Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Page 2 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by Guest on Tue Oct 28, 2014 8:56 am

Exactly, Bunny. Hell, even I was thinking "seriously, fuck white people" (and still am as it's still ongoing) during a lot of the Ferguson coverage, and I AM white. Also because, although I may vehemently disagree with the blatant racism and abuse of power in that horrific situation, I have to accept that I still benefit from the social structures that make life for me as a white woman easier than for my black counterparts.

If I then barrel into that discussion and try to turn it into #notallwhites, and make it so that everyone has to discuss and appease my hurt feelings before I will graciously allow them to continue, am I not rather proving the point?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by reboot on Tue Oct 28, 2014 9:19 am

embertine wrote:Exactly, Bunny.  Hell, even I was thinking "seriously, fuck white people" (and still am as it's still ongoing) during a lot of the Ferguson coverage, and I AM white.  Also because, although I may vehemently disagree with the blatant racism and abuse of power in that horrific situation, I have to accept that I still benefit from the social structures that make life for me as a white woman easier than for my black counterparts.

If I then barrel into that discussion and try to turn it into #notallwhites, and make it so that everyone has to discuss and appease my hurt feelings before I will graciously allow them to continue, am I not rather proving the point?

I ran into this a lot working overseas when everyone would talk about what the Americans were doing (often veering into some really uncomfortable territory). Sure, it hurt because I did not personally bomb your village or make you a refugee, but if I turned it into #notallAmericans or #Ididnotvoteforhim it made the narrative about me and how I felt about the situation, not the speaker who had to live it.
reboot
reboot
Moderator of "Other Relationships" and "Gender, Identity and Society"

Posts : 2514
Reputation : 1005
Join date : 2014-09-24

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by UristMcBunny on Tue Oct 28, 2014 10:25 am

(As an aside, I am so grateful Tumblr exists, because Ferguson is still happening and without my sometimes-excessive SJW land of shipping and drama I would know literally nothing about it)

_________________
Some of you will know me as Bunny from the old forums.
UristMcBunny
UristMcBunny
Moderator of "Romantic and Sexual Relationships"

Posts : 371
Reputation : 116
Join date : 2014-09-24

http://uristmcdorf.tumblr.com/

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by Enail on Tue Oct 28, 2014 12:08 pm

SadisticToaster wrote:
Enail wrote:This has come up a bit lately on this site, and I've found it interesting and surprising.

In the dying days of the old forum I saw people saying that certain groups of people should be considered 'legitimate targets for abuse' because of the way that they were born. This idea made me very uncomfortable, but I wimped out of saying anything because I didn't feel like getting into a flame war.

Apparently I either didn't notice this or understood things very differently from you, because that does not sound like something okay. If you'd like to drop me a PM giving me the details of these incidents, I'd be very interested to hear it and see if there's something we should be keeping a closer eye on, but no pressure if you'd rather not.
Enail
Enail
Admin

Posts : 4038
Reputation : 2276
Join date : 2014-09-22

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by BasedBuzzed on Tue Oct 28, 2014 12:20 pm

A large problem with this type of discourse is the format of the internet. Suppose I make a post on my Tumblr about getting tired of stale "spermskins can't handle spices" remarks getting thrown into the fusion cooking tag. While this sentiment is completely valid and likely shared between me and my cooking-related followers, depending on the tags I use, Ferguson campaigners fresh from being teargassed can read it and jump on it with the usual institutional power spiel. This is also a completely valid and logical sentiment.

To me, these are folks jumping at every opportunity to spew their talking points with any number of bingo cards and logical fallacies disguised as derail callouts to stifle any other noise than mum agreement. To them, I'm the next in a long line of insensitive white people who cares more about fusion cooking than justified venting and black lives. Neither is entirely wrong, but not yielding is more important than mutual understanding to both parties.

