Friends With Benefits Request

dio001 isn’t really looking for anything serious right now, but if you’re interested, you two could just mess around or whatever.

“I hadn’t played on my PS3 for over a month so I decided to get on a game. 30 minutes into playing and I get a friend request. I opened it, read it, and thought, ‘This is exactly why I avoided my PS3 for so long.’”

dio001

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

    Perfect reply? “Balls or GTFO.”

  • http://blogs.got-rave.com/sputter sputtertoo

    Soooooo THIS! ^^

  • Anonymous

    I’d be worried that he’d only find that encouraging.

  • Harmondale2

    ugh.. this is why I usually stick to PC games, or away from multiplayer in general

  • alex Mattos

    If you avoid games because of them is their win. This is a problem with everyone being anonymous on games or the internet. When someone starts being a troll I just ignore or mute.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     Nah, most of them are really insecure. And if he does then its that much easier to get a ban in place.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     And thats unfortunate, cuz there are LOTS of great console/multiplayer games out there. You shouldn’t have to hide *says the woman who never uses a mike* >_>

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     And if you are the target then thats a good way to go, but if you see it happening to others its important to challenge the troll, otherways a permissiveness for harassment and hate develops in that society/group.

  • alex Mattos

    I would say to ignore the troll. I think its the rule right?
    Do not feed the Troll.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     Except the rule only encourages people who are there to specifically harass certain groups. See, if they don’t get challenged, then it creates an atmosphere of tolerance to hate and das no gut.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3xxE_KPdoY

  • Anonymous

    ^ Exactly this. It’s in the best interest of the one being harassed to automatically block/ignore/report the harassing individual. Those around though need to at least say something before doing the same. If left unchecked, the person won’t get any better, and others could see no repercussions coming to him/her, and decide to start harassing others as well. The communities need to show that these actions aren’t wanted and are not considered at all cool. Or else they devolve into the infamous hives of villany that are XBL, LoL, etc.

  • Anonymous

    “And if he does then its that much easier to get a ban in place.”

    Is it a bannable offense if it’s asked for?  In fact, couldn’t “balls or GTFO” get you reported? Hrm.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

    Uh huh. It usually takes a lot for a person to actually get banned. Pics work better then text. No pornographic images are allowed to be transmitted on XBL. Its a gaming community not a dating site. I guess it could be a little mean to trap a person like that, but really–its harassment to begin with so you gatta respond with a weapon that work. Ban their IP.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     *is sad cuz I’m on XBL*

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ezequiel-Barisov/100004279624217 Ezequiel Barisov

    And I thought this happened in XBL most of the time? This is fucking sad. No wonder male gamers have a bad rep with sexism.

  • Adam Bragg

    I’m simply stunned by this occurrence.  I know this happens, but still I just don’t understand it.  Just why would someone even think to send such a message?  To what end?  Did they expect you to reply with, “Sure!  Tell me where to book my flight and I’ll be there as soon as modern airline technology can grant!  I hope your pole is slick, cause I’m about to dance on it!”  I mean really!  My fictitious response is obviously over the top and somewhat offensive to read, but that’s my point.  Outside of a patently ridiculous and implausible response like that, what is even the point of asking a random person if they “wanna fuck?”.

    On a side-tangent, when you were playing the online game, what was your username?  Was it obviously feminine like “gamergirl” or something?  I don’t actually care what your username is so much as I’m wondering what clued the obnoxious turd to even suspect you were a woman?  Not that going by a feminine handle justifies the act in any way, I’m just wondering what the trigger point might have been.

  • Anonymous

    I’d think some people like dio001 would ask this because while he knows there’s an impracticality to actual sexual contact, it communicates his desire for base, relationship-less sexual stimulation.  If anyone responds positively to the request, then I’m sure they’d be up for mutual masturbation over a camera, or other similar activities.

    I think other people do it because they think they’re funny and/or brave (they aren’t).

    Others do it, I think, as a form of domination.  It’s about going out there and being brazenly disrespectful to someone, just to show that they’re willing to be disrespectful to them.

    There could be other motivations, I’m sure, but I think I hit on most likely reasons.

    —-

    Sometimes it’s the name, sometimes it’s the voice on the mic, sometimes it’s information gleaned from the profile.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     Its a quick way to reduce the conversation to gender (same thing happens in with race or nationality when somebody wants to be hateful about it). By making it a sexual thing, he is trying to make her feel self-conscious…she is no longer a part of the gaming community. She is now an ‘other’. an object. Its no different then calling her a bunch of dirty gender-related words.

    Also, I know you were talking to the OP, but my gamertag is DeathbyDD (cuz I work hospice with terminally ill folks). So its not a ‘I’m a gurrl!’ tag and I don’t use voicechat. I text only. Still I play as fem characters and my friends DO speak to me over voicechat in response to my texts. So short of being chased out of online games, its pretty much impossible to hide your gender. ^_^

  • WhyleKat

    Although I find it hard to believe that this kind of behavior is really limited to consoles, I think it really depends what games you’re playing. 

     Like all aspects of life,  different types of people congregate around different events and what not, obviously.  I’m really curious as to what game she was playing. 
    I’ve personally heard women and flamboyant sounding men get ripped up over chat during Halo, Gears of War, CoD, Battlefield, and some various racing titles.  But I’ve never been witness to the same type of behavior during Left 4 Dead or Red Dead Redemption or even Mass Effect multiplayer. 

    Of course it sucks for anyone, man or woman, to have to resort to avoiding specific games (or even establishments) based solely on the clientele.. I often rack my brain on what any other options might be.  I sadly can not think of very many… =

  • WhyleKat

    I’m with DeathbyDD on that.. F those lowlifes.. Banning them is not at all excessive.  If it comes to the point where their account actually got banned, then they definitely deserved it!

  • WhyleKat

    You’re not alone in your bewilderment.  It constantly blows my mind that people actually behave that way and I can’t for the life of me even begin to understand what they’re trying to get out of it.  Like I’ve said many times on this site before, I think they can’t possibly say any of this with hope of a positive response.. They’re just using words to try and stir the preverbial pot and/or specifically hurt or anger someone.  The reasons for this type of behavior are rarely justified. 

  • WhyleKat

    Is it so simple tho?  Is it the same as the group of guys “cat calling” the woman as she walks by?  Or the way some dudes crane their necks around while driving just to get one last glimpse of that woman walking around the corner? 

    I think it takes a very “special” type of person to even approach any aspect of life with that sort of mentality.  I personally know plenty of people like that in the real world and I really struggle to understand how they think any of that kinda of behavior or talk is OK or mature… And even more so when that jerk behavior actually scores them one for the night. 

    *sigh* I fear it’s a part of society that I’ll never understand…

  • WhyleKat

    I’ve been curious.. Do you mainly game with Randoms/Strangers?  I ask because recently that’s something I’ll rarely to almost never do anymore.  And I often think about how the online gaming scene is so much different from when it first started.

