8:26 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by FunkyHelix at 8:26 PM on December 8, 2004
boob (1-10 of 159 results) + boobs (1-10 of 232 results) + boobies (1-10 of 143 results) = 538 results
Hey! That's rigged math! Won't search engines count "boob" when you search for "boobs", since one is a subset of the other (i.e., the word "boob" is in the word "boobs").
Damn, I think I just threw off the boob/penis statistics.
Penis, penis, penis, penis, penis, penis.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:32 PM on December 8, 2004
Hey! That's rigged math! Won't search engines count "boob" when you search for "boobs", since one is a subset of the other (i.e., the word "boob" is in the word "boobs").
Damn, I think I just threw off the boob/penis statistics.
Penis, penis, penis, penis, penis, penis.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:32 PM on December 8, 2004
FunkyHelix, I fully admit that. Now please explain it to me.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 8:32 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by Pretty_Generic at 8:32 PM on December 8, 2004
Let she without guilt throw the first stone, eh?
kenko, did my comment to lemonpillows sound leer-y? I was trying to make a silly joke, but...uh...no one laughed. No one commented on it at all, in fact, so I wasn't sure what folks were thinking. And I don't know how to reach lemonpillows to ask her myself (no e-mail address on her profile, which seems perfectly sensible to me).
Honestly, I'm glad you told me what your impression of it was. Of course I didn't mean to offend anyone, but maybe I did. So I'm sorry, and I'll try to be more careful in the future. One bad joke doesn't make me a bad person, nor does your comment try to make me look like one--in fact, this gives me the opportunity to become a better person. In all seriousness, thanks.
And thanks to jonson for being willing to examine his comments too. It's a healthy thing, folks--far better for you (and for everyone else) than getting angry at the people who say they're uncomfortable. As geoff pointed out at the beginning of this thread, it's even easier when the people voicing there discomfort do so politely, without including ad hominem attacks.
P.S. -- How do I link to a particular spot in a previous thread? My metaskills are still fledgling.
posted by equipoise at 8:39 PM on December 8, 2004
kenko, did my comment to lemonpillows sound leer-y? I was trying to make a silly joke, but...uh...no one laughed. No one commented on it at all, in fact, so I wasn't sure what folks were thinking. And I don't know how to reach lemonpillows to ask her myself (no e-mail address on her profile, which seems perfectly sensible to me).
Honestly, I'm glad you told me what your impression of it was. Of course I didn't mean to offend anyone, but maybe I did. So I'm sorry, and I'll try to be more careful in the future. One bad joke doesn't make me a bad person, nor does your comment try to make me look like one--in fact, this gives me the opportunity to become a better person. In all seriousness, thanks.
And thanks to jonson for being willing to examine his comments too. It's a healthy thing, folks--far better for you (and for everyone else) than getting angry at the people who say they're uncomfortable. As geoff pointed out at the beginning of this thread, it's even easier when the people voicing there discomfort do so politely, without including ad hominem attacks.
P.S. -- How do I link to a particular spot in a previous thread? My metaskills are still fledgling.
posted by equipoise at 8:39 PM on December 8, 2004
P_G, I think that dobbs is saying that the only woman you deserve is one with actual centipedes in her vagina, and since that is completely absurd, you are unlikely to ever have sex again, thereby not propagating your horrible sexist genetics, sparing future generations of delicate flowers just that much of a possibility of being scarred by such a terrible sentiment as the one you posted earlier.
Maybe someone else can explain it better. I don't understand it, either.
posted by majcher at 8:41 PM on December 8, 2004
Maybe someone else can explain it better. I don't understand it, either.
posted by majcher at 8:41 PM on December 8, 2004
I've been sitting here for a few minutes wondering if I should throw something into the debate. I've said things like this before... but here goes anyway.
I don't find MeFi to be a sexist place. It's a boyzone in the sense that there are more boys than girls here, and so the content and atmosphere inevitably reflects that. But that's fine. I don't feel excluded or disrespected, and that's what counts. There are some misogynists here, but they are very few and there are many men here who are quick to call out misogyny when they see it. And I find Matt's attitude towards women to be practically gallant, so it helps balance things. I get flirted with, but I also do my share of flirting, and frankly it's a pleasant little ego boost sometimes when I'm down from yet another disappointment in my dating life.
But I would like the MeFi men to be aware of and sensitive to one thing. Women get hassled constantly by men they don't know. I don't think men know, generally speaking, how bad it is or how hard it can be to take long term. I literally can't leave my apartment without having to put up with it. I am not exaggerating. Everytime I leave my home guys honk horns at me, yell things out of car windows, say things as I walk by them. I usually tune it out, so only the worst of it gets through to me. Last weekend, for instance, I headed off to the grocery store and was followed for a block by a man who kept saying, "Hey, sexy, honey, look at me, hey sexy, turn and look at me..." It can be frightening and upsetting at times, and sometimes you just get so fed up you want to scream at the next man who does the least thing.
So then sometimes when a woman comes on here and is trying to learn how to buy a bra that fits properly it can be the last straw to have to read some man's comments about her chest. So guys - make sure you're aware of this. No, you are not responsible for what the men in her neighbourhood say to her. But you need to be aware that there are many women in many communities who get hassled by many men. And it would be great if you would continue to do your part to keep the hassle level down in this particular community.
posted by orange swan at 8:41 PM on December 8, 2004
I don't find MeFi to be a sexist place. It's a boyzone in the sense that there are more boys than girls here, and so the content and atmosphere inevitably reflects that. But that's fine. I don't feel excluded or disrespected, and that's what counts. There are some misogynists here, but they are very few and there are many men here who are quick to call out misogyny when they see it. And I find Matt's attitude towards women to be practically gallant, so it helps balance things. I get flirted with, but I also do my share of flirting, and frankly it's a pleasant little ego boost sometimes when I'm down from yet another disappointment in my dating life.
But I would like the MeFi men to be aware of and sensitive to one thing. Women get hassled constantly by men they don't know. I don't think men know, generally speaking, how bad it is or how hard it can be to take long term. I literally can't leave my apartment without having to put up with it. I am not exaggerating. Everytime I leave my home guys honk horns at me, yell things out of car windows, say things as I walk by them. I usually tune it out, so only the worst of it gets through to me. Last weekend, for instance, I headed off to the grocery store and was followed for a block by a man who kept saying, "Hey, sexy, honey, look at me, hey sexy, turn and look at me..." It can be frightening and upsetting at times, and sometimes you just get so fed up you want to scream at the next man who does the least thing.
So then sometimes when a woman comes on here and is trying to learn how to buy a bra that fits properly it can be the last straw to have to read some man's comments about her chest. So guys - make sure you're aware of this. No, you are not responsible for what the men in her neighbourhood say to her. But you need to be aware that there are many women in many communities who get hassled by many men. And it would be great if you would continue to do your part to keep the hassle level down in this particular community.
posted by orange swan at 8:41 PM on December 8, 2004
Dear Bligh,
There is a reason other waves of feminism came after—filling up holes. Plenty is pleasant in first-wavedom, but there is something to be said for challenging which values are given predominance in a patriarchal system. That is, "traditionally female" values can be deemed worthwhile without also being deemed inherent to the Other sex.
Besides, I don't think what people are arguing for is nice happy noncombative MeFi. (If you think I want that, then you haven't been paying attention.) Rather the point is that there is an air here of boyness that causes plenty of women to leave. The ones that stick around aren't likely to find it that bad; we're the ones who stick around. But there is something to the boyzone arguments and something icky in the "just boys being boys" response.
I dunno, the best way I can put it (for me) is: call me an asshole or an idiot, but don't call me a cunt or baby or ask me if my pussy hurts. After all, isn't that the point of first wave: attack people for what they say not what they are?
posted by dame at 8:41 PM on December 8, 2004
There is a reason other waves of feminism came after—filling up holes. Plenty is pleasant in first-wavedom, but there is something to be said for challenging which values are given predominance in a patriarchal system. That is, "traditionally female" values can be deemed worthwhile without also being deemed inherent to the Other sex.
Besides, I don't think what people are arguing for is nice happy noncombative MeFi. (If you think I want that, then you haven't been paying attention.) Rather the point is that there is an air here of boyness that causes plenty of women to leave. The ones that stick around aren't likely to find it that bad; we're the ones who stick around. But there is something to the boyzone arguments and something icky in the "just boys being boys" response.
I dunno, the best way I can put it (for me) is: call me an asshole or an idiot, but don't call me a cunt or baby or ask me if my pussy hurts. After all, isn't that the point of first wave: attack people for what they say not what they are?
posted by dame at 8:41 PM on December 8, 2004
You've found my secret qounsar. I have a penis. I keep it in a jar on my night stand, and my husband misses it very much.
posted by FunkyHelix at 8:41 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by FunkyHelix at 8:41 PM on December 8, 2004
equipoise, go to the post in question, click on the "time" it was posted and copy that url from the address bar.
posted by dobbs at 8:42 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by dobbs at 8:42 PM on December 8, 2004
All I'm asking is why dobbs and/or Everyone Else openly despises me. Can't you people get some kind of spokesperson?
posted by Pretty_Generic at 8:44 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by Pretty_Generic at 8:44 PM on December 8, 2004
I despise you because you have centipedes in your penis, Pretty_Generic.
posted by cmonkey at 8:47 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by cmonkey at 8:47 PM on December 8, 2004
To coin a stavrosthewonderchickenism, the stupid is strong in this thread.
I can't wait 'til it starts getting lighter for longer in the northern hemisphere.
posted by i_cola at 8:47 PM on December 8, 2004
I can't wait 'til it starts getting lighter for longer in the northern hemisphere.
posted by i_cola at 8:47 PM on December 8, 2004
You've found my secret qounsar.
there's a secret quonsar?
posted by quonsar at 8:48 PM on December 8, 2004
There are two valid points here.
One, which melissa may pointed out very eloquently, is that MeFi is crass, insensitive, and frequently vitriolic. I say this should change, but women who believe this is a "boyzone" should realize that MeFi treats religious people, Republicans, gun owners, people who drive SUV's, people who have a thin skin, people who double post, and fat people just as poorly as it treats women. The problem isn't mysoginy in particular: it's incivility and snarkiness in general. It's just that you particularly notice it when it's aimed at you.
Years ago, I had to learn to either laugh at the religious intolerance and ignorance here, or leave the place. You now have to make the same choice.
Two, STOP BLOODY CHATTING IN THE GREEN! If it's a joke, it doesn't belong on Ask. If it's a funny story, it doesn't belong on Ask. If it's off-topic, it doesn't belong on ask. If it isn't helpful to the person asking the question, it doesn't belong on Ask. Women, like all MeFites, should feel comfortable posting any question they have on AskMetaFilter and getting nothing but helpful answers. Nothing but helpful answers.
i would have hoped that in just ONE THREAD we could all be adults and not make snarky jokes about something that a number of members feel is a real concern.
Try being a Christian on MetaFilter. You've got it easy, sister.
posted by gd779 at 8:49 PM on December 8, 2004
One, which melissa may pointed out very eloquently, is that MeFi is crass, insensitive, and frequently vitriolic. I say this should change, but women who believe this is a "boyzone" should realize that MeFi treats religious people, Republicans, gun owners, people who drive SUV's, people who have a thin skin, people who double post, and fat people just as poorly as it treats women. The problem isn't mysoginy in particular: it's incivility and snarkiness in general. It's just that you particularly notice it when it's aimed at you.
Years ago, I had to learn to either laugh at the religious intolerance and ignorance here, or leave the place. You now have to make the same choice.
Two, STOP BLOODY CHATTING IN THE GREEN! If it's a joke, it doesn't belong on Ask. If it's a funny story, it doesn't belong on Ask. If it's off-topic, it doesn't belong on ask. If it isn't helpful to the person asking the question, it doesn't belong on Ask. Women, like all MeFites, should feel comfortable posting any question they have on AskMetaFilter and getting nothing but helpful answers. Nothing but helpful answers.
i would have hoped that in just ONE THREAD we could all be adults and not make snarky jokes about something that a number of members feel is a real concern.
Try being a Christian on MetaFilter. You've got it easy, sister.
posted by gd779 at 8:49 PM on December 8, 2004
Remember, dobbs, I'm only an email away. I'm here for you. I want to let the healing begin.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 8:51 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by Pretty_Generic at 8:51 PM on December 8, 2004
Geezo, after reading Melissa's comment up there, I feel like an ass. Sorry. Oh wait, I did apologize.
And don't mind P_G, he's like your friend's retarded parrot that just blurts out the most unpleasant things.
P_G, you're a flaming jackass for posting such an offensive graphic. You really can't be that dense, can you? Are your pants on backwards?
posted by fenriq at 8:52 PM on December 8, 2004
And don't mind P_G, he's like your friend's retarded parrot that just blurts out the most unpleasant things.
P_G, you're a flaming jackass for posting such an offensive graphic. You really can't be that dense, can you? Are your pants on backwards?
posted by fenriq at 8:52 PM on December 8, 2004
Matt, can we give Pretty_Generic a time-out? He's being a jerk, and I think it would send the right message to the ladies of MetaFilter.
posted by gd779 at 8:53 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by gd779 at 8:53 PM on December 8, 2004
there's a secret quonsar?
You got me on the comma. Pin a rose on your nose. So, this secret quonsar...it vibrates?
posted by FunkyHelix at 8:54 PM on December 8, 2004
You got me on the comma. Pin a rose on your nose. So, this secret quonsar...it vibrates?
posted by FunkyHelix at 8:54 PM on December 8, 2004
Yes, please, give me a time out, before I say a naughty sex word again. Jesus Christ, this is like Invasion of the Body Snatchers. What happened to the sense-of-humor-endowed denizens of MeFi I used to know?
posted by Pretty_Generic at 8:58 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by Pretty_Generic at 8:58 PM on December 8, 2004
thanks, dobbs!
And a round of "hear ye, hear ye" for orange swan's post. It would be kinda silly to keep saying "yeah, what she said," but there are a lot of posts in this thread saying "no one agrees with you--you're just overly sensitive," so now I figure that it's worth letting folks know when I agree with them.
Along those lines, though, this could go on forever. I'm also grateful to Sidhedevil and melissa may and and and...
posted by equipoise at 9:01 PM on December 8, 2004
And a round of "hear ye, hear ye" for orange swan's post. It would be kinda silly to keep saying "yeah, what she said," but there are a lot of posts in this thread saying "no one agrees with you--you're just overly sensitive," so now I figure that it's worth letting folks know when I agree with them.
Along those lines, though, this could go on forever. I'm also grateful to Sidhedevil and melissa may and and and...
posted by equipoise at 9:01 PM on December 8, 2004
Female here. Yeah, I think Metafilter is kind of a boyzone, but then I think it's also kind of a socially-inept zone. The latter strikes me as a bigger problem than the former. The people on MeFi that have pissed me off the most have done so not because of their maleness, but because they obviously have little to no experience in dealing with human beings of either gender. And for that, good women and men of Metafilter, these sad little fucks deserve our pity.
Please, though, no "special treatment" -- I find the concept horribly condescending. Speaking only for myself, I can tell you that I don't need it. I remember riding the bus to school in 3rd grade, and the mean kid, Buck, sat next to me immediately. He said to me, "Girls are made of poop juice." From then on, I got the feeling things would be an uphill battle. But regular, shitty ol' everyday sexism is nothing a strong, clever, sharp-tongued woman shouldn't be able to handle. The more unthinking idiots are put in their place in GENERAL, the less they'll go running their mouths (or fingers) off.
Me, I've got enough estrogen for this entire site. And I will probably menstruate again in other, oh... (checks watch) .. two weeks or so. Please to be bringing it on.
posted by fricative at 9:03 PM on December 8, 2004
Please, though, no "special treatment" -- I find the concept horribly condescending. Speaking only for myself, I can tell you that I don't need it. I remember riding the bus to school in 3rd grade, and the mean kid, Buck, sat next to me immediately. He said to me, "Girls are made of poop juice." From then on, I got the feeling things would be an uphill battle. But regular, shitty ol' everyday sexism is nothing a strong, clever, sharp-tongued woman shouldn't be able to handle. The more unthinking idiots are put in their place in GENERAL, the less they'll go running their mouths (or fingers) off.
Me, I've got enough estrogen for this entire site. And I will probably menstruate again in other, oh... (checks watch) .. two weeks or so. Please to be bringing it on.
posted by fricative at 9:03 PM on December 8, 2004
But regular, shitty ol' everyday sexism is nothing a strong, clever, sharp-tongued woman shouldn't be able to handle.
Ooh, shit, before someone jumps on me: and MEN, men can handle sexism too! Yes, I know men can be and are sexually discriminated against. We're all in this together, etc.
posted by fricative at 9:05 PM on December 8, 2004
Ooh, shit, before someone jumps on me: and MEN, men can handle sexism too! Yes, I know men can be and are sexually discriminated against. We're all in this together, etc.
posted by fricative at 9:05 PM on December 8, 2004
straw man, pretty_generic. the issue is not censorship, and if you can't tell that from orange swan's wonderful post above, i can't imagine you have all that much respect for women in the real world, either. how you can not feel even a little bit of empathy for what she is saying is beyond me.
gd779: you're totally right about the christian on mefi thing.
posted by pikachulolita at 9:08 PM on December 8, 2004
gd779: you're totally right about the christian on mefi thing.
posted by pikachulolita at 9:08 PM on December 8, 2004
Exhortations to "respect the ladies" gives me hives. The premise that aggression is masculine and women are naturally cooperative makes my blood boil. The assumption that all sexual talk is inherently objectifying of women and necessarily misogynist is repulsive.