_________________
Pompeii, VIII.2 (in the basilica); 1904: "O walls, you have held up so much tedious graffiti that I am amazed that you have not already collapsed in ruin."
BasedBuzzed
BasedBuzzed

Posts : 811
Reputation : 267
Join date : 2014-10-01

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by fakely mctest on Tue Oct 28, 2014 1:25 pm

embertine wrote:If I then barrel into that discussion and try to turn it into #notallwhites, and make it so that everyone has to discuss and appease my hurt feelings before I will graciously allow them to continue, am I not rather proving the point?

Agreed. And, honestly, I'm more comfortable with the male tears rhetoric than others seem to be in part because I've been called out (like, literally, on the street) for being white in a predominantly black neighborhood. And because of the freedom I have as a white person to go basically everywhere without having to examine my own whiteness or think about my safety on that axis, I strongly feel that it isn't something that should upset my worldview. Having my whiteness cited, sometimes in an abrupt way, is a good reminder to be aware of myself as I exist within the context of larger societal power structures. Because I have the privilege of being able to fade into the racial background for the most part. The times it happened didn't ruin my day, maybe made me feel a little uncomfortable, but that is nothing compared to the lived experiences of the people doing the calling out. It wouldn't say much for my powers of empathy if that's all it took to shake my beliefs about a more egalitarian society.

Some people in a socially disadvantaged group are going to be more willing to engage in basic level education and explanation, others are not, others might unless they're having a shit day and you're the 20th person to raise the same point. It's a bit of dark, bitter humor, but that is how punching up vs. punching down works in comedy.

_________________
Please let it be an empty shoebox with a note saying “LOL Just kidding, I love cats, sorry I worried anyone. xoxox E. Schrödinger”
fakely mctest
fakely mctest
General Oversight Moderator

Posts : 298
Reputation : 74
Join date : 2014-09-24

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by The Wisp on Tue Oct 28, 2014 1:52 pm

I'm fine with the justification for this kind of rhetoric that Fakely and Bunny offered as long as the people using it recognize the consequences: that you probably won't be convincing anybody not already on your side to join your side, that you may alienate even some people on your side, that the privileged people who will read are probably not the same privileged people you're ranting about, etc. If you engage in that kind of rhetoric often, don't complain when you're not drawing any converts or you get some push-back. It's okay to vent, circlejerk, and preach to the choir, but realize that that is what you're doing.

I have to say that, personally, I have a reflexive disgust for this kind of tribalism from all political movements. However, it always seemed most grating from social justice people. It felt much more hypocritical coming from them than from, say, a Christian conservative or an environmentalist. The only reason I didn't become completely anti-feminist 3 or 4 years ago was because I found Clarisse Thorn's blog where she had very nuanced and compassionate discussions of masculinity. I never posted that on her blog. I would bet there were others like me.
The Wisp
The Wisp

Posts : 896
Reputation : 198
Join date : 2014-10-01

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by eselle28 on Tue Oct 28, 2014 2:18 pm

After reading these discussions, I'm now fairly convinced that while "Male Tears" is an expression of frustration that I understand, it's also affecting a broader audience.

That being said, I don't necessarily agree with some of the other statements that have been made here. Specifically, I disagree that social justice doesn't ever mean taking away privilege and only consists of granting additional people rights. There are cases where the latter is true, but there are also cases where giving everyone a slice of the social pie means that some groups will have less. If your group has historically received access to employment, housing, and leniency when dealing with the authorities (even in cases when you're in the wrong) and things are suddenly made more just, some members of your group will find they're no longer being hired at the jobs they want, having their rental applications accepted at their first choice of apartment complexes, or being let go with a warning when they have broken the law. A person who's used to seeing their state and employer recognize their religious practices may feel loss at not seeing their favorite decorations displayed or at being told an organization will be open on one of their holidays so that it can be closed on someone else's. Someone who enjoys experiencing other people's perspectives in media occasionally may not enjoy the amount of choice as much when it means that there are fewer high quality works with characters they identify strongly with. There are lots of cases where eliminating bias helps everyone, but there are also cases where it will take away unearned privileges that powerful groups have had, and that will work.