    I have 6-8 gamer friends that I’ve known for almost 20 years, so that’s my gaming crew.  Whether it’s a simple 4-player co-op or big Battlefield games, there’s usually enough of us to fill a room or at least take it over. 

    But behavior like what’s on this site (and of course any racist or queer-hating behavior) really makes me disgusted when I hear it (to the point where I no longer want to play).  So I specifially won’t load up Battlefield or Halo unless I have all my actual friends online and available to game.

    I mean maybe I’m just the guy in his the 30′s shouting “those damn kids!”  Because I remember when online gaming meant me plus 5 others are all carrying our PC Desktops or Xbox and TVs to a rich friend’s house with lots of space to plug them all in and have epic LAN sessions.  So obviously nothing there but friendly trash talk…  
    But I really feel like it’s a real problem of society these days… Only not nearly enough people care because Video Games are still in their respective teenage years and it’s rarely taken seriously. But no matter how you slice it, It’s def a problem and shouldn’t be tolerated. Not by the victim or the people listening in during big chat games. None of us should have to deal with it on any level.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     Well sure it depends what games you play (and as far as I know, console isn’t any worse/better then pc). The more competitive a game, the more butt-hurt boys will get over the ‘dishonor’ of losing to a *gasp!* girl!? Where as if its a more cooperative mode like Mass Effect 3 and L4D multiplayer, they will likely instead try to hit on you, which isn’t really much better then being hated on. That said, there are quite a few dudes who are fans of both genres who just don’t care, and only talk in relation to your play. Those are the gamers that I am most happy to share a chat or screen with. ^_^
    As far as ‘what can be done!?’, it easy! If people challenge harassment wherever they see it, it will marginalize the misogynist. However, if you just listen in and do nothing, then it only builds a more hate-saturated community. So…its all up to us–da players!

    PS: I usually have a friend or two in a group with me and we usually get matched up on the same team (against another team). But occasionally we are short a person and get a random person in there *shrug*

  • Anonymous

    I found this hilarious!

  • http://twitter.com/replaycache replaycache

    Is this site making fun of mentally handicapped men ? Yes at a certain point a person is considered retarded and this site is making fun of sexually retarded men.They are stuck in the 12 to 14 years of age behavior they can’t help it, that’s the last time they spoke to a female. Making fun of them will not work quite the opposite they need help.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     Most of these woman-hating dudes are probably married and are hardly an online minority, no matter how much people would like to think they are just a handful of teenagers or social outcasts. They are every-day people–which is pretty scary, ya know? So much anger simmering just behind the surface.

  • Anonymous

    I think there’s a chance you’re just being ironic, but, in case you aren’t…

    As a social retard, I’m quite sensitive to how they can be poorly treated.  Still, some decorum is needed when interacting with other people, be they male or female, online or in the real world.  This site isn’t about punishing people as much as it is about shining a light on a problem. Everyone can learn from that:

    Even if it doesn’t cure their handicaps, it may at least shame them into not making others uncomfortable.It can serve as warning to others who might absent-mindedly slip into similar behavior.
    Others can see how much of a problem it is, and encourage them to support those suffering from it.And more!And, for the most part, unless the person featured is being an overbearing asshole, the folks here tend to only make fun of what they say, not the person themselves.

    “Most of these woman-hating dudes are probably married and are hardly an online minority, no matter how much people would like to think they are just a handful of teenagers or social outcasts.”

    “Probably married”?  I’ll have to think on this some more, but my gut reaction is to disagree.  ”Hardly an online minority”? Really? You think most of the dudes you encounter online hate women?  It seems to me that they’re a very vocal minority.  I mean, look at all the repeat offenders here at FUoS.  Assuming that the repeat offenders weren’t being targeted, the chances of randomly encountering the same shitheads is staggeringly minuscule  unless that pool of shitheads is fairly small.That’s not to say it isn’t a problem.  You don’t need a whole lot of black mold in your house for it to be intolerable.

    “They are every-day people–which is pretty scary, ya know? So much anger simmering just behind the surface.”

    Everyday people don’t act like this.  To me, it just goes to show how weak and chickenshit they actually are.I wouldn’t think there’s much anger simmering under the surface of many people.  Much of what I see here at FUoS isn’t anger, but button pushing.  And then there are people who get angry when they lose, but that’s pretty normal (it’s just that the folks featured here express themselves horridly).You seem to paint a picture where society is a minefield of people a single-word-away from snapping and stabbing someone in the throat.  That’s needless fear.

  • Anonymous

    @DeathbyDD:disqus, sorry, I meant to tag you in that last post.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     Sweetie, I’m OKAY with you believing whatever you like. The stats on world-wide violence against women speak for themselves. I’m pretty durned privileged living in the country that I live. Most other places in the Middle East aren’t so fem-friendly as mine. But ya know, I’m gunna go ahead and stand behind what I said. I’m glad you’re a cup half full kind of dude. Looking on the bright side is IMPORTANT. But some might call what you’re saying as being wishful or even turning a blind eye to a symptom of a much more serious problem. I personally dont take time out of my day to seek people out and call them dirty f*cking c*nts because I’m bored. If I did, it’d be safe to say I had deeper feelings toward a group of people and those people’s sex than just being bored. No. Me? I’m just here to laugh it off. ^_^

  • Anonymous

    “The stats on world-wide violence against women speak for themselves.”

    The world-wide violence statistics are heavily weighted is areas that don’t participate in online misogyny.  It isn’t a Somali guy trying belittle women during matches of CoD.  And if it IS a Somali guy, then you and I have no chance of running into him on the street.  He wouldn’t be an every-day person to us.

    It makes no sense to speak of global violence against women when we’re talking about online misogynists.  Huge numbers of women are in incredible danger essentially every day of their lives.  And to try and equate some shithead saying “fuck me?” with rape-being-used-as-weapon-of-war or gender-selective abortions (or outright slaying of female babies) is kinda disrespectful to the women who actually suffer and live in terror of real threats.

    Online misogyny is a first-world problem.  That isn’t to say it isn’t a problem– I’m very passionate about many first-world problems.  I just think that we’d be more unpersuasive to the undecided or apathetic if we keep some perspective.

    “I’m pretty durned privileged living in the country that I live. Most other places in the Middle East aren’t so fem-friendly as mine.”

    Actually, I’ve been wondering about that.  When you play online, what kinds of folk do you get match with?  Do you play with gamers throughout the Middle East?  Is it mostly Israeli players?  Do they lump you with Europe?  Or do you tend to play in a global field?

    “But some might call what you’re saying as being wishful or even turning a blind eye to a symptom of a much more serious problem.”

    And I think that’s a very valid criticism.  This is something that I worry about, and I try to take time question myself.  I also try to immerse myself in various perspectives, with a particular desire to find opinions that seem to counter my own.How often do you question your beliefs?

    “ I personally dont take time out of my day to seek people out and call them dirty f*cking c*nts because I’m bored. If I did, it’d be safe to say I had deeper feelings toward a group of people and those people’s sex than just being bored.”

