Top 10 feminist fiascoes

[Underseer]

Ah, don't you love it?

Conservolibertarians point to a few extreme cases in order to argue "...and therefore feminism is wrong and you should stop complaining about the stuff we do to women."

If we were to come up with a "top ten" list for people who oppose feminism, do you think we could keep the list down to just ten? Could we keep the list below 100? If we follow your own logic, shouldn't we therefore conclude that the anti-feminists are far more wrong than the feminists?

Or will you use a special pleading fallacy to wriggle out of this?

 

[Underseer]

Here's a top ten list covering only the specific case of anti-woman violence that involves stuffing women into refrigerators:

http://www.toplessrobot.com/2008/06/the_10_worst_women_in_refridgerators_ie_cases_of_v.php

That's just the cases of anti-feminists doing horrible things to women with refrigerators. Just imagine what a more complete list would look like. Should we not conclude that all anti-feminists are wrong and that their arguments should be summarily dismissed? No. We should dismiss the arguments of anti-feminists because of the whole "rape to those who say we are misogynist" thing. It's not only evil, but incredibly, eye-gougingly stupid.

 

[Emily Lake]

I think women should have equal rights and opportunities to men. However, I do not see how banning certain clothing or joking among employees would accomplish that. I.e. I do not see why women should be seen as "measure of all things" when it comes to what is appropriate in the workplace.

I would like to suggest that you step outside of yourself for a little bit. It's very difficult for any human to do, but please give it a try.

Think about how you're treated on this website, where almost everything you post is dismissed out of hand. Where almost any point you try to make is immediately assumed to be sexist, regardless of whether that's what you're trying to say or not. I imagine that most of the time you feel like you get the short end of the stick, right? Like the well is poisoned? Now imagine that this is your workplace. And imagine that instead of it being anonymous people on the internet, it's people that you have to work with, day in and day out. And imagine if you were frequently and constantly overhearing jokes about "Derec" and "Guys like Derec". Jokes that continued to push the same viewpoint of all Derecs being misogynists and sexists. Jokes that were dismissive and offensive to Derecs, and that had punchlines that implied that Guys like Derec were less human, less deserving of fair treatment and respect than "normal people".

How would that make you feel? Would that make you feel like you worked in a fair environment, where you would get equal treatment? Or would it make you feel like your workplace was hostile and uninviting, and a constant place of harassment and ridicule to you?

 

[Emily Lake]

Or take advertisements. Feminists often complain that ads that eroticize women are "sexist". They do not have similar complaints about ads that eroticize men. Neither do they complain about actual sexism (I do not consider eroticization to be sexist) in commercials, for example the usual portrayal of men as bumbling idiots who have to shown by their wives how to do even the simplest household tasks.

Actually, a lot of us do complain about them. I complain about the bumbling-idiot-man commercials, although I know that logically the intent is to show an intelligent capable female for a change. I also complain about the hyper-sexualized men in ads, as well as women. Both portray unattainable ideals of sexuality and body image that are really superficial and in my opinion damaging. Unfortunately, humans are animals, and sex is a magnificent motivator. Sex sells. You don't see as much in the way of sexualized men in ads for women, mostly because at the animal level women are attracted to wealth, security, and capability more than to outward trappings of male eroticism. Virility and sexual attractiveness for women is a more complex thing that includes many more attributes than solely physical indicators.

 

[Toni]

Ah, don't you love it?

Conservolibertarians point to a few extreme cases in order to argue "...and therefore feminism is wrong and you should stop complaining about the stuff we do to women."

If we were to come up with a "top ten" list for people who oppose feminism, do you think we could keep the list down to just ten? Could we keep the list below 100? If we follow your own logic, shouldn't we therefore conclude that the anti-feminists are far more wrong than the feminists?

Or will you use a special pleading fallacy to wriggle out of this?

More like special phallus pleading.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Donglegate? You refer to these things like they were 9/11 or the bombing of Pearl Harbor.

It's the name commonly given to the incident.

That is what I'm talking about. You have a name for it. You refer to the incident like it is a significant event. A day that will live in infamy. I have no fucking clue what "Donglegate" is.

 

[ksen]

The image on the book cover depicts sexist representations of both the man and the woman. One difference between the book cover and the tshirt is that a book cover can be easily hidden behind another book cover to avoid offending anyone or betraying one's lower brow tastes in literature. The tshirt is being worn as work attire and more than that, is being worn by someone representing his employer in a public and official capacity. This is starkly diffetent than what one chooses to read on break but my employer would have a serious problem with employees reading material openly with such depictions as on the book cover.

If that shirt were worn under a sweater for example or if the same images were on this man's underwear, no one would have a reason to care.

As it is, he chose a garmet which should not be worn to most work places and certainly not to represent NASA in any official or public capacity. This lack of good judgement should warrant a stern reprimand from his supervisor. Worn at say, the mall? Who cares?