On the point of feminist rhetoric, I think it should be noted that feminists do generally realize when they're not preaching to potential converts, and that there's an important place within the movement for rhetoric that is not aimed at potential converts. Without gentler or 101 level discussions, there won't ever be new blood in the movement. Without ones among people who already identify as feminists, including ones that may be angry, all discussions tend to end up being about understanding men and their problems (or antifeminist women and their problems) - which alienates many people who already identify as feminists and who would like some space where they aren't expected to cater to men or antifeminist women. Most groups with an ideological agenda need to walk that line, and if you're an outsider to a particular group, it can sometimes be hard to advise that it change further to further accommodate you rather than the people for whom it was formed.
eselle28
eselle28
General Oversight Moderator

Posts : 1994
Reputation : 999
Join date : 2014-09-24

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by fakely mctest on Tue Oct 28, 2014 2:25 pm

eselle28 wrote:On the point of feminist rhetoric, I think it should be noted that feminists do generally realize when they're not preaching to potential converts, and that there's an important place within the movement for rhetoric that is not aimed at potential converts. Without gentler or 101 level discussions, there won't ever be new blood in the movement. Without ones among people who already identify as feminist, including ones that may be angry, all discussions tend to end up being about understanding men and their problems - which alienates many people who already identify as feminists and who would like some space where they aren't expected to cater to men. Most groups with an ideological agenda need to walk that line, and if you're an outsider to a particular group, it can sometimes be hard to advise that it change further to further accommodate you rather than the people for whom it was formed.

Cosigned. In social movements and groups there are places that aren't for you if you're not a member of that group and I'd say that sometimes dark humor is used to delineate those boundaries to an extent. And, yes, those spaces may be defended in a way that some people find off-putting, which is a feature not a bug. It's a reaction to the fact that in the larger societal space there are tons of places where people in out-groups are unwelcome.

_________________
Please let it be an empty shoebox with a note saying “LOL Just kidding, I love cats, sorry I worried anyone. xoxox E. Schrödinger”
fakely mctest
fakely mctest
General Oversight Moderator

Posts : 298
Reputation : 74
Join date : 2014-09-24

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by Lemminkainen on Tue Oct 28, 2014 2:50 pm

eselle28 wrote:
That being said, I don't necessarily agree with some of the other statements that have been made here. Specifically, I disagree that social justice doesn't ever mean taking away privilege and only consists of granting additional people rights. There are cases where the latter is true, but there are also cases where giving everyone a slice of the social pie means that some groups will have less. If your group has historically received access to employment, housing, and leniency when dealing with the authorities (even in cases when you're in the wrong) and things are suddenly made more just, some members of your group will find they're no longer being hired at the jobs they want, having their rental applications accepted at their first choice of apartment complexes, or being let go with a warning when they have broken the law. A person who's used to seeing their state and employer recognize their religious practices may feel loss at not seeing their favorite decorations displayed or at being told an organization will be open on one of their holidays so that it can be closed on someone else's. Someone who enjoys experiencing other people's perspectives in media occasionally may not enjoy the amount of choice as much when it means that there are fewer high quality works with characters they identify strongly with. There are lots of cases where eliminating bias helps everyone, but there are also cases where it will take away unearned privileges that powerful groups have had, and that will work.


Ah, okay. Something which I should have communicated more clearly-- my vision of social justice includes something like Nordic-style social democracy, so nobody would have to worry about going without decent housing, education, the ability to take religious holidays which are important to them off from work, or enough money to live on comfortably. (And the people who would pay for that are mostly those who could easily meet their needs and have lots left over even if you took away a significant part of their income.) The other things you mention... don't strike me as being actually important? It's not like there's an actual shortage of high-quality media works (right now, I would say that watching all of the good TV that's on or available on Netflix would be impossible for anyone who wants to have an actual life). Similarly, you can always just but up your big Christmas/Chanukah/Diwali decorations at your local church/synagogue/temple-- not having them in the middle of the town square (or letting them share the town square with other religious decorations) doesn't seem like a huge deal.