Come on. These are straw men. What part of "girls are evil" don't you understand? I don't think anyone here is proscribing an end to profanity and talk of sexuality for the sake of the delicate sensibilities of the ladies. If they are, please show me where. What I've been hearing is complaints about subtle or overt anti-woman stuff.
Sometimes your views on gender are so complex I have no idea where you stand, Keith.
posted by scarabic at 9:10 PM on December 8, 2004
Come on. These are straw men. What part of "girls are evil" don't you understand? I don't think anyone here is proscribing an end to profanity and talk of sexuality for the sake of the delicate sensibilities of the ladies. If they are, please show me where. What I've been hearing is complaints about subtle or overt anti-woman stuff.
Sometimes your views on gender are so complex I have no idea where you stand, Keith.
posted by scarabic at 9:10 PM on December 8, 2004
P_G, I can't believe you actually don't get it, but if not, my address is in my profile.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 9:14 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 9:14 PM on December 8, 2004
I read orange swan's post, and I agree with it totally. I didn't see anything there about caterpillars though.
In my opinion, sexism is such an obviously absurd and irrational thing that it can be joked about. Same with racism. And if you don't feel the same way, frankly, it doesn't bother me, because the only thing that matters is what we as individuals actually believe, rather than what we make occasional jokes about.
However, the caterpillar joke is just meant to be surreal. I suggest you all get over it.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 9:18 PM on December 8, 2004
In my opinion, sexism is such an obviously absurd and irrational thing that it can be joked about. Same with racism. And if you don't feel the same way, frankly, it doesn't bother me, because the only thing that matters is what we as individuals actually believe, rather than what we make occasional jokes about.
However, the caterpillar joke is just meant to be surreal. I suggest you all get over it.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 9:18 PM on December 8, 2004
That was pretty much how I took it. I'm actually struggling to see what's so offensive about it, other than the presence of a word you can't say on broadcast television. But again, maybe I have a problem...
posted by jonson at 9:29 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by jonson at 9:29 PM on December 8, 2004
"...call me an asshole or an idiot, but don't call me a cunt or baby or ask me if my pussy hurts."
I agree totally.
I'm fighting off a migraine, so I just spent the last twenty minutes with my head under the shower thinking about this thread. So I'll probably be thoughtful yet semi-incoherent in articulating my thinking.
Let's take actual sexism and misogyny for granted. It exists, and it exists here. But, beyond that, there's two core issues in contention in this thread (as elsewhere).
The first involves the unintentional and sadly inevitable blurring of intent and harm. It seems to me that the gut, majority "sense" of racism/sexism/antigay bigotry and the like requires at least some minimal (if subconscious)intent. It is rare that accusations of these don't include explicit or implicit assumptions about the psychology of the accused. It's my strong belief that these assumptions are dangerous and, very often, counter-productive. They confuse and provoke more than they enlighten.
The second is more complicated. A fundamental ethic of mine is that being reactive to one's moral opposition is to be to some degree complicit with the opposition. That sexist men typically behave in certain ways does not, in my view, require that I behave exactly the opposite. Because, again in my view, doing so would concede a great deal of territory that I am unwilling (and, anyway, should not) concede.
Finally, I think it's clear that I deeply disagree with what some people call "difference feminism". I don't disagree that people can hold to this view with good intent, and honestly and thoughtfully. I can no longer disagree with the assertion that there are, for example, substantial differences between male and female brains. And I comprehend and sympathize with the postmodern feminist critique of (some) early feminism's naive masculinization of women. Nevertheless, I greatly prefer the individual empowerment that results from the rejection of gender ideals. More broadly, as a paleoliberal, I reject "identity politics" as essentially dehumanizing.
If this were 1955, it could be persuasively argued that the general lack of childrearing and other domestic discourse here at MeFi was alienating to women and essential to the "boyzone" vibe. Would it be right, then, to encourage and embrace such domestic discourse to foster a more friendly environment for women? Or would it be, rather, a compounding of the injury? I don't doubt that a large number of women find the supposedly "masculine" flavor of MeFi to be uninviting. But to "feminize" MeFi would be, in my opinion, a deep offense of patronization.
On Preview: "Sometimes your views on gender are so complex I have no idea where you stand, Keith." Well, I am unambiguously antisexist and anti-misogynist and if there is one social/political issue that I feel most strongly about, it is this. But, yes, my views on sex and gender (and sexual orientation) are very complex because, quite simply, the reality of these things is complex. The bottom line, though, is that probably one-fifth of the world's women live in literal or de facto slavery. Quibbling about whether MeFi is a "boyzone" is, in that context, perverse.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:32 PM on December 8, 2004
I agree totally.
I'm fighting off a migraine, so I just spent the last twenty minutes with my head under the shower thinking about this thread. So I'll probably be thoughtful yet semi-incoherent in articulating my thinking.
Let's take actual sexism and misogyny for granted. It exists, and it exists here. But, beyond that, there's two core issues in contention in this thread (as elsewhere).
The first involves the unintentional and sadly inevitable blurring of intent and harm. It seems to me that the gut, majority "sense" of racism/sexism/antigay bigotry and the like requires at least some minimal (if subconscious)intent. It is rare that accusations of these don't include explicit or implicit assumptions about the psychology of the accused. It's my strong belief that these assumptions are dangerous and, very often, counter-productive. They confuse and provoke more than they enlighten.
The second is more complicated. A fundamental ethic of mine is that being reactive to one's moral opposition is to be to some degree complicit with the opposition. That sexist men typically behave in certain ways does not, in my view, require that I behave exactly the opposite. Because, again in my view, doing so would concede a great deal of territory that I am unwilling (and, anyway, should not) concede.
Finally, I think it's clear that I deeply disagree with what some people call "difference feminism". I don't disagree that people can hold to this view with good intent, and honestly and thoughtfully. I can no longer disagree with the assertion that there are, for example, substantial differences between male and female brains. And I comprehend and sympathize with the postmodern feminist critique of (some) early feminism's naive masculinization of women. Nevertheless, I greatly prefer the individual empowerment that results from the rejection of gender ideals. More broadly, as a paleoliberal, I reject "identity politics" as essentially dehumanizing.
If this were 1955, it could be persuasively argued that the general lack of childrearing and other domestic discourse here at MeFi was alienating to women and essential to the "boyzone" vibe. Would it be right, then, to encourage and embrace such domestic discourse to foster a more friendly environment for women? Or would it be, rather, a compounding of the injury? I don't doubt that a large number of women find the supposedly "masculine" flavor of MeFi to be uninviting. But to "feminize" MeFi would be, in my opinion, a deep offense of patronization.
On Preview: "Sometimes your views on gender are so complex I have no idea where you stand, Keith." Well, I am unambiguously antisexist and anti-misogynist and if there is one social/political issue that I feel most strongly about, it is this. But, yes, my views on sex and gender (and sexual orientation) are very complex because, quite simply, the reality of these things is complex. The bottom line, though, is that probably one-fifth of the world's women live in literal or de facto slavery. Quibbling about whether MeFi is a "boyzone" is, in that context, perverse.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:32 PM on December 8, 2004
But what are your thoughts re: a cock in the mouth?
posted by jonson at 9:37 PM on December 8, 2004 [1 favorite]
posted by jonson at 9:37 PM on December 8, 2004 [1 favorite]
You have a choice about being a Christian or gun nut or a conservative or what have you. You don't have a choice about being a girl. So please don't equate the two. I don't think you should be discriminated against either way, but thinking someone is dumb for choosing to believe something is different.
posted by dame at 9:39 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by dame at 9:39 PM on December 8, 2004
Etheral Bligh: so, basically you like using lots of words to say that you like women?
Congrats!
posted by cheaily at 9:39 PM on December 8, 2004
Congrats!
posted by cheaily at 9:39 PM on December 8, 2004
Get back under that shower, dude. You're babbling.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 9:39 PM on December 8, 2004
posted by mr_crash_davis at 9:39 PM on December 8, 2004
The bottom line, though, is that probably one-fifth of the world's women live in literal or de facto slavery. Quibbling about whether MeFi is a "boyzone" is, in that context, perverse.
No, quibbling about whether women on MeFi live in slavery would be perverse. "Boyzone," as an allegation, is on a totally different level, and I think is a reasonable complaint, given what we have to work with.
This is all very basic. Do we want female members here? We don't have very many. Some of them from time to time express a make-or-break complaint about the discourse here. Telling them to sit on a centipede neither improves the diversity here nor frees anyone anywhere else from slavery.
Sorry to hear about the headache. I don't think this is helping.
posted by scarabic at 9:43 PM on December 8, 2004
No, quibbling about whether women on MeFi live in slavery would be perverse. "Boyzone," as an allegation, is on a totally different level, and I think is a reasonable complaint, given what we have to work with.
This is all very basic. Do we want female members here? We don't have very many. Some of them from time to time express a make-or-break complaint about the discourse here. Telling them to sit on a centipede neither improves the diversity here nor frees anyone anywhere else from slavery.
Sorry to hear about the headache. I don't think this is helping.
posted by scarabic at 9:43 PM on December 8, 2004
... But to "feminize" MeFi would be, in my opinion, a deep offense of patronization.
I agree with this. But at the risk of repeating myself, all I'd suggest is that we humanize it. Or dial down the cock. However you want to put it. Fuck no we don't need a fringe on top. Who said that?
posted by scarabic at 9:45 PM on December 8, 2004
I agree with this. But at the risk of repeating myself, all I'd suggest is that we humanize it. Or dial down the cock. However you want to put it. Fuck no we don't need a fringe on top. Who said that?
posted by scarabic at 9:45 PM on December 8, 2004
LOLololLOLoL!
That was a good one. I mean good. You don't just open your mouth for no reason. Only when you feel yourself about to cough up a flying furball of pure cashmere.
[wrestles with other fans in the stands, trying to catch it]
posted by scarabic at 10:40 PM on December 8, 2004
That was a good one. I mean good. You don't just open your mouth for no reason. Only when you feel yourself about to cough up a flying furball of pure cashmere.
[wrestles with other fans in the stands, trying to catch it]
posted by scarabic at 10:40 PM on December 8, 2004
I too think Orange Swan's post is the best one in this thread. That's the kind of thoughtfulness and intelligence I paid my five bucks for.
Thanks, ma'am.
posted by mono blanco at 11:05 PM on December 8, 2004
Thanks, ma'am.
posted by mono blanco at 11:05 PM on December 8, 2004
"You have a choice about being a Christian or gun nut or a conservative or what have you. You don't have a choice about being a girl. So please don't equate the two."
With all due respect—and this is something I say frequently with regard to gay rights—I strongly believe the issue of "choice" is (unintentionally) a red herring. Jonson asks about "cock in mouth". Well, as I've said before, the fact that I'm straight yet have voluntarily sucked dick would, in the moral calculus that results from making such a distinction, be a justly punishable "offense". Because, of course, I "chose" it. This is an absurd result that demonstrates that bigotry is equally unjust whether or not "choice" is present. Further, I put forth the proposition that voluntary action, voluntary self definition of identity, is essentially human and thus at least as deserving of legal and moral protection as that which is involuntary. Were it possible to choose to change one's sex and gender in every sense, to be unfairly discriminated against on that basis would be no less objectionable. As history has demonstrated a trend toward increasing the possibilities of "choice" where it previously did not exist, a defense of rights and identity based partly on the lack of volition is one built unwittingly on the weak foundation of sand.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 11:30 PM on December 8, 2004
With all due respect—and this is something I say frequently with regard to gay rights—I strongly believe the issue of "choice" is (unintentionally) a red herring. Jonson asks about "cock in mouth". Well, as I've said before, the fact that I'm straight yet have voluntarily sucked dick would, in the moral calculus that results from making such a distinction, be a justly punishable "offense". Because, of course, I "chose" it. This is an absurd result that demonstrates that bigotry is equally unjust whether or not "choice" is present. Further, I put forth the proposition that voluntary action, voluntary self definition of identity, is essentially human and thus at least as deserving of legal and moral protection as that which is involuntary. Were it possible to choose to change one's sex and gender in every sense, to be unfairly discriminated against on that basis would be no less objectionable. As history has demonstrated a trend toward increasing the possibilities of "choice" where it previously did not exist, a defense of rights and identity based partly on the lack of volition is one built unwittingly on the weak foundation of sand.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 11:30 PM on December 8, 2004
woah.
pretty_generic. You should learn how to sleep at normal times man. I really hope that you work nights. 'cos that's just abnormal.
E.B. For fucks sake. This was turning into a proper conversation, I was near to changing my mind and apologising for the kitchen reference, and then you had to wade in with your "me, me, me, I'm a feminist too." nonsense.
You're not a feminist, and this isn't about you dude. Unless you've undergone the same kind of humiliation orange swan describes, you're not a feminist.
orange swan. I agree entirely. And I'm sorry.
posted by seanyboy at 12:15 AM on December 9, 2004
pretty_generic. You should learn how to sleep at normal times man. I really hope that you work nights. 'cos that's just abnormal.
E.B. For fucks sake. This was turning into a proper conversation, I was near to changing my mind and apologising for the kitchen reference, and then you had to wade in with your "me, me, me, I'm a feminist too." nonsense.
You're not a feminist, and this isn't about you dude. Unless you've undergone the same kind of humiliation orange swan describes, you're not a feminist.
orange swan. I agree entirely. And I'm sorry.
posted by seanyboy at 12:15 AM on December 9, 2004
seanyboy -- Unless you've undergone the same kind of humiliation orange swan describes, you're not a feminist.
Bullshit. Feminism is not defined by victimization.
posted by NortonDC at 12:28 AM on December 9, 2004
Bullshit. Feminism is not defined by victimization.
posted by NortonDC at 12:28 AM on December 9, 2004
Or, more precisely, feminists are not defined by victimization.
posted by NortonDC at 12:46 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by NortonDC at 12:46 AM on December 9, 2004
The word is personist, you sexist clod!
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 1:01 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 1:01 AM on December 9, 2004
I would tend to assume that in general, on Metafilter, these three statements are roughly all at the same level of seriousness:
God created earth in six days.
Global warming doesn't exist.
Get back in the kitchen, bitch.
Which is to say that a true misogynist would feel as alienated on Metafilter as a fundamentalist Christian or a card-carrying Republican because we (If that's a suitable word) find these sentiments to be utterly ridiculous.
And, of course, it's not to say that occasionally one won't come along and really believe in that stuff, because they do and will - but they'll be treated like an alligator at the all-waterfowl annual dinner party.
posted by cell at 1:11 AM on December 9, 2004
God created earth in six days.
Global warming doesn't exist.
Get back in the kitchen, bitch.
Which is to say that a true misogynist would feel as alienated on Metafilter as a fundamentalist Christian or a card-carrying Republican because we (If that's a suitable word) find these sentiments to be utterly ridiculous.
And, of course, it's not to say that occasionally one won't come along and really believe in that stuff, because they do and will - but they'll be treated like an alligator at the all-waterfowl annual dinner party.
posted by cell at 1:11 AM on December 9, 2004
Feminism is defined in part by the experience of being a woman. And a part of that part is defined by victimization. Men can hold feminist beliefs, but they cannot be feminists.
Currently, this is an unfashionable view to hold, I've no idea what the Steinem/Friedan view is, and I understand that feminsm means different things to different people, but it is my view.
To me, the fact that some men insist that they're feminists because they've made some small concessions to equality belittles those who know first hand what it is like to spend a lifetime being heckled and discriminated against because they are women.
In fact, I'll go further than that. Everytime I see a man explain to women that really he's a feminist, I think... He's just saying that to get laid.
Feminism is a power word. It confers a degree of strength to the women that use it, and gives them a sense of belonging which normally is stripped away by our sexist society. By co-opting the word to mean "men and women who think we should have an equal society", you are stripping the word of this strength.
posted by seanyboy at 1:25 AM on December 9, 2004
Currently, this is an unfashionable view to hold, I've no idea what the Steinem/Friedan view is, and I understand that feminsm means different things to different people, but it is my view.
To me, the fact that some men insist that they're feminists because they've made some small concessions to equality belittles those who know first hand what it is like to spend a lifetime being heckled and discriminated against because they are women.
In fact, I'll go further than that. Everytime I see a man explain to women that really he's a feminist, I think... He's just saying that to get laid.
Feminism is a power word. It confers a degree of strength to the women that use it, and gives them a sense of belonging which normally is stripped away by our sexist society. By co-opting the word to mean "men and women who think we should have an equal society", you are stripping the word of this strength.
posted by seanyboy at 1:25 AM on December 9, 2004
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Basically, your statement is just wrong. Get enough people to be wrong with you and then you'll give the descriptivists something to chew on, but for now it's just wrong.
posted by NortonDC at 1:36 AM on December 9, 2004
Basically, your statement is just wrong. Get enough people to be wrong with you and then you'll give the descriptivists something to chew on, but for now it's just wrong.
posted by NortonDC at 1:36 AM on December 9, 2004
The old MetaTalk classic.