    Then I guess you really don’t understand what drives a troll.  There’s a joy in it, similar to setting off a firework.  With little effort, you create extreme kinesis– a grand spectacle of high energy and even danger.  They light a fuse with a “fucking cunt” and they’re rewarded with a reaction of angry outbursts and/or tearful disconnect.  The paradox in this is that while they’re looking to exploit people’s emotions, they rarely recognize the humanity of the person they’re trolling.  I think for many trolls, if they really understood how what they did affected them, they would stop.  I think that the ones who wouldn’t stop are unhappy in their lives and want to see others as miserable as they are.

    In either case, these people are parasites.  They are selfish and prey on others and their willful ignorance towards understanding the effects of their actions on others is no excuse.  Still, while they are clearly cretins, there’s no reason to assume there’s a deeper meaning to it.  They’re just weak creatures who succumb to their id.

    Which is why, for the majority of the cases, the best response is just to not feed the troll.

    I’ll also go out of my way to say that not all people are “just trolls”, and I fully believe that there are true misogynists out there (and even featured at this site).  I’ll also say that that I was speaking in general terms about trolls, and not every troll will completely fit into what I just described.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

    (I’ll try to not make this a wall of text)

    It makes perfect sense to speak of the overall problem when talking about misogynist of any kind (online or off). Why wouldn’t it? How else can one identify the symptoms and the underlying problems both and then properly address the specific issue? You can’t. You have to give subtext. What happens online isn’t in some random sphere of existence, it is the extension of people in the world.

    ‘Every day’ people are the ones who precipitate the violence. To ignore that is to spread ignorance and is shying away from source problem discussions and THAT is whats disrespectful.  They aren’t all wearing purple capes and mwuahahahaing in a tall dark spikey tower somewhat reminiscent of a phallus, a ‘phallus palace’, if you will. They are just people, which means everyone is capable of it, which also means that everyone who hasn’t participated in it has made a conscious choice not to, and thats the bit thats real important. Its about a magical rapist demon, but People who can choose to be mean or nice to other sentient beings. So having a discussion about it is maybe kinda heavy for this site but still spot-on in my view and I got nuthin’ to be ashamed of for doing it.

    How often do I question my beliefs? Well I don’t really think I have an established, specific set that I took time to sit down and think about like a Commandments list or something, but I hear new stuff every day. I have a general affirmation of who and what I am and what and who I am that personification with, so I guess maybe that counts. Anyway, when I work with my patients they are from all sorts of religions and philosophies and hold all sorts of opinions, and its literally my job to find a way to help them reconcile any regrets they have before they die. So…I basically have to adopt their philosophies, at least for a while. ^_^

    Trolls? Trolls try to get a reaction out of you. They can even be pretty funny! Then there are the folks who get labeled ‘trolls’ but R-E-A-L-L-Y they just hate jews/women/gays etc and want to run them out of every space they find those people occupying. Ignoring those kind of ‘trolls’ only breeds a tolerance for their kind of hate-speech and is uncool. I think I already shared a NEAT little vid with you that talked about how challenging those trolls is important if you are not the person that is being attacked. 

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     Oh and I mostly get matched in online games with Americans, the British, the French, and the Japanese. ^_^

  • Anonymous

    “It makes perfect sense to speak of the overall problem when talking about misogynist of any kind (online or off). Why wouldn’t it?”

    Because misogyny is cultural.  Adjustments in one culture doesn’t magically change other cultures.  The people who commit acts of misogyny and those who suffer from it online are in a completely different culture than most of the people who commit profane acts of cruelty against women in an unimaginable scale.

    Keeping women from driving and voting in Saudi Arabia is not the reason why a shithead feels okay by spewing misogynistic vitriol online.  A shithead spewing misogynistic vitriol online is not the reason why women are kept from driving and voting in Saudi Arabia.  While these issues have similar themes and maybe even similar solutions, they are not the same problem. They are similar (except in scale) but separate problems.

    Using world-wide violence statistics to make predictions about local violence makes about as much sense as my following analogy:

    You and a stranger come into the hospital with dog bites on your hands.  Assuming that if a dog bites once, it will bite again, you lead Animal Control folk to the dog that bit you.  Animal Control takes it away to be rehabilitated, and seemingly by your logic, the other dog who bit the stranger’s hand will also be rehabilitated, even though they’re completely separate dogs.

    Now I’ll extend this analogy to try and show why it doesn’t make sense to me to use world-wide violence statistics to make people take action on online misogyny:

    Your dog bite sucks and you’ll need some stitches and probably some penicillin, but truthfully, you’re just as likely to heal without any medical assistance.  The stranger’s dog bite ended up mangling the stranger’s whole arm, and the stranger will need immediate surgery or risk bleeding-out.

    You then go to Animal Control and tell of the dog that bit you and how it needs to be captured and rehabilitated.  As they listen to your story, they realized that they know of the dog your talking about.  The dog is well loved by the neighborhood it lives in, though no one specifically owns the dog.  It is a nice dog, but it’s very skittish around strangers, and it is known to snap at people on occasion.  Animal Control have tried picking up the dog before, but the neighbors hide the dog until AC has to go.  AC has no authority to kick down doors looking for the dog.

    Seeing how Animal Control isn’t moved into action by your situation, you then tell the story of The Stranger, and how a dog almost killed The Stranger.  Animal Control informs you that they also know of this dog.  It terrorizes the community it lives in.  Unfortunately, the dog lives outside the jurisdiction of this particular Animal Control unit.  And the area that the dog lives in has no Animal Control unit.

    And then you’re like, “Soooo…”.  And they’re like, “‘Sooooo’, what?”  And you’re like, “Aren’t you going to get the dog that bit me?”  And they’re like, “We told you, we can’t get to it because people hide him.”  And then you’re like, “But that other dog mangled The Stranger!”  And they’re like, “Wait, what?”  And you’re like, “Since the other dog mangled the stranger, you need to capture the dog that bit me!”  And they’re like, “Seriously?  ….Listen, we’d like to give that dog the help it needs, but we don’t have the time to spend a week to capture one dog. There are many other animals that need to be controlled.  Just stay away from the dog and you’ll be fine.”  And then you’re like, “I can’t believe you’ll let that dog go free when other dogs are nearly killing people”.
    “The dog that bit you isn’t the dog that’s mauling people”
    “But it could be.”
    “There’s no reason to think that.”
    “It bit me, just as the other dog bit The Stranger.”
    “That’s technically true, since they’re both dogs and they used their mouths to injure humans, but the scale and circumstances are completely different!”
    *scoff*”You’re promoting a culture of animal on human violence!”
    *gobsmacked*”I spend many of my waking hours keeping animals from harming humans.  I… I don’t know what else to say.”

    End scene.

    I may have gotten a little carried away there.