Lemminkainen

Posts : 143
Reputation : 58
Join date : 2014-10-02

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by eselle28 on Tue Oct 28, 2014 3:05 pm

Lemminkainen wrote:
Ah, okay.  Something which I should have communicated more clearly-- my vision of social justice includes something like Nordic-style social democracy, so nobody would have to worry about going without decent housing, education, the ability to take religious holidays which are important to them off from work, or enough money to live on comfortably.  (And the people who would pay for that are mostly those who could easily meet their needs and have lots left over even if you took away a significant part of their income.)  The other things you mention... don't strike me as being actually important?  It's not like there's an actual shortage of high-quality media works (right now, I would say that watching all of the good TV that's on or available on Netflix would be impossible for anyone who wants to have an actual life).  Similarly, you can always just but up your big Christmas/Chanukah/Diwali decorations at your local church/synagogue/temple-- not having them in the middle of the town square (or letting them share the town square with other religious decorations) doesn't seem like a huge deal.

Are we picturing a science fiction world where human labor is mostly decorative? In any other one, some people still get to have jobs that are considered enjoyable (film critic, professional athlete) or prestigious (professor, elected official) while others will need to do work that's boring or stressful or unpleasant (fast food worker, taxi driver, telemarketer). Even in a perfectly society where all those jobs paid equally, there would still be far more people who'd want jobs in the first group than the second. I also think it's worth noting that societies move toward being more just incrementally, which means that as real world advances are made, there are in fact people who will be unemployed or living in substandard housing who may have gotten more breaks under an unjust system and who will resent change for that reason.

I'd disagree on the importance of the other two, coming from the standpoint of someone who's in the minority when it comes to both things. These are the kinds of things that aren't substantively that important but that people attach a lot of emotional meaning to, and I think it's at least helpful to understand the objections of someone who's annoyed they can't find an action adventure game released this year featuring a protagonist they identify with or that there are lots of quality shows out there but that the ones that are the most praised at the moment all happen about women's experiences, even if I don't agree with the underlying thesis that the person in question's tastes are more important than everyone else's.

azazel wrote:
fakely mctest wrote:

Cosigned.  In social movements and groups there are places that aren't for you if you're not a member of that group and I'd say that sometimes dark humor is used to delineate those boundaries to an extent.  And, yes, those spaces may be defended in a way that some people find off-putting, which is a feature not a bug.  It's a reaction to the fact that in the larger societal space there are tons of places where people in out-groups are unwelcome.

So... gatekeeping is good.

Huh.

Gatekeeping is a tool. It can be implemented well or badly, and in cases where it's helpful, harmful, or neutral but perhaps unnecessary.


Last edited by eselle28 on Tue Oct 28, 2014 3:15 pm; edited 1 time in total
eselle28
eselle28
General Oversight Moderator

Posts : 1994
Reputation : 999
Join date : 2014-09-24

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by The Wisp on Tue Oct 28, 2014 3:13 pm

Lemmi, it's also worth noting that Nordic social democracies don't just fund themselves on the backs of the super rich. They also have high taxation dates on their middle classes (especially by anglo-ametican standards). Yes, they get some back in services, but not all of it. Many predominantly white Americans would see a substantial tax hike to pay for a Nordic-like safety net.


Last edited by The Wisp on Tue Oct 28, 2014 3:26 pm; edited 1 time in total
The Wisp
The Wisp

Posts : 896
Reputation : 198
Join date : 2014-10-01

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by UristMcBunny on Tue Oct 28, 2014 3:24 pm

You know, I actually think the gate-keeping thing could be an interesting conversation, albeit a derail.

Please hold one sec while I split off and then add my thoughts...

_________________
Some of you will know me as Bunny from the old forums.
UristMcBunny
UristMcBunny
Moderator of "Romantic and Sexual Relationships"

Posts : 371
Reputation : 116
Join date : 2014-09-24

http://uristmcdorf.tumblr.com/

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by SadisticToaster on Tue Oct 28, 2014 5:45 pm

UristMcBunny wrote: Because in the end I found myself working so hard to try to manage the emotions and needs and feelings of people who might be reading who were not the target audience for what I was writing, that it ended up derailing the entire point I was trying to make. 