I'll take your Dictionary definition and raise you a google search.
Although it is radical, there's nothing unique about my viewpoint, and I'd have hoped that you'd have argued specific points without falling on the rather weak argument that language is fixed and "it says it here in this book here look"
posted by seanyboy at 1:46 AM on December 9, 2004
I'll take your Dictionary definition and raise you a google search.
Although it is radical, there's nothing unique about my viewpoint, and I'd have hoped that you'd have argued specific points without falling on the rather weak argument that language is fixed and "it says it here in this book here look"
posted by seanyboy at 1:46 AM on December 9, 2004
I'd have hoped that you'd have argued specific points without falling on the rather weak argument that language is fixed
Then you're in luck, because that's exactly what I didn't do. I pointed out that your statement is wrong right now.
As for the Googlefight, if you had actually tried to make it representative, it would have gone something like this:
posted by NortonDC at 2:05 AM on December 9, 2004
Then you're in luck, because that's exactly what I didn't do. I pointed out that your statement is wrong right now.
As for the Googlefight, if you had actually tried to make it representative, it would have gone something like this:
"only women can be feminists" -- 23And I don't suppose that you actually read the pages returned by your own search, did you? The top two explicitly state that men can be feminists, and the third posits the search phrase as only a potential interpretation of one line of reasoning.
"men can be feminists" -- 310
posted by NortonDC at 2:05 AM on December 9, 2004
I did read them. I wasn't after proving my viewpoint. As requested, I was after proving that it wasn't a UNIQUE viewpoint. I was also mocking your rather ridiculous use of a dictionary to prove your point.
More people than not think that "men can be feminists".
Well a majority of people used to think that the world was flat.
And a majority believe in a God
And its astonishing how many people used to think that slavery was a good thing.
This is an argument. It's not a popularity contest.
posted by seanyboy at 2:19 AM on December 9, 2004
More people than not think that "men can be feminists".
Well a majority of people used to think that the world was flat.
And a majority believe in a God
And its astonishing how many people used to think that slavery was a good thing.
This is an argument. It's not a popularity contest.
posted by seanyboy at 2:19 AM on December 9, 2004
I found a tiny thing wrong in what you said. I'm going to pick every minor point to death. I'm just going to keep saying "you're wrong" 'til you shut up. I'm arguing like a baby. waaah waah waah
moron.
posted by seanyboy at 3:12 AM on December 9, 2004
moron.
posted by seanyboy at 3:12 AM on December 9, 2004
[Mortal Kombat Announcer] NORTON . . . WINS! FLAWLESS FATALITY!
Wait - is Mortal Kombat too boyzone?
posted by Ryvar at 3:36 AM on December 9, 2004
Wait - is Mortal Kombat too boyzone?
posted by Ryvar at 3:36 AM on December 9, 2004
[strolls in WAY late]
I say this should change, but women who believe this is a "boyzone" should realize that MeFi treats religious people, Republicans, gun owners, people who drive SUV's, people who have a thin skin, people who double post, and fat people just as poorly as it treats women.
Far worse... please.
[takes first bite ever of a McDonalds McGriddle]
I've never read anything of the "you stupid fucking red-state moronic Jesus freak" ilk directed at a person because they were a woman. I'll believe there's a real "problem" when I consistently read comments like, "Hey so-and-so, you can ignore the comment KittyKat made... she's just a dirty whore anyway". It just doesn't happen. Most people are insulted and abused for the things they say and the beliefs that stand behind those comments (and I'm not referring to little jokes).
If the real complaint here is that women can't discuss boobs without some dude making a little comment like, "Mmmm... boobs. Can I touch 'em?" then I really don't feel sorry for you.
On Thanksgiving day, our family was sitting around, post-meal, drinking coffee and casually chatting about this and that. After a while, somehow, all of the retired folk starting talking about arthritis and bloody stools. It was stunning how the conversation was stolen but such foul topics. But I guess that happens with old people and they need to talk about it. Fine. They only got away with it for so long before one us young bucks made a little joke/stab about it, gently kissed grandma on the forehead and scampered off and get a card game going.
As for feminism, well that's as fair game as anything else. If you want to admit to everyone that you're a feminist (under whatever definition people choose to use), then you have to be prepared to take your shots. It's no different than coming out and saying you're a Republican or Jewish or gay or a hunter or a vegan or a smoker or whatever the fuck. Bascially, it just boils down to being able to take it like a man. That's all I'm sayin'.
posted by Witty at 4:20 AM on December 9, 2004
I say this should change, but women who believe this is a "boyzone" should realize that MeFi treats religious people, Republicans, gun owners, people who drive SUV's, people who have a thin skin, people who double post, and fat people just as poorly as it treats women.
Far worse... please.
[takes first bite ever of a McDonalds McGriddle]
I've never read anything of the "you stupid fucking red-state moronic Jesus freak" ilk directed at a person because they were a woman. I'll believe there's a real "problem" when I consistently read comments like, "Hey so-and-so, you can ignore the comment KittyKat made... she's just a dirty whore anyway". It just doesn't happen. Most people are insulted and abused for the things they say and the beliefs that stand behind those comments (and I'm not referring to little jokes).
If the real complaint here is that women can't discuss boobs without some dude making a little comment like, "Mmmm... boobs. Can I touch 'em?" then I really don't feel sorry for you.
On Thanksgiving day, our family was sitting around, post-meal, drinking coffee and casually chatting about this and that. After a while, somehow, all of the retired folk starting talking about arthritis and bloody stools. It was stunning how the conversation was stolen but such foul topics. But I guess that happens with old people and they need to talk about it. Fine. They only got away with it for so long before one us young bucks made a little joke/stab about it, gently kissed grandma on the forehead and scampered off and get a card game going.
As for feminism, well that's as fair game as anything else. If you want to admit to everyone that you're a feminist (under whatever definition people choose to use), then you have to be prepared to take your shots. It's no different than coming out and saying you're a Republican or Jewish or gay or a hunter or a vegan or a smoker or whatever the fuck. Bascially, it just boils down to being able to take it like a man. That's all I'm sayin'.
posted by Witty at 4:20 AM on December 9, 2004
Orange swan spoke well.
The "Boyzone" thing... the crudist comments come from people that i think of as immature and worried about their status with the other guys. I'm hopeful that when they grow up, childish showoff things like snarky sexist jokes will be put aside, that men they respect will influence them to start thinking instead of strutting and talking trash.
I've read some of the dialog that goes around on the "not to be named" IRC channel, though. THAT's no place for a woman to hang out. I could suggest that y'all keep the sexist shit there, but that just sweeps it under the rug.
My feeling is that it would be best if people quit showing off and trying to gain status by being rude or crude. It's a conundrum for me, because some of the mature and witty men that post to Metafilter are wizards of crude.
Best, I think, when the issue comes up to state: "what you said seems mean/sexist/uninformed" and try to discuss the issue privately with the person. There's little profit in derailing the thread to argue a point and a lot to be said for personal discussion.
Since I'm a new gal on the block, I'll continue to play it by ear.
posted by reflecked at 4:49 AM on December 9, 2004
The "Boyzone" thing... the crudist comments come from people that i think of as immature and worried about their status with the other guys. I'm hopeful that when they grow up, childish showoff things like snarky sexist jokes will be put aside, that men they respect will influence them to start thinking instead of strutting and talking trash.
I've read some of the dialog that goes around on the "not to be named" IRC channel, though. THAT's no place for a woman to hang out. I could suggest that y'all keep the sexist shit there, but that just sweeps it under the rug.
My feeling is that it would be best if people quit showing off and trying to gain status by being rude or crude. It's a conundrum for me, because some of the mature and witty men that post to Metafilter are wizards of crude.
Best, I think, when the issue comes up to state: "what you said seems mean/sexist/uninformed" and try to discuss the issue privately with the person. There's little profit in derailing the thread to argue a point and a lot to be said for personal discussion.
Since I'm a new gal on the block, I'll continue to play it by ear.
posted by reflecked at 4:49 AM on December 9, 2004
Men can hold feminist beliefs, but they cannot be feminists.
seanyboy, you've made me agree with NortonDC you b**tard!
Your view isn't radical whatsoever, it's out-of-date. Of course men can be feminists - the main principle of feminism is true gender equality. A feminist can fight for men's rights for example (what does it matter that the feminist is male or female? - you're caught up in semantics). Gender equality applies to men as well as women. Why can't a man fight for women's rights? Why not a woman for men's rights? It's ridiculous to suggest we all sit in a corner looking after our own gender while the other does the same.
EB:I am an old-style Steinem/Friedan equality feminist. Exhortations to "respect the ladies" gives me hives. The premise that aggression is masculine and women are naturally cooperative makes my blood boil. The assumption that all sexual talk is inherently objectifying of women and necessarily misogynist is repulsive. These examples and everything like them represent, to me, a topsy-turvy hell where feminism has been subverted by the archaic sexist ideals it had intended to destroy.
I think you're talking about "gender feminism" where the advancement of female rights/causes are sought regardless of whether it creates legal/social parity or puts females at an advantage.
BTW, good messageboard here for this kind of talk.
posted by SpaceCadet at 4:53 AM on December 9, 2004
seanyboy, you've made me agree with NortonDC you b**tard!
Your view isn't radical whatsoever, it's out-of-date. Of course men can be feminists - the main principle of feminism is true gender equality. A feminist can fight for men's rights for example (what does it matter that the feminist is male or female? - you're caught up in semantics). Gender equality applies to men as well as women. Why can't a man fight for women's rights? Why not a woman for men's rights? It's ridiculous to suggest we all sit in a corner looking after our own gender while the other does the same.
EB:I am an old-style Steinem/Friedan equality feminist. Exhortations to "respect the ladies" gives me hives. The premise that aggression is masculine and women are naturally cooperative makes my blood boil. The assumption that all sexual talk is inherently objectifying of women and necessarily misogynist is repulsive. These examples and everything like them represent, to me, a topsy-turvy hell where feminism has been subverted by the archaic sexist ideals it had intended to destroy.
I think you're talking about "gender feminism" where the advancement of female rights/causes are sought regardless of whether it creates legal/social parity or puts females at an advantage.
BTW, good messageboard here for this kind of talk.
posted by SpaceCadet at 4:53 AM on December 9, 2004
Yeah but SpaceCadet we don't want to go to ifeminists to talk to each other without dealing with Horny Loser interruptions. This is a conversation that affects the people here, on Metafilter.
The more I think about it, the more irritated I am that Matt deleted anything - the Loser interruptions here or the bra thread because of Horny Loser interruptions. (There's no one person named Horny Loser, but we all know who they are, even if they choose to remain oblivious.) Matt - we need bras, even fat ladies need bras, and believe me they're hard to find. That thread was actually one the first I've ever sent to other people, because I knew they'd find at least some of the information to be very useful. For you to delete it because some Horny Losers were doing their thing, don't you think those of us who need big bras are fairly used to that? Your galantry is nice but misplaced, and in the end makes us look like we need protecting.
Oh and uh, P_G: Maggots in your scrotal sack! Crawling up your urethra and backing into your prostate, digging holes into your colon and nesting there. Thanks for the nice visuals, I thought I'd give you some right back. It may be some kind of inside joke but you suck for posting it anyway. Same to your little buddy P&C.
posted by pomegranate at 5:28 AM on December 9, 2004
The more I think about it, the more irritated I am that Matt deleted anything - the Loser interruptions here or the bra thread because of Horny Loser interruptions. (There's no one person named Horny Loser, but we all know who they are, even if they choose to remain oblivious.) Matt - we need bras, even fat ladies need bras, and believe me they're hard to find. That thread was actually one the first I've ever sent to other people, because I knew they'd find at least some of the information to be very useful. For you to delete it because some Horny Losers were doing their thing, don't you think those of us who need big bras are fairly used to that? Your galantry is nice but misplaced, and in the end makes us look like we need protecting.
Oh and uh, P_G: Maggots in your scrotal sack! Crawling up your urethra and backing into your prostate, digging holes into your colon and nesting there. Thanks for the nice visuals, I thought I'd give you some right back. It may be some kind of inside joke but you suck for posting it anyway. Same to your little buddy P&C.
posted by pomegranate at 5:28 AM on December 9, 2004
It may be out of date, but it's a belief which is still held very strongly by a lot of people. Admitedly, most of these people come from an older generation of feminists, but I still think as a concept it has validity.
There is a huge difference between feminist ideals and this concept of the "feminist". Gender Equality is a feminist ideal, but it doesn't follow that having Gender Equality as an ideal makes you a feminist.
I've only been swayed to the "only women can be feminists" view recently, so there is a possibilty that I'm being overzealous in my interpretation.
I like the idea of the word Feminist being used as a weapon. Whenever a man says "It's unfair that I can't be a feminist because of my sex!", it strikes a small victory for those women who cannot get a specific job because they just happen to be women. Sure, it's unfair, but the fact that some men are willing to spend time righting this specific undamaging wrong instead of working on there own attitudes to women makes me believe that equal rights has a long way to go. As such it's also a great indicator of people's opinions.
I also do believe that feminism cannot exist without the patriachy as it is inherently defined in terms of its reaction against the patriachy. I'm a man, and although I can fight against the patriachy, it's remiss of me not to be aware of the fact that I'm a part of, and working with the benefits of that patriachy on my side. As such, I have no right to define myself as a feminist.
posted by seanyboy at 5:30 AM on December 9, 2004
There is a huge difference between feminist ideals and this concept of the "feminist". Gender Equality is a feminist ideal, but it doesn't follow that having Gender Equality as an ideal makes you a feminist.
I've only been swayed to the "only women can be feminists" view recently, so there is a possibilty that I'm being overzealous in my interpretation.
I like the idea of the word Feminist being used as a weapon. Whenever a man says "It's unfair that I can't be a feminist because of my sex!", it strikes a small victory for those women who cannot get a specific job because they just happen to be women. Sure, it's unfair, but the fact that some men are willing to spend time righting this specific undamaging wrong instead of working on there own attitudes to women makes me believe that equal rights has a long way to go. As such it's also a great indicator of people's opinions.
I also do believe that feminism cannot exist without the patriachy as it is inherently defined in terms of its reaction against the patriachy. I'm a man, and although I can fight against the patriachy, it's remiss of me not to be aware of the fact that I'm a part of, and working with the benefits of that patriachy on my side. As such, I have no right to define myself as a feminist.
posted by seanyboy at 5:30 AM on December 9, 2004
I've only been swayed to the "only women can be feminists" view recently, so there is a possibilty that I'm being overzealous in my interpretation.
Yeah you got that right.
I'm a man, and although I can fight against the patriachy, it's remiss of me not to be aware of the fact that I'm a part of, and working with the benefits of that patriachy on my side.
That's what I'd describe as "victim rhetoric" even if it's by proxy (particularly the casual use of the word "patriarchy"). What you are doing is dividing victims of sexism up into two distinct groups creating an "us and them" mentality, which tends to lead to blaming and shaming, arguments about who suffers the most, etc. I just don't think it's very helpful at all in any practical way.
posted by SpaceCadet at 6:35 AM on December 9, 2004
Yeah you got that right.
I'm a man, and although I can fight against the patriachy, it's remiss of me not to be aware of the fact that I'm a part of, and working with the benefits of that patriachy on my side.
That's what I'd describe as "victim rhetoric" even if it's by proxy (particularly the casual use of the word "patriarchy"). What you are doing is dividing victims of sexism up into two distinct groups creating an "us and them" mentality, which tends to lead to blaming and shaming, arguments about who suffers the most, etc. I just don't think it's very helpful at all in any practical way.
posted by SpaceCadet at 6:35 AM on December 9, 2004
I think there is a difference between this place being a "boyzone" [whatever that means] and being antiwoman. [Unless boyzone means antiwoman.]
It seems to me that most of the women 'round here don't really mind all the macho posturing and toilet humor unless it becomes antiwoman. They just seem to want their serious inquiries and thoughts treated with respect. The same problems also appear when religion and politics get going. Pretty much any time sex, gender, religion or politics get brought up, someone is going to get a shiv between the ribs. We all want treated with respect but respect is the gold-standard 'round here.
So, sort of reiterating what others have said, cutting down folks you disagree with needs to decrease across the board.
I'm not sure that there is any feasible action that can be taken to ensure that asshattery decreases because it requires a voluntary change by the asshat. Banning or time-outs are only punishment and not rehabilitation.
I guess I'm saying the most effective thing we can do is lead by example and hope others realize that making things personal isn't constructive. This thread has an awful lot of leading by example in it.
posted by sciurus at 6:49 AM on December 9, 2004
It seems to me that most of the women 'round here don't really mind all the macho posturing and toilet humor unless it becomes antiwoman. They just seem to want their serious inquiries and thoughts treated with respect. The same problems also appear when religion and politics get going. Pretty much any time sex, gender, religion or politics get brought up, someone is going to get a shiv between the ribs. We all want treated with respect but respect is the gold-standard 'round here.