    I don’t want to sound like I’m trivializing or dismissing your opinions, but, looking back, I’m not sure I can make a strong argument of it.  Still, please believe me.  All I’m trying to convey is how much it makes no sense to talk about world-wide violence statistics when talking about specific cultures.

    I hope making the analogy as I did will help you see it as I do.  And, hopefully this will either allow you to agree with me, OR it will help you reiterate your opinion in a way I can reconcile it.

    “How else can one identify the symptoms and the underlying problems both and then properly address the specific issue? You can’t. ”

    You seem to think misogyny comes from a single source.  The only way I can see that happening is if male biology inherently drives them to be misogynistic.  You don’t think that, do you?

    “‘Every day’ people are the ones who precipitate the violence.”

    And I’m saying that the ones who precipitate the violence only look like every-day people.  The every-day person– the average American man– doesn’t hurt women.  Yes, there are bound to be some wolves in sheepskin, but as long as we’re cautious, there’s no reason to think we’ll get hurt.

    “reminiscent of a phallus, a ‘phallus palace’, if you will.”

    Hahahaha!

    “They are just people, which means everyone is capable of it, which also means that everyone who hasn’t participated in it has made a conscious choice not to, and thats the bit thats real important.”

    There’s much truth in this, but I believe that there are plenty of people (maybe just as much) who’s personality is so aligned with cooperation and good will that it never occurs to them to act that way.

    It’s like the psychopath test:  You tell a person that while at a funeral they happen to meet the love of their life.  This person is a niece/nephew of the person who died.  In spite of the strange setting the two make a real connection.  However, afterwards, they realize that they never exchange contact information.  You ask the person how would they go about contacting this person.

    Non-psychopaths don’t come up with this answer: Kill a sibling of the person’s funeral you attended.

    On the flip side, there are people out there who couldn’t conceive of a way of being nice or passive could get them what they want, without external help.

    People’s personalities will blind them to different options.

    Still, your point is well taken, there are plenty of folk who needs to spend a good deal of willpower on being a decent human being.

    “So having a discussion about it is maybe kinda heavy for this site but still spot-on in my view and I got nuthin’ to be ashamed of for doing it.”

    If my opinion matters to you, I want you to know that I also feel like you’ve got nothing to be ashamed about.

    “Well I don’t really think I have an established, specific set that I took time to sit down and think about like a Commandments list or something, but I hear new stuff every day.”

    Okay. When’s the last time you thought, “Well, maybe Patriarchy (as defined as a system where all real power lays with men and at the expense women) doesn’t conform with all the evidence, and perhaps, my belief in the Patriarchy stems from selective sampling of observations, which is exacerbated by my tendency to surround myself with others who already support this belief.”

    And I’m not trying to say that The Patriarchy, as I described it, doesn’t exist. I’m just uneasy how many people take it as The Truth.  That it is something that cannot be questioned, and if you do, you’re a misogynist pig!  Feminists say that they want equality, but as long as they believe in The Patriarchy, their quest for equality only takes shape in dismantling the parts they feel constitute it.  And if The Patriarchy doesn’t exist, what will the feminist efforts accomplish? I’m not sure, but there’s no good reason to think that they’ll get the outcome they say they want.

    I just want to see more skepticism.  In everyone.

    “ Ignoring those kind of ‘trolls’ only breeds a tolerance for their kind of hate-speech and is uncool.”

    I agree.  And I don’t consider these people trolls.  It just seems fair to assume someone is a “mere” troll until they demonstrate a pattern indicative of hate (such as spending a great deal of energy to upset someone).

    I tried leave room in my explanation for who didn’t fit in it, but I guess I failed at that.  Still, my point was that, on this site, I see less examples of clear misogyny than I see examples of folks just being shitty people.

    And, yeah, I’ve seen you post that video twice before.  I like it and it gave me something to consider when I watched it.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     Hmm. Well thats a really nice story. Way to get all excited about this issue! <3
    So to use your lovely analogy, I would campaign about safer dog laws in ALL neighborhoods, not just about MY problem, and if people agree with me, then it takes off, if people believe there isn't a problem in their particular neighborhoods (even though statistically there definitely is) then they'll ignore it and nothing will change (however small their particular problem may have been). BUT if enough people care to realize that every third person they know has been a victim of dog-on-woman violence and it DOES take off, then other neighborhoods that were previously resistant to the changes will look at their neighboring areas and see that they are the odd-man out, highlighting them as problem area and make them feel (international) pressure to acquiesce to what is seen by people who support my movement as something thats inexorably needed in all areas of da hood.
    Still, I see the humanity and our world as a whole, not as stand-alone
    cultures (although the world is certainly comprised of these cultures).
    So when I look at an issue like gender-hate, I connect it to gender
    violence as a whole (since it exists to varying degrees of social
    tolerance in EVERY culture). Since raising awareness about one culture
    that may have it worse where I/friends may or may not have any influence
    seems like micromanaging, I prefer to use the broad strokes and perhaps
    touch many people all at once that can then internalize my general
    grief into their own personal knowledge of it. You see? Its a way to
    communicate in a way thats um…multilingual. ^_^

    No I don't think men are biologically driven to be hateful. I do think its very important to identify common factors. And I do know that men are the perpetrators of gender-violence (along with plenty of females who have internalized their oppression support/make excuses for those actions). See, its important to reach the male audience thats willing to be reasonable. The problem is that reasonable people seldom take the time to campaign stuff (as in an example of your country where the 'loony rednecks' or 'liberal crazies' are the ones who are heard the most–they have the most passion about what they feel is right. For instance if the religious zealot feels that abortion is the new Holocaust, he is going to have a whole lot more passion to write and call his democratically elected representatives than a guy who just plain disagrees with him, because that second person is reasonable and reasonable people tend to not like to make waves. Which in the long run, is why people who are angry get so loud a voice. So the only way to make change is to make decent people angry/motivated.

    I'm glad you feel you, as an American man, have no reason to fear being hurt. ^_^

    Of course there are plenty of good people! I think more than people who wanna be mean. But you see, just 'existing' isn't enough to stop mean people from acting. Apathy kills. What was that saying? "All it takes is for good men/women to do nuthin'". Also, in my medical experience, not all psychopaths are at all violent. And those that are understand enough about human emotion to know how to lie.

    Thanks! *HUGGLEZ!*

    Well there are several definitions of patriarchy that I have heard. The one that sounds most correct to my maybe-not-so-logical-brain is the one that says Patriarchy (as defined in the negative) creates entrenched social gender roles that oppress men and women both. Women moreso because while men are oppressed they still hold the reins that determine the tides of power and tribal decision. But to really quantify your question you have to determine what Feminism is too. I like the one that says it advocates equality for ALL but recognizes the existence of Patriarchy (in the negative) that prevents that social equality (for men to be what they want and for women to be what they want too, all without fear of persecution).
    Whether Patriarchy exists or not? Having just thought about those two definitions, I'd say 'ABSOLUTELY' and 'It's a Shame'. Also most people that I hang out with/are my patients don't concern themselves with either of the above things, so I don't think I'm 'surrounded' by people who take them as a given.

