i know this might piss off some people, but whatever, fvck em, imo this is an intelligent article discussing a fact of how the internet is
At the idea of man doing this as it is said numerous times in that article:
I doubt it and I am fairly certain it's boys, not man.
Anti Gmo activists are some sort of lunatic cultists. So says the corporate interest and that is a fact. There is no study that proves that GMO harmed people, or animals for that matter. That doesn't say it couldn't. It's a bit like atomic energy was once thought to be safe and when people pointed at the same tech being used in bombs, they shrugged it off. Now it's GMO vs Biological weapon tech. It's not really that safe. When we look at Mad cow, all of it was started by introducing a seemingly harmless practice decades before anything happened. If you had asked anyone, if feeding sheep meat to cows would kill them and turn their brain to goo, people would have painted you the village idiot.
What I am trying to say: If you have a problem with people being victims to prejudice, don't go and form some group. Don't invent slogans. Don't make feminist, or anti-feminist blogs. Don't hold conventions about it. You are just ending up in a fight and no one wins.
The truth doesn't need slogans... The article has a point and it's sad to see it poisoned by Hypocrisy.
Last edited by Ronin; 01-23-2014 at 04:16 PM.
Would I know about sex trafficking if people didn't make videos and blogs? No, I wouldn't. And still, many people don't know it exists. Exposure is key to reaching people to facilitate change, whether that be through a video, blog, or advertisement.
It could, because it totally is. One does not encounter drama while browsing pictures of Kim Jong Il looking around or while browsing posts about random objects satisfyingly fitting inside of other random objects.
Likewise, if you go and subscribe to blogs where some nut-job talks about how 'the patriarchy' tricks women into enjoying sex, you're gonna run into lots of drama and a surprisingly little amount of hilariously bad real estate photos. It's all about what blogs you follow.
Couldn't Take It No More
So I Became Hardcore
@TuxedoSam: "You're preaching silence."
No. I am against using the wrong tools. See this article is a good example, because it draws such a wrong picture, by coming down on "man". What do you learn from that? You just unlearn.
I am not for silence. I am against crawling into a cave. I am against exclusionism and yes, avoiding exclusionism is more important than hammering home w/e message. If you can't get the message to the streets, by getting yourself a comfortable circle that just shouts everyone down, you don't accomplish something. You just fail more spectacularly.
Thats why I am listening and talking to everyone that is listening, but I wont even waste my time talking to someone who preaches that way. Its always just people who can't admit they are completely wrong. Its sad that the loudest shouters are listened to the most.
The other one was about racism and white privilege, so one was accused of hating men and the other was accused of hating white people.
*gets on a soap box for a quick moment*
People need to understand that sexism and racism isn't an individual thing, you can't just assume when someone brings it up they're pointing fingers at you specifically to call you out.
*gets down from soap box and offers everyone a cookie*
When it comes down to it, a lot of people are evil and simply kept in check by laws.
Anonymity + No real repercussions allow that to flow out on the web.
I strive to make sure my Evil Level does not hit anything beyond Sarcastic Ass occasionally.
I am really finding it hard to believe in a culture of man relentlessly harassing women. Discriminating on the job, I can see that. Inappropriate jokes, well, definitely a thing. I can't picture a 35 year old dad going on the web and harassing women. I don't know for sure, since I don't even have all to much second hand knowledge about that, but it sounds odd to me, the whole idea of it.
So what I am sure of is, that teens and late teens (males) often are like that. I would assume, that for the same psych. reasons, namely that of failure, some people get stuck on it and keep intensifying their crusade, over admitting that they are wrong. So this is the voice of male puberty and guys who couldnt really get through it. Now this is really not proven. The thing is I don't know what to think, when I hear the terms of "rape culture" and see the word men thrown around in the same context as the article does it and things like blaming testosterone for the ****ups that adult man make (down to how business or int. diplomacy supposedly works...).