So, sort of reiterating what others have said, cutting down folks you disagree with needs to decrease across the board.
I'm not sure that there is any feasible action that can be taken to ensure that asshattery decreases because it requires a voluntary change by the asshat. Banning or time-outs are only punishment and not rehabilitation.
I guess I'm saying the most effective thing we can do is lead by example and hope others realize that making things personal isn't constructive. This thread has an awful lot of leading by example in it.
posted by sciurus at 6:49 AM on December 9, 2004
Why'd we have to revive this?
I'm too tired to type all my comments from the green thread again. Can we hire a girl to do it for me?
posted by jonmc at 7:03 AM on December 9, 2004
I'm too tired to type all my comments from the green thread again. Can we hire a girl to do it for me?
posted by jonmc at 7:03 AM on December 9, 2004
EB: Did you read the sentences that came after the ones you quote? I said I don't think discriminating against someone is okay regardless. But thinking you are an idiot for choosing to suck a cock (which you say you did; I'd say I was born hetero) or drive an SUV or vote Republican is beyond my right. It is but moral to judge people by their choices.
(Note: I *could* say you're an idiot for sucking cock but I don't. Talking about it over and over, well . . .)
posted by dame at 7:10 AM on December 9, 2004
(Note: I *could* say you're an idiot for sucking cock but I don't. Talking about it over and over, well . . .)
posted by dame at 7:10 AM on December 9, 2004
I'm not using the word patriachy casually. (In fact I hesitated to use the word.) By patriachy, I mean the social structure that we have in place which means women are disadvantaged. This includes, for example, the promotion of unhealthy body types, the inability to get certain jobs, and differences in education. These are three areas in which I have been given, and continue to recieve an unfair advantage.
I'm also not splitting sexism into two camps. Sexism is cross gender, and there are a number of expectations as to my behaviour & my societal role which are unfair. I do believe however that women tend to get a harder time because of their sex than men.
The phrase "victim rhetoric" is interesting, and if true would certainly make me consider my position. I tend to see the F word as being more about empowerment. You could argue that there can be no empowerment without victimhood, and I'd concede that point.
/me goes off to think a bit more about this.
posted by seanyboy at 7:17 AM on December 9, 2004
I'm also not splitting sexism into two camps. Sexism is cross gender, and there are a number of expectations as to my behaviour & my societal role which are unfair. I do believe however that women tend to get a harder time because of their sex than men.
The phrase "victim rhetoric" is interesting, and if true would certainly make me consider my position. I tend to see the F word as being more about empowerment. You could argue that there can be no empowerment without victimhood, and I'd concede that point.
/me goes off to think a bit more about this.
posted by seanyboy at 7:17 AM on December 9, 2004
pomegranate - Matt didn't delete the Bra Thread. He deleted an ask.metafilter question from yesterday along the lines of [I'm thinking about leaving MeFi because MeFi is too lady unfriendly. I'm not looking for reasons to stay, I'm just wondering if anybody else feels the same way].
It was deleted because it was a question more appropriate to MetaTalk, not because people in the thread were being unfriendly toward women. The Bra thread was just offered in this thread as evidence that MeFi is unfriendly toward women.
I don't see it myself, but whatever. I guess there were a couple of peripheral comments along the lines of big boobs good or heh heh heh, we need pictures. I guess if comments like that really annoy you, then you're going to be annoyed sometimes on MetaFilter -- particularly when female topics are raised. There's going to be bores in every group though, and it seems like both genders got to be too chatty as the thread progressed. Generally, MetaFilter seems better than most sites for this kind of stuff (at least to me). Even through the chattiness and boorish comments, the signal to noise in that question was pretty high. I think the question got answered.
If we can get some people (and in particular one specific person) to stop moralizing or offering opinions in ask.metafilter threads, I think that would certainly go a long way to making ask.metafilter better. That person seems to crave attention and has a persecution complex a mile long, so I doubt that curbed behavior will be forthcoming.
posted by willnot at 7:26 AM on December 9, 2004
It was deleted because it was a question more appropriate to MetaTalk, not because people in the thread were being unfriendly toward women. The Bra thread was just offered in this thread as evidence that MeFi is unfriendly toward women.
I don't see it myself, but whatever. I guess there were a couple of peripheral comments along the lines of big boobs good or heh heh heh, we need pictures. I guess if comments like that really annoy you, then you're going to be annoyed sometimes on MetaFilter -- particularly when female topics are raised. There's going to be bores in every group though, and it seems like both genders got to be too chatty as the thread progressed. Generally, MetaFilter seems better than most sites for this kind of stuff (at least to me). Even through the chattiness and boorish comments, the signal to noise in that question was pretty high. I think the question got answered.
If we can get some people (and in particular one specific person) to stop moralizing or offering opinions in ask.metafilter threads, I think that would certainly go a long way to making ask.metafilter better. That person seems to crave attention and has a persecution complex a mile long, so I doubt that curbed behavior will be forthcoming.
posted by willnot at 7:26 AM on December 9, 2004
Oh and uh, P_G: Maggots in your scrotal sack! Crawling up your urethra and backing into your prostate, digging holes into your colon and nesting there. Thanks for the nice visuals, I thought I'd give you some right back.
This might be more vivid.
Equipoise, if you're still reading this, it didn't offend me but it did catch me off-guard, I suppose. (I'm a guy, for the record--I guess listing "Coelacanth" as my gender isn't very informative.)
posted by kenko at 7:28 AM on December 9, 2004
This might be more vivid.
Equipoise, if you're still reading this, it didn't offend me but it did catch me off-guard, I suppose. (I'm a guy, for the record--I guess listing "Coelacanth" as my gender isn't very informative.)
posted by kenko at 7:28 AM on December 9, 2004
Wait, no, I take it all back. Shit like this:
Dick had a Stroke??? I wonder if it was a big stroke - would he be a stiff?
...is lame. Of course, it's lame irrespective of gender, and most people in thread were talking about how lame it was. Still, lame, lame, lame.
posted by willnot at 7:34 AM on December 9, 2004
Dick had a Stroke??? I wonder if it was a big stroke - would he be a stiff?
...is lame. Of course, it's lame irrespective of gender, and most people in thread were talking about how lame it was. Still, lame, lame, lame.
posted by willnot at 7:34 AM on December 9, 2004
If we can get some people (and in particular one specific person) to stop moralizing or offering opinions in ask.metafilter threads, I think that would certainly go a long way to making ask.metafilter better. That person seems to crave attention and has a persecution complex a mile long, so I doubt that curbed behavior will be forthcoming.
I said in the deleted thread that I'd leave it alone, willnot.
posted by jonmc at 7:36 AM on December 9, 2004
I said in the deleted thread that I'd leave it alone, willnot.
posted by jonmc at 7:36 AM on December 9, 2004
I prefer to ignore what sex/race/religion someone is and judge the comment/post on it's quality. I don't believe I have ever been offensive to someone based on their sex or sexuality because frankly (nods to P_G) it's fundamentally unimportant.
It's what you bring to the site that matters, not whether you have certain sexual characteristics etc. I disagree with konolia's Christianity, I disagree with Krrrlson's sensitivity regarding his Jewituditiness, I disagree with a lot of people about a lot of things (as is my right) but if one of them makes a statement I agree with I will 100% support them.
I apologise if anyone finds P_G's attitude cryptic - I get it and I believe he is right. You may now shoot the messenger.
posted by longbaugh at 7:47 AM on December 9, 2004
It's what you bring to the site that matters, not whether you have certain sexual characteristics etc. I disagree with konolia's Christianity, I disagree with Krrrlson's sensitivity regarding his Jewituditiness, I disagree with a lot of people about a lot of things (as is my right) but if one of them makes a statement I agree with I will 100% support them.
I apologise if anyone finds P_G's attitude cryptic - I get it and I believe he is right. You may now shoot the messenger.
posted by longbaugh at 7:47 AM on December 9, 2004
pomegranate: you will observe that I am not, now, on the basis of those visuals, wishing you a lifetime bereft of sexual fulfillment. Who is being more offensive here, the guy making a surreal joke, or the apparently-serious dobbs?
posted by Pretty_Generic at 7:59 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by Pretty_Generic at 7:59 AM on December 9, 2004
I hesitate to comment but I will.
The bra thread on AskMe was deleted because of bad comments? Why, oh why, Matt, would you do that instead of deleting the actual comments? The question in question was a honest one, and since there have been questions on AskMe about MEN'S underwear before, the content couldn't have been bad. Punish the bad commenters, not the poster of an honest question.
Juicylicious's statement that "if women don't like it, don't mention boobs or menstruation in the Green" is probably the one thing on this thread I find most upsetting.
Me too. I find this problem in the Green FAR more upsetting than sexist comments in the blue. The Green is supposed to be for everyone, and snarky comments are NOT supposed to be the norm. I myself had a thread (not the recent one) where someone made a nasty comment towards me - I responded, and Matt deleted both of the comments, for which I was grateful. If he had deleted the thread, however, that would have made me mad. That thread was about finding a dentist for my boyfriend, but if it had been the bra thread and I had posted it, I would have expected the same response from Matt. The Green is far more sacred to me than the Blue, especially now that there is an annoymous feature. Answers, not snark! We women might not want to go anywhere else to ask a question. And we shouldn't have to. THAT'S where sexism gets super annoying - "Well if you don't like it, go somewhere else to talk." That's not what equality is about.
posted by agregoli at 8:13 AM on December 9, 2004
The bra thread on AskMe was deleted because of bad comments? Why, oh why, Matt, would you do that instead of deleting the actual comments? The question in question was a honest one, and since there have been questions on AskMe about MEN'S underwear before, the content couldn't have been bad. Punish the bad commenters, not the poster of an honest question.
Juicylicious's statement that "if women don't like it, don't mention boobs or menstruation in the Green" is probably the one thing on this thread I find most upsetting.
Me too. I find this problem in the Green FAR more upsetting than sexist comments in the blue. The Green is supposed to be for everyone, and snarky comments are NOT supposed to be the norm. I myself had a thread (not the recent one) where someone made a nasty comment towards me - I responded, and Matt deleted both of the comments, for which I was grateful. If he had deleted the thread, however, that would have made me mad. That thread was about finding a dentist for my boyfriend, but if it had been the bra thread and I had posted it, I would have expected the same response from Matt. The Green is far more sacred to me than the Blue, especially now that there is an annoymous feature. Answers, not snark! We women might not want to go anywhere else to ask a question. And we shouldn't have to. THAT'S where sexism gets super annoying - "Well if you don't like it, go somewhere else to talk." That's not what equality is about.
posted by agregoli at 8:13 AM on December 9, 2004
There is a reason other waves of feminism came after—filling up holes
Good Lord, that made me laugh. (Due to an awareness of the history of feminism from the giddy heights of 70s extremism to the depressing lows of post-feminst man-pleasing drivel of more recent times, and because of my own feminist beliefs, not because I find vaginas funny, I should probably add, just in case.)
I think the best suggestion above is for us all to have a go at recruiting more women to the site. The place certainly gives the impression of being overwhelmingly male, and since I spend my time in real life with people of both genders, but mostly with women, that makes male me faintly uncomfortable sometimes, so I can see how it would be a bind for women members.
posted by jack_mo at 8:14 AM on December 9, 2004
Good Lord, that made me laugh. (Due to an awareness of the history of feminism from the giddy heights of 70s extremism to the depressing lows of post-feminst man-pleasing drivel of more recent times, and because of my own feminist beliefs, not because I find vaginas funny, I should probably add, just in case.)
I think the best suggestion above is for us all to have a go at recruiting more women to the site. The place certainly gives the impression of being overwhelmingly male, and since I spend my time in real life with people of both genders, but mostly with women, that makes male me faintly uncomfortable sometimes, so I can see how it would be a bind for women members.
posted by jack_mo at 8:14 AM on December 9, 2004
I agree with agregoli.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 8:19 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by Pretty_Generic at 8:19 AM on December 9, 2004
Agregoli it wasn't deleted I was wrong.
posted by pomegranate at 8:19 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by pomegranate at 8:19 AM on December 9, 2004
Did he delete any comments? I might have to go take a look. Because I think he should have, if not.
(By the way, I appreciate that Matt is reading these threads. Thank you for realizing this is a concern for many of us.)
posted by agregoli at 8:21 AM on December 9, 2004
(By the way, I appreciate that Matt is reading these threads. Thank you for realizing this is a concern for many of us.)
posted by agregoli at 8:21 AM on December 9, 2004
Dame: yes, I am aware that you allowed that bigotry on the basis of choice is also wrong. My argument is that the matter of choice is mostly irrelevant. If an act is objectionable or not is independent of choice. I am perfectly comfortable condemning a sociopath who was born a sociopath.
It is but moral to judge people by their choices.
...which is why I so aggressively make the point that I'm making. That homosexuality is not a choice is a weak defense. That there's not a damn thing wrong with it, regardless of choice, is a strong defense. A common complaint among gay rights activists is that the general public is willing to be tolerant of gays so long as they don't have to actually think about, you know, gay sex. I think it's important to make people think about gay sex and to aggressively affirm its acceptability.
Also, that it is "but moral to judge people by their choices"—an assertion with which I deeply agree—assumes that people are capable of making choices and that their choices matter. In my view, tolerance and respect for other people require that one assume they are moral agents.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:21 AM on December 9, 2004
It is but moral to judge people by their choices.
...which is why I so aggressively make the point that I'm making. That homosexuality is not a choice is a weak defense. That there's not a damn thing wrong with it, regardless of choice, is a strong defense. A common complaint among gay rights activists is that the general public is willing to be tolerant of gays so long as they don't have to actually think about, you know, gay sex. I think it's important to make people think about gay sex and to aggressively affirm its acceptability.
Also, that it is "but moral to judge people by their choices"—an assertion with which I deeply agree—assumes that people are capable of making choices and that their choices matter. In my view, tolerance and respect for other people require that one assume they are moral agents.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:21 AM on December 9, 2004
to the depressing lows of post-feminst man-pleasing drivel of more recent times,
If that's all you get from third-wave or post-feminism then your "awareness of history" is pretty crap.
posted by dame at 8:23 AM on December 9, 2004
If that's all you get from third-wave or post-feminism then your "awareness of history" is pretty crap.
posted by dame at 8:23 AM on December 9, 2004
As a (mostly) lurker I wasn't gonna comment here, but given that I am a woman, if I don't speak up, then I'm requiring/allowing a lot of other people here to speak for me. 160+ comments in, here I go.
While I agree many points other women here have made, I think I agree most with fricative. The problem isn't that the majority of posters on mefi are sexist or cads; it's that there's an extremely vocal minority who are totally emotionally/intellectually/socially stunted. And it's cool that the community is so laissez-faire about it, because I'm sure that this is a pretty big social outlet for these crippled children. However, it's pretty damned annoying that women are frequently the target of these sophomoric barbs and injokes. It'd be nice if those sentiments would be less prevalent. After all, we don't make fun of you for what we perceive are *your* shortcomings. (And believe me, if it were open season on losers, you wouldn't be saying "Grow a thicker skin.")
Actually, it's damned annoying when any group is inevitably singled out as the butt of a joke, and I don't think that choosing to be that way makes one any more valid a target. Mefites sometimes make sweeping generalizations about women/southerners/Republicans/animal rights activists/transfolk ad infinitum without any representative mefites from said groups even saying a thing.
That's just rude and intolerant. And it's so intellectually simple. Mefi is a forum of intelligent--even brilliant--people. Why do we so often behave like 6th graders?
And on the subject of AskMe, I'd really prefer not to go to iVillage if I want to ask a question that the people here just as capable of answering, especially sans {{{{{{HUGS}}}}}} tone. I find it really, really annoying that men visit those specific threads to be the internet equivalent of Bababooie.
posted by cowboy_sally at 8:34 AM on December 9, 2004
While I agree many points other women here have made, I think I agree most with fricative. The problem isn't that the majority of posters on mefi are sexist or cads; it's that there's an extremely vocal minority who are totally emotionally/intellectually/socially stunted. And it's cool that the community is so laissez-faire about it, because I'm sure that this is a pretty big social outlet for these crippled children. However, it's pretty damned annoying that women are frequently the target of these sophomoric barbs and injokes. It'd be nice if those sentiments would be less prevalent. After all, we don't make fun of you for what we perceive are *your* shortcomings. (And believe me, if it were open season on losers, you wouldn't be saying "Grow a thicker skin.")
Actually, it's damned annoying when any group is inevitably singled out as the butt of a joke, and I don't think that choosing to be that way makes one any more valid a target. Mefites sometimes make sweeping generalizations about women/southerners/Republicans/animal rights activists/transfolk ad infinitum without any representative mefites from said groups even saying a thing.
That's just rude and intolerant. And it's so intellectually simple. Mefi is a forum of intelligent--even brilliant--people. Why do we so often behave like 6th graders?
