[QUOTE=yawmwen;43256021]feminism threatens the comfort of gender conformity(for those who conform). people are understandably resistant and hostile to ideas that challenge the identity and culture that they have grown accustomed to.[/QUOTE]
As someone who has a couple of times gotten into "arguments" with you I think you might be misunderstanding your opponents. Most people on facepunch would agree that women as well as other oppressed groups deserve to be completely safe from rape, violence, and other nasty things. The ones who don't agree with those things are nutters, and in most threads I've seen they are regarded exactly as that.
Most people disagreeing (or thinking you guys are bat-shit, which I can sympathize with sometimes) just disagree on the current state of affairs such as how close we are to equality and how unfairly certain groups of people are treated. Some of us may be more biased in this than others, because of their background. I come from an area that is pretty far to the left - there's still issues for sure and lots of people still suck but the average person supports gays, women's rights, transgender rights, etc. It's because of this, in part, that I find it hilarious and sad when people say things like "all white males are oppressors" because in the area I come from whites mostly get along with all the other races fantastically. I have many friends of other races who would definitely want to punch someone in the face for saying something like that, largely in part because even if you're just trying to bring across the point that white people are still under societal influence to do and say offensive things all you're really doing is creating racial tension when we should be breaking it down.
Just my 2 cents. Spread love not hate, etc
[QUOTE=thisispain;43254189]well im not saying it equals violence, im saying that masculinity fits into a cycle of violence because historically we've associated male domination with power
think about historically the concept of machismo. you can say "well that was history, this is now", but you can't disassociate these "ghosts" from present day. they have an importance, they have an impact.
look at threads about someone getting raped. often you'll see some people give a very violent response, which id argue is something ingrained within the way we interact. no-one tells us to be violent yet in our interaction we jump to that.
that is "RADICAL" feminism. radical feminism seeks to change the structure of our behavior to one thats more open for women and ultimately better for men. radical feminists feel that our behavior should change on a more fundamental level, and that we should discard the violence from the past.
if you think masculinity isnt associated with violence, then that's great and i hope you can maintain such an excellent conception of masculinity. (srs) however, in a lot of parts of the world masculinity is associated with the explicit and implicit violence of male power structure. do you understand that's what someone means when they say patriarchy as well? it's the way we express power and dominance through violence that is the problem[/QUOTE]
Late back to the party here but first off, I know what the terms radical feminism and patriarchy mean. I wouldn't have the gall to enter these debates if I didn't understand simple definitions. I'm not saying these issues aren't present today (hence why feminism still exists), I'm just saying that masculinity does not equal violence. I never said masculinity isn't [I]associated[/I] with violence, if you paid attention one of my earlier posts you'll find me saying the opposite. My words were "Violence [I]is[/I] associated with masculinity", italics and everything, so there's no need for the chiding sarcasm.
[QUOTE=Bread_Baron;43257699]Late back to the party here but first off, I know what the terms radical feminism and patriarchy mean. I wouldn't have the gall to enter these debates if I didn't understand simple definitions. I'm not saying these issues aren't present today (hence why feminism still exists), I'm just saying that masculinity does not equal violence. I never said masculinity isn't [I]associated[/I] with violence, if you paid attention one of my earlier posts you'll find me saying the opposite. My words were "Violence [I]is[/I] associated with masculinity", italics and everything, so there's no need for the chiding sarcasm.[/QUOTE]
you misunderstood, i wasnt being sarcastic at all.
[QUOTE=Elspin;43257584]As someone who has a couple of times gotten into "arguments" with you I think you might be misunderstanding your opponents. Most people on facepunch would agree that women as well as other oppressed groups deserve to be completely safe from rape, violence, and other nasty things. The ones who don't agree with those things are nutters, and in most threads I've seen they are regarded exactly as that.
Most people disagreeing (or thinking you guys are bat-shit, which I can sympathize with sometimes) just disagree on the current state of affairs such as how close we are to equality and how unfairly certain groups of people are treated. Some of us may be more biased in this than others, because of their background. I come from an area that is pretty far to the left - there's still issues for sure and lots of people still suck but the average person supports gays, women's rights, transgender rights, etc. It's because of this, in part, that I find it hilarious and sad when people say things like "all white males are oppressors" because in the area I come from whites mostly get along with all the other races fantastically. I have many friends of other races who would definitely want to punch someone in the face for saying something like that, largely in part because even if you're just trying to bring across the point that white people are still under societal influence to do and say offensive things all you're really doing is creating racial tension when we should be breaking it down.