How do they know they're not the target audience? The only qualifier is "Men" : which they are.

And even though I've also been keeping up to date with the trouble in Ferguson : statements like "fuck White people" only add to divisive "Us and Them" attitudes which rarely help anything. As much as I dislike ISIS "Fuck Muslims" isn't a banner I'd like to march under - even if I was waving a little flag explaining that I didn't mean all Muslims, only the bad ones.

Reboot : Tricky one - I can't quite work out in my head why "Americans bombed my village" doesn't feel directed at all Americans, but "Do men have a problem with empathy?" does feel directed towards all men.

SadisticToaster

Posts : 22
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2014-10-06

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by UristMcBunny on Tue Oct 28, 2014 6:22 pm

"How do they know they're not the target audience" is an interesting question. My answer would be - how does anyone, ever? It's usually pretty clear pretty quickly who a space is supposed to be for.

Personally, it's very apparent to me when my interest isn't relevant to someone - things feel ever so slightly hostile, in that "I'm so used to this shit I barely notice but it's one more thing that grinds me down" kind of way. I am generally pretty confidently aware that - say - the average mainstream porn site is not "for me". It is not a space where I am particularly desired or welcomed, or where my participation or needs are at all important. Mostly because of the sheer number of overly-shopped, uncomfortably posed, fake-orgasming women being choked out by aggressively-muscled men with under-lubed genitals penetrating holes way too hard. The entire ethos says "men's pleasure at women's expense".

That said, I think this is an area where privilege plays a part. People who belong to more privileged parts of society are overwhelmingly catered to not only in their own spaces, but in spaces that are not intended for them, often to the point that it becomes invisible. When I want to buy a dress to fit my body, and all the plus size shops online have their clothes modelled on 6 foot tall size 12 women, the company isn't creating ad copy to appeal to the women who actually buy from them - they're creating ad copy to appeal to mainstream heterosexual beauty standards. When I go to a lingerie shop to buy myself some new bras, and the walls are plastered with close-ups of pouting lips and perfect stomachs and women putting on porn-face, the company isn't creating a space where they are caring much about my comfort, my desires or interests. They're making ads to appeal to the same guys who feel so much more comfortable on porn sites than I do. And on the other end of things, when I turn on the TV I am presented with a massive number of images of people with the same skin colour that I have, whose experiences and perspectives are presented as being unique and not merely a reflection of their race.

The end result is a society where one group of people is so overwhelmingly catered to that they seem to simply expect that same deference to their preferences literally everywhere. You see it on feminist blogs like feministe, which are neither 101-oriented or focused on outreach, yet which continuously deal with derailing commentary from people who don't even have a basic understanding of what terms like privilege or patriarchy mean.

Which... actually has brought up some more thoughts on the whole Male Tears thing. I need some time to think through them more.

_________________
Some of you will know me as Bunny from the old forums.
UristMcBunny
UristMcBunny
Moderator of "Romantic and Sexual Relationships"

Posts : 371
Reputation : 116
Join date : 2014-09-24

http://uristmcdorf.tumblr.com/

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by reboot on Tue Oct 28, 2014 6:25 pm

SadisticToaster wrote:
UristMcBunny wrote: Because in the end I found myself working so hard to try to manage the emotions and needs and feelings of people who might be reading who were not the target audience for what I was writing, that it ended up derailing the entire point I was trying to make. 

How do they know they're not the target audience? The only qualifier is "Men" : which they are.

And even though I've also been keeping up to date with the trouble in Ferguson : statements like "fuck White people" only add to divisive "Us and Them" attitudes which rarely help anything. As much as I dislike ISIS "Fuck Muslims" isn't a banner I'd like to march under - even if I was waving a little flag explaining that I didn't mean all Muslims, only the bad ones.  