And on the subject of AskMe, I'd really prefer not to go to iVillage if I want to ask a question that the people here just as capable of answering, especially sans {{{{{{HUGS}}}}}} tone. I find it really, really annoying that men visit those specific threads to be the internet equivalent of Bababooie.
posted by cowboy_sally at 8:34 AM on December 9, 2004
Okay, I'm reeeaaallly late to the thread, but it doesn't matter, because I don't have that much to add. Here it is: is MeFi a boyzone? Absolutely! Do I feel unwelcome? Absolutely not. Do I cringe in advance when certain subjects are introduced, or whenever a link leads to an article accompanied by a photo of any woman? Yes!!
And this embarrasses me - not as a woman, but as a user/member.
But MeFi has some of the coolest men on the face of the earth, and they are people that I probably wouldn't have ever met somewhere else online. I really only stay here because of them, and because the women who hang in here are extradoubleplusspecialgood. Mefi is supposed to be the "smart" site... I don't know if that's true, but if it is, I would hope that some of our otherwise intelligent-funny-likeable guys would listen to some of this stuff, not take it personally, and apply a little of teh smart to the issue
posted by taz at 8:38 AM on December 9, 2004
And this embarrasses me - not as a woman, but as a user/member.
But MeFi has some of the coolest men on the face of the earth, and they are people that I probably wouldn't have ever met somewhere else online. I really only stay here because of them, and because the women who hang in here are extradoubleplusspecialgood. Mefi is supposed to be the "smart" site... I don't know if that's true, but if it is, I would hope that some of our otherwise intelligent-funny-likeable guys would listen to some of this stuff, not take it personally, and apply a little of teh smart to the issue
posted by taz at 8:38 AM on December 9, 2004
men can hold feminist beliefs, but they cannot be feminists
Is that somehow related to how black people can't be racist? Because it sounds just about as stupid. Isn't any [something]ist pretty easily defined as "someone who believes in [something]ism"?
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:39 AM on December 9, 2004
Is that somehow related to how black people can't be racist? Because it sounds just about as stupid. Isn't any [something]ist pretty easily defined as "someone who believes in [something]ism"?
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:39 AM on December 9, 2004
I am perfectly comfortable condemning a sociopath who was born a sociopath.
I'm not. I think choice does matter, and if you can prove that a sociopath was born that way to comdemn him is no better than comdemning a baby for shitting himself. (Of course you may have to take steps to protect others from him.)
As for the homosexuality question, people do have a total right to think homosexuality is icky—as long as they don't discriminate. I think Christianity is icky. Then again, I'll think you're an ass for thinking homosexuality is icky and Jeebus will think I'm an ass for thinking Christianity is icky. So fucking what. I'm interested in making it clear which thoughts are unacceptable not dictating which are.
posted by dame at 8:39 AM on December 9, 2004
I'm not. I think choice does matter, and if you can prove that a sociopath was born that way to comdemn him is no better than comdemning a baby for shitting himself. (Of course you may have to take steps to protect others from him.)
As for the homosexuality question, people do have a total right to think homosexuality is icky—as long as they don't discriminate. I think Christianity is icky. Then again, I'll think you're an ass for thinking homosexuality is icky and Jeebus will think I'm an ass for thinking Christianity is icky. So fucking what. I'm interested in making it clear which thoughts are unacceptable not dictating which are.
posted by dame at 8:39 AM on December 9, 2004
Mefi is a forum of intelligent--even brilliant--people. Why do we so often behave like 6th graders?
Because intelligence != moral fiber. Oftentimes, people mainly use their advanced intellects to create elaborate justifications for their petty hatreds and prejudices.
posted by jonmc at 8:42 AM on December 9, 2004
Because intelligence != moral fiber. Oftentimes, people mainly use their advanced intellects to create elaborate justifications for their petty hatreds and prejudices.
posted by jonmc at 8:42 AM on December 9, 2004
Who is being more offensive here, the guy making a surreal joke, or the apparently-serious dobbs?
P_G, I thought your "surreal joke" was repulsive, and I find your "it's funny, get over it" defense ignorant and obnoxious. I might not have been as emphatic as Dobbs, but yeah, I'm in that corner. And I'm wondering if I can dig up the receipt and get a return on the sympathy I wasted on you when you shared your dating woes.
And while I'm prone to the occasional feminist rant, I'm not even one of those who feels uncomfortable in the boyzone. It doesn't take a shrinking violet to feel that what you did sucks.
posted by clever sheep at 8:49 AM on December 9, 2004
P_G, I thought your "surreal joke" was repulsive, and I find your "it's funny, get over it" defense ignorant and obnoxious. I might not have been as emphatic as Dobbs, but yeah, I'm in that corner. And I'm wondering if I can dig up the receipt and get a return on the sympathy I wasted on you when you shared your dating woes.
And while I'm prone to the occasional feminist rant, I'm not even one of those who feels uncomfortable in the boyzone. It doesn't take a shrinking violet to feel that what you did sucks.
posted by clever sheep at 8:49 AM on December 9, 2004
"I'm interested in making it clear which thoughts are unacceptable not dictating which are."
And I the reverse. Which I think goes right to the heart of our greatly differing sensibilities and why you and I so often come into conflict.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:49 AM on December 9, 2004
And I the reverse. Which I think goes right to the heart of our greatly differing sensibilities and why you and I so often come into conflict.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:49 AM on December 9, 2004
P_G "In my opinion, sexism is such an obviously absurd and irrational thing that it can be joked about. Same with racism. And if you don't feel the same way, frankly, it doesn't bother me, because the only thing that matters is what we as individuals actually believe, rather than what we make occasional jokes about.
However, the caterpillar joke is just meant to be surreal."
Pretty_Generic, ask me what the secret to humor is ...
...
TIMING!
There are plenty of good jokes about people meeting untimely deaths. It's part of how we deal with life. Tell one of those jokes to a grieving husband at the funeral of his wife who just met an untimely end ... lets just say that no one will feel sorry for you when you get your nose broken. Likewise, if you had posted your graphic in the context of an exhibition of surreal photoshopped ad parodies, it might have come across as humorous (if a bit gross). When you post it in the context of a conversation where some women are trying to sincerely communicate the ways in which this community can feel unfriendly or insensitive, you communicate the message that you are a clueless jerk who doesn't take seriously the concerns of the women in the conversation. You may have intended to deliver the message that sexism is absurd and irrational, but trust me, that's not the message that was received.
You can of course dismiss those concerns with the attitude of "I know what I meant, who cares what everyone else thought I meant." In that case, you might want to question your motivation behind trying to communicate in the first place.
If you honestly still don't get it, feel free to email me (or take i_am_joes_spleen up on his offer. He's a pretty sharp guy and might be able to explain it better.)
posted by tdismukes at 8:49 AM on December 9, 2004
However, the caterpillar joke is just meant to be surreal."
Pretty_Generic, ask me what the secret to humor is ...
...
TIMING!
There are plenty of good jokes about people meeting untimely deaths. It's part of how we deal with life. Tell one of those jokes to a grieving husband at the funeral of his wife who just met an untimely end ... lets just say that no one will feel sorry for you when you get your nose broken. Likewise, if you had posted your graphic in the context of an exhibition of surreal photoshopped ad parodies, it might have come across as humorous (if a bit gross). When you post it in the context of a conversation where some women are trying to sincerely communicate the ways in which this community can feel unfriendly or insensitive, you communicate the message that you are a clueless jerk who doesn't take seriously the concerns of the women in the conversation. You may have intended to deliver the message that sexism is absurd and irrational, but trust me, that's not the message that was received.
You can of course dismiss those concerns with the attitude of "I know what I meant, who cares what everyone else thought I meant." In that case, you might want to question your motivation behind trying to communicate in the first place.
If you honestly still don't get it, feel free to email me (or take i_am_joes_spleen up on his offer. He's a pretty sharp guy and might be able to explain it better.)
posted by tdismukes at 8:49 AM on December 9, 2004
Oftentimes, people mainly use their advanced intellects to create elaborate justifications for their petty hatreds and prejudices.
This is precisely what I was talking about when I said "we make sweeping generalizations."
Sigh. Like Fran Lebowitz said, "The opposite of talking isn't listening. The opposite of talking is waiting."
posted by cowboy_sally at 8:50 AM on December 9, 2004
This is precisely what I was talking about when I said "we make sweeping generalizations."
Sigh. Like Fran Lebowitz said, "The opposite of talking isn't listening. The opposite of talking is waiting."
posted by cowboy_sally at 8:50 AM on December 9, 2004
If I believe in polygamy, does that make me a polygamist. If I condone terrorism do I immediately become a terrorist.
Come on.
posted by seanyboy at 8:52 AM on December 9, 2004
Come on.
posted by seanyboy at 8:52 AM on December 9, 2004
BTW, I don't mean to imply that feeling uncomfortable in the boyzone = shrinking violet. Poor comment construction and not my position at all.
[Doing twenty pushups]
posted by clever sheep at 8:54 AM on December 9, 2004
[Doing twenty pushups]
posted by clever sheep at 8:54 AM on December 9, 2004
seanyboy, I take it you think feminism is, generally and for the most part, a set of actions, not beliefs?
posted by kenko at 9:07 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by kenko at 9:07 AM on December 9, 2004
Seems kind of limiting, EB, to explicitly state what is okay.
Oh, and jon, you got me. I'm totally prejudiced against people who hold beliefs that make them, in my estimation, bad people—you know sexists, racists . . . God it felt good to finally admit I'm just like one of them, what with my unbearable prejudice.
posted by dame at 9:11 AM on December 9, 2004
Oh, and jon, you got me. I'm totally prejudiced against people who hold beliefs that make them, in my estimation, bad people—you know sexists, racists . . . God it felt good to finally admit I'm just like one of them, what with my unbearable prejudice.
posted by dame at 9:11 AM on December 9, 2004
When all is said and done, I'm learning. It's all that I need. No matter what, let the message run free. Don't stop looking for love. Love me for a reason, let the reason be love.
kenko: wtf? If I understand your question (which I don't), then the answer is that I believe feminism is a set of beliefs.
posted by seanyboy at 9:12 AM on December 9, 2004
kenko: wtf? If I understand your question (which I don't), then the answer is that I believe feminism is a set of beliefs.
posted by seanyboy at 9:12 AM on December 9, 2004
Oh, and jon, you got me. I'm totally prejudiced against people who hold beliefs that make them, in my estimation, bad people—you know sexists, racists
Sexists & racists were not was i was talking about dame. It was more along the lines of what cowboy_sally said, that yes, sweeping generalizations are tolerated and even encouraged towards certain groups around here. And when the pile-ons get gratuitious and mean spirited, my sympathies go to the pile-onee, even if, to some extent, they bring it on themselves. Being right is no excuse for being a bully.
I'm not saying that you do any of these things, just that it happens here. A lot.
posted by jonmc at 9:16 AM on December 9, 2004
Sexists & racists were not was i was talking about dame. It was more along the lines of what cowboy_sally said, that yes, sweeping generalizations are tolerated and even encouraged towards certain groups around here. And when the pile-ons get gratuitious and mean spirited, my sympathies go to the pile-onee, even if, to some extent, they bring it on themselves. Being right is no excuse for being a bully.
I'm not saying that you do any of these things, just that it happens here. A lot.
posted by jonmc at 9:16 AM on December 9, 2004
"I think it's important to make people think about gay sex and to aggressively affirm its acceptability."
Why?
I don't want to think about gay sex, it has no appeal to me. This has nothing to with whether or not I accept it -- I don't really want to think about my parents having sex either and don't even get me going on my kids. Ignorance really can be quite blissful, providing it's willful and all.
My opinion (or yours, for that matter) has nothing to do with whether or not an act is 'acceptable'. The fact that I choose not to dwell on sex acts that do not arouse me -- yep, if it doesn't elicit the prurient interest of my nether regions, I don't care -- has no bearing anyones reality but my own. And despite your desire to make me 'think' you can't... so, na-na-boobooo.
posted by cedar at 9:18 AM on December 9, 2004
Why?
I don't want to think about gay sex, it has no appeal to me. This has nothing to with whether or not I accept it -- I don't really want to think about my parents having sex either and don't even get me going on my kids. Ignorance really can be quite blissful, providing it's willful and all.
My opinion (or yours, for that matter) has nothing to do with whether or not an act is 'acceptable'. The fact that I choose not to dwell on sex acts that do not arouse me -- yep, if it doesn't elicit the prurient interest of my nether regions, I don't care -- has no bearing anyones reality but my own. And despite your desire to make me 'think' you can't... so, na-na-boobooo.
posted by cedar at 9:18 AM on December 9, 2004
Look, I've made it quite clear what my opinions are. What I did was a joke, a joke without even a target, just a joke, which many people found extremely funny. They've told me so. Now, it's up to you whether you judge me based on the joke, or on what my opinions actually are. I think the latter is of incomparably greater importance.
Or, you could judge me prejudicially by associating my joke with the sincere and heartfelt offensive behavior and beliefs of other people of my gender. There's a word for that, isn't there?
posted by Pretty_Generic at 9:22 AM on December 9, 2004
Or, you could judge me prejudicially by associating my joke with the sincere and heartfelt offensive behavior and beliefs of other people of my gender. There's a word for that, isn't there?
posted by Pretty_Generic at 9:22 AM on December 9, 2004
At some point in this thread it becomes necessary to speak up for the "emotionally and socially stunted". Since I've already made a point of standing up for Rape Haiku, I really don't have much to lose by making myself that sacrificial lamb.
I apologize to those who cannot grasp the concept of meta-humor - of making racist, homophobic, or sexist jokes specifically because only an idiot would make them and actually mean them - thereby stealing power from the genuinely negative concepts that gave rise to the jokes which are being mocked. I feel bad that your inability to detect those rolling eyes behind my defense of rape haiku - both directed against women AND attractive young white men such as myself in prison cells everywhere - has forced you to sound so shrill and strident.
It is not my fault, nor the fault of my friends and peers, that you lack this faculty. I have participated in several online communities with different sets of acceptable behavior, but I would hope that in all of them that at least 95% of the population could see the humor inherent in a passionately outspoken gay man joining an IRC channel and greeting my friends and I with "'Sup, faggots?"
I believe that absurdity, irony, and humor are transcendant forces above and beyond the real discriminatory power of labels, icons, and fear. Where "nigger" divides, a heartfelt and friendly "fuck you" mends. Horror, shock, and the need to correct others must be met with laughter, derision, and invective.
Ultimately, our every gasp of outrage is but a drop into an ocean of zeitgeist that determines language and thereby the true standing of women, homosexuals, and minorities. Shouting that it is not appropriate for me to employ the word "cunt" in the service of humor that specifically and consciously seeks to remove the discriminatory power of that term is not just disingenuous on your part, it is embarrassing. You may not ever realize it - but those standing about you in silent witness will cast their own quiet judgements on your unwitting pretensions even as you attempt to socially castrate me for thoughtcrime. The human instinct towards tribalism must be annihilated by casting down the stones of symbolism into a sea of meaninglessness - only thus will we free ourselves to judge each other as individuals.
The term "fuck" is, as many have correctly observed, rapidly losing any power to shock or provoke. It is my belief that this same phenomenon is replicable across every divisive epithet in existence - and that destruction of pejoratives, my friends, is a goal I pursue with open and unabashed zeal.
posted by Ryvar at 9:23 AM on December 9, 2004
I apologize to those who cannot grasp the concept of meta-humor - of making racist, homophobic, or sexist jokes specifically because only an idiot would make them and actually mean them - thereby stealing power from the genuinely negative concepts that gave rise to the jokes which are being mocked. I feel bad that your inability to detect those rolling eyes behind my defense of rape haiku - both directed against women AND attractive young white men such as myself in prison cells everywhere - has forced you to sound so shrill and strident.
It is not my fault, nor the fault of my friends and peers, that you lack this faculty. I have participated in several online communities with different sets of acceptable behavior, but I would hope that in all of them that at least 95% of the population could see the humor inherent in a passionately outspoken gay man joining an IRC channel and greeting my friends and I with "'Sup, faggots?"
I believe that absurdity, irony, and humor are transcendant forces above and beyond the real discriminatory power of labels, icons, and fear. Where "nigger" divides, a heartfelt and friendly "fuck you" mends. Horror, shock, and the need to correct others must be met with laughter, derision, and invective.
Ultimately, our every gasp of outrage is but a drop into an ocean of zeitgeist that determines language and thereby the true standing of women, homosexuals, and minorities. Shouting that it is not appropriate for me to employ the word "cunt" in the service of humor that specifically and consciously seeks to remove the discriminatory power of that term is not just disingenuous on your part, it is embarrassing. You may not ever realize it - but those standing about you in silent witness will cast their own quiet judgements on your unwitting pretensions even as you attempt to socially castrate me for thoughtcrime. The human instinct towards tribalism must be annihilated by casting down the stones of symbolism into a sea of meaninglessness - only thus will we free ourselves to judge each other as individuals.
The term "fuck" is, as many have correctly observed, rapidly losing any power to shock or provoke. It is my belief that this same phenomenon is replicable across every divisive epithet in existence - and that destruction of pejoratives, my friends, is a goal I pursue with open and unabashed zeal.
posted by Ryvar at 9:23 AM on December 9, 2004
It's not that we don't GET the joke, Ryvar, it's that it's STILL not appreciated. The intent doesn't matter. It's still ugly.
posted by agregoli at 9:27 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by agregoli at 9:27 AM on December 9, 2004
I totally agree with orange swan. Just thought I should mention that.
posted by Stynxno at 9:32 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by Stynxno at 9:32 AM on December 9, 2004
Why?