Just my 2 cents. Spread love not hate, etc[/QUOTE]
Building on this, it is evident that most people are on the fence or just generally support these kind of issues, it's basic compassion after all. The problems come up when people are given the impressions as described here, that people arguing for it believe that white people or men are the oppressors, and of course they react to this kind of broad accusation.
When prompted of course people claim this isn't the case, it happens in nearly every thread this is brought up, but how is it that so many people get this impression? It's a hand-wave and completely baseless to claim they were actually sexist from the start, and far more likely an issue in the way the associated messages are communicated. So many times the only reaction I've seen to this kind of objection is "You don't understand", with no effort to help people understand, and nothing ever changes.
Yelling about something and feeling superior is fun, we all know that, but this is at the expense of convincing people of such a basic cause and is directly driving people into opposition.
[QUOTE=Elspin;43257584]As someone who has a couple of times gotten into "arguments" with you I think you might be misunderstanding your opponents. Most people on facepunch would agree that women as well as other oppressed groups deserve to be completely safe from rape, violence, and other nasty things. The ones who don't agree with those things are nutters, and in most threads I've seen they are regarded exactly as that.
Most people disagreeing (or thinking you guys are bat-shit, which I can sympathize with sometimes) just disagree on the current state of affairs such as how close we are to equality and how unfairly certain groups of people are treated. Some of us may be more biased in this than others, because of their background. I come from an area that is pretty far to the left - there's still issues for sure and lots of people still suck but the average person supports gays, women's rights, transgender rights, etc. It's because of this, in part, that I find it hilarious and sad when people say things like "all white males are oppressors" because in the area I come from whites mostly get along with all the other races fantastically. I have many friends of other races who would definitely want to punch someone in the face for saying something like that, largely in part because even if you're just trying to bring across the point that white people are still under societal influence to do and say offensive things all you're really doing is creating racial tension when we should be breaking it down.
Just my 2 cents. Spread love not hate, etc[/QUOTE]
when people are saying "all white males are oppressors" there is something very specific that we are saying. we have explained this a billion times but it seems to fly over most people's heads, which is frustrating.
do you argue that our culture creates systems of oppression in people? do you find patriarchy and ideas of racial inferiority or superiority to be oppressive? do you think that some people are privileged in society based on their race or their gender conformity? do you think it's possible to perpetuate oppressive ideas even if you aren't consciously aware you are doing it? if you answer yes to these questions, then you yourself have admitted that "all white males are oppressors". it isn't that men sit around plotting how to make women's life worse. it's that once you realize how deep patriarchal cultural ideas go, and how easy it is to perpetuate it, you realize that you will perpetuate oppression simply because you are privileged in society. it's unavoidable. i'm not saying "all men except me are oppressors", i'm saying "all men including me are oppressors to some degree at some point in our life".
this isn't demonization of men, it's an illustration of just how much gender roles influence and shape our lives without us knowing. i don't think that you should feel guilty, but i am trying to pin some of the responsibility on you, personally, because it might help to increase your awareness of the more subtle ways patriarchy taints our lives.
do you sorta understand where i'm coming from now?
i explain the resistance to this idea as a general resistance to the discomfort that radical change brings because i see this idea literally going over people's heads even after explaining it as delicately as i am able. i could draw a fucking map and some people will still miss the point because i don't think they are really even looking for the point. they want to assure themselves that things are ok and that their comfort isn't going to be upset.
honestly id try to never say all white males are oppressors because i dont think it communicates much as a statement
[QUOTE=thisispain;43257916]honestly id try to never say all white males are oppressors because i dont think it communicates much as a statement[/QUOTE]
most people don't say it. however, it is said and it's generally said because a seemingly outrageous claim is preferable to having your totally reasonable analysis completely ignored. the former at least starts an argument and might get issues into the public discourse or w/e.
