« Reunion review: a note on memory, myopia, and grace | Main | Quick note about nepotism »

October 24, 2005

Comments

The Gonzman

Well, Hugo, Myth, you both did the strawman thing yourself. Let's reread what Mr. Bad really said, as opposed to what you attacked him for not saying:

Then by all means djw, view away. However, I trust you will understand that we are just as diverse a group as you feminists claim to be. Either that, or Valerie Solanas, Robin Morgan, Andrea Dworkin, Lorena Bobbit, ginmar, Trish Wilson, Liz Kates, Asherah (are the last three one and the same?), et al., are truly the mainstream leaders, representative and voices of feminists after all and what most of you say about 'being moderate' is just a sham. As many of you - including Hugo - seem to be saying about us MRAs.

Read again. He never said they were - he just said if it was fair for you to judge a movement opposed to you by extreme elements, than that hat is good enough for ya'll to wear. If - then.

You feminists are the first to claim "diversity" and "not all feminists think the same," and plead to not be judged by the extremists who are your spokesmen and whom you never denounce or refuse to follow - but decline to extend the slightest fraction of that courtesy to your foes.

The Gonzman

Damitol, I know I closed that

Mr. Bad

Hugo, I used to frequent plenty of feminist sites in the '90s, e.g., the BB for Ms. Magazine back when it was still in operation, and there was far more frequent and abusive/sexist rhetoric posted there than any I've ever seen at SYG. However, the difference between SYG and feminist sites is that Dr. Evil and Sir Jessy regularly and quickly step in to warn and if necessary ban posters whem they break the rules, while in contrast, from my experience most feminist sites let posts remain as long as the mods agree with the rhetoric (yours is the exception to this rule, although at times you're guilty of this as well). And correct me if I'm wrong, but the Ms. Foundation is one of - if not the - premier feminist orgs. in the U.S. So as such, IMO they are certainly representative spokeswomen for the feminist movement. And yes, at the time of the Bobbit domestic violence case many of the women there at the Ms. BB were hollering the "Lorena Bobbitt for Surgeon General" cheer, so don't try to tell me that feminists haven't rallied around Lorena. I know for a fact that they did.

As for the fellows at "Nice Guys," they're representative of the lunatic fringe of MRAs, so it is you who are hauling out straw men. Besides, I don't view their site so I don't know what they're about, etc.

However, as is to be expected, you and I have different perspectives and definitions of what constitutes "vitriol" so I doubt that we could ever settle this little side debate.

Mr. Bad

Here Gonz, let me get us out of this

Better

mythago

You feminists

Now, what was that about 'diversity' and tarring a movement with the same brush, Gonzman?

I don't see it as much different that Cosmo or Glamour, or any of those rags

It isn't. More explicit, but it's always fascinated me that a 'woman's magazine' puts half-dressed women on the cover.

The Gonzman

Here's the thing, Mr. Bad: for better or for worse, MRA websites are public. Hugo links to them periodically. If he's misrepresenting y'all, it's right there in zeros and ones for everyone to see. We can judge the accuracy of his claims for ourselves.

And except for the fact that a statement such as "I don't think feminism has hit the mark" is seen as screeching, misogynistic, preaching of stripping away the rights to vote, hold jobs, and learn to read; and on the other hand "They are abusive and sometimes violent control freaks who are angry that they are unable to have their unreasonable demands met. They are also not extremists within the movement." is considered reasonable and non-inflammatory discourse, you'd be spot on.

*http://users.adelphia.net/~enitria/trish_wilson/blog/archives/sept_2003.html#000338

Q Grrl

So, I'm confused. Are you, Gonzman and Mr. Bad, saying that Playboy is not deliberately conflating inflammatory words with male heterosexual fantasies?

Mr. Bad

mythago said: "Hugo, he's not interested in intellectually honest discussions. It's all about praising MRAs and bashing feminists, and if that means pinging pulledoutofmyass.com, so what?"

Ah yes, the very flower of intellectually honest discussion. Uh huh.

Myth, how old are you? Hugo, I know you're in your 30s. I'm 50-ish. That would make Hugo in his early to mid-20s, myth who-knows-how-old, and me about 40 when John Bobbit had his 'surgery' in 1993. Now I don't know about you guys, but I know that like most people, I was a hell of a lot more aware and savvy when I was 40 than when I was 20-ish, and I was not only around back then, but paying attention to gender issues. And I'm here to tell you that Lorena Bobbitt was a 'shero' of the feminists back then. Doesn't matter whether you believe me or not - I was there and I know what went down.