The other issue is how much of an issue is gender equity at NASA? What is the culture? Do all people feel welcome and respected or just straight white males.

The culture at NASA is unlikely to influence the shirt selection choices of people working at the ESA.

What is it with Americans, do you really have so much trouble grasping the fact that you are not the only people with a space program?

yes

 

[AthenaAwakened]

The culture at NASA is unlikely to influence the shirt selection choices of people working at the ESA.

What is it with Americans, do you really have so much trouble grasping the fact that you are not the only people?

FIFY

 

[ZiprHead]

Here's a top ten list covering only the specific case of anti-woman violence that involves stuffing women into refrigerators:

http://www.toplessrobot.com/2008/06/the_10_worst_women_in_refridgerators_ie_cases_of_v.php

That's just the cases of anti-feminists doing horrible things to women with refrigerators. Just imagine what a more complete list would look like. Should we not conclude that all anti-feminists are wrong and that their arguments should be summarily dismissed? No. We should dismiss the arguments of anti-feminists because of the whole "rape to those who say we are misogynist" thing. It's not only evil, but incredibly, eye-gougingly stupid.

Hey, if it makes them stay in the kitchen...

 

[Davka]

The culture at NASA is unlikely to influence the shirt selection choices of people working at the ESA.

What is it with Americans, do you really have so much trouble grasping the fact that you are not the only people?

FIFY

"you must spread some reputation around..."

 

[Derec]

(delete)

 

[Derec]

Actually, a lot of us do complain about them. I complain about the bumbling-idiot-man commercials, although I know that logically the intent is to show an intelligent capable female for a change.

For a change? That's all you see in commercials.

I also complain about the hyper-sexualized men in ads, as well as women. Both portray unattainable ideals of sexuality and body image that are really superficial and in my opinion damaging.

I think it's fine, for both genders.

Unfortunately, humans are animals, and sex is a magnificent motivator. Sex sells.

No "unfortunately" about it. I just think feminists need to lighten up. They can be as bad as religious fundies.

You don't see as much in the way of sexualized men in ads for women, mostly because at the animal level women are attracted to wealth, security, and capability more than to outward trappings of male eroticism. Virility and sexual attractiveness for women is a more complex thing that includes many more attributes than solely physical indicators.

So all those commercials with bare-chested men with six-backs are all aimed at gay men? Is the woman having a "crisis" in the grocery store aisle over a drain cleaner just a decoy?
But I guess men are more visual than women, on average. Men and women are different. Which makes the feminist complaints about male sexuality all the more stupid because they want men to stop being men basically.

 

[Derec]

That is what I'm talking about. You have a name for it. You refer to the incident like it is a significant event. A day that will live in infamy.

The incident might not be significant in itself, but it is if it leads to this kind of hypersensitive, zero tolerance, attitude spreads. And the fact that these policies are spread by an organization (ADA) founded for that express purpose makes such a spread more likely.

I have no fucking clue what "Donglegate" is.

Two male attendees at a tech conference (on Python) told each other a joke about dongles. A female busybody attendee named Adria Richards overheard them and complained about the joke on Twitter which led to one of the male attendees being fired. As a consolation, Adria got fired herself as well though.

 

[Derec]

Think about how you're treated on this website, where almost everything you post is dismissed out of hand. Where almost any point you try to make is immediately assumed to be sexist, regardless of whether that's what you're trying to say or not. I imagine that most of the time you feel like you get the short end of the stick, right? Like the well is poisoned?

Right. But that is the intolerance of so-called "liberalism" to anybody who disagrees with their sacred cows, especially things like "white privilege" or "male privilege" and are reacting in a hostile manner to anybody who challenges those articles of faith.

Now imagine that this is your workplace. And imagine that instead of it being anonymous people on the internet, it's people that you have to work with, day in and day out. And imagine if you were frequently and constantly overhearing jokes about "Derec" and "Guys like Derec". Jokes that continued to push the same viewpoint of all Derecs being misogynists and sexists. Jokes that were dismissive and offensive to Derecs, and that had punchlines that implied that Guys like Derec were less human, less deserving of fair treatment and respect than "normal people".

I do not think men should be jerks to women in the workplace. But the same should apply to women coming into male dominated industries. When they try to force to sterilize the culture and make "woman the measure of all things" then the pendulum has swung too far. It should be a compromise, a give and take, not one side having to accommodate the other unilaterally. A workplace dominated by men will tend to have a different culture than one dominated by women. A woman working in tech (or as a firefighter or a cop) should not expect everybody to cater to her wants any more than a man working as a nurse or elementary school teacher should expect the same.

How would that make you feel? Would that make you feel like you worked in a fair environment, where you would get equal treatment? Or would it make you feel like your workplace was hostile and uninviting, and a constant place of harassment and ridicule to you?

