persephone said:
I clarified my earlier post on page 3, 5 posts down. If nothing else, check out the hilarious image in the spoiler.BiscuitTrouser said:
Anita Sarkeesian states that sexism against men is impossible
- Thread starter Lightknight
- Start date
So Anita said something ignorant and oversimplistic. Wow this is new.
Many definitions of sexism tend to downplay the sexism men face. In fact, sexism has historically had a female bias (in feminist theory many examples of "sexism against men" is regarded as "benevolent sexism towards women").
It's an approach that does more harm than good. It's nothing new.
Can we just disregard Feminist Frequency and allow them to rot in the annals of history along with fundies saying Pokemon and Harry Potter are demonic and Jack Thompson saying that video games cause more violence than guns?
Many definitions of sexism tend to downplay the sexism men face. In fact, sexism has historically had a female bias (in feminist theory many examples of "sexism against men" is regarded as "benevolent sexism towards women").
It's an approach that does more harm than good. It's nothing new.
Can we just disregard Feminist Frequency and allow them to rot in the annals of history along with fundies saying Pokemon and Harry Potter are demonic and Jack Thompson saying that video games cause more violence than guns?
Again, there is more than one of those. You can say in the theories of certain forms of feminism, but there's no monolithic whole.DizzyChuggernaut said:
Oh but you don't understand! The topic's title has "Anita Sarkeesian" in it! That therefor means that it must get a couple hundred responses and numerous multi-person arguments! Despite the fact that the internet is comprised of random jackasses braying mindlessly at one another, we're supposed to actually care about what this particular random jackass has to say. Why? Because "reasons".madwarper said:
OT: Seriously, is there going to be a topic every time Anita opens her mouth? How has this not gotten old and crusty by now? Ahhh, Sarkeesian...the (mindless/pointless) controversy that just keeps on giving.
And before all you social psychos jump on my case, I'm all for gender equality in games. I just don't like Anita as a spokesperson nor the methods she employs or her questionable credibility. I also dislike the attention that we as a community keep throwing at her...particularly those that out-right hate her.
Given that this is in response to something she said almost a month ago that we've already discussed on the forum...yes.RJ 17 said:
OTOH...why not? Let's all each go pick one tweet she's made, and make a thread about it. Turn this into the Sarkeesian forum and be done with it.
I'm hoping you understand what I mean when I refer to "feminist theory". Like any kind of theory, there are aspects that form the basis that ends up being built upon in further iterations. I'm not attempting to discredit feminism, "benevolent sexism" is a legitimate idea that forms the basis of a lot of feminist literature.thaluikhain said:
I mean we have "music theory", but we also have many different forms of music and the fundamentals of music theory is what is used to identify and characterise certain features. But just because "music theory" exists, doesn't mean everyone has to follow it. The same with "feminist theory". I'm sure there's plenty of disagreement but in terms of the collective feminist literature, you'll see certain ideas recur such as patriarchy, androcentrism, male gaze, glass ceiling etc.
I am not even against the idea of "benevolent sexism", however I find the gynocentrism of a lot of gender discussion to be harmful (which is my main point, really).
Well, if the sensible ones stopped calling themselves feminists and started calling themselves egalitarians (you know, people who actually want equal rights and opportunities for everyone), maybe there would be a distinction between people I can have a decent talk with and hypocrites.MeatMachine said:
That's about par for the course with the Escapist; one big issue dominates for a year or two then it's all change.IceForce said:
How many people are going to say they don't want equal rights and opportunities for everyone, if you don't ask them to specify who that everyone is? Sure, there'd be some, but a minority, I think.GundamSentinel said:
Saying it is one thing. Actually having opinions on practical situations that match it is quite another.thaluikhain said:
Anita is a living breathing straw man, super easy to attack her arguments because they are often totally brain dead. We can keep focusing on the crazy ones and keep making ourselves look ignant as fuck, or we can have real discussions. We cannot do both.
Hell we might as well dig up something like oh i don't know, this crazy radical feminist who thinks all men should be placed in solitary confinement, and then decry feminism as evil based on it, makes just as much sense. Although give her some hits if you want, its super good for an afternoon laugh, she also thinks all sex is rape and all women have some kind of latent super powers that men are holding back.
(http://witchwind.wordpress.com/2014/10/07/utopia-what-would-a-womens-society-look-like/)
I do not know why, but i love finding the most crazy people i can and reading their tripe, I am currently on a search for the most crazy MRA I can find.
Hell we might as well dig up something like oh i don't know, this crazy radical feminist who thinks all men should be placed in solitary confinement, and then decry feminism as evil based on it, makes just as much sense. Although give her some hits if you want, its super good for an afternoon laugh, she also thinks all sex is rape and all women have some kind of latent super powers that men are holding back.
(http://witchwind.wordpress.com/2014/10/07/utopia-what-would-a-womens-society-look-like/)
I do not know why, but i love finding the most crazy people i can and reading their tripe, I am currently on a search for the most crazy MRA I can find.
Happyninja42 said:
I am in the army right now. Every female I see is either not a soldier or has a higher grade than me. Women in certain areas have it so easy she can't even imagine. Same thing can be said about men in other areas.
As for video games, if sexism against men doesn't exist, I expect her to explain to me how almost every male character in games today has a six pack and pecks that you can grind cheese on.
As for video games, if sexism against men doesn't exist, I expect her to explain to me how almost every male character in games today has a six pack and pecks that you can grind cheese on.
Male power fantasy, I wish i could grind cheese on my nipples. Although i doubt i would eat it afterward. Also, grinding cheese as a concept intrigues me what would you grind it into, perhaps a different type of cheese?katsabas said:
Powdered cheese that you can sprinkle on top of certain meals.Reasonable Atheist said:
But yeah, the men in those games are male fantasies, the same way the women in those games tend to be male fantasies of a different type.
To be fair my best friend Elyse loves it when their are shirtless ripped men in her games.... but she also loves it when their are big wacky titties in her games. So there is that.thaluikhain said:
First off, that particular tweet, which I posted mostly because it was funny, was a guy talking about Ferguson saying that, and this is a direct quote, "black people are the most racist of all" because someone called him names. He was directly comparing being murdered to being made fun of and concluding that he had it worse.WhiteNachos said:
Second, the concept you are referring to is known as the fallacy of relative privation [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_relative_privation], and it doesn't really apply here. An example of the fallacy would be telling a man who was sexually assaulted by a woman to stop whining because that kind of thing happens to women all the time. It is not an example of the fallacy to devote more resources to protecting women than men, when women are statistically at greater risk. Here's a fun illustration:
Context. It's not that men never fear women, but in general, what is your biggest worry when, say, meeting someone you found through an online dating site in person for the first time? For a man, it's usually that he'll be embarrassed or she'll reject him. For a woman, it's usually that he might rape or murder her.
Name one man born after 1960 who was actually drafted into the US military. If it really hurts men, I'm sure you can find some men born in the past half century that it actually hurts.WhiteNachos said:
Even if we used her definition of the word, she'd still be wrong.Zeconte said:
Under her definition a men only draft is sexism against men, the fact that men get longer sentences than women for the same crimes is sexism against men. Airlines having policies where they won't sit unaccompanied children next to men for fear of being pedophiles is sexism against men. If a woman boss targeted their male employees that would be sexism against men.
It doesn't help that her definition of the word is objectively wrong.