I don't feel that this is relevant to me. I don't feel like I should listen to that. Let me bring an example: I might be prejudiced against gays, since I have things happen to me that where, by the written definition stalking and again from others sexual harassment. Not enough to put fear of being raped into me (there was enough unwanted attempts of what one summarizes with foreplay). Of course this is also a topic that gets marginalized and not talked about and I wouldn't be imagining how to hold someone else in a conversation about it. People, even very close friends would weasel out of having to talk about any of it, let alone support or help me. I understand how all of this works. I also get that a guy who tells anyone to "not be square and have a little fun" while trying to pull his weight through threatening body-language is a horrid jerk and that forcefully giving someone a kiss is not "showing that person what fun is".
It's however not true that this behavior is relevant to me culturally, directly. I do see that society is culturally complicit in covering up sexual abuse, but not in condoning it, or in making it happen. The guys and girls who can't talk about it are the majority and the problem the general culture has, not the actual acts. They are isolated and they are not generally condoned. They are just covered up.
I am personally at a loss why many modern feminist outlets do not name those animals by their name. It makes me wonder, if all they are about is an intellectual substance-less reshuffling of the facts into seller-articles and ideologies that are worse than the truth and harmful to the idea of an equal society.
If you ask people what feminists want, they are generally clueless. They don't understand it, both men and woman. Where does that come from, when it should be easily doable to explain their agenda? Why do the stupidest cases get the biggest spotlight? Why are simple connections left as mysteries intentionally? How did we get to this point, where none of the people who try to steer the debate encompass the idea of equality anymore? Its clear that there is something going wrong here.
I personally would love to know how to be less of a jerk, but the people who are calling me a jerk are jerks who don't want me to...
Finally ironically, the mature people are even more going to ignore any feminist message that calls them a rapist to the face on no grounds and the lesser mature guys, well they are ready to pick up the chance for any decent fight. Not making treating people as equals the centerpiece doesn't accomplish anything at best and at worst, it encourages what it calls the enemy so it might "better fight it". Thats retarded and gets us nowhere.
Last edited by Ronin; 01-23-2014 at 08:45 PM.
Times have changed. Most people get their news and information from the internet. Moreover, a blog is not only for news, but for people to express their thoughts about their opinions, data, and factual occurrences.
The article condemns men it's directly referring to. If you are not a rapist, predator, misogynist, etc., then it's not referring to you. However, that doesn't mean it's irrelevant to you. A little exposure and acknowledgment can emit more empathy and action, from everyone.
I don't feel the article was offensive to men as a whole. I don't recall anything similar to "men are heinous." There are men who do bad things and that is what the article is about.
In regards to your rant, I only read a small portion: I know for a fact many men do what the article says. When I was 15-16, I used to frequent Yahoo Chat Rooms. I would be spammed by men of all ages with vulgar messages. Most of the time, I would just receive webcam requests to view their webcam...constantly. I eventually blocked all messages and requests through settings.
When I was new and naive, I accepted a few and it was always a man masturbating. Sometimes the webcam request would bug and accepted anyway and fullscreened automatically...which was terrifying because my brother was sitting next to me and I actually was afraid of penises at the time because they were ugly and unknown to me.
Additionally, I've also experienced much older men than me hitting on me and sexually aggressive towards me via other online chat mediums and WoW. I also happen to have an extremely perverted dad who has traumatized me. Not to mention, most people have at least one friend who has been sexually molested by a man. I have more than one. Therefore, this information doesn't surprise me. I'm actually surprised that you're in denial.
@TuxedoSam: Fist here, let me reply to the part concerned with statistics: Those are really the cornerpoint of the story and before I start another rant, let me just say, I don't have them, so that's that. (I am fairly certain no one has any of the numbers on any of the issues here down, they are new scenarios, or the numbers are difficult to get.)
On the thing about labels and men and how the article was "ok" or not "ok":
I'd be angry, if the article would put a "this is what woman do" statement in it once. Mind you, once. If the article does the same thing with "men" ten times (didn't count) I am frustrated. I could be alone in that, but if you are saying, "hah, you need to ready between the lines, it's no big deal", that's a big schizophrenic sounding to me. Those 2 things are one and the same thing, there is no difference.