There is a danger of making workplace hostile and uninviting to men by making the rules too strict. Donglegate is a perfect example of such an overreaction, which is why I brought it up.

 

[Derec]

So you see that the images are eroticised sexual fantasy - that's good.
Can you see how a woman might feel uncomfortable in a workplace where men felt free to wear such images?

Perhaps. The question is, how sensitive should workplaces be to employees being offended by stuff?

Sure they do. Feminists dislike objectification of humans, period. It's just that the objections to objectified male fantasy-figures don't get as much press.

Well I have never heard high profile feminists complain about a commercial featuring some hot guy with a sixpack. Or do you have any link that says otherwise?
Generally though, men tend to be more visual than women. So we are more attracted to visual representations of the female form than vice versa, on average. And feminists just need to lighten up about so-called "objectification".

The feminists I've talked to (at length, since most of my friends are feminists) are equally annoyed by those things.

That's not progress. They should be equally "unannoyed" about both.

However, the creation of a work environment which accepts the open display of erotic female images is most definitely sexist. Such an environment is deeply uncomfortable and off-putting to most women. Most men, on the other hand, are either OK with it or simply don't notice. When an environment is disturbing and even threatening to one gender but not the other, that environment is inherently sexist.

Depends on various factors but I think overall we have gone way overboard on hypersensitivity. And usually in just one direction. No females are getting fired because they talk about 50 shades or something within the earshot of a male employee.

And yes, that also goes for environments in which men are made to feel threatened and uncomfortable but women are not. But the truth is that woman-unfriendly environments are far more common than man-unfriendly environments, and STEM workplaces are extremely likely to be the former.

I would say that a hypersensitive work environment where male employees have to weigh every word lest they offend some new PC standard is in itself a man-unfriendly environment.

 

[Metaphor]

Here's a top ten list covering only the specific case of anti-woman violence that involves stuffing women into refrigerators:

http://www.toplessrobot.com/2008/06/the_10_worst_women_in_refridgerators_ie_cases_of_v.php

That's just the cases of anti-feminists doing horrible things to women with refrigerators.

Not, it's not. It's a list of violent things that have happened to female characters in comic books, and only one item on the list involves a refrigerator.

The comic books were not written by 'anti-feminists' (unless you know each author to be one) nor does depicting violence against women in comic books mean you're a misogynist.

My goodness, if you're going to tally up all the violence done to characters in comic books, by gender, male characters are going to 'win' that tally.

 

[Davka]

I would say that a hypersensitive work environment where male employees have to weigh every word lest they offend some new PC standard is in itself a man-unfriendly environment.

It's also extremely rare, compared to the number of woman-unfriendly workplace environments.

 

[maxparrish]

This is the shirt in question. While it can be argued that a shirt like that is not professional enough for a public appearance like that no matter the subject matter (say cars or planes or Star Wars) I fail to see how it's "sexist" or "demeaning".

Well, then, can we try looking at it from a different direction?

Do you agree that the images on the shirt are essentially hyper-sexualized male fantasies, rather than accurate depictions of women? In other words, can you see that these cartoon versions of women are intended to be at least partially erotic, just as similar cartoons of men with rippling muscles are intended to be partially erotic?

To me, there's no real difference between the pics on the shirt and the cover of a standard "chick-lit" bodice-ripper such as this one:

Do you see the similarity?

Oh yes, I see the similarity! Those insulting and demeaning male fantasies on that shirt that are sexist look exactly like the erotic and seductive images created by women.

Olivia De Berardinis - perhaps the most famous since Vargas and currently Playboys artist in residence:

Jennifer Janesko

Mabel Rollins Harris

Bunny Yeager

Joyce Ballantyne Brand

The difference is, of course, these women artists don't have the hangups of fembot feminists.

 

[maxparrish]

Now compare the forgoing to the Bond Girl Fabric used for the shirt:

Pretty tame stuff.

 

[Toni]

Well, then, can we try looking at it from a different direction?

Do you agree that the images i. on the shirt are essentially hyper-sexualized male fantasies, rather than accurate depictions of women? In other words, can you see that these cartoon versions of women are intended to be at least partially erotic, just as similar cartoons of men with rippling muscles are intended to be partially erotic?

To me, there's no real difference between the pics on the shirt and the cover of a standard "chick-lit" bodice-ripper such as this one:

Do you see the similarity?

Oh yes, I see the similarity! Those insulting and demeaning male fantasies on that shirt that are sexist look exactly like the erotic and seductive images created by women.

Olivia De Berardinis - perhaps the most famous since Vargas and currently Playboys artist in residence:

Jennifer Janesko

Mabel Rollins Harris

Bunny Yeager

Joyce Ballantyne Brand

The difference is, of course, these women artists don't have the hangups of fembot feminists.

No, the difference is context.

Do you have any idea which artist designed the graphics on the fabric of the shirt in question?