i certainly cannot deny that works haha
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43257899]when people are saying "all white males are oppressors" there is something very specific that we are saying. we have explained this a billion times but it seems to fly over most people's heads, which is frustrating.
do you argue that our culture creates systems of oppression in people? do you find patriarchy and ideas of racial inferiority or superiority to be oppressive? do you think that some people are privileged in society based on their race or their gender conformity? do you think it's possible to perpetuate oppressive ideas even if you aren't consciously aware you are doing it? if you answer yes to these questions, then you yourself have admitted that "all white males are oppressors". it isn't that men sit around plotting how to make women's life worse. it's that once you realize how deep patriarchal cultural ideas go, and how easy it is to perpetuate it, you realize that you will perpetuate oppression simply because you are privileged in society. it's unavoidable. i'm not saying "all men except me are oppressors", i'm saying "all men including me are oppressors to some degree at some point in our life".
this isn't demonization of men, it's an illustration of just how much gender roles influence and shape our lives without us knowing. i don't think that you should feel guilty, but i am trying to pin some of the responsibility on you, personally, because it might help to increase your awareness of the more subtle ways patriarchy taints our lives.
do you sorta understand where i'm coming from now?
i explain the resistance to this idea as a general resistance to the discomfort that radical change brings because i see this idea literally going over people's heads even after explaining it as delicately as i am able. i could draw a fucking map and some people will still miss the point because i don't think they are really even looking for the point. they want to assure themselves that things are ok and that their comfort isn't going to be upset.[/QUOTE]
I saw where you're coming from a long time ago, did you miss this?
[QUOTE]even if you're just trying to bring across the point that white people are still under societal influence to do and say offensive things all you're really doing is creating racial tension[/QUOTE]
What I'm trying to say is casually dropping "all white males are oppressors" etc is basically guaranteed to cause confusion because even if that's all you mean there's people who mean the statement way more literally and it's not a very good way to put it anyways.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43257933]most people don't say it. however, it is said and it's generally said because a seemingly outrageous claim is preferable to having your totally reasonable analysis completely ignored. the former at least starts an argument and might get issues into the public discourse or w/e.[/QUOTE]
A seemingly outrageous claim sounds like a better way to get ignored than get around it. Especially in the long term.
[QUOTE=Elspin;43257958]I saw where you're coming from a long time ago, did you miss this?
What I'm trying to say is casually dropping "all white males are oppressors" etc is basically guaranteed to cause confusion because even if that's all you mean there's people who mean the statement way more literally and it's not a very good way to put it anyways.[/QUOTE]
this explanation i gave was very wordy and people tend to not like wordy explanations. generally when you spend time to write out a very clear analysis of these sorts of things the whole analysis is completely ignored by everyone who is not already sympathetic to the idea in the first place.
basically the policy is "shoot first, explain later". i'll say "white males are oppressors" because it is something that is provocative and seemingly outrageous because people will pay attention. once you have the person engaged then you can explain all your wonderful reasons that support your initial outrageous claim and hopefully the person will be a little bit more informed about whatever struggle you find important.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43257933]most people don't say it. however, it is said and it's generally said because a seemingly outrageous claim is preferable to having your totally reasonable analysis completely ignored. the former at least starts an argument and might get issues into the public discourse or w/e.[/QUOTE]
It certainly can create discussion but it's the feminist equivalent to MRAs making up false rape reports to bring attention to false rape reports. Even if what you're trying to do is a good thing, making people in your cause look bad can slow the progress it makes.
[QUOTE=Mingebox;43257964]A seemingly outrageous claim sounds like a better way to get ignored than get around it. Especially in the long term.[/QUOTE]
not really. when the news or w/e reports on one of these outrageous claims, it actually does the movement more benefit than you might think.
no matter what the claim is, somewhere out there is a family who is having a very passionate argument about that claim. they wouldn't be arguing and discussing if the claim were ignored by media. so these outrageous statements [i]do[/i] help bring some of the theory and ideas of the struggle to the "public discourse" or w/e you wanna call it.