See, we don't seem to stick to one topic here:
Men threatening woman with murder and violence is in my book a different spectrum on the harassment scale to men looking for sexual contact with minors. Can we please make this into some coherent narrative of what happens without using the term men in it, to blanket term the super group of all the number of offences? You see, the group categorizes the offences put in it, not the similarity of the offences. That's what, in the usual course of things, earns words the followup "ism". I am not cynical about this, I am trying to make sense of how that can work out...
I don't care to blur the lines here and discuss the question of a disturbing lack of style vs. lack of attention, general rude form, etc. No one wants me to spin complicated sentences for my own sake. If I want to read a proper article on behavioral ethics, I just wonder where I could. All I read is this and similar stuff, that fails the task at hand on the most basic level. You can't compromise on a solid foundation for an argument and this one is built on quicksand.
Last edited by Ronin; 01-24-2014 at 12:29 AM.
There are articles of things women do. And "women" are also included in the analytical comparisons.
How do you feel the article should be presented then? They use the term "men" because they're talking about men. I don't understand what you expect them to say? They're not saying ALL men. They're using a specific number or a generalization based on factual statistics, according to their data.
Please correct me if I'm misinterpreting something here, but is this one of those situations where sexism is brought up and someone doesn't like it because it makes that person offended because they're male?
That's like saying in history class, "Stop talking about slavery, because I'm white."
Ya know, I think it's me not wanting to deal with disagreeing with people on subjects I'm passionate about when it comes to Tumblr and stuff like that.
I don't know how to debate well, and I fear the debate turning uncivil in a threatening or abusive manner.
I take things too personally when I shouldn't.
From now on I'll be on whatever site I want to be on, and slowly but surely learn how to deal with people even if it gets stressful!
I have always believed that my biggest crime is to try to be honest, but I might be mistaken.
(Feel free to call me an idiot, if you can live with the fact that I will ponder it for a couple of days. Even if I am deflecting as you say I might be, I do generally not let myself of easily and it's imo better than just turning away.)
I am not claiming the key to knowledge. I am trying to figure something out that doesn't make sense to me.
(You seem to agree that the question in this matter is in nuances. I am not that elegant in my mother-tongue, so I can just try to hit the right notes.)
@TuxedoSam: Man made it for thousands of years, on being "just a little sloppy". I am a somewhat ethical person and I don't like untidy spots, that's all.
(Uh my age, 20ish does still cut it, lol)
Seriously I am kinda relieved that you guys bother to answer at all. See, we could try to get this onto the topic of abusers and such and how they are what they are, but honestly, I would just try to come up with technicalities about how to deal with them and the takeaway might just as well be that I am deflecting responsibility to the government, or even marginalizing certain crimes, since I don't believe in revenge justice.
Last edited by Ronin; 01-24-2014 at 12:55 AM.
It's the internets, full of empty threats, horny teenagers and people with delusions of grandeur.
Meat life laws are slowly creeping through and starting to apply on the internets, 'trolling' is getting people jail time, give it another decade or two and people will be thinking twice about what they say, just like outside the net.
Best thing to do is filter out the really bad ones, most games and forums have an 'ignore' feature. Just learn to use it, be happy you can just filter bad shit out of your online life, not so easy out in meatspace.
EDIT: Ooh that font looks bad in quotes.
Last edited by Ronin; 01-24-2014 at 01:14 AM.
I love hostile communities because I love a good laugh. When I'm playing LoL and people start raging, even if they're raging and cussing at me, I've got a big grin on my face. And I miss how hateful /b/ used to be, it's so full of white knights and people offering post-breakup advice these days.
Obviously I haven't been subjected to the intense hatred and sexism that girls are subjected to on the internet, but I was beaten-up regularly in primary school and trashtalked to viciously by some of my best friends who became contemptuous when I pointed out flaws in their teamwork or religion. So I guess I have been subjected to the same levels of hatred (to the point of wanting to commit suicide, and doing nothing but stare at the floor without eating for three to four days). Believe me, there are hundreds of derogatory words for men that I hear from men. But I suppose (sarcasm) this is one of those ambiguities where it's ok for women to trashtalk women, like it's ok for black people to call black people n***ers? (I'll asterisk it since I'm not black.) Anyways - my point is - obviously I haven't been subjected to sexism in the form of mysogyny, but yes I do know it exists and I can relate because I have been subjected to INTENSE bullying throughout primary school (partially my fault, because I often laughed at classmates' stupidity without realizing that humans are on the whole, generally stupid). So of course there's bad people. But if you in retaliation categorize everyone as either:
A) A lustful mysogynist
A lustful white knight
Then you'll end-up confusing yourself and others around you because a lot of people don't fit into those two categories.