    The thing is that, all we get on this site are snippets of these other people's ('trolls') lives. There really is no telling (for the most part) how much energy they pour into this. I can see the sammich jokes being an effort at funny trolling. But the detailed or even the short and to the point detalings of why women are just c*** or whatnot don't seem like something you would hear out of a person who doesn't feel some manner of emotion about the subject. Still, you are right, its safest not to assume. ^_^

  • http://www.inklesspen.com Jon Rosebaugh

    You seem to be using the term “patriarchy” as if it were thought to be a grand conspiracy, such as the Illuminati, organized for the purpose of keeping men down and women up. It’s actually much more like Anonymous, or even the flu and the common cold.

    Anonymous is defined by whoever wants to be Anonymous; its motives are the motives of whoever says he or she is a member of Anonymous; its actions are the actions of whoever identifies as Anonymous. It’s decentralized and anarchic, but it does tend to rally around certain causes in opposition to certain other groups. Of course, this analogy is flawed, because while people may explicitly choose to identify with Anonymous, people will rarely choose to identify with “the patriarchy”.

    Flu and cold viruses are varied, and constantly changing. That’s one of the reasons you need to get a flu shot every year; there’s hundreds of viruses in the flu family and each shot only covers against the ones thought to be widely spread this year. And that’s why there’s no cure for the common cold; there’s over 200 virus types which produce similar symptoms. We don’t say “oh, you have this one particular virus, you must have the cold.” We say “You have these common cold symptoms, and you don’t have any symptoms of something more serious, so it’s most likely just the cold and will blow over in a few days.” It’s a name we’ve given to the symptoms more than anything else, because the symptoms are the phenomena we experience.

    In the same way, feminism recognizes that there are many cultural differences in the world, and vastly many personal experiences. Even though cultures have differences, there are also common threads; you will find kings in societies on every continent, from Montezuma of the Aztecs to Mansa Musa of Mali. You also find many societal constructs which give relatively more power to men than to women, and which give men power over the women in their lives. These constructs are present to lesser or greater levels; among the Iroquois, family and inheritance was/is matrilineal, while the book of Numbers in the Bible provides that Israelite daughters inherit only if a man has no sons.

    Sometimes these constructs are not explicitly encoded in law; for example, among some parts of American society there is a belief that if a woman was wearing revealing clothing and was subsequently raped, she was “asking for it”; this is certainly not established in the US Code, but it is a common enough belief that it will affect how law enforcement investigate crimes, how prosecutors prosecute crimes, and how judges and juries try crimes.

    All of this to say, there are a collection of symptoms in western society which work to place women within a certain sphere of society and place men within a different sphere. Feminism finds it convenient to label these symptoms as “patriarchy”, because by and large they work to elevate masculinity and male persons above femininity and female persons.

    There are certainly cases where patriarchy works to limit males as well; the average man in American society would attract ridicule for wearing a skirt or other traditional feminine attire, and may be mocked for entering traditionally female occupations such as nursing. However, in these instances, I think you’ll find that this is still an aspect of femininity being viewed as inferior; the male is being mocked for taking on aspects which society has coded as female.

    So patriarchy is no unified system of oppression; it’s simply a name given to a common experience.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     WOW! Now see there, Ogre? That there is why I don’t feel right identifying myself as a feminist. This Jon fellow, like my little brother, is WAAAAAAAAY more educated and motivated on the subject then me. I’m just like ‘tra-la-la!” while they’re all like “KABLAH!” XD

  • Anonymous

    “ I prefer to use the broad strokes and perhaps touch many people all at once that can then internalize my general grief into their own personal knowledge of it. You see? Its a way to communicate in a way thats um…multilingual. ^_^”

    Hm. Maybe.

    And while there’s cross-cultural influence when we export good and entertainment, as well as exposure to the internet, that doesn’t always have the effect we want.

    Some people see it and say, “Look, we don’t have to live this way– there’s a better way!”  Other say, “Look at how terrible their society is!  We must be vigilant to never become like them!”

    “And I do know that men are the perpetrators of gender-violence (along with plenty of females who have internalized their oppression support/make excuses for those actions).”

    Whoa, are you saying that violent females are only violent because males made them that way?

    “. The problem is that reasonable people seldom take the time to campaign stuff”

    Ain’t that the truth!

    “Which in the long run, is why people who are angry get so loud a voice.”

    Again, an unfortunate truth!

    “So the only way to make change is to make decent people angry/motivated.”

    I agree that the only way to make change is to get enough people to break from their apathy, but I disagree that anger is the only motivation.  In fact, I think using anger to motivate people is dangerous and lazy.  It isn’t hard to make people angry.  It can be pretty difficult to control people when they’re angry.  Look at all the brown people killed right after 9/11.  Self-identifying feminists go to extremes in their anger, too, and MRA’s love enshrining various comments and videos of women who call for the reduction of the male population (to about 10% of the total population) through means of selective abortions, if not outright murder.

    Inequity is cancer in our global society.  A surgeon is not angry when removing cancer.  A surgeon takes deliberate, precise and calm actions when removing cancer.

    “I’m glad you feel you, as an American man, have no reason to fear being hurt. ^_^”

    Heh, hold on– you phrased that in a loaded way.  The reason I don’t fear being hurt isn’t because I’m an American male; it’s because I make decisions to minimize my risk.  The other half of it is that I don’t let my fear control me.  I let it warn me of potential dangers, but I make the assessment if it’s warranted.  And, again, even if my fear is valid, I don’t make decisions solely based on removing the fear.

    “But you see, just ‘existing’ isn’t enough to stop mean people from acting. Apathy kills.”

    True dat!

    “Also, in my medical experience, not all psychopaths are at all violent.”

    I know. In fact, I’ve heard 1 in 4 CEOs are psychopaths.

    “And those that are understand enough about human emotion to know how to lie.”

    I’ve heard that it’s kind of a coin toss.  Some psychopaths are really good at manipulating people people because their empathy doesn’t get in the way.  But there are just as many that can’t do it just because they don’t “get” people.

    “Also most people that I hang out with/are my patients don’t concern themselves with either of the above things, so I don’t think I’m ‘surrounded’ by people who take them as a given.”

    The people I work with don’t directly influence my social attitudes either, though I spend a whole lot of time with them. On FB, you seem to link to many things that have a feminist bent.  You spend a whole lot of time here, too.  And while FUoS isn’t explicitly feminist, it supports feminist viewpoints by gathering examples of misogyny.  And you reference your feminist “Little Brother” pretty often.

    Also, you quickly dismissed that one lady by saying she’s internalized her oppression and that it sounded like she was reading from a MRM script.  All of that together makes me think that you might be a little selective about who you choose to “surround yourself” with.  It’s all about to how open to other ideas are you– particularly, if they contradict your own.

    And please don’t think that I think that all these examples paint a full picture of who you are.