[editline]21st December 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Elspin;43257998]It certainly can create discussion but it's the feminist equivalent to MRAs making up false rape reports to bring attention to false rape reports. Even if what you're trying to do is a good thing, making people in your cause look bad can slow the progress it makes.[/QUOTE]
no it's not even comparable that's just a silly thing to say.
if a statement about oppression is the feminist equivalent to filing [i]false rape reports[/i] then i would say that feminism is way more benign than i thought.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43258014]no it's not even comparable that's just a silly thing to say.
if a statement about oppression is the feminist equivalent to filing [i]false rape reports[/i] then i would say that feminism is way more benign than i thought.[/QUOTE]
It's totally comparable - you're intentionally trolling people to bring attention to your cause. It's not even a loose comparison. Maybe you should think about how you're bringing yourself across to people and how they might have been on your side if you didn't act like that?
[QUOTE=Elspin;43258067]It's totally comparable - you're intentionally trolling people to bring attention to your cause. It's not even a loose comparison. Maybe you should think about how you're bringing yourself across to people and how they might have been on your side if you didn't act like that?[/QUOTE]
but one is just an effort to have a discussion while another is tying up law enforcement resources for the purpose of marginalizing rape victims.
no, it's not a good comparison. find another one. seriously.
[QUOTE=SCopE5000;43250770]Maybe I'm wrong but;
I feel in this generation we should be coming closer together, uniting, disregarding differences and learning to function as one humanity.
I feel as though these recently arising groups with 'boxed ideals' don't really have much point to them other than giving people a "Oh yeah, well I'm X and Y" to associate with - which creates more division for the purpose of dividing, irrespective of whether what actually happens is related to the groups ideals or just perceived to be.
It's like, if you want to acknowledge independence or whatever, fall back on real independence - that you were born, and will die, completely alone in the world. And so does everyone else. So that should be a uniting factor. Anything added to that just creates more division.
And then spend your time doing something that contributes to humanity as a whole.[/QUOTE]
yeah that's cool and all but it's not going to happen until everyone's actually on equal ground
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43258083]but one is just an effort to have a discussion while another is tying up law enforcement resources for the purpose of marginalizing rape victims.
no, it's not a good comparison. find another one. seriously.[/QUOTE]
While one certainly causes more harm than the other it's overtly obvious that you just hate the comparison because you don't like the group [sp]like anyone sane[/sp] and you don't want to be associated with them. To me it seems silly that someone trying to be a member of a group bringing equality for the good of all would use a method such as trolling people to bring attention to their cause valid.
[QUOTE=Elspin;43258121]While one certainly causes more harm than the other it's overtly obvious that you just hate the comparison because you don't like the group [sp]like anyone sane[/sp] and you don't want to be associated with them. To me it seems silly that someone trying to be a member of a group bringing equality for the good of all would use a method such as trolling people to bring attention to their cause valid.[/QUOTE]
when i said find a different comparison i meant it. it's incredibly insulting to compare making bold statements with filing false police reports for rape.
it has nothing to do with whoever the other side is. it's just not a good comparison. it's crude and one causes actual harm while the other causes arguments and stuff.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43258150]when i said find a different comparison i meant it. it's incredibly insulting to compare making bold statements with filing false police reports for rape.
it has nothing to do with whoever the other side is. it's just not a good comparison. it's crude and one causes actual harm while the other causes arguments and stuff.[/QUOTE]
I frankly disagree - while I have made it clear I find one much worse than the other the nature is the same. By making deliberately misleading statements you're creating racial tension rather than helping remove it, detracting from your cause, and overall just making yourself look like a dick. I know MRAs are worse than poorly adjusted feminists, I'm just trying to make it clear to you how your behavior could be harming feminism.
[QUOTE=Elspin;43258185]I frankly disagree - while I have made it clear I find one much worse than the other the nature is the same. By making deliberately misleading statements you're creating racial tension rather than helping remove it, detracting from your cause, and overall just making yourself look like a dick. I know MRAs are worse than poorly adjusted feminists, I'm just trying to make it clear to you how your behavior could be harming feminism.[/QUOTE]
again it's not a comparable situation but i'm not gonna convince you of that so w/e
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43258014]not really. when the news or w/e reports on one of these outrageous claims, it actually does the movement more benefit than you might think.
no matter what the claim is, somewhere out there is a family who is having a very passionate argument about that claim. they wouldn't be arguing and discussing if the claim were ignored by media. so these outrageous statements [i]do[/i] help bring some of the theory and ideas of the struggle to the "public discourse" or w/e you wanna call it.