Moreover, men and women have the same nervous systems, so we both have the potential to be equally stupid/cruel/discriminatory. And finally - when I play as a female character, I get WAY more respect in-game than as a male (in the form of people wanting to hang out with me and giving me freebies, though of course, my sample size is limited to the games I've played as a girl).
Labelling all hate-speech as sexism... @TuxedoSam: You literally bait guys into it on the LoL forums. Of course there's going to be that one person who is an arrogant d***, but ... If you're going to make generalizations about men, then they often also apply to women. I get it - a lot of men hate women for no reason, just like a lot of people hate Muslims/Arabs/Islam. But making anti-mysogyny slogans and anti<insert sexist person here> blogs is no different from guys making anti-feminist slogans and anti<insert popular streamer here> blogs. It's like watching Israelis fighting Palestinians - after a while you don't care who did the worst things because it becomes senseless and you can't generalize personal conflict to a global scale... I mean - can generalize anything, but when you start cherry picking specific events to promote your anti-anything agenda... If it's something that somebody did to you then that's fine, but if you're ranting about what someone did to somebody else whom neither of us know, and put it in the context of your anti-whatever campaign, then it's tiresome to read.
Yes. Men are all evil ****ing arrogant morons who say mean things and do mean things and want sex. I get it. Does that mean you should treat us like evil ****ing arrogant morons? Nooooooo!
If there is a specific issue, that's worth campaigning over, then go for the political change. But as soon as someone starts preaching that <X> group of people are evil, then I instantly lose interest.
I don't mind listening to someone rage about one particular idiot. But generalizations about men often apply to women as well.
If you're a teenage girl, you'll likely get bullied a lot more by other girls than by guys (because female social life in schools is vicious). And yes I have been bullied by girls (yanking my hair while I'm reading, or breaking my possessions at school), but I'll tell you one thing: The reason they did it wasn't because I was a different gender.
And yeah of course death threats are way out of line! That's illegal, and if someone sends you death threats then by all means don't stay silent about it. But if you bait on a League of Legends forum and someone tells you to make a sandwich... You'll be trolled regardless of gender. Your wellbeing's not in danger. @TuxedoSam: I'm sure you've been trolled by plenty of females.
Last edited by Phenoca; 01-24-2014 at 02:35 PM.
I am really finding it hard to believe in a culture of man relentlessly harassing women.
there's a reason rape and violence shelters rarely need to offer their services to men.
I volunteer at a violence and rape shelter. We get calls from men and help them via our hotline. Our services as a shelter, though, they seldom need.
Maybe you just broke reading of after the first line? Maybe you did misunderstand my context, since I didn't build in a safeguard? I might be cynic to say this, but what can you expect from a person who jumps ship after the first line, just because it's possible to construe some meaning? He will jump again after the second and the third. It would haven been a wasted effort.
Anyways, if I try to follow your path of the argument, since you found mine so lacking: The thing is what you call culture in this case. You can claim the problem is culture. Have fun trying to fix that culture. I am curious as to how that works.
At least you had fun. I am left to wonder what you where even meaning to tell me and everyone else and if you even read that first sentence properly at all.
Last edited by Ronin; 01-24-2014 at 08:37 PM.
This isn't getting out of hand quite yet, but it's on the slippery slope heading in that direction.
And I'm having trouble understanding what Ronin is saying to an extent, so I'm unsure what to debate about at this point.
That might be me just having trouble reading.
I swear, my freaking brain sees a paragraph and panics. >.<
Okay, next two cents...
1. No one is denying that bad things happen to men, via other men or even women.
2. No one is denying that women do bad things.
Both genders are unfairly treated by sexism when you really look at it.
Boys are raised being told not to show interest in certain harmless activities, cry or show "weak" emotions or else they'll be considered a weakling.