A Crash Course in Feminism Mk. II (or, why everyone should be a feminist)

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

Fair point. I meant from a player's point of view. If I don't tactics then they drop like a sack of potatoes.

[Gotthammer]

Seemed to be the case though, with the shirt, that some of the affected group felt that it was a problem whereas others didn't. It would seem there is a dividing line between something that is sexist / discriminatory / offensive or demeaning to a group of people as a whole versus something that offends an individual.

As such, can you trust the "person from the affected group" that is offended to separate their own personal feelings about something that has offended them as an individual, and to not take bias from their own sensitivities into making a declaration for their group as a whole?

I find that only listening to people who can detach themselves from their personal feelings to be iffy, as it is often a privilege of those not really suffering to talk of things without it. That's why there's the trope of the "angry feminist" - they're angry because they're sick of dealing with these things and being told to calm down, or that it "must be that time of the month" (fun fact: that time of the month is when a woman's hormone levels are closest to that of a man's).

To answer the issue of some people find it a problem and some don't - well I guess it's common courtesy really. I mean if someone at your family lunch is deathly allergic to garlic that even the smell of it makes them ill you wouldn't cook anything with garlic that day would you? Similarly if you're riding in a car and someone asks you to turn the music down as it's giving them a headache you'd be pretty much an arse not to. Same with wearing a shirt a bunch of people find demeans their gender and highlights the struggles women face to be taken seriously in STEM fields. It seems just common sense to me that in an industry with a massive issue with women covering oneself in pinup girls to advertise your work only proves the point, so why would you do it?



Edit: also it seems a lot of people here are dismissing issues and points raised because you don't like EG's style of rhetoric, which I have to say casts doubt on the whole saying "I support feminism" thing. If it's contingent on your getting along personally with every single feminist it'll never happen. I support amnesty international, but I won't say "I'm not going to support the fight for global freedom and ending torture and abuse of power because this one person on this one forum was kinda sarcastic to me" will I? It comes off sounding like you only support it so long as it doesn't ever force you to examine yourself critically, change your own behaviours or accept that what some people say might not be entirely correct all the time. I mean we're all only human (except EG who we all know is really an AI) so people make mistakes or misspeak or, as I said above, get passionate about issues that really effect them. To dismiss what has been proven, what has been said by people over and over, because of a personal difference "making it hard to support" really makes it seem like you don't support it at all.

[Kirsten]

Basically I looked at the shirt and really don't see the difference between what it represents and either the Dark Eldar or Dark Elves model range. I didn't resort to personally insulting anyone who disagrees with me either. It's funny how the most liberal are also the most willing to resort to name calling.

- - - Updated - - -



So instead of trying to win the debate and win over and maybe educate those you feel aren't completely on board with your ideals, you would prefer they just stfu ? How's the world going to change with that attitude ?
This attitude is everything that's wrong with this thread. You guys would obviously like it restricted to just posters who only agree with exactly what yourselves are saying ?
It's funny in the "real world" I'm one of the most liberal people I know. But in here ? Ha different kettle of fish.

but you frequently do however, you dismiss EG as hysterical and nonsensical and complain about what she says on a regular basis.

Animal cruelty is as much an issue as feminism, and f*ck you for demeaning it.

seriously? just go start an animal cruelty thread and stop bringing up ****ing irrelevant bull****. nobody at any point has stated that animal rights are unimportant, nobody has demeaned them in any way. they are very clearly not relevant to a thread about feminism, you are just trying to muddy the waters and distract the topic because you have nothing to add.

I was gunna ignore this one, but it's been two days now...

First off, Eldargal, your opinion on Animal Rights is just plain wrong. The fact an animal cannot say, "I am oppressed," is not a means to deny that Animal Rights is an important thing. In fact, the fact they can't talk to us is the most important part - it's compassion for less intelligent beings that don't possess our cognitive problem solving abilities to escape it.

Secondly, you seem to be constructing a hierarchy of who is allowed to discuss an issue. If I were to invite a black lady here, would she be allowed free reign of the conversation with no-one allowed to interject, because she would be both a person of colour and female, and thus incredibly oppressed?

Firstly, no her opinion is not 'wrong' because she has not expressed any kind of anti animal sentiments at any point, that is just something you have imagined. animal rights and womens rights are not the same, they are not comparable issues. all that has happened is that EG has stated that an apple is not the same as a banana, and you have gone 'omg what have you got against bananas? how can you hate bananas that is terrible'

it is not a question of a hierarchy of opinion. the scientist with the lady shirt is an expert in his field, I don't tell him that he is wrong about space probes and comets because he knows far more than I do. women know a lot more about harassment than men, because we live it every day, it is, unfortunately, our field of expertise.

as far as the shirt and GW art, the guy is on national TV, he is the face of a major event, and should have given a little bit more thought to what he was wearing. as a few other people have said, something more formal might have been sensible. I am not terribly offended by the shirt, I know he didn't mean it, but as Gott says, common courtesy would be to have not worn it for a public event. as it is, he acknowledged that immediately and he apologised, and good for him.