Because the default, dominant assumption is that gay sex is unacceptable. If it weren't for that context, I'd agree with you. That is, if people were neutral on the subject, then I have little justification for forcing them to think about it. But the fact is that they're not neutral; most people and the structure of our society is condemnatory. That is an active force that is justifiably opposed.
This answers dame's question, as well. The dominant social context (here and elsewhere) is prohibitions on behavior—negative judgments on other people's beliefs and actions. I believe the most appropriate and productive response to a negative is a positive, not another negative. (And while I can't deny there is some element of froufrou temperment involved in this belief, I think it is nevertheless rationally justified. It's justified because answering a negative with a negative is far too prone to ambiguity while answering a negative with a positive is unambiguous.)
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:32 AM on December 9, 2004
Because the default, dominant assumption is that gay sex is unacceptable. If it weren't for that context, I'd agree with you. That is, if people were neutral on the subject, then I have little justification for forcing them to think about it. But the fact is that they're not neutral; most people and the structure of our society is condemnatory. That is an active force that is justifiably opposed.
This answers dame's question, as well. The dominant social context (here and elsewhere) is prohibitions on behavior—negative judgments on other people's beliefs and actions. I believe the most appropriate and productive response to a negative is a positive, not another negative. (And while I can't deny there is some element of froufrou temperment involved in this belief, I think it is nevertheless rationally justified. It's justified because answering a negative with a negative is far too prone to ambiguity while answering a negative with a positive is unambiguous.)
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:32 AM on December 9, 2004
agregoli: neverminding that I disagree with the implicit assumption that everything must and ought to be beautiful, 'not getting the joke' wasn't at all what I was talking about.
posted by Ryvar at 9:33 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by Ryvar at 9:33 AM on December 9, 2004
It would be nice if people stopped being fucktards on MeFi. I myself am trying to be less of a fucktard. I challenge everyone to do the same (my hope is that they will have better results than I).
What Sidhedevil said. Also. what gd779 said. And a bunch of other sensible people.
My take:
1) MeFi is unquestionably a boyzone, which is not (as sciurus said) the same as being antiwoman, though of course there is overlap.
2) MeFi is much less of a boyzone than most sites (that are not explicitly feminist). I suspect you'd have to be pretty sensitive to be actually driven away from the site (not that there's anything wrong with being sensitive).
3) But it sure would be nice if it were less of one, if there were more women and the guys got more of a clue and the frequency of dumb comments that have to be defended with "hey, it was only a joke, cantcha take a joke?" diminished to the vanishing point.
In this regard, I am heartened by seanyboy's comments, which show thoughtful reconsideration. If we hurled fewer insults and made fewer snap judgements and overheated analogies, we might get that sort of thing more often.
Oh, and EB, you really should reconsider your need to explain your theories about sexism and feminism at exhaustive length on every conceivable occasion.
On preview: Jesus, this thread is growing fast.
posted by languagehat at 9:34 AM on December 9, 2004
What Sidhedevil said. Also. what gd779 said. And a bunch of other sensible people.
My take:
1) MeFi is unquestionably a boyzone, which is not (as sciurus said) the same as being antiwoman, though of course there is overlap.
2) MeFi is much less of a boyzone than most sites (that are not explicitly feminist). I suspect you'd have to be pretty sensitive to be actually driven away from the site (not that there's anything wrong with being sensitive).
3) But it sure would be nice if it were less of one, if there were more women and the guys got more of a clue and the frequency of dumb comments that have to be defended with "hey, it was only a joke, cantcha take a joke?" diminished to the vanishing point.
In this regard, I am heartened by seanyboy's comments, which show thoughtful reconsideration. If we hurled fewer insults and made fewer snap judgements and overheated analogies, we might get that sort of thing more often.
Oh, and EB, you really should reconsider your need to explain your theories about sexism and feminism at exhaustive length on every conceivable occasion.
On preview: Jesus, this thread is growing fast.
posted by languagehat at 9:34 AM on December 9, 2004
The term "fuck" is, as many have correctly observed, rapidly losing any power to shock or provoke. It is my belief that this same phenomenon is replicable across every divisive epithet in existence - and that destruction of pejoratives, my friends, is a goal I pursue with open and unabashed zeal.
Words are only a minor component of prejudice Ryvar, there are plenty of people I know who would never dare say the word "nigger," aloud, who are 14k racists.
I agree that we shouldn't be banally "polite" all the time and that true conversation and consensus on difficult issues can only be acheived when we feel comfortable speaking frankly about our most difficult and unattractive thoughts.
But however fun it might be, saying pee-pee and poo-poo ain't gonna do it, not by itself.
posted by jonmc at 9:35 AM on December 9, 2004
Words are only a minor component of prejudice Ryvar, there are plenty of people I know who would never dare say the word "nigger," aloud, who are 14k racists.
I agree that we shouldn't be banally "polite" all the time and that true conversation and consensus on difficult issues can only be acheived when we feel comfortable speaking frankly about our most difficult and unattractive thoughts.
But however fun it might be, saying pee-pee and poo-poo ain't gonna do it, not by itself.
posted by jonmc at 9:35 AM on December 9, 2004
It helps though. I want a society where we are so comfortable with the rejection of racism, sexism and homophobia that I can make a joke to a friend of mine based on any of those aspects, in the same way as any other aspect of his or her character.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 9:38 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by Pretty_Generic at 9:38 AM on December 9, 2004
seanyboy -- I believe feminism is a set of beliefs.
Then quit trying to define it as a set of experiences.
posted by NortonDC at 9:41 AM on December 9, 2004
Then quit trying to define it as a set of experiences.
posted by NortonDC at 9:41 AM on December 9, 2004
I agree that we shouldn't be banally "polite" all the time and that true conversation and consensus on difficult issues can only be acheived when we feel comfortable speaking frankly about our most difficult and unattractive thoughts.
This, again, isn't really what I was talking about - but I do agree with what you're saying here.
posted by Ryvar at 9:41 AM on December 9, 2004
This, again, isn't really what I was talking about - but I do agree with what you're saying here.
posted by Ryvar at 9:41 AM on December 9, 2004
What I did was a joke, a joke without even a target, just a joke, which many people found extremely funny. They've told me so.
In other words, P_G, "It's funny, get over it." You just don't get it, do you? Even after tdismukes thoughtfully lays it all out for you about the importance of context and timing. After that, your position isn't just ignorant, it's deliberately ignorant.
Now, it's up to you whether you judge me based on the joke, or on what my opinions actually are>...Or, you could judge me prejudicially...
Do you seriously expect me to accept your construction that those who feel offended by your stupid stunt and think the worse of you for it are prejudiced?
At no point have I called you a misogynist, or indeed, called you anything. What I have done is let you know that I find your behavior repulsive, obnoxious, and ignorant.
Quit trying to shift the blame. You did something royally stupid and several people let you know they didn't appreciate it. If you truly felt secure in the applause you say you received, then you wouldn't be whining about your detractors as you have repeatedly done.
Keep on pushing, P_G. I'm sure that eventually everyone will come around and agree that your joke was the Best. Idea. EVAR.
posted by clever sheep at 9:44 AM on December 9, 2004
In other words, P_G, "It's funny, get over it." You just don't get it, do you? Even after tdismukes thoughtfully lays it all out for you about the importance of context and timing. After that, your position isn't just ignorant, it's deliberately ignorant.
Now, it's up to you whether you judge me based on the joke, or on what my opinions actually are>...Or, you could judge me prejudicially...
Do you seriously expect me to accept your construction that those who feel offended by your stupid stunt and think the worse of you for it are prejudiced?
At no point have I called you a misogynist, or indeed, called you anything. What I have done is let you know that I find your behavior repulsive, obnoxious, and ignorant.
Quit trying to shift the blame. You did something royally stupid and several people let you know they didn't appreciate it. If you truly felt secure in the applause you say you received, then you wouldn't be whining about your detractors as you have repeatedly done.
Keep on pushing, P_G. I'm sure that eventually everyone will come around and agree that your joke was the Best. Idea. EVAR.
posted by clever sheep at 9:44 AM on December 9, 2004
I apologize to those who cannot grasp the concept of meta-humor - of making racist, homophobic, or sexist jokes specifically because only an idiot would make them and actually mean them - thereby stealing power from the genuinely negative concepts that gave rise to the jokes which are being mocked.
Oh I get the concept. I do it all the time. At home. With trusted friends. At a discreet volume. In a long-standing tradition of empty bullshitting with people to whom I've proven myself a genuinely tolerant soul.
You want to do it in a room full of strangers, some of whom might belong to the group which you're treating with your transcendent "fuck" humor. There's a second concept you might want to try to grasp: that some black people might be offended by nigger jokes.
I know it's a tough one, especially for an evolved soul like yours to integrate, but please bring yourself down from your post-human, beatific life of healing society's wounds with the word "fuck" and give a little service to the concept of basic respect.
posted by scarabic at 9:46 AM on December 9, 2004 [1 favorite]
Oh I get the concept. I do it all the time. At home. With trusted friends. At a discreet volume. In a long-standing tradition of empty bullshitting with people to whom I've proven myself a genuinely tolerant soul.
You want to do it in a room full of strangers, some of whom might belong to the group which you're treating with your transcendent "fuck" humor. There's a second concept you might want to try to grasp: that some black people might be offended by nigger jokes.
I know it's a tough one, especially for an evolved soul like yours to integrate, but please bring yourself down from your post-human, beatific life of healing society's wounds with the word "fuck" and give a little service to the concept of basic respect.
posted by scarabic at 9:46 AM on December 9, 2004 [1 favorite]
I totally understand--nay, appreciate!--subversive, ironic, even vulgar humor. Yeah, I know, it might seem hard to believe.
There are true comedic geniuses who did/do said humor with perfect delivery. Bruce, Carlin, Pryor, etc.
When a member of the Metafilter Awkward Squad does it, trust me: it's not as savored or appreciated. See under "Day jobs, Don't quit." To put it another way: You're simply not as funny as Bruce or Carlin or Pryor and by explaining the semiotics and the social context of the joke in exhaustive detail and explaining WHY we should think it's funny doesn't make it so.
People can be frank without being rude or cretinous. I think.
posted by cowboy_sally at 9:47 AM on December 9, 2004
There are true comedic geniuses who did/do said humor with perfect delivery. Bruce, Carlin, Pryor, etc.
When a member of the Metafilter Awkward Squad does it, trust me: it's not as savored or appreciated. See under "Day jobs, Don't quit." To put it another way: You're simply not as funny as Bruce or Carlin or Pryor and by explaining the semiotics and the social context of the joke in exhaustive detail and explaining WHY we should think it's funny doesn't make it so.
People can be frank without being rude or cretinous. I think.
posted by cowboy_sally at 9:47 AM on December 9, 2004
If you truly felt secure in the applause you say you received, then you wouldn't be whining about your detractors as you have repeatedly done.
There stands one who has never watched P_G debate religion.
posted by Ryvar at 9:47 AM on December 9, 2004
There stands one who has never watched P_G debate religion.
posted by Ryvar at 9:47 AM on December 9, 2004
clever sheep, you seem to be accepting that the joke doesn't reflect my opinions, but that it's acceptable to feel hatred towards me based on it. That, frankly, is all I need to know about you, and I am no longer concerned about your opinion.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 9:49 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by Pretty_Generic at 9:49 AM on December 9, 2004
Scarabic: the concept of respect and attendant principle of social deference is what created these messes in the first place. ALL the idols must be torn down, including the ones to "An Unknown God."
posted by Ryvar at 9:51 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by Ryvar at 9:51 AM on December 9, 2004
People can be frank without being rude or cretinous. I think.
Yes, but can we (in MeFi, or in society at large for that matter) be frank without offending somebody somewhere to the point where their indignance stops rational conversation?
Again, I'm not pointing at anyone here, or any specific utterances, or trying to start shit. I'm just asking. I think it's an important question.
posted by jonmc at 9:54 AM on December 9, 2004
Yes, but can we (in MeFi, or in society at large for that matter) be frank without offending somebody somewhere to the point where their indignance stops rational conversation?
Again, I'm not pointing at anyone here, or any specific utterances, or trying to start shit. I'm just asking. I think it's an important question.
posted by jonmc at 9:54 AM on December 9, 2004
Seanyboy, the reason I asked you that question was that, if you believe that feminism is a set of beliefs, not actions, your rebuttal to Civil_Disobedient is incredibly lacking in interpretive charity and is basically a tangent. Yes, it's true that a polygamist is not (just) someone who believes in polygamy, so C_D's definition is not completely accurate. But, since the overall discussion is about feminism, not polygamy, using words which refer to practices or types of action as a means of countering (his? her?) argument about who can be a feminist (since the proposed definition is clearly being offered in a tendentious way, not as a completely neutral just-the-facts-ms.-definition) is pretty lame—unless you believe feminism is also a set of practices. But if it's a set of beliefs, then why isn't C_D's point about an xist being one who subscribes to xism valid, for values of x equal to feminism? Sure, it's not true for any old thing, but in the context of the discussion at hand it's pretty clear what she/he was getting at.
posted by kenko at 9:57 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by kenko at 9:57 AM on December 9, 2004
Scarabic: the concept of respect and attendant principle of social deference is what created these messes in the first place. ALL the idols must be torn down, including the ones to "An Unknown God."
What, are you twelve? Sheesh.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:58 AM on December 9, 2004
What, are you twelve? Sheesh.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:58 AM on December 9, 2004
clever sheep, you seem to be accepting that the joke doesn't reflect my opinions, but that it's acceptable to feel hatred towards me based on it. That, frankly, is all I need to know about you, and I am no longer concerned about your opinion.
I don't care whether the joke reflects your opinions or not, P_G. Nor do I feel hatred toward you. Why would you assume that you're that important?
However, I have been deeply impressed by your inability to accept responsibility for a mistake, or to attempt to understand why others might have a different view of your behavior than your own. Ultimately, these behaviors are more of a disappointment than the stupid joke itself.
Go ahead and ignore my opinions. That behavior will fit right in with everything else I've observed from you in this thread. Been quite an eye-opener, it has.
posted by clever sheep at 9:59 AM on December 9, 2004
I don't care whether the joke reflects your opinions or not, P_G. Nor do I feel hatred toward you. Why would you assume that you're that important?
However, I have been deeply impressed by your inability to accept responsibility for a mistake, or to attempt to understand why others might have a different view of your behavior than your own. Ultimately, these behaviors are more of a disappointment than the stupid joke itself.
Go ahead and ignore my opinions. That behavior will fit right in with everything else I've observed from you in this thread. Been quite an eye-opener, it has.
posted by clever sheep at 9:59 AM on December 9, 2004
Ethereal Bligh:
The demand for deference isn't at the root of feminism and racism? What, are you blind?
posted by Ryvar at 10:00 AM on December 9, 2004
The demand for deference isn't at the root of feminism and racism? What, are you blind?
posted by Ryvar at 10:00 AM on December 9, 2004
the concept of respect and attendant principle of social deference is what created these messes in the first place
No, the idea of applying the concept of respect selectively is what created these messes in the first place.
posted by jonmc at 10:01 AM on December 9, 2004
No, the idea of applying the concept of respect selectively is what created these messes in the first place.
posted by jonmc at 10:01 AM on December 9, 2004
Excuse me. At the root of SEXISM and racism. Cry 'Freud!' and let slip the dogs of war if you must.
posted by Ryvar at 10:01 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by Ryvar at 10:01 AM on December 9, 2004
jonmc: almost no human will ever apply an advantage non-selectively. That's just not how we're built.
posted by Ryvar at 10:03 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by Ryvar at 10:03 AM on December 9, 2004
dobbs hates me.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 10:03 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by Pretty_Generic at 10:03 AM on December 9, 2004
dobbs hates me.
Again, I doubt you're that important, though dobbs can speak for him or herself. All you can justifiably assume is that dobbs is angry about something you said.
But by all means, don't let me interrupt your whining.
posted by clever sheep at 10:08 AM on December 9, 2004
Again, I doubt you're that important, though dobbs can speak for him or herself. All you can justifiably assume is that dobbs is angry about something you said.
But by all means, don't let me interrupt your whining.
posted by clever sheep at 10:08 AM on December 9, 2004
jonmc: almost no human will ever apply an advantage non-selectively.
True. But that selectivity should not be based on capricious concepts like race/gender/sexuality/religion/ethnicity, etc.
posted by jonmc at 10:09 AM on December 9, 2004
True. But that selectivity should not be based on capricious concepts like race/gender/sexuality/religion/ethnicity, etc.
posted by jonmc at 10:09 AM on December 9, 2004
Hey kenko, I didn't even look at your user page for your gender. Your comment is just as valid to me coming from a man. Once again, thanks.