Reboot : Tricky one - I can't quite work out in my head why "Americans bombed my village" doesn't feel directed at all Americans, but "Do men have a problem with empathy?" does feel directed towards all men.

Maybe because you are not American so have some distance from it, but you are a man so it feels more personal? And trust me, in the situations I ran into it "All Americans do/believe/hate X" really meant all Americans in the mind of the speakers.
reboot
reboot
Moderator of "Other Relationships" and "Gender, Identity and Society"

Posts : 2514
Reputation : 1005
Join date : 2014-09-24

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by Lemminkainen on Tue Oct 28, 2014 7:09 pm

eselle28 wrote:

Are we picturing a science fiction world where human labor is mostly decorative? In any other one, some people still get to have jobs that are considered enjoyable (film critic, professional athlete) or prestigious (professor, elected official) while others will need to do work that's boring or stressful or unpleasant (fast food worker, taxi driver, telemarketer). Even in a perfectly society where all those jobs paid equally, there would still be far more people who'd want jobs in the first group than the second. I also think it's worth noting that societies move toward being more just incrementally, which means that as real world advances are made, there are in fact people who will be unemployed or living in substandard housing who may have gotten more breaks under an unjust system and who will resent change for that reason.

I'd disagree on the importance of the other two, coming from the standpoint of someone who's in the minority when it comes to both things. These are the kinds of things that aren't substantively that important but that people attach a lot of emotional meaning to, and I think it's at least helpful to understand the objections of someone who's annoyed they can't find an action adventure game released this year featuring a protagonist they identify with or that there are lots of quality shows out there but that the ones that are the most praised at the moment all happen about women's experiences, even if I don't agree with the underlying thesis that the person in question's tastes are more important than everyone else's.

Hmmm, your first paragraph is excellent food for thought-- getting rid of "meaningful/pleasurable" job hierarchies would probably be even more difficult than eliminating prestige distinctions, and the distribution of those sorts of things is still rival. You made me recognize a sort of privilege that I have but don't think about too much because it hasn't been politicized yet. I have an exceptional memory, gift for mathematics, and facility with languages, which seem to be natural (ie: I'm much better at these than most of my socioeconomic peers are-- some of these skills are clearly an effect of childhood nutrition and education, but not all of them are), which is an advantage that nothing short of transhumanism could erase completely. So maybe supporting social justice that would remove some kinds of privilege is easier for me because I have a hedge against losing status. I'll need to think more about this. Thank you for your critique!

Re your second paragraph: I'm not sure if I actually disagree with you about how entertainment or religious expression are important things that can merit a lot of feelings. I can understand how feeling a total lack of representation could be really painful(I'm a bisexual atheist, so I experience this myself). The point that I was trying (unsuccessfully) to make is that entertainment and religious expression aren't things that are all that subject to scarcity. The world entertainment economy has such an astounding capacity to produce good-quality work that we could easily make good, critically well-received works that capture all kinds of peoples' experiences. The past few years have seen a nice expansion of good shows about women and people of color AND good shows about white people-- Scandal coexists comfortably with House of Cards and Nikita and The Legend of Korra haven't put a dent in the huge number of action shows featuring white dudes. Similarly, in most liberal democratic countries, there are tons and tons of religious social organizations and congregations and spaces where you can be religious, even if the state doesn't promote your particular faith. I guess that things could hurt if you have a huge investment in domination, but I view the need to completely control and dominate everything as something more like a pathology or a mental illness than a legitimate desire-- a person who feels that way needs to be fixed. Er, does this response suggest that I'm reading you correctly, or did I miss some important nuance or idea?

@Wisp: This is true, but it's important to remember that 1) Scandinavia's income distribution is much more equitable than America's, so the tax burden would obviously be spread out more there, 2) In purchasing power terms, the US has a higher GDP per capita than all of the Scandinavian countries except for Norway, so we actually have more total wealth to go around [which means that we would probably need to put less of a tax burden on people to pay for services] and 3) Middle-class Scandinavians enjoy a standard of living equal to or better than that of their American counterparts even though they have less wealth and a higher tax burden. [So even after the US economy becomes more income and wealth-equitable, socialism will still make middle-class people mostly better off.] So, I don't think that your point is a good argument that social democracy would make anybody significantly worse off in real terms.