[Psychosplodge]

I don't think its comparable to something that has a physical effect on someone.
From what I've seen its only the professionally offended ology crowd that seem bothered. Has any female from the field criticised him? or expressed any opinion publicly?

[URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/11234620/Dr-Matt-Taylors-shirt-made-me-cry-too-with-rage-at-his-abusers.html"]Boris[/URL] has waded in now...

[Kirsten]

well I don't know who has made a big deal of it, none of us here did, we said, bad choice of a shirt, he thought so too, he apologised, fair play.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

I hate bananas, they taste awful.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, I am aware that EG hunts, so your point about her never having been cruel to animals is moot.

[Gotthammer]

Atlantic tech writer Rose Eveleth: "No no women are toooootally welcome in our community, just ask the dude in this shirt."

Astrophysicist Katie Mack: "I don't care what scientists wear. But a shirt featuring women in lingerie isn't appropriate for a broadcast if you care about women in science.”

[Kirsten]

Also, I am aware that EG hunts, so your point about her never having been cruel to animals is moot.

first, I didn't say she was never cruel to animals, I said she has never stated that animal rights are not important. second, hunting animals does not automatically mean you are cruel, it depends on the method.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

I don't want to be hunted, that would be sh*t. I'm sure animals don't appreciate it either.

Anyway, I'm done for the day here. It's like charging a brick wall.

[-Tom-]

I find that only listening to people who can detach themselves from their personal feelings to be iffy, as it is often a privilege of those not really suffering to talk of things without it. That's why there's the trope of the "angry feminist" - they're angry because they're sick of dealing with these things and being told to calm down, or that it "must be that time of the month" (fun fact: that time of the month is when a woman's hormone levels are closest to that of a man's).

To answer the issue of some people find it a problem and some don't - well I guess it's common courtesy really. I mean if someone at your family lunch is deathly allergic to garlic that even the smell of it makes them ill you wouldn't cook anything with garlic that day would you? Similarly if you're riding in a car and someone asks you to turn the music down as it's giving them a headache you'd be pretty much an arse not to. Same with wearing a shirt a bunch of people find demeans their gender and highlights the struggles women face to be taken seriously in STEM fields. It seems just common sense to me that in an industry with a massive issue with women covering oneself in pinup girls to advertise your work only proves the point, so why would you do it?



Edit: also it seems a lot of people here are dismissing issues and points raised because you don't like EG's style of rhetoric, which I have to say casts doubt on the whole saying "I support feminism" thing. If it's contingent on your getting along personally with every single feminist it'll never happen. I support amnesty international, but I won't say "I'm not going to support the fight for global freedom and ending torture and abuse of power because this one person on this one forum was kinda sarcastic to me" will I? It comes off sounding like you only support it so long as it doesn't ever force you to examine yourself critically, change your own behaviours or accept that what some people say might not be entirely correct all the time. I mean we're all only human (except EG who we all know is really an AI) so people make mistakes or misspeak or, as I said above, get passionate about issues that really effect them. To dismiss what has been proven, what has been said by people over and over, because of a personal difference "making it hard to support" really makes it seem like you don't support it at all.

Fair point on the family dinner garlic situation. Although, to expand the metaphor, what if you were having a large BBQ party, inviting over, say, 30 friends. One couple are vegetarians on moral grounds. Would you make the whole BBQ vegetarian, or provide vegetarian options? What if it was a 50/50 split in the guests instead? What if it was reversed so that there were only 2 meat eaters there? Should your choice of whether to get a couple of steaks just for those 2 meat eaters depend on how vocally they'd complain if there wasn't any meat?

Then, the problem of something causing offence is a little more intangible than something causing deathly harm through allergies, which is why I changed it to vegetarianism on moral grounds. People are offended by all kinds of things, and to continue from last post are the relative number important. Can you say something is discriminatory if 25% of the group allegedly being discriminated against feel it is so? Or does it need to be 50% or higher? Or, is 5% or 10% a significant enough percentage?

I think I can see the point EG was trying to make. I think she made it poorly, such that it can be easily misinterpreted. However, if she were to make a comment that riled me up, it would only offend me on behalf of her, not on behalf of women, nor Eldar players, nor any other sub group of people that she may be a member of.