P_G, you may want a society in which "we are so comfortable with the rejection of racism, sexism and homophobia," but we don't live in that society yet, mainly because those repressions are still going on. For some people, poking fun at it relieves tensions. For others, it doesn't. Folks in the latter group are hurt by your jokes, and you've not only insisted on continuing to make them--you've also insisted that the people who feel differently are WRONG to do so.
My guess is that you're not targeted by those prejudices very often. That doesn't automatically mean that you can't have a valid viewpoint on them, but you lose credibility when you insist on trying to discredit the feelings of those who are on the receiving end of those biases every day. Of course you can continue to make your jokes, and of course some people will continue to enjoy them, but other will continue to be bothered by them and you are purposefully choosing to make them feel worse. At least don't be disingenuous about your choice.
posted by equipoise at 10:15 AM on December 9, 2004 [1 favorite]
P_G, you may want a society in which "we are so comfortable with the rejection of racism, sexism and homophobia," but we don't live in that society yet, mainly because those repressions are still going on. For some people, poking fun at it relieves tensions. For others, it doesn't. Folks in the latter group are hurt by your jokes, and you've not only insisted on continuing to make them--you've also insisted that the people who feel differently are WRONG to do so.
My guess is that you're not targeted by those prejudices very often. That doesn't automatically mean that you can't have a valid viewpoint on them, but you lose credibility when you insist on trying to discredit the feelings of those who are on the receiving end of those biases every day. Of course you can continue to make your jokes, and of course some people will continue to enjoy them, but other will continue to be bothered by them and you are purposefully choosing to make them feel worse. At least don't be disingenuous about your choice.
posted by equipoise at 10:15 AM on December 9, 2004 [1 favorite]
Have fun storming the castle, Ryvar.
Wild guess: you are a white guy under 30, right?
Hot tip: it shows.
posted by scarabic at 10:19 AM on December 9, 2004
Wild guess: you are a white guy under 30, right?
Hot tip: it shows.
posted by scarabic at 10:19 AM on December 9, 2004
Right. I'm saying humans are incapable of ignoring all that and that therefore the concepts of respect and social deference are a crock. Also, as you said earlier - "and that true conversation and consensus on difficult issues can only be acheived when we feel comfortable speaking frankly about our most difficult and unattractive thoughts."
Are we even disagreeing at this point?
posted by Ryvar at 10:20 AM on December 9, 2004
Are we even disagreeing at this point?
posted by Ryvar at 10:20 AM on December 9, 2004
No only that, scarabic, but I'm almost as effeminate as Cary Elwes was in that movie.
posted by Ryvar at 10:22 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by Ryvar at 10:22 AM on December 9, 2004
I'm saying humans are incapable of ignoring all that and that therefore the concepts of respect and social deference are a crock.
Respect and deference are not the same thing. The correct way of "ignoring all that" is to treat all persons with a modicum of respect, until if and when they give you a good reason not too. It's called the benefit of the doubt.
Deference (as you seem to be articulating it) is the act of defering to somebody, ie placing them above yourself or anyone else, which is not the same thing as respect.
posted by jonmc at 10:24 AM on December 9, 2004
Respect and deference are not the same thing. The correct way of "ignoring all that" is to treat all persons with a modicum of respect, until if and when they give you a good reason not too. It's called the benefit of the doubt.
Deference (as you seem to be articulating it) is the act of defering to somebody, ie placing them above yourself or anyone else, which is not the same thing as respect.
posted by jonmc at 10:24 AM on December 9, 2004
Transgression is like civil disobediance. (Well, it's exactly like civil disobediance.) It's effective only when used sparingly. Overuse, or an infatuation with it, undermines its credibility.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 10:26 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 10:26 AM on December 9, 2004
OK, I didn't expect MeFi to have many people who would be this upset by the joke, and to those people I apologise. I expected people to either laugh, shrug, or say "creep" and move on.
All I want you people to accept is that dobbs's desire for me to live a life of enforced celibacy is an overreaction, and a genuinely nasty one.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 10:30 AM on December 9, 2004
All I want you people to accept is that dobbs's desire for me to live a life of enforced celibacy is an overreaction, and a genuinely nasty one.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 10:30 AM on December 9, 2004
I apologize to those who cannot grasp the concept of meta-humor - of making racist, homophobic, or sexist jokes specifically because only an idiot would make them and actually mean them - thereby stealing power from the genuinely negative concepts that gave rise to the jokes which are being mocked.
Ryvar, sounds like it's exactly what you were talking about.
posted by agregoli at 10:31 AM on December 9, 2004
Ryvar, sounds like it's exactly what you were talking about.
posted by agregoli at 10:31 AM on December 9, 2004
All I want you people to accept is that dobbs's desire for me to live a life of enforced celibacy is an overreaction, and a genuinely nasty one.
Okay. You're right. But he was pissed-off. You understand that concept, don't you?
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 10:35 AM on December 9, 2004
Okay. You're right. But he was pissed-off. You understand that concept, don't you?
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 10:35 AM on December 9, 2004
Well, first off, yeah, I'm a feminist and I've commented on metafilter's boyzoneness before. I'm also on the rag today, boys. (BTW, PMS stands for Pre-Menstrual Syndrome, so don't worry - the mythical danger period was, like, a day and a half ago.) (OH, also btw, here's one type pf a girlzone community, if you want contrast.)
The thing is, I usually assume a cetrain number of any group are just going to be asshats, and by and large I ignore the sexist asshats along with the other types, unless they're particularly egregious. Consider the girls = evil post. My response was to snark a bit and move on. Another users response was to feel attacked.
I think I lose some feminist cred for even implying that a thicker skin is in order, but there is something to be said for calling a moron a moron. I don't ignore the asshats who yell comments to my tits as I walk down the street because I think their behavior is appropriate or because I am scared, but because that sort of asshat likes attention.
posted by Karmakaze at 10:35 AM on December 9, 2004
The thing is, I usually assume a cetrain number of any group are just going to be asshats, and by and large I ignore the sexist asshats along with the other types, unless they're particularly egregious. Consider the girls = evil post. My response was to snark a bit and move on. Another users response was to feel attacked.
I think I lose some feminist cred for even implying that a thicker skin is in order, but there is something to be said for calling a moron a moron. I don't ignore the asshats who yell comments to my tits as I walk down the street because I think their behavior is appropriate or because I am scared, but because that sort of asshat likes attention.
posted by Karmakaze at 10:35 AM on December 9, 2004
jonmc: I think we're going to have to agree to disagree here. Speaking for myself, I prefer people who feel comfortable telling me to "fuck off" at the drop of hat. It's also easier, for the congenitally lazy who can't be arsed to figure out what people REALLY think about them.
EB: Transgression only passes into overuse if you're terrifically lacking in creativity. There are so many ways to demolish the linguistic status quo that it defies the imagination.
I will say, though, that I'm quite freaked out by your use of the term 'transgression' - last week salmonberry told me she thought I was 'notoriously transgressive.' In truth, I blushed.
posted by Ryvar at 10:35 AM on December 9, 2004
EB: Transgression only passes into overuse if you're terrifically lacking in creativity. There are so many ways to demolish the linguistic status quo that it defies the imagination.
I will say, though, that I'm quite freaked out by your use of the term 'transgression' - last week salmonberry told me she thought I was 'notoriously transgressive.' In truth, I blushed.
posted by Ryvar at 10:35 AM on December 9, 2004
P_G, how many comments have you made here in a pretty shameless attempt to derail the conversation? You posted an offensive and unnecessary graphic in a thread about sexism. And now you want to stand there with your arms crossed telling people to get over it?
At this point, I'm with dobbs, jackwads like you have no business reproducing.
posted by fenriq at 11:03 AM on December 9, 2004
At this point, I'm with dobbs, jackwads like you have no business reproducing.
posted by fenriq at 11:03 AM on December 9, 2004
To chime in with dobbs, dame, Gravy, and equipoise--Juicylicious's statement that "if women don't like it, don't mention boobs or menstruation in the Green" is probably the one thing on this thread I find most upsetting.
I NEVER SAID THE ABOVE STATEMENT. If you are going to quote me, do it correctly!!!!!!!
I have said that: 1) I didn't feel that the example that the original poster used was misogynistic; 2) there are better, more helpful and certainly more respectful forums to post questions relating to breasts, menstruation, vaginas and female sexuality; 3) posting questions that contain words such as "I have 40 GG" breasts is a golden invitation to jonmc to jump in with a snark.
I also asked for examples of the misogyny that has occurred on mefi/askme/meta not because I don't think that it's occurred, but because I haven't witnessed it myself and I want to understand where everyone is coming from on this topic.
I have never used the term "in the Green" either verbally or in writing! In the future, I would appreciate it if you quote me accurately, or don't quote me at all. Oh and since I find myself having to correct your inaccuracies - the possessive of Juicylicious is "Juicylicious'"
posted by Juicylicious at 11:08 AM on December 9, 2004
I NEVER SAID THE ABOVE STATEMENT. If you are going to quote me, do it correctly!!!!!!!
I have said that: 1) I didn't feel that the example that the original poster used was misogynistic; 2) there are better, more helpful and certainly more respectful forums to post questions relating to breasts, menstruation, vaginas and female sexuality; 3) posting questions that contain words such as "I have 40 GG" breasts is a golden invitation to jonmc to jump in with a snark.
I also asked for examples of the misogyny that has occurred on mefi/askme/meta not because I don't think that it's occurred, but because I haven't witnessed it myself and I want to understand where everyone is coming from on this topic.
I have never used the term "in the Green" either verbally or in writing! In the future, I would appreciate it if you quote me accurately, or don't quote me at all. Oh and since I find myself having to correct your inaccuracies - the possessive of Juicylicious is "Juicylicious'"
posted by Juicylicious at 11:08 AM on December 9, 2004
Wow. What a bizarre thread. I agree with Cowboy Sally and Taz's back to back messages. Good stuff.
posted by dobbs at 11:08 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by dobbs at 11:08 AM on December 9, 2004
The possessive of a singular noun, even when it ends in "s", is "'s".
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 11:11 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 11:11 AM on December 9, 2004
2) there are better, more helpful and certainly more respectful forums to post questions relating to breasts, menstruation, vaginas and female sexuality; 3) posting questions that contain words such as "I have 40 GG" breasts is a golden invitation to jonmc to jump in with a snark.
There are surely better forums for women-specific questions.
But posting what size your breasts are in an AskMe thread about how to find a bra is in NO WAY an invitation for any snark. That's the point. It's a question like any other question. If you can't provide help, you shouldn't be commenting in that thread.
posted by agregoli at 11:35 AM on December 9, 2004 [1 favorite]
There are surely better forums for women-specific questions.
But posting what size your breasts are in an AskMe thread about how to find a bra is in NO WAY an invitation for any snark. That's the point. It's a question like any other question. If you can't provide help, you shouldn't be commenting in that thread.
posted by agregoli at 11:35 AM on December 9, 2004 [1 favorite]
The possessive case of most proper nouns is formed according to the rules for common nouns: (singular) Eliot’s novels, Yeats’s poetry, Dostoyevsky’s biography, Velázquez’s paintings; (plural) the McCarthys’ and the Williamses’ parties, the Schwartzes’ trip. By convention, however, certain proper nouns ending in s form the possessive by adding just the apostrophe since adding -’s would make the pronunciation difficult or awkward: Jesus’ teachings, Moses’ children, Achilles’ heel Hercules’ strength, Ramses’ reign, Xerxes’ conquest.
The American Heritage® Book of English Usage.
posted by Juicylicious at 11:37 AM on December 9, 2004
The American Heritage® Book of English Usage.
posted by Juicylicious at 11:37 AM on December 9, 2004
But posting what size your breasts are in an AskMe thread about how to find a bra is in NO WAY an invitation for any snark
Posting news about the murder of a famous musician isn't either, but people still did it. Not saying either one is right or wrong, but who gets to decide what's untouchable and what's not? and on what basis?
posted by jonmc at 11:41 AM on December 9, 2004
Posting news about the murder of a famous musician isn't either, but people still did it. Not saying either one is right or wrong, but who gets to decide what's untouchable and what's not? and on what basis?
posted by jonmc at 11:41 AM on December 9, 2004
Jonmc - you'll have to be more specific for that comment to make any sense to me.
It's wrong to comment without helping to answer the question for one. Two, it's innappropriate to comment on someone's body in a sexual manner when the thread itself isn't sexual. It's about bras. There have been AskMes about underwear and socks before - it's the same thing.
posted by agregoli at 11:45 AM on December 9, 2004
It's wrong to comment without helping to answer the question for one. Two, it's innappropriate to comment on someone's body in a sexual manner when the thread itself isn't sexual. It's about bras. There have been AskMes about underwear and socks before - it's the same thing.
posted by agregoli at 11:45 AM on December 9, 2004
I'm really getting tired of people paraphrasing when referring to what I've posted.
Did ya read the entire sentence? Huh? Here it is again: " . . . is a golden invitation to jonmc to jump in with a snark."
See that name? jonmc!!!!!! I was referring to the great jonmc specifically because clearly he is incapable of keeping his fingers from typing a snark to every post about breasts, brazilian waxing, blah, blah. Now, I'm sure that there are other males here that do the same, but it just so happens that he's particularly prolific and his snarks tend to stand out. And, since I have gotten the impression that jonmc has been and will be allowed to continue his snarkiness, then yes any posting of breasts, etc. is basically an invitation for a snark.
What you don't seem to get is that I agee with you that it should come to an end. I say we get together and in the very least least burn all snarky mefi men in effigy.
Oh and cowboy_sally: {{{{{{have a nice day}}}}}} from your friends at ivillage
posted by Juicylicious at 11:46 AM on December 9, 2004
Did ya read the entire sentence? Huh? Here it is again: " . . . is a golden invitation to jonmc to jump in with a snark."
See that name? jonmc!!!!!! I was referring to the great jonmc specifically because clearly he is incapable of keeping his fingers from typing a snark to every post about breasts, brazilian waxing, blah, blah. Now, I'm sure that there are other males here that do the same, but it just so happens that he's particularly prolific and his snarks tend to stand out. And, since I have gotten the impression that jonmc has been and will be allowed to continue his snarkiness, then yes any posting of breasts, etc. is basically an invitation for a snark.
What you don't seem to get is that I agee with you that it should come to an end. I say we get together and in the very least least burn all snarky mefi men in effigy.
Oh and cowboy_sally: {{{{{{have a nice day}}}}}} from your friends at ivillage
posted by Juicylicious at 11:46 AM on December 9, 2004
agregoli: while I still maintain that my comments were misintrepreted, I've already agreed to lay off for the sake of the site.
you'll have to be more specific for that comment to make any sense to me.
I'm talking about the snarky comments in this thread. if you want to say that comments about body parts are inappropriate, then fine. But i'd also venture to say that cheap jokes about the murder of a man many here admired are equally so. But then we're along on a road toward worrying about things that could concievably offend anyone.
on preview: juicy, I promise I will never, ever talk about boobies on this site ever again. OK. :)
posted by jonmc at 11:50 AM on December 9, 2004
you'll have to be more specific for that comment to make any sense to me.
I'm talking about the snarky comments in this thread. if you want to say that comments about body parts are inappropriate, then fine. But i'd also venture to say that cheap jokes about the murder of a man many here admired are equally so. But then we're along on a road toward worrying about things that could concievably offend anyone.
on preview: juicy, I promise I will never, ever talk about boobies on this site ever again. OK. :)
posted by jonmc at 11:50 AM on December 9, 2004
Juicy, it really depends on which style guide you use for that rule. In Chicago (books), it only applies to historical figures. Otherwise it's apostrophe s. In AP (some newspapers) and MLA (academics), you would be correct. So it depends on which style guide you prefer. There is no hard & fast.
posted by dame at 11:52 AM on December 9, 2004
posted by dame at 11:52 AM on December 9, 2004
who gets to decide what's untouchable and what's not? and on what basis?
I don't know how many times this needs to be repeated, but
here's what it says underneath the comment box in every AskMe thread: Ask MetaFilter is as useful as you make it. Please limit comments to answers or help in finding an answer. Wisecracks don't help people find answers. Thanks.
What this means is that unless you can offer helpful advice or suggestions, kindly STFU. Because even if you think what you're saying is funny/erudite/genius, it's not helpful. (And it's probably neither of those other three things either.)
LYLAS, Juicylicious!!!
posted by cowboy_sally at 11:54 AM on December 9, 2004
I don't know how many times this needs to be repeated, but
here's what it says underneath the comment box in every AskMe thread: Ask MetaFilter is as useful as you make it. Please limit comments to answers or help in finding an answer. Wisecracks don't help people find answers. Thanks.
What this means is that unless you can offer helpful advice or suggestions, kindly STFU. Because even if you think what you're saying is funny/erudite/genius, it's not helpful. (And it's probably neither of those other three things either.)
LYLAS, Juicylicious!!!
posted by cowboy_sally at 11:54 AM on December 9, 2004
Juicylicious - jonmc isn't the only one, and I don't like to single people out.
And yes, I agree - posts like comments in the bra post shouldn't be allowed, and I wholeheartedly support Matt deleting them, just like he deleted mean comments in my previously mentioned dentist thread. It's the same thing, and I don't like to see people/threads treated differently in AskMe.