    “ I can see the sammich jokes being an effort at funny trolling.”

    I wouldn’t go as far as to say it’s funny.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t have time to give a full response right now, but you’ve given me some things to think about.  I’ll elaborate later.

  • http://www.inklesspen.com Jon Rosebaugh

    “And I do know that men are the perpetrators of gender-violence (along with plenty of females who have internalized their oppression support/make excuses for those actions).”
    Whoa, are you saying that violent females are only violent because males made them that way?

    No, that’s not what “internalized their oppression” means. It means that the woman learns to accept the abuse she receives as natural, or an ordinary part of the relationship. This is a woman who says she’s clumsy and walked into a door, when in fact her boyfriend hit her, or a woman who claims that the hit was justified because she screwed up dinner, or a woman who views the man as the authority figure in the relationship.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     Hey thanks, Jon! ^_^

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     I don’t understand what your argument is. To..not communicate? We just both agreed that change is needed to move humanity forward. The people causing the problems and the people perpetrating those problems because that is all they know will obviously get angry when faced with a movement to stop their violence.

    No. I am talking specifically about indoctrination and gender oppression, not naturally aggressive people.

    Yep. ^_^

    Uh-huh.

    I am coorelating anger with motivation, meaning it is used in a positive. People NEED to feel passion. You are talking about hate. Not what I am trying to say. Just leave out the anger part of my statement if I confused you. Also, these ‘feminists’ the MRA goes after are no doubt refering hypothetically to the ACTUAL active infanticide and murder of girls in places like India and China. Just thought I’d mention the difference between one extreme side talking and another socially accepted side doing.

    You’re right, that was a loaded question. I did not want it to come across as an insult, but I think we can agree that we both are speaking from a position of considerable priviledge, yea? Some priviledge born of nationality. Some priviledge born of gender and sex. There is nothing wrong with being a straight white male (if thats what you are), and I’m not trying to shame you. My point is just that the more priviledge you are born with the less tasteful it sounds when one plays down the suffering of others (not that you ARE, mind you).

    Yup Yup!

    Yes ^_^_^_^

    The previous part of my statement was refering to those that DON’T know how to quantify emotions. See that part.

    You’re right. But you seem to be insinuating that I didn’t give that lady a chance. Just because what she said revolted me, doesn’t mean that I am blind to other people’s opinions. Naturally, people who do not revolt me are prefered company. ^_^

    Neither did I. I said it was an effort.

  • Anonymous

    “You seem to be using the term “patriarchy” as if it were thought to be a grand conspiracy…”

    Yeah, I guess I feel like that how it’s often presented, though I know that’s not how everyone sees it.  Though, now that I look for links, I can’t even point to why I feel like it’s presented in the conspiratorial manner.

    I suppose the other thing that made handle it the way I did is that it seems to be treated as the one (or, at least, most significant  beast to be slain before there’s social equality for all, which I feel widely misses the mark.  But, again, perhaps I’m seeing something that isn’t there.

    I must try to be more careful.

    “That’s one of the reasons you need to get a flu shot every year;”

    I’ve never had the flu shot and I’ve rarely have the flu.  It makes me suspicious that flu shots just make people dependent on flu shots.  Or maybe my immune system is awesome.  Well, this doesn’t actually have anything to do with what we’re talking about, so I guess I’m just bragging. Heh.

    “And that’s why there’s no cure for the common cold; there’s over 200 virus types which produce similar symptoms….We say “You have these common cold symptoms… so it’s most likely just the cold and will blow over in a few days.”"

    That is extremely interesting, and if it’s true (and I’m pretty sure that it is), I’m shocked I didn’t know that before.  It makes a world of sense to me, but I was always understood it that the cold was a rapidly mutating virus.

    “…there are a collection of symptoms in western society which work to place women within a certain sphere of society and place men within a different sphere. Feminism finds it convenient to label these symptoms as “patriarchy”, because by and large they work to elevate masculinity and male persons above femininity and female persons.”

    This, right here, I can totally get behind.  I like how it lacks words like, “oppresses” or “tyranny”.

    “But saying patriarchy doesn’t exist just because it doesn’t act the same way at all places and times to all people is like saying the cold doesn’t exist because we use the term to refer to different specific viruses.”

    Well said.

    “No, that’s not what “internalized their oppression” means.”

    I know what it’s supposed to mean, I just don’t understand what idea DxDD was trying to convey.

    And, please correct me if I’m wrong, but “internalized oppression” can go as far as women finding it ridiculous for another woman to run for president.  Or for a woman to brag about how many wives her husband has.  (I’ve seen both of these examples, and my mind was blown for each).

    And DxDD has go as far to apply the idea to that lady in the Disposable Male video I linked you a good while ago.  I mean, I can see how that can be applied, but I feel like it’s stretching it. And I fear it’s just a way to dismiss dissenting opinions.

    The way DxDD says, “…men are the perpetrators of gender-violence..”, makes it sound like she feels like women are incapable of gender-violence. Perhaps we have different ideas of what “gender-violence” is.

  • http://www.inklesspen.com Jon Rosebaugh

    I can’t speak for DxDD, but I suspect she was making a generalization. While there are exceptions to most generalizations, it quickly becomes tiresome having to mention “but of course there are exceptions” when this is something that really ought to be understood by everyone involved. We’re talking about societies and people here, not mathematics; there are always exceptions.
    (And, frankly, there is a particular kind of complaining about unmentioned exceptions, sometimes called “what about the mens”, which pops up a lot and often has the effect, intended or not, of derailing the discussion. Even though patriarchy hurts both men and women, it is not always necessary to discuss how to improve the state of affairs for men at the same time as we discuss how to improve the state of affairs for women. Just something to keep in mind.)