Mr. Bad

mythago said: "Hugo, he's not interested in intellectually honest discussions. It's all about praising MRAs and bashing feminists, and if that means pinging pulledoutofmyass.com, so what?"

Ah yes, the very flower of intellectually honest discussion. Uh huh.

Myth, how old are you? Hugo, I know you're in your 30s. I'm 50-ish. That would make Hugo in his early to mid-20s, myth who-knows-how-old, and me about 40 when John Bobbit had his 'surgery' in 1993. Now I don't know about you guys, but I know that like most people, I was a hell of a lot more aware and savvy when I was 40 than when I was 20-ish, and I was not only around back then, but paying attention to gender issues. And I'm here to tell you that Lorena Bobbitt was a 'shero' of the feminists back then. Doesn't matter whether you believe me or not - I was there and I know what went down.

Jeff

And except for the fact that a statement such as "I don't think feminism has hit the mark" is seen as screeching, misogynistic, preaching of stripping away the rights to vote, hold jobs, and learn to read;

*Where* is this supposed to have happened?

Mr. Bad

mythago said: "Hugo, he's not interested in intellectually honest discussions. It's all about praising MRAs and bashing feminists, and if that means pinging pulledoutofmyass.com, so what?"

Ah yes, the very flower of intellectually honest discussion. Uh huh.

Myth, how old are you? Hugo, I know you're in your 30s. I'm 50-ish. That would make Hugo in his early to mid-20s, myth who-knows-how-old, and me about 40 when John Bobbit had his 'surgery' in 1993. Now I don't know about you guys, but I know that like most people, I was a hell of a lot more aware and savvy when I was 40 than when I was 20-ish, and I was not only around back then, but paying attention to gender issues. And I'm here to tell you that Lorena Bobbitt was a 'shero' of the feminists back then. Doesn't matter whether you believe me or not - I was there and I know what went down.

But back to the thread: You folks are calling Playboy porn? Come on, that's like saying The National Enquirer is news. You people really need to get out more.

Jeff

And except for the fact that a statement such as "I don't think feminism has hit the mark" is seen as screeching, misogynistic, preaching of stripping away the rights to vote, hold jobs, and learn to read;

*Where* is this supposed to have happened?

The Gonzman

You feminists

Now, what was that about 'diversity' and tarring a movement with the same brush, Gonzman?

It isn't - but then again, I don't make those kinds of pleas, either. I figure that since is how ya'll play this game, that's how this game gets played.

It isn't. More explicit, but it's always fascinated me that a 'woman's magazine' puts half-dressed women on the cover.

I don't even think it's that explicit - it's pretty much the male version of a romance novel.

Glitch

but it's always fascinated me that a 'woman's magazine' puts half-dressed women on the cover.

For the same reason many magazines devotes to male fitness put extrodinarily muscular men with 1% body fat on theirs. It's to make you feel inferior and unattractive, so that you're more likely to purchase products being advertised in said magazine.

If you are acutely aware that you look nothing like the model on the cover, and that fact makes you feel unattractive, you're probably more likely to buy push-up bras, expensive cosmetics, etc. that are advertised in the mag. In the same manner, when I glance at a cover of Men's Health, I start wondering if I'm ever going to lose those twenty pounds I put on since college, if perhaps I should spend more time in the gym, if I might look better if I buy that home ab roller for $100 that's on page 52. I'll admit that years of loneliness have given me a nasty inferiority complex, so I've gone to some extrodinary lengths to limit my exposure to advertising. It does wonders for the self esteem.

That's my theory anyway.

Anne

"I don't know what Pandagon you're reading, Hugo. I find hate filled anti-religious diatribes..."

I agree with you about Feministe, Hugo, but I'm with Gonz about Pandagon. Yuck.

Anne

"I don't know what Pandagon you're reading, Hugo. I find hate filled anti-religious diatribes..."

I agree with you about Feministe, Hugo, but I'm with Gonz about Pandagon. Yuck.

Glitch

but it's always fascinated me that a 'woman's magazine' puts half-dressed women on the cover.

For the same reason many magazines devotes to male fitness put extrodinarily muscular men with 1% body fat on theirs. It's to make you feel inferior and unattractive, so that you're more likely to purchase products being advertised in said magazine.