Cheap jokes are always going to come up in Metafilter - but I'm talking about AskMe now, where the rules are different. Also, how many people KNEW the man who died, as opposed to posters commenting DIRECTLY on the body of the person posting? That's as personal and direct as it gets, saying something like that to someone just asking a question, asking for help.
posted by agregoli at 11:54 AM on December 9, 2004
And yes, I agree - posts like comments in the bra post shouldn't be allowed, and I wholeheartedly support Matt deleting them, just like he deleted mean comments in my previously mentioned dentist thread. It's the same thing, and I don't like to see people/threads treated differently in AskMe.
Cheap jokes are always going to come up in Metafilter - but I'm talking about AskMe now, where the rules are different. Also, how many people KNEW the man who died, as opposed to posters commenting DIRECTLY on the body of the person posting? That's as personal and direct as it gets, saying something like that to someone just asking a question, asking for help.
posted by agregoli at 11:54 AM on December 9, 2004
There is no hard & fast.
Well, there is, but not in the context of possessive nouns. One suggestion I've heard is that if you can hear the vowel sound before the 's', use s-apostrophe, thus avoiding the awkward-sounding Jesus's (geesuz-is vs. geesuzs). Personally, I think it's best to just pick one method and be consistent. I prefer the s-apostrophe only because it saves keystrokes and layout space.
And now, back to your regularly scheduled thread.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 12:07 PM on December 9, 2004
Well, there is, but not in the context of possessive nouns. One suggestion I've heard is that if you can hear the vowel sound before the 's', use s-apostrophe, thus avoiding the awkward-sounding Jesus's (geesuz-is vs. geesuzs). Personally, I think it's best to just pick one method and be consistent. I prefer the s-apostrophe only because it saves keystrokes and layout space.
And now, back to your regularly scheduled thread.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 12:07 PM on December 9, 2004
(Actually, reading agregoli's comment, I realize that my last comment seems like I'm singling out jon as well. What I meant is, anyone who uses AskMe as their own personal grindingstone or Fleshlight should just give it a rest.)
(Please.)
posted by cowboy_sally at 12:08 PM on December 9, 2004
(Please.)
posted by cowboy_sally at 12:08 PM on December 9, 2004
You're right about Fandom Wank being the girlzone to Mefi's boyzone, Karmakaze. Right down to the accusations about our behavior. I think the term used to describe FW once was angry lesbian hive vagina.
P_G, you have the right to make whatever jokes you want, to make whatever statement you want. Other people have the right to think you're an ass. Dobbs is responding with the same vigor you're using in calling those who don't get your joke as humorless, etc. Not agreeing your joke was rotten does not equal lacking a sense of humor.
Ryvar, you remain the most disgusting example of a man ever held up for inspection. Next to you, quonsar is prince charming.
posted by FunkyHelix at 12:15 PM on December 9, 2004
P_G, you have the right to make whatever jokes you want, to make whatever statement you want. Other people have the right to think you're an ass. Dobbs is responding with the same vigor you're using in calling those who don't get your joke as humorless, etc. Not agreeing your joke was rotten does not equal lacking a sense of humor.
Ryvar, you remain the most disgusting example of a man ever held up for inspection. Next to you, quonsar is prince charming.
posted by FunkyHelix at 12:15 PM on December 9, 2004
C_D: There is a hard and fast in the context of a decided-upon style. But not in general internet blather. As for the pronunciation question, you can write the apostrophe s and leave it silent; I read Jesus' and Jesus's the same. It's hardly the weirdest strategy demanded by English. Okay, word-dork mode off.
posted by dame at 12:16 PM on December 9, 2004
posted by dame at 12:16 PM on December 9, 2004
...wasn't rotten. *sighs* Well that all sounded good in my head.
posted by FunkyHelix at 12:18 PM on December 9, 2004
posted by FunkyHelix at 12:18 PM on December 9, 2004
Ryvar, you remain the most disgusting example of a man ever held up for inspection. Next to you, quonsar is prince charming.
Yes, but - DO I MAKE YOU HORNY, BABY? RANDY??
posted by Ryvar at 12:30 PM on December 9, 2004
Yes, but - DO I MAKE YOU HORNY, BABY? RANDY??
posted by Ryvar at 12:30 PM on December 9, 2004
....anyway.
posted by FunkyHelix at 12:34 PM on December 9, 2004
posted by FunkyHelix at 12:34 PM on December 9, 2004
jonmc - that's what's happening here (you are part of the discussion deciding what is ok and what is not). i'm not sure that you can build as good a case for systematic opression for metalheads as you can for women, but you can try making it if you want.
more generally, the discussion here is not making any laws. no-one is losing any rights by participating. you can still say what you like and no-one will put you in jail. maybe that's obvious - sorry. less obviously perhaps, the only way things will change on mefi is by changing consensus. the kind of problems discussed here won't go away if a few people are banned and i doubt matt would do that anyway, because it's more about the cumulative effect of small things - general attitudes - than any single worth-banning abuse.
what i'm trying to say is that you're participating in a process, amongst (more or less) friends. people who come here, in small part, to listen to what you have to say. and you have control over what happens afterwards as much as anyone else. it's not a press-gang. it's about making friends feel more comfortable.
i've been reading through this thread and it's more like a huge group counselling session. some opinions have changed, which is pretty rare and extremely cool (yeah, maybe i have to think about a few things too).
bleagh. do i sound like eb? it's not judge and jury here. it's people who like you, us, here, enough to stay around and argue about it, understand each other, and make the world a nicer place with more fluffy kittens....
posted by andrew cooke at 1:10 PM on December 9, 2004
more generally, the discussion here is not making any laws. no-one is losing any rights by participating. you can still say what you like and no-one will put you in jail. maybe that's obvious - sorry. less obviously perhaps, the only way things will change on mefi is by changing consensus. the kind of problems discussed here won't go away if a few people are banned and i doubt matt would do that anyway, because it's more about the cumulative effect of small things - general attitudes - than any single worth-banning abuse.
what i'm trying to say is that you're participating in a process, amongst (more or less) friends. people who come here, in small part, to listen to what you have to say. and you have control over what happens afterwards as much as anyone else. it's not a press-gang. it's about making friends feel more comfortable.
i've been reading through this thread and it's more like a huge group counselling session. some opinions have changed, which is pretty rare and extremely cool (yeah, maybe i have to think about a few things too).
bleagh. do i sound like eb? it's not judge and jury here. it's people who like you, us, here, enough to stay around and argue about it, understand each other, and make the world a nicer place with more fluffy kittens....
posted by andrew cooke at 1:10 PM on December 9, 2004
i think that sounds like wank, which is frustrating because there's a real point in there trying to get out about the only way forwards being through understanding each other. and it's sounding like hippy crap again already.
posted by andrew cooke at 1:18 PM on December 9, 2004
posted by andrew cooke at 1:18 PM on December 9, 2004
jonmc - that's what's happening here (you are part of the discussion deciding what is ok and what is not). i'm not sure that you can build as good a case for systematic opression for metalheads as you can for women, but you can try making it if you want.
Actually, that's not the case I'm making andrew. It was more along the lines of this: it's a commonly accepted norm of society that in a civil conversation about bras, vulgar sexual innuendo are considered rude. It's also an accepted norm that it's rude to crack jokes when a man has been brutally murdered for no good reason. And the ultimate question was how many "norms" are we going to accept as our own, and how will that effect that need for candor and comfort at speaking frankly neccessary to keep this site interesting.
posted by jonmc at 1:19 PM on December 9, 2004
Actually, that's not the case I'm making andrew. It was more along the lines of this: it's a commonly accepted norm of society that in a civil conversation about bras, vulgar sexual innuendo are considered rude. It's also an accepted norm that it's rude to crack jokes when a man has been brutally murdered for no good reason. And the ultimate question was how many "norms" are we going to accept as our own, and how will that effect that need for candor and comfort at speaking frankly neccessary to keep this site interesting.
posted by jonmc at 1:19 PM on December 9, 2004
Actually, that's not the case I'm making andrew. It was more along the lines of this: it's a commonly accepted norm of society that in a civil conversation about bras, vulgar sexual innuendo are considered rude. It's also an accepted norm that it's rude to crack jokes when a man has been brutally murdered for no good reason.
You're ignoring the personal nature of the bra post, like I mentioned above - comments there were directly about the poster, someone who was asking the community for help - and got shit on. The crude comments about the dead musician are also crude and unnecessary, but they aren't personal. Also, it was in the Blue, not the Green. Different rules.
posted by agregoli at 1:24 PM on December 9, 2004
You're ignoring the personal nature of the bra post, like I mentioned above - comments there were directly about the poster, someone who was asking the community for help - and got shit on. The crude comments about the dead musician are also crude and unnecessary, but they aren't personal. Also, it was in the Blue, not the Green. Different rules.
posted by agregoli at 1:24 PM on December 9, 2004
I will say this much - Matt's made it pretty clear about a dozen times over that snark of any variety isn't welcome in the Green. I, apparently a representative of hard-line 'males' or whatever (nothing could be further from the truth but far be it from me to deny other people their easy stereotypes), certainly don't object in the least to the existence of a fact-based space where menstruation can be seriously discussed alongside tuning car engines.
That said, FunkyHelix - I'm curious to know what exactly your objection to my approach is, what in particular about it strikes you as intellectually (or morally, if you're into that) bankrupt?
posted by Ryvar at 1:35 PM on December 9, 2004
That said, FunkyHelix - I'm curious to know what exactly your objection to my approach is, what in particular about it strikes you as intellectually (or morally, if you're into that) bankrupt?
posted by Ryvar at 1:35 PM on December 9, 2004
but it's not about norms and rules! it's about us and what we decide. if there was the energy and emotion sufficient to sustain a discussion this long and involved over the comments in that thread then we'd have to think long and hard about those comments. but there's isn't. what's upsetting people here is something clearly stronger, deeper, and more important to this community.
society's rules can go play on the interstate for all i care. this is about us and what we want, as a collective, not what some list of what's ok and what isn't prescribes (proscribes?) from on high.
posted by andrew cooke at 1:36 PM on December 9, 2004
society's rules can go play on the interstate for all i care. this is about us and what we want, as a collective, not what some list of what's ok and what isn't prescribes (proscribes?) from on high.
posted by andrew cooke at 1:36 PM on December 9, 2004
what's upsetting people here is something clearly stronger, deeper, and more important to this community.
Well, as a member of this community, I'm offering my concerns and my two cents on that score, andrew.
posted by jonmc at 1:41 PM on December 9, 2004
Well, as a member of this community, I'm offering my concerns and my two cents on that score, andrew.
posted by jonmc at 1:41 PM on December 9, 2004
One suggestion I've heard is that if you can hear the vowel sound before the 's', use s-apostrophe, thus avoiding the awkward-sounding Jesus's (geesuz-is vs. geesuzs). Personally, I think it's best to just pick one method and be consistent.
I agree with both the suggestion (definitely the easiest way to deal with the issue) and the "be consistent."
And I'm glad this thread hasn't degenerated as badly as it looked like it was going to.
posted by languagehat at 3:39 PM on December 9, 2004
I agree with both the suggestion (definitely the easiest way to deal with the issue) and the "be consistent."
And I'm glad this thread hasn't degenerated as badly as it looked like it was going to.
posted by languagehat at 3:39 PM on December 9, 2004
Man, I hate it when threads do not degenerate like they are supposed to. I am too lazy to find a good way to help it along, but this list must have something useful on it:
This thread must make it to 300 posts!!!
posted by weretable and the undead chairs at 4:19 PM on December 9, 2004
This thread must make it to 300 posts!!!
posted by weretable and the undead chairs at 4:19 PM on December 9, 2004
kenko. You've managed to confuse me yet again, but that's me and my 7 pints of post poetry performance beer. We should talk. But not now.
The attack on pretty_generic was harsh, and I believe an apology is in order. He's apologised for accidently upsetting people, and yet there is no hint of a comeback apology. What was said to him was below the belt, and sure, this is an internet community and we should all have thick skins, but you need to apologise.
And now to bed.
posted by seanyboy at 5:23 PM on December 9, 2004
The attack on pretty_generic was harsh, and I believe an apology is in order. He's apologised for accidently upsetting people, and yet there is no hint of a comeback apology. What was said to him was below the belt, and sure, this is an internet community and we should all have thick skins, but you need to apologise.
And now to bed.
posted by seanyboy at 5:23 PM on December 9, 2004
Not suggesting that kenko made the attack. That was Dobbs and some other people.
posted by seanyboy at 5:24 PM on December 9, 2004
posted by seanyboy at 5:24 PM on December 9, 2004
Oh I get the concept. I do it all the time. At home. With trusted friends. At a discreet volume. In a long-standing tradition of empty bullshitting with people to whom I've proven myself a genuinely tolerant soul.
scarabic: This is the nub of it. I have a tendency to treat MeTa as "at home. With trusted friends". You're right in that I'm wrong to do this. There's a conflict in that even though it isn't I want to carry on treating MeFi as a home. It's certainly true that I don't know most people here, and they don't know me. Perhaps this is the time for me to stop treating this like the local pub where I can talk loudly (because that's the only way I know to show how comfortable I am) and start treating it with a bit more respect.
I hope that you understand that I'm not saying that I'm going to do all this straight away btw. Just that I completely understand and agree with what you said. And I'll *maybe* try to be a bit more tolerant.
posted by seanyboy at 5:34 PM on December 9, 2004
scarabic: This is the nub of it. I have a tendency to treat MeTa as "at home. With trusted friends". You're right in that I'm wrong to do this. There's a conflict in that even though it isn't I want to carry on treating MeFi as a home. It's certainly true that I don't know most people here, and they don't know me. Perhaps this is the time for me to stop treating this like the local pub where I can talk loudly (because that's the only way I know to show how comfortable I am) and start treating it with a bit more respect.
I hope that you understand that I'm not saying that I'm going to do all this straight away btw. Just that I completely understand and agree with what you said. And I'll *maybe* try to be a bit more tolerant.
posted by seanyboy at 5:34 PM on December 9, 2004
Fuck. I sound like I'm in counselling. "Well I understand that you understand how I feel, but I feel that you're not listening to what I'm saying. And even though it's not your fault the situation makes me sad."
Somebody. Just shoot me.
posted by seanyboy at 5:38 PM on December 9, 2004
Somebody. Just shoot me.
posted by seanyboy at 5:38 PM on December 9, 2004
"Perhaps this is the time for me to stop treating this like the local pub where I can talk loudly."
No. That's exactly the way I approach it as well. The "community" part of "community weblog" is the only thing that sets this site apart from other, less-interesting sites, and the only reason many of us keep coming back. It's true, sometimes you DO want to go where everybody knows your name.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 6:34 PM on December 9, 2004
No. That's exactly the way I approach it as well. The "community" part of "community weblog" is the only thing that sets this site apart from other, less-interesting sites, and the only reason many of us keep coming back. It's true, sometimes you DO want to go where everybody knows your name.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 6:34 PM on December 9, 2004
*reads him bedtime story*
posted by orange swan at 6:34 PM on December 9, 2004
posted by orange swan at 6:34 PM on December 9, 2004
There is a hard and fast in the context of a decided-upon style. But not in general internet blather.
Ahh, but do you have Genuine Languagehat ™ approval?
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:26 PM on December 9, 2004
Ahh, but do you have Genuine Languagehat ™ approval?
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 8:26 PM on December 9, 2004
Sorry, seanyboy, but once the spell's been cast I can't recall it.
posted by dobbs at 11:18 PM on December 9, 2004
posted by dobbs at 11:18 PM on December 9, 2004
Ummm, I'm not clear on the secret MeTa Smackdown rules, but is anyone gonna call out today's Ann Coulter thread? It's got sexual objectification and violence against women -- "she's hot, she's not hot, I'd do her (with a knife or gun?), I'd hit it (with a 2x4), I'd let her touch my wiener but only if she washed her hands first," and so on, ad nauseatum -- and the first such comment was made by a woman. What fun!
posted by naomi at 8:12 AM on December 10, 2004
posted by naomi at 8:12 AM on December 10, 2004
You know, I can hardly even get my back up on that one; it's such a bad post that there's basically nowhere for it to go but straight down into utterly inane (with rocket boosters). To me the offences demonstrated there are pretty much on the same par as sexist comments about a cartoon character; even if the criticism of such behavior might be perfectly well-grounded in terms of the bigger picture, it's waste of the breath it takes to express the thought. Let's save the energy for something worth the engagement.
posted by taz at 10:36 AM on December 10, 2004
posted by taz at 10:36 AM on December 10, 2004
naomi,
Keyser Soze -- a person of the "male" variety (I'm pretty sure) -- made the first such comment, so far as I can see.
posted by Moody834 at 12:01 PM on December 10, 2004
Keyser Soze -- a person of the "male" variety (I'm pretty sure) -- made the first such comment, so far as I can see.
posted by Moody834 at 12:01 PM on December 10, 2004
I think TGC laid a smackdown in that thread. I think. Too lazy to go check.
posted by sciurus at 6:20 PM on December 10, 2004
posted by sciurus at 6:20 PM on December 10, 2004
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by five fresh fish at 3:10 PM on December 8, 2004