  • Anonymous

    “I don’t understand what your argument is. To..not communicate?”
    Naw.  I suppose my argument would be, “broad strokes have weak and unpredictable results, and that specific solutions need to be adapted at a problem-by-problem basis.”“No. I am talking specifically about indoctrination and gender oppression, not naturally aggressive people.”I’m still not sure what you were trying to say.“People NEED to feel passion.”Agreed.“Also, these ‘feminists’ the MRA goes after are no doubt refering hypothetically to the ACTUAL active infanticide and murder of girls in places like India and China.”That was kind of half my point.  The threat of male-holocaust and the hands of Feminists is absurd, and the MRAs make themselves look ridiculous by focusing on it as much as they do.  I’m very aware of female infanticide is a terrible problem in the world.My overall point was, however, no mater how noble the organization, anger can make people in that group do terrible things.“ I did not want it to come across as an insult”I wasn’t insulted, nor did I think you were trying to insult me. I just wanted to make sure I was understood.“I think we can agree that we both are speaking from a position of considerable priviledge, yea?”I think the concept of “privilege” is a matter of comparison, but, yeah I certainly have more privileges than many people in the world.  I would guess that you do to, but I’d hate to presume too much.  I’m thankful for my privilege that I don’t really have to worry about bombs taking out my internet… or, uh, my community and the people therein.“There is nothing wrong with being a straight white male (if thats what you are)”For the record, I am a straight white male (cue the dramatic gopher).  I like being straight, though it really hasn’t gotten me anywhere.  I like being male–  I like my strong body and I’m quite fond of my genitals.Though, I suspect I’d like being gay or female if I was born that way.  Can’t say for sure though.I will say, however, that I hate being white.  I never identified with being white, but it’s a label I can’t escape.  The only things that get associated with whiteness abuses of power other terrible crimes against humanity.  I only started to “see” race when black kids started to call me “white boy” in middle school.And it’s not that there’s another race I’d rather be. I’d just rather be sans-race.  Still, I think I’d take any race over “white”.  A sense of belonging may feel nice.That all being said, sure, there shouldn’t be nothing wrong with being a straight white male.  It makes sense, and it’s easy to say, but I feel treated differently. Sure, if I have a problem that many other straight white males have (and recognize), I can expect it to be solved.  However, if my problem exists outside of the realm of acceptable SWM problems, no one will give a shit about it.  I think many people think, “he’s a straight white male, so his problem will be solved shortly”  Others seem to think, “He’s a straight white male, so how bad could his problem be? He’s just a whiner.  Like a spoiled rich kid crying that his allowance is only $50 a week”  I’m supposedly part of the majority group, but I feel alone all the time.“…and I’m not trying to shame you.”

    I don’t think you’re trying to.

    I don’t think you have to try to shame someone in order to get it done.  That said, I don’t think you’re inadvertently shaming me either.

    “My point is just that the more priviledge you are born with the less tasteful it sounds when one plays down the suffering of others”

    I can appreciate that.

    Also, what spell checker are you using? You’re consistently adding a “d” to “privilege”.

    “The previous part of my statement was refering to those that DON’T know how to quantify emotions. See that part.”

    Got it.

    “ But you seem to be insinuating that I didn’t give that lady a chance.”

    You didn’t seem to give her much of one.  When you say she’s been received indoctrination which internalized her oppression, and that she’s reading from the MRM script, I can’t help but to interpret that, “Her opinions are not her own, so I don’t need to address them”.

    You kind of commented on a few things she said, but that ended up going no where fast.

    And you didn’t watch the whole video.  Now, I don’t blame you for having better things to do, but do you honestly feel like you gave her ideas much of a chance?

    “Naturally, people who do not revolt me are prefered company. ^_^”

    :) Naturally!

    And that’s kind of my point!  It’s a very natural thing to do, and it’s frighteningly easy to become insular without knowing it.

    “Neither did I. I said it was an effort.”

    Haha. You have my apologies for misreading your original statement.

  • Anonymous

    There are plenty of folks that will argue that it’s more than the exception.  Plenty of people will say that, within the western world, domestic violence shows parity between the genders.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence#Violence_against_men“ it quickly becomes tiresome having to mention “but of course there are exceptions” when this is something that really ought to be understood by everyone involved”If everyone involved knew what you were saying, there would be no point in saying it.  I try to qualify my statements as much as possible, and when I’m called out on being too general, I humbly clarify myself.  These discussions are about awareness and persuasion– there’s no reason to believe that your audience understands all the caveats and nuances of your position if you don’t state it.It’s the job of the communicator to communicate their ideas in a way their audience understands.

    Being persuasive involves reaching out and making a connection with your audience.  It helps if you phrase things in a way that keeps them feeling defensive.

    If you’re not doing these things, you’re just fighting, and that’s likely only to make things more divisive.

    “And, frankly, there is a particular kind of complaining about unmentioned exceptions, sometimes called “what about the mens”, which pops up a lot and often has the effect, intended or not, of derailing the discussion.”

    I can see how that can happen.

    I hope you can appreciate that while I wanted clarification on the statement, I kept on topic throughout my post.  It isn’t a derail, just one of many branches this discussion has turned into.

    “it is not always necessary to discuss how to improve the state of affairs for men at the same time as we discuss how to improve the state of affairs for women. Just something to keep in mind.”

    I can agree with that, but I don’t see it being applicable here since this is a discussion about many things within the sphere of gender-relations in societies.

    If the sole topic was, “how do we reduce violence against women”, it would inappropriate to mention violence against men, or violence against children, or how to buy the yacht that’s right for you.  But that isn’t the sole topic here.

  • http://www.inklesspen.com Jon Rosebaugh

    It’s the job of the communicator to communicate their ideas in a way their audience understands.

    This is true. However, there is a reciprocal obligation; an audience engaged in a regular discussion of some topic has a responsibility to learn to understand the technical terms (the jargon, if you will) that are used to facilitate the discussion of that topic. Likewise, someone who is an occasional visitor to a forum where such regular discussions are held has an obligation to educate himself or herself before complaining about the terminology used, just as if you sat in on a university lecture on some topic.

    For some reason, people are perfectly willing to understand that physicists have specific meanings in mind when they talk about “vacuum energy” or “condensation”, but they insist that social science can’t have technical terms of its own. Can you imagine how tiresome a physics lecture would become if the lecturer had to define every single term she used, and possibly define some of the terms used in the definitions, just in case some member of the class had failed to do the background reading? There has to be an understanding that sometimes the topics will be discussed with the expectation that you can find the definitions on your own. You’ve been here a while, Ogre; I know you know how to use Google and Wikipedia.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     Well thats nice. I guess Ogre is taking the Jedi Knight stance that anger should be avoided no matter what. I think all emotions have intrinsic value at specific times including things like anger and despair, with the exceptions, perhaps, of fear and hate. You could argue that anger leads to these, but I think the basis for all hate starts with fear. Thats an opinion and so I don’t really see a way (or need) to agree on this and thats A-OKAY!

    Oh and I’m sorry you don’t understand my meanings. Between my attempts and Jon’s attempts at clarification, I dunno what more I can do to help you. Sorry! ^_^

    Glad you’re comfortable with your gender, Ogre! As far as your race discomfort, maybe you could try identifying yourself with national roots like ‘Irish’ or something and reject the monochrome label of USA culture? I dunno too much about the USA though so maybe thats no help. And its sweet of you to mention the internet and the bombs and stuff. We have all sorts of people here. Mostly, they are divided by religion rather than ethnicity. There are sorts of Jews and Christians and Muslims living here (those are the three largest groups) and each group is divided into their own sub-groups. The seculars and the orthodox and the ultra orthodox etc. You can be an atheist, chances are you will still be identified with a religious group on par (I think) with the ‘white’ label you are talking about depending on your family background. So here’s a question, as a straight white male in the USA, were you ever compelled/have joined one of those white power groups despite being, as you say, the lone majority? Why/why not?