Lemminkainen

Posts : 143
Reputation : 58
Join date : 2014-10-02

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by eselle28 on Tue Oct 28, 2014 7:43 pm

Lemminkainen wrote:
Re your second paragraph: I'm not sure if I actually disagree with you about how entertainment or religious expression are important things that can merit a lot of feelings. I can understand how feeling a total lack of representation could be really painful(I'm a bisexual atheist, so I experience this myself).  The point that I was trying (unsuccessfully) to make is that entertainment and religious expression aren't things that are all that subject to scarcity.  The world entertainment economy has such an astounding capacity to produce good-quality work that we could easily make good, critically well-received works that capture all kinds of peoples' experiences.  The past few years have seen a nice expansion of good shows about women and people of color AND good shows about white people-- Scandal coexists comfortably with House of Cards and Nikita and The Legend of Korra haven't put a dent in the huge number of action shows featuring white dudes.  Similarly, in most liberal democratic countries, there are tons and tons of religious social organizations and congregations and spaces where you can be religious, even if the state doesn't promote your particular faith.  I guess that things could hurt if you have a huge investment in domination, but I view the need to completely control and dominate everything as something more like a pathology or a mental illness than a legitimate desire-- a person who feels that way needs to be fixed.  Er, does this response suggest that I'm reading you correctly, or did I miss some important nuance or idea?


I'm just going to go with the entertainment example here, but I think where we fundamentally disagree is about whether people can experience a scarcity of entertainment. I think that they can, at least when it comes to mainstream works that receive reasonable marketing budgets and are accessible to most people. The reason Nikita and The Legend of Korra haven't put a dent in the huge number of action shows featuring white dudes is because most action shows are still very white and very male. I think the way to get at it is to reverse the problem. Let's say someone cares a great deal about watching TV shows featuring women and people of color and wants to add some action series to the list. Let's also say this person doesn't want to watch an animated show and tried but didn't particularly enjoy Nikita. Since there are only a few options and taste varies, that viewer may need to choose between watching a TV show that represents them and watching an action series this year. Things tend to get a bit starker when we're talking about things that aren't as varied as television programming. Someone looking for a superhero movie or a AAA FPS game will be even less likely to find something that represents them.

Currently, the weight of that choice falls on less privileged people. As representation improves, there probably will be some times when straight white guys won't always be able to find something in their preferred subgenre that they both like and that represents them. They'l be frustrated, and I'm okay recognizing this frustration while recognizing that it's one that should have been shared all along.
eselle28
eselle28
General Oversight Moderator

Posts : 1994
Reputation : 999
Join date : 2014-09-24

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by Lemminkainen on Tue Oct 28, 2014 7:49 pm

@eselle: Ahhhh, okay.  The way I see it is that there's a huge abundance of entertainment (which is growing ever-larger because production costs are dropping and distribution channels are expanding), but straightwhitedudestuff hogs such a ridiculously huge proportion of it that straight white dudes could easily give away enough stuff that everybody gets represented in shows of genres that they like without finding themselves in that frustrated position.

EDIT: Also, in my last post, I was trying to acknowledge that some people do experience a scarcity of entertainment when they're poorly represented in the media.  If I didn't make that adequately clear, I apologize.


Last edited by Lemminkainen on Tue Oct 28, 2014 8:04 pm; edited 2 times in total

Lemminkainen

Posts : 143
Reputation : 58
Join date : 2014-10-02

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by Enail on Tue Oct 28, 2014 7:50 pm

I think going from more to less is almost always surprising and frustrating, whether or not the 'less' is still technically a lot.
Enail
Enail
Admin

Posts : 4038
Reputation : 2276
Join date : 2014-09-22

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by eselle28 on Tue Oct 28, 2014 7:54 pm

I think there's some truth to that too - I suspect there's some slack there at least! - but I don't think it would always be the case. But that's admittedly something that's hard to measure. I think enail also makes a point about perception versus reality. If you're used to a glut of choice, having slightly less of a glut may still have an emotional impact.