If you are acutely aware that you look nothing like the model on the cover, and that fact makes you feel unattractive, you're probably more likely to buy push-up bras, expensive cosmetics, etc. that are advertised in the mag. In the same manner, when I glance at a cover of Men's Health, I start wondering if I'm ever going to lose those twenty pounds I put on since college, if perhaps I should spend more time in the gym, if I might look better if I buy that home ab roller for $100 that's on page 52. I'll admit that years of loneliness have given me a nasty inferiority complex, so I've gone to some extrodinary lengths to limit my exposure to advertising. It does wonders for the self esteem.

That's my theory anyway.

Anne

"I don't know what Pandagon you're reading, Hugo. I find hate filled anti-religious diatribes, accusations of repressed homosexuality, and all manner of vitriol there."

I agree with you about Feministe, Hugo, but I'm with Gonz about Pandagon. Yuck.

The Gonzman

You feminists

Now, what was that about 'diversity' and tarring a movement with the same brush, Gonzman?

It isn't - but then again, I don't make those kinds of pleas, either. I figure that since is how ya'll play this game, that's how this game gets played.

It isn't. More explicit, but it's always fascinated me that a 'woman's magazine' puts half-dressed women on the cover.

I don't even think it's that explicit - it's pretty much the male version of a romance novel.

And yeah, Q Grrrl - I am saying that. In fact, I think it says a lot more that most men really don't want some demure sexpot who doesn't have anything to offer them besides a roll in the hay - we have them aplenty anymore, & they are not hard to find.

Gonzman

You feminists

Now, what was that about 'diversity' and tarring a movement with the same brush, Gonzman?

It isn't - but then again, I don't make those kinds of pleas, either. I figure that since is how ya'll play this game, that's how this game gets played.

It isn't. More explicit, but it's always fascinated me that a 'woman's magazine' puts half-dressed women on the cover.

I don't even think it's that explicit - it's pretty much the male version of a romance novel.

And yeah, Q Grrrl - I am saying that. In fact, I think it says a lot more that most men really don't want some demure sexpot who doesn't have anything to offer them besides a roll in the hay - we have them aplenty anymore, & they are not hard to find.

Q Grrl

But Gonzman, a picture of woman that is only described as assertive leaves you ultimately with nothing but your hand. So then are you saying that assertiveness is only sexy in fantasy? Or are you saying that the fantasy of demure is dead, men find it boring in the women they know, but yet want to blame the woman for actualizing the sexual fantasy they held 20 years ago? I'm confused also by your acceptance that Playboy represents male heterosexual sexual fantasies but yet it is not considered porn. Is it just a mastubatory aid then? And if it is only that, what is your take on how it represents the common denominator male psyche in this society?

evil_fizz

Re Cosmo and its progeny: I think one could easily level the accusation that these magazines are guilty of the same kinds of sins that Playboy is. Half of Cosmo is about "being empowered", the other half is about pleasing men (sexually, cooking, you name it). It seems to be the same kind of "build them up, smack them down" mentality which gets expressed in the "tough" written descriptions and submissive pictures.

Hugo doesn't go quite this far, but the whole taking someone down a notch sexually reeks to me of a threat to rape. Not an actual, physical threat, but a "I can control you and you are powerless for it" threat. I find it deeply disturbing that such an element gets into these conversations. (That's not as clearly expressed as I would like it to be, but holding rape over someone's head, however metaphorically is what makes me really say "Yuck!")

Patr

Hugo, you said you banned NYMOM but isn't she still here? I thought I saw a post of hers.
Language trends can work for many different reasons. The language used in the magazines now may just reflect how people are speaking at the time.
I would argue that a lot of those women posing for the magazne want the money to do that, the attention, and still would like to be described as tough. The fact is there is an issue of culpability. Men are not intentionally harming 100% innocent women.
As for MRA's, I myself don't care if a woman has a career, etc. I just think women should take individual responsibility for their individual actions.

Thomas

If the MRAs have a link to a forum that better represents them than NG and SYG, we're still waiting for it.

Q Grrl

Patr writes: "The fact is there is an issue of culpability. Men are not intentionally harming 100% innocent women."

So women are responsible for their porn shots, but we dare not suggest taking porn away from men's perusal? And child porn... do you feel the same way? Can't it also be said that the child gets something out of it too, like attention, or money, or toys, or candy? What is the litmus test for innocence? For harm?

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Regular reads

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 01/2004