[editline]21st December 2013[/editline]
no it's not even comparable that's just a silly thing to say.
if a statement about oppression is the feminist equivalent to filing [i]false rape reports[/i] then i would say that feminism is way more benign than i thought.[/QUOTE]
In the short term, it might provoke arguments, but I think in the long term it might just further entrench people or make them not even want to bother. I think the most important part of moving someone to your side of the argument is to responded to even small concessions with thanks, and end the discussion there. Then maybe next time they'll be a little more open minded to your point of view.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43258206]again it's not a comparable situation but i'm not gonna convince you of that so w/e[/QUOTE]
I could say the same thing for you, obviously - it is but I can't convince you etc. The fact is the way you present yourself is going to reflect on your cause and if you act immaturely you have to understand it's going to hurt the cause even if you're a poor example of a feminist. I may not use the term feminist to refer to myself but I try promote equality and tolerance for everybody without being a dick about it, and I think that's something you should try to do as well
[QUOTE=Mingebox;43258236]In the short term, it might provoke arguments, but I think in the long term it might just further entrench people or make them not even want to bother.[/QUOTE]
you got it reversed. people can't stay entrenched for very long. a constant bombardment of new ideas will inevitably break through most people's natural barriers. that's why pundits are very careful about who they let on their shows to be "the other guy" or the opposition.
[editline]21st December 2013[/editline]
and that's why most radicals have taken a policy of taking action that is most likely to get media coverage. some exposure is better than no exposure. if you can influence the dialogue for long enough you will gain a lot of influence in the future of society.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43258244]and that's why most radicals have taken a policy of taking action that is most likely to get media coverage. some exposure is better than no exposure.[/QUOTE]
It's that same policy that causes many people to stop taking such people seriously.
And when you constantly label all men "oppressors" it loses the power in the word, you guys already killed the word "misogyny"'s power.
[QUOTE=person11;43256697]What is more important than the oppression of half the world by the other half
I guess in plain numbers you could say Europe+The USA is oppressing the rest of the world resulting in more people oppressed than there are women in the world[/QUOTE]
There's hyperbole in that statement, you're saying that EXACTLY 50% of the population of the earth are oppressing EXACTLY the other 50%. You're saying that in all countries, everywhere in the world that all men oppress all women by their very existence and can't you know, choose not to?
Don't tell me that it should be obvious that you don't mean it literally, because you are blatantly exaggerating the problem and as a result you are trivializing it by turning it into this big giant, overbearing, mepalophonous dichotomy instead of focusing on real issues that can be resolved.
When we are talking about imbalances of wealth and social standing, we are not simply talking about the advantageous group oppressing the other, as that suggests that they are choosing to do so. People are not being "oppressed" (at least not by everyone choosing to do so) in that it's more a matter of these imbalances existing needing to be corrected.
How can I, as an individual, stop oppressing someone by my very existence? By simply agreeing with some random stranger on the internet who believes they are morally superior to me? Surely I need to actually do something, and as a society we should be doing specific things to correct imbalances of power and standing within our society. When you talk about real issues that can be resolved, you'll suddenly find people will be a lot more willing to listen to you.
By mushing all of our social problems together by saying that the issue is simply that "men are oppressing women, they need to stop doing that" you're purporting this unrealistic view that ALL men are choosing to oppress ALL women, and you can't accuse someone of doing something by association. It suggests that since I'm a man I'm already wrong, so what's the point in doing anything about it?
[QUOTE]But yeah, the ideal feminism is one that recognizes race, wealth, and sexual orientation. There are lots of examples of feminists that do not actually care for those other issues (the Lena Dunham/Lily Allen effect), which is why many non-white women are moving to radical feminism now.[/QUOTE]
That's why I see myself as being equalitarian (as in, the belief that all people regardless of sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation or religion should be equal), not a feminist, it's means pretty much the same thing and leaves less room for confusion and misinterpretation.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43258244]you got it reversed. people can't stay entrenched for very long. a constant bombardment of new ideas will inevitably break through most people's natural barriers. that's why pundits are very careful about who they let on their shows to be "the other guy" or the opposition.
and that's why most radicals have taken a policy of taking action that is most likely to get media coverage. some exposure is better than no exposure. if you can influence the dialogue for long enough you will gain a lot of influence in the future of society.[/QUOTE]
There are many people who are either extremely conservative or liberal who seem like they would never change their fundamental beliefs no matter what. Psychologists have actually discovered that the fundamental principles we learn as children are actually hardwired into our brains, you cannot force someone to change those principles, only make them reconsider them and realign them with their current world view. Brainwashing is obviously a different story, because if you can break someone down into their most basic elements you can make them believe anything.
[QUOTE=soulharvester;43258740]It's that same policy that causes many people to stop taking such people seriously.
And when you constantly label all men "oppressors" it loses the power in the word, you guys already killed the word "misogyny"'s power.[/QUOTE]
It's okay, they'll move on to the new term, " Triple Inverse Guatemalan-style Turbobigot."
[QUOTE=Mingebox;43259105]It's okay, they'll move on to the new term, " Triple Inverse Guatemalan-style Turbobigot."[/QUOTE]
Turbobigot is my new favourite word, thank you
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43257994]this explanation i gave was very wordy and people tend to not like wordy explanations. generally when you spend time to write out a very clear analysis of these sorts of things the whole analysis is completely ignored by everyone who is not already sympathetic to the idea in the first place.
basically the policy is "shoot first, explain later". i'll say "white males are oppressors" because it is something that is provocative and seemingly outrageous because people will pay attention. once you have the person engaged then you can explain all your wonderful reasons that support your initial outrageous claim and hopefully the person will be a little bit more informed about whatever struggle you find important.[/QUOTE]
This doesn't make an artful debater.
It makes a Special Super Snowflake who purposefully chooses a completely inimical and unworkable ideal in order to be "special" and "unique". Meanwhile the reason you get to BE a special snowflake and sit on your butt and pontificate about living in a society without tiered concepts is literally the infrastructure you incessantly whine about and rail against happens to be provided by your evil oppressive overlords.
The last time anarchy was a practical modality for real life was when Neaderthals were an actual thing.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43258244]you got it reversed. people can't stay entrenched for very long. a constant bombardment of new ideas will inevitably break through most people's natural barriers. that's why pundits are very careful about who they let on their shows to be "the other guy" or the opposition.
[editline]21st December 2013[/editline]
and that's why most radicals have taken a policy of taking action that is most likely to get media coverage. some exposure is better than no exposure. if you can influence the dialogue for long enough you will gain a lot of influence in the future of society.[/QUOTE]
Good luck with that. Especially when groups in question have mixed ideas of what is the information they're trying to spread. Sending good ideas mixed with garbage is the best and fastest way to get your message disregarded, like "patriarchy" concept. Thanks to radical movements, it pretty much turned from being legit concept of socio-cultural structure of human relations into white male conspiracy to oppress all women for the sake of *insert pseudo-scientific terms here*.
[QUOTE=thisispain;43257810]you misunderstood, i wasnt being sarcastic at all.[/QUOTE]
Well you misunderstood me in the first place so nobody's perfect.
[editline]21st December 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43258244]you got it reversed. people can't stay entrenched for very long. a constant bombardment of new ideas will inevitably break through most people's natural barriers. that's why pundits are very careful about who they let on their shows to be "the other guy" or the opposition.
[editline]21st December 2013[/editline]
and that's why most radicals have taken a policy of taking action that is most likely to get media coverage. some exposure is better than no exposure. if you can influence the dialogue for long enough you will gain a lot of influence in the future of society.[/QUOTE]
Look at the history of these threads on Facepunch. People bombard the opposition with ideas and yet it's the same people on each side every time. Nobody here is weak-minded enough to say "aaaaaaa you're right" because you bombarded them with ideas and they can't take it any more. The only thing that will change anyone's views is thoughtful discussion. Deliberately provoking people just makes them think you're a nutter.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.