Also worth noting, since science fiction universes came up before, democratizing the production of entertainment so that independent productions can better replicate production values in all genres and effectively advertise themselves would eliminate some of these problems. I think we're moving there, but I think there's quite a ways to go.
eselle28
eselle28
General Oversight Moderator

Posts : 1994
Reputation : 999
Join date : 2014-09-24

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by celette482 on Tue Oct 28, 2014 7:55 pm

eselle wrote:shared all along.

This I think is crucial. I see the world as this great balance of benefits and costs. For every action, there is a benefit and a consequence. You go to work: cost- you have to be at a job 40 hours a week and wear a tie; benefit: you get paid. In the work example, you face the cost and get the benefit. Sometimes though, the benefits and the costs are not vested in the same person. Let's say you are a 10 year old bully. You have a rough home life and you can't safely express your emotions at home. So you bully other children. You get the benefit of working out some of your emotions, but the other children bear the cost of being bullied. And in this case, the chain goes up, because you the bully are also a child and also being mistreated and neglected at home. Your parents are dodging their responsibilities and taking out THEIR frustrations on you, so you are paying the cost and they are getting the benefit. This whole system can trickle down, in other words.

Loss of privilege is part of making the benefits and costs vest in the same person. And that's uncomfortable, because you're stuck paying for something you never have before. But, since you've been getting the benefit this whole time, you aren't going to find sympathetic ears that you shouldn't be paying the cost.
celette482
celette482

Posts : 168
Reputation : 138
Join date : 2014-10-22

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by Lemminkainen on Tue Oct 28, 2014 8:06 pm

@enail: I guess that's true for some people?  For some reason, this effect doesn't really bother me all that much. (Maybe because I'm a weirdo who likes works that he isn't the target audience for?  Or because I'm bisexual and non-neurotypical, and thus used to being not represented in most works in at least some ways?)


Lemminkainen

Posts : 143
Reputation : 58
Join date : 2014-10-02

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by Enail on Tue Oct 28, 2014 8:28 pm

I was meaning more generally, rather than for representation in media specifically. I think different people will find different kinds of 'less' more or less impactful - and for things like diverse representations, which can be beneficial even for people not being represented more (different stories, different character types can be interesting for everyone), not everyone will perceive it as a loss. But I can imagine how some people would feel it as one!
Enail
Enail
Admin

Posts : 4038
Reputation : 2276
Join date : 2014-09-22

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by The Wisp on Tue Oct 28, 2014 9:10 pm

Getting back to the original topic, though I think there are cases where "die cishet scum" is valid, I still think the use of such language shouldn't be a regular thing (I don't know if it is). I still think there's hypocrisy there, and it seems to be motivated by a "an eye for an eye" mentality. Regular use will just foster hate and tribalism.

I am also, on reflection, much less sympathetic to "male tears" than "die cishet scum" or a black guy yelling "whitey!" at someone. The reason is I think gender relations are much more complicated from a power/oppression view point than race relations or trans/cis relations. Yes, men have historically held the power, and still hold most of the power in many spheres. However, the oppression isn't unidirectional. Both men and women suffer from patriarchy, and many women do have a role in enforcing oppressive norms through various means (e.g. women are mothers, >90% of men want sex and romance with women). "Male tears" just reinforces a significant factor of male oppression: the repression of emotions. I still think in certain cases it is acceptable: when ranting in a safe space or among close friends, but I think it should be used very sparingly.


Last edited by The Wisp on Tue Oct 28, 2014 11:33 pm; edited 1 time in total
The Wisp
The Wisp

Posts : 896
Reputation : 198
Join date : 2014-10-01

Back to top Go down

Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric - Page 2 Empty Re: Discomfort with "Male Tears" and "Die, Cishet Scum!" Rhetoric

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum