Why I Wear Princess Leia's Metal Slave Bikini

[Scow2]

So a family-oriented company deciding to retire a decades old outfit that fetishizes slavery from production apropos of no real pressuring from the public is "censorship" and anyone who dares think that the slave Leia outfit is anything but the most sacrosanct assortment of female-empowering fabric is a "counterfeit feminist"? Combined with an allusion to more serious issues, references to chastity-obsessed morality police, and cries of what about the mens! Someone's got an audience they want to pander to and the poor, cookie-cutter arguments to match!

If you think there's no pressure from the public, you must be socially deaf. Also - can you prove you're not just as disingenuous in stating your opinion as you feel she is in hers?

 

[crimson5pheonix]

No, I think I got another word wrong. I thought "disingenuous" meant "insincere".

Oh, and who actually used that word before you came in?

You're right, I jumped to conclusions. I saw your statement that she was pandering with a cookie-cutter argument and took it to mean that you don't think she believes the views that she espouses.

Of course,

But you definitely did say she was pandering.

Well, she just so happens to be expressing a number of views that all appeal to a certain group of people that she and the site she works for love appealing to, but you're right. It's wrong to make assumptions that people who are paid to write articles want their articles to attract attention from an intended audience.

Yes, as it turns out, feminism is about telling someone with bad, disingenuous arguments that they're wrong when they call anyone with a different opinion of a particular outfit a counterfeit feminist and rely on little more than what amounts to a checklist of anti-feminist rhetoric to support it. That she's a woman just means that we use feminine pronouns when addressing her.

I feel that my assumption is well founded. But in any case, this has been a big misunderstanding. Since I have clearly misunderstood feminism, I suppose it's only right that we discount her opinion since we can operate on the assumption that she doesn't believe what she writes. We can do so because she disagrees with certain feminists apparently. My bad.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

You're right, I jumped to conclusions. I saw your statement that she was pandering with a cookie-cutter argument and took it to mean that you don't think she believes the views that she espouses.

Don't worry about it, it's quite common amongst people desperate to take issue with something despite not having some tangible thing to actually take issue with.

But in any case, this has been a big misunderstanding. Since I have clearly misunderstood feminism, I suppose it's only right that we discount her opinion since we can operate on the assumption that she doesn't believe what she writes. We can do so because she disagrees with certain feminists apparently. My bad.

We could also discount her opinion because she supports it with your typical assortment of bad anti-feminist rhetoric that only really convinces people who were already thoroughly entrenched in the idea of some shadow group of morality enforcing counterfeit feminists (wearing police hats!). That's what I'd like to do. Though, I imagine that makes it harder for you to continue this disingenuous thing you're doing where you ignore what people actually say in favor of going on about nonsense. It must be horribly inconvenient for you and I feel just terrible about putting you through such a thing.

Well one thing I certainly feel horrible about is that, apparently in addition to not knowing the definitions of certain words, I was also incorrect about you even using those words in your posts that I quoted you using them in.

I suppose that means that I'm not actually reading you using "disingenuous" in this post that I'm quoting?

Does that also mean that I'm not seeing you saying (paraphrase) "we should discount the opinions of people who strenuously disagree with certain feminists"?

 

[ThatOtherGirl]

If you think there's no pressure from the public, you must be socially deaf. Also - can you prove you're not just as disingenuous in stating your opinion as you feel she is in hers?

Show me the sort of public pressure that could get a massive corporation to do something. Preferably something that is recent and can actually be linked to this. Where's the hashtagtwittertumblrmob that supposedly is responsible for this?

There has been a fairly significant wave of pressure coming from parents over the past year and a half on the slave Leia issue. It's been much talked about and very well covered, I'm surprised you haven't noticed it, seeing how much you seem to care about feminism.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

snip

Alright, enough being cute.

Spoiler: Things you've said

A bunch of people telling a woman that her opinion is bad or wrong or disingenuous. Is this what feminists are going on about?

Yes, as it turns out, feminism is about telling someone with bad, disingenuous arguments that they're wrong when they call anyone with a different opinion of a particular outfit a counterfeit feminist and rely on little more than what amounts to a checklist of anti-feminist rhetoric to support it. That she's a woman just means that we use feminine pronouns when addressing her.

So a family-oriented company deciding to retire a decades old outfit that fetishizes slavery from production apropos of no real pressuring from the public is "censorship" and anyone who dares think that the slave Leia outfit is anything but the most sacrosanct assortment of female-empowering fabric is a "counterfeit feminist"? Combined with an allusion to more serious issues, references to chastity-obsessed morality police, and cries of what about the mens! Someone's got an audience they want to pander to and the poor, cookie-cutter arguments to match!

You're right, I jumped to conclusions. I saw your statement that she was pandering with a cookie-cutter argument and took it to mean that you don't think she believes the views that she espouses.

Don't worry about it, it's quite common amongst people desperate to take issue with something despite not having some tangible thing to actually take issue with.

But in any case, this has been a big misunderstanding. Since I have clearly misunderstood feminism, I suppose it's only right that we discount her opinion since we can operate on the assumption that she doesn't believe what she writes. We can do so because she disagrees with certain feminists apparently. My bad.

We could also discount her opinion because she supports it with your typical assortment of bad anti-feminist rhetoric that only really convinces people who were already thoroughly entrenched in the idea of some shadow group of morality enforcing counterfeit feminists (wearing police hats!). That's what I'd like to do. Though, I imagine that makes it harder for you to continue this disingenuous thing you're doing where you ignore what people actually say in favor of going on about nonsense. It must be horribly inconvenient for you and I feel just terrible about putting you through such a thing.

You HAVE said that she's pandering. You HAVE said that she's disingenuous. You HAVE said that her opinion can be ignored. What we can INFER is that you do not believe that people can legitimately hold on to a view counter to yours. You do not believe a woman can hold on to this opinion unless it was for money. This is what counterfeit feminism is. Your argument is not a constructive one. It's not even an innocent disagreement. It's a destructive contradiction based on the idea that she is inherently wrong. It is the argument that women should only hold certain opinions, or at least that they can't hold certain other opinions. It is not the argument that advances female empowerment or equality, it's the argument that stratifies women into "right" or "wrong".

If that's not what you meant to say, you should find a different way to say what you mean.

If you want to say you didn't say what I quoted, deal with your own conscience.

 

[Scow2]

If you think there's no pressure from the public, you must be socially deaf. Also - can you prove you're not just as disingenuous in stating your opinion as you feel she is in hers?

Show me the sort of public pressure that could get a massive corporation to do something. Preferably something that is recent and can actually be linked to this.

... that's not the sort of pressure we're talking about. It's not some easily-dismissed Internet Outrage Phenomenon that can be linked to through easily-ignored twitter hashtags and similar tizzying stupidity. It's the overall 'background noise' on how women are supposed to be depicted in media, going on all over the place. It's social pressure - such as that of the atmosphere or white noise, not social force, like a hammer. Not that I disagree with Disney's decision to end an unhealthy obsession over the costume.

So... I guess we are showing by having this conversation in the first place.

Something I have a problem with in discussions of feminism (and this is an "External baggage" thing, not wholly related to this particular conversation) is when avoiding sexually-objectifying women moves from that to shaming and suppressing the female form. This came up in the Stormtrooper commander's armor. Stormtrooper men wear boobplate armor that reflects the underlying anatomy. Why don't stormtrooper women? This is a common thing in discussion of sci-fi/fantasy armors. (It doesn't help that some idiots think women have dicks over their ribcage instead of chests)

 

[Callate]

(Checks watch)...So, everybody convinced that their opposites are irredeemable in their ignorance, malicious in their intent, cemented in their closed-mindedness, and that they were fully justified in their preconceptions again?

I mean, if you really feel that a metal bikini is the fulcrum on which so much rides that it's necessary to become incandescently ballistic about it, being either the final straw before the world slides into either feminist tyranny or the universal acceptance of female slavery, far be it from me to stand in your way.

But if those ideas seem, perhaps, the tiniest bit hyperbolic, maybe you could grant those who disagree with you the slightest shred of humanity, perhaps even try to find some common ground? Make actual progress? Expand some horizons?

Look, I'm not claiming to be above this kind of thing, or that I've never gotten overly heated in an argument that wasn't worth the trouble. But to see this kind of spite and sneering, just outside the boundaries of the terms of use, over and over again, doesn't convince me of the peerless enlightenment and unassailable goodness of anyone participating. It just makes me tired.

 

[ThatOtherGirl]

Well one thing I certainly feel horrible about is that, apparently in addition to not knowing the definitions of certain words, I was also incorrect about you even using those words in your posts that I quoted you using them in.

I suppose that means that I'm not actually reading you using "disingenuous" in this post that I'm quoting?

Does that also mean that I'm not seeing you saying (paraphrase) "we should discount the opinions of people who strenuously disagree with certain feminists"?

Like I said, don't worry about it. We all make mistakes in our attempts at blindly charging forward at those evil people who think that a woman might be wrong and be using crappy arguments, especially when they're criticizing counterfeit feminists while said crappy arguments are little more than a copy of what anti-feminists would write.

...Well, not "all," really. More like some, with some grammatical workings to make it fit.

Though if you'd like, I could change the description of your recent posts from disingenuous to just blindly ignorant of what other people are actually writing. Those are really the only two options when I write "I think the author's wrong because her arguments are bad" and you come away with this whole thing of yours.

There has been a fairly significant wave of pressure coming from parents over the past year and a half on the slave Leia issue. It's been much talked about and very well covered, I'm surprised you haven't noticed it, seeing how much you seem to care about feminism.

And I'm surprised that if it was such a fairly significant wave of pressure that has been much talked about and very well covered, you decided to commit the cardinal sin of telling rather than showing. Because it seems like the latter would be really easy to do.

A cardinal sin? Wow, that's a bit over dramatic. I have no interest in forum sparing with you. Just thought you might want to know your ignorance of the issue was showing. You could just google it. I mean, if it was really something you were interested in beyond simply winning the argument at hand you would end up doing that anyway.

 

[Scow2]

I'm not sure how anything she said could be construed as Anti-feminist, aside from a snipe at people who seek to use "feminism' to deprive women of control over their own lives and bodies.

 

[Scow2]

I'm glad the new armor is consistent, but your dismissal of the female figure as 'stupid' is what I'm talking about.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

snip

Spoiler: If you didn't think those were horrible charges, why did you try saying that you didn't say them?

No, it's okay. I just got feminism wrong. I thought it was about equality and empowerment. I was further confused by other people in the thread disagreeing with her without having to say that she's only pandering and doesn't actually believe what she's saying.

Well considering you think feminism is bowing to the opinions of any woman who uses words as if she were an infallible prophet of truth, I'd say you definitely got feminism wrong. You also seem to be imagining people writing words they haven't actually written, so your confusion makes sense.

Spoiler: If you think people can legitimately hold a counter position, why do you immediately assume she doesn't hold her opinion?

So a family-oriented company deciding to retire a decades old outfit that fetishizes slavery from production apropos of no real pressuring from the public is "censorship" and anyone who dares think that the slave Leia outfit is anything but the most sacrosanct assortment of female-empowering fabric is a "counterfeit feminist"? Combined with an allusion to more serious issues, references to chastity-obsessed morality police, and cries of what about the mens! Someone's got an audience they want to pander to and the poor, cookie-cutter arguments to match!

And do you not see the problem with just assuming somebody shouldn't be listened to because you disagree with them? Do you not see the problem with just assuming a woman doesn't believe their own opinion? Isn't that what modern feminists have been talking about?

 

[crimson5pheonix]

If you didn't think those were horrible charges, why did you try saying that you didn't say them?

Why did I say that I didn't say she doesn't believe what she wrote? Mostly because I didn't. At least, from what I can tell, but you clearly see the truth of existence where I say the words that you ascribe to me.

If you think people can legitimately hold a counter position, why do you immediately assume she doesn't hold her opinion?

I immediately assumed she was pandering, which I guess in your mind that's intent on semantics despite not being very good at it means that I accused her of not really holding that opinion. It's a shame that you can easily pander while holding the opinion you're pandering too. I have no problem believing that Milo Yiannopoulas believes the vile bullshit that streams from his throat even if everything he says is pandering to the scum who read what he writes.

A bunch of people telling a woman that her opinion is bad or wrong or disingenuous. Is this what feminists are going on about?

Yes, as it turns out, feminism is about telling someone with bad, disingenuous arguments that they're wrong when they call anyone with a different opinion of a particular outfit a counterfeit feminist and rely on little more than what amounts to a checklist of anti-feminist rhetoric to support it. That she's a woman just means that we use feminine pronouns when addressing her.

Previous posts aside, I do actually know the meaning of disingenuous. I can read and comprehend your posts. Since you are denying up and down that you've said this, I suggested that you change the way you type.

And do you not see the problem with just assuming somebody shouldn't be listened to because you disagree with them? Do you not see the problem with just assuming a woman doesn't believe their own opinion? Isn't that what modern feminists have been talking about?

Except she was listened to. That's the thing you constantly brush over in your attempts to act as though I've just dismissed her out of hand for disagreeing with me. I listened to her and found her arguments to be terrible and unconvincing. But then I don't actually expect much from you at this point since you've once again decided that not thinking that this one particular woman's argument was shit and that she's pandering (especially through her word choice) to a certain audience means that I think that every woman doesn't believe their own opinion.

That doesn't change that your argument is poor and thinks less of women.