    Yes, I think I DID gave her a chance to explain her opinions. I watched several of her videos, despite finding them heavily distasteful. I drew my conclusions faster than you, but that doesn’t mean that I just lobbed her into ‘MRAs etc’ group. However, you yourself said that she seems to be a ‘leader’ in the MRA field, so my comment about ‘it sounding like she was reading from an MRA script’ is…pretty durned spot in if I don’t say so myself! XD

    PS: I dun’ use spell-checker. I’m just generally working on my English. Thanks for the tip! ^_^

  • Anonymous

    “an audience engaged in a regular discussion of some topic has a responsibility to learn to understand the technical terms…”

    Jon, my problem wasn’t with the meaning of “internalized oppression”.  My concern was that I’m not sure if DxDD thinks that men are the sole (or significant majority of) perpetrators of gender-violence.  

    “Likewise, someone who is an occasional visitor to a forum where such regular discussions are held has an obligation to educate himself or herself before complaining about the terminology used…”

    Great. I totally agree. Now tell me where this discussion is taking place.  Are we in a forum of a formal gathering of people discussing women’s issues?  Or are we in the comments section of a website designed to bring awareness to online misogyny and to poke fun at the transgressors?

    “You’ve been here a while, Ogre; I know you know how to use Google and Wikipedia.”

    I can’t tell if you’re snidely dismissing my link, or if you’re condescendingly telling me to look up stuff I already know.

    I’m comfortable with my understanding of “internalized oppression”, but I wasn’t sure if DxDD was using it in a way others do.  I was just trying to get on the same page when you started with all of this.

    Seriously, I was just looking for some clarification from Death, and you try to warn me of derailing the conversation.  And now we’re here.  I’m stuck trying to defend why I should be allowed to ask for clarification, when I could have already gotten it.  Who has derailed the conversation here?  Dude, you need to check yourself.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

    First of all: Wow guyz. Lets all just calm down and HUGGLE it out! *groupGLOMP!* XD

    Second, Ogre said for the past few posts stuff like this:
    “Jon, my problem wasn’t with the meaning of “internalized oppression”.
     My concern was that I’m not sure if DxDD thinks that men are the sole
    (or significant majority of) perpetrators of gender-violence.”

    Significant majority, yep. I don’t see how there can be confusion since I specifically added the caveat regarding the female contributers to the epidemic. Maybe I’m missing some intrinsic clarifying component of English speech? (not trying to be sarcastic! c|=) (tophat smilie!)
    There are some naturally mean womenz out there. I also don’t see the confusion there either. I mean, women are People too so there are all kinds. And the mean womenz that specifically try to undermine the rights of other women are the ones I said ‘internalize oppression’. I…literally cannot make myself any more clear (I think). I hope you understand my meanings now. ^_^

  • Anonymous

    “ I guess Ogre is taking the Jedi Knight stance that anger should be avoided no matter what. ”

    Haha, I feel as though that’s a misrepresentation of the point I was trying to make.  We all have emotions, and, in many instances, it’s hard to say someone’s feelings are invalid.  I just think that focusing on using anger as a way to motivate people is dangerous.  Though, you clarified and you said that you just mean that they need to be passionate, which I totally agree with. And anger can very well be part of that passion– we just need to be careful it doesn’t overwhelm our other feelings.

    “Between my attempts and Jon’s attempts at clarification, I dunno what more I can do to help you.”

    If you feel Jon adequately explained your meaning behind the statement I questioned, then I understand you.

    “ maybe you could try identifying yourself with national roots like ‘Irish’ or something and reject the monochrome label of USA culture?”

    I’m fine with being an American.  I like our food, our sports, our music, our art, our movies and our useless crap!  I love the beautiful lands I live in.  Most of all, I love the idealism that I believe that is at the core of America.  The belief of liberty for everyone– that everyone is equals and that everyone can be happy.  It’s about helping others when they need it, and making something of yourself through your own hard work.  Though I’m not proud of everything America has done, I am proud to be an American.

    I have never equated being American with being a specific race.  We’re all Americans here.

    My surname is German, as is my mother’s maiden name.  Both of those names have been in America since colonial times, so I really have no connection to that past.

    “…were you ever compelled/have joined one of those white power groups despite being, as you say, the lone majority? Why/why not?”

    “White-power groups”?  Do you mean like, white supremacists?  No.  I never personally known of any white supremacist groups.  I’m pretty sure if I had to spend much time with folks like that, I’d end up becoming quite violent towards them.

    Or do you mean, “White power-groups”?  If so, I’m not sure what this would be.  Country clubs?  Politicians and CEOs?  I’ve never been interested in joining these ranks, nor have members of these groups been courteous enough to extend an invitation to me.

    I’m afraid, however, that I’m misunderstanding your question.  What are you calling a “white power group”?

    “ I watched several of her videos, despite finding them heavily distasteful.”

    Oh!  I thought you said you only saw part of that one video.  I’d love to hear your thoughts on what you found so distasteful about the videos!

    “so my comment about ‘it sounding like she was reading from an MRA script’ is…pretty durned spot in if I don’t say so myself! XD”

    It was!  And I happily offered that information to you! :)  Though, I would like to caution that just because a snap judgement happened to be dead-on, it doesn’t mean that snap judgments should be relied upon.

    “I dun’ use spell-checker. I’m just generally working on my English. Thanks for the tip! ^_^”

    Well, then that’s pretty friggin’ amazing.  You spell much better than I do– I’m constantly using spell-checker to fix spelling errors. Thank you for effortlessly putting me to shame! ;)

  • Anonymous

    “ I hope you understand my meanings now. ^_^”

    Yes, I believe I understand you! Thank-you.

  • http://facebook.com/deathbydd DeathbyDD

     Hehehe, glad we understand each other!
    Um, what I mean by white power groups is like you say, the ‘supremicists’. Erm, KKK? Skinheads? I guess Black Panthers are pretty much the same thing just with slightly different surface qualifications, etc.
    So my point is, I feel like maybe the type of mentality of feeling like an ‘oppressed majority’ that draws people to those groups, is maybe a very similar effect to some of the MRA people? White power, Male power, (in your country) Christian power, etc. Majority feeling they are losing their grip on their world when the other groups ‘forget their place’ or at least just feel unjustly blamed for past/present injustices and so join the supremacist groups. What do you think?

  • Anonymous

    “, I feel like maybe the type of mentality of feeling like an ‘oppressed majority’ that draws people to those groups, is maybe a very similar effect to some of the MRA people?”

    There no doubt in my mind that the MRM would attract those selfish, shitty men who demand that gender roles be observed– and that women should be submissive towards men.  I don’t believe that this is the mind-set of the leaders of the MRM, however.

    Now, just in case your worried, I’m in no danger of falling in with the MRA’s– for the most part, I find their sense of urgency and victimization ridiculously inflated.  Still, that doesn’t mean I don’t think they have valid points to be made.  I think they say some interesting things that worth mulling over.  I’m just trying to stay open to different perspectives.

    I’d also like to make the point to say that I don’t feel as though I’m oppressed.  I can’t tell if you were thinking that or not, but I was compelled to mention that just in case. 

blog comments powered by Disqus

Recent Comments