I did. See that little blue arrow. Next to your name. In the quote box? Click on it. It will take you back to the original post. In this case, the post you made this observation in. I’ll put it down to not knowing about the blue arrow.
People have repeatedly asked you to explain your position about feminism or anti-feminism. Every. Single. Time. That you have asked to be convinced to change your mind about your stance. But you haven’t explained your position. You have pointed to a collation of other people’s work that may or may not support your position, WHICH YOU HAVEN’T EXPLAINED.
FTR I am as unlikely to gather an understanding of historical events from Tumblr as the Queen is to travel by Tube and eat at the local pub. Less actually. A more disorganized means of gathering anything other than images of polar bears gamboling in the snow I can’t imagine.
Congratulations. You have given me an entirely new appreciation of LinusK’s position. I might not agree with it. But he has one. He laid it out. He had supporting evidence, which he provided. Well done LinusK.
Mockery and straw-manning are two different things. I was mocking your assertions about tyranny by comparing it to equally-silly assertions by misogynists (but not you) about women’s inferiority.
No, Mr. Straw-Man, this is not my position. My position is maybe that the shirt was inappropriate and offensive in a minor way and he shouldn’t have worn it, and it was appropriate for him to apologize for wearing a minorly inappropriate and offensive shirt. No big deal. Apologizing isn’t a big deal. He’s a good scientist who made a minorly stupid mistake and apologized for it. Good for Matt Taylor, and I think he’s a good dude.
I oppose tyranny, and I support calling out the mistakes of public figures that can be hurtful (even if in a minor way), and I support those public figures who choose to apologize when they make a mistake.
So you claim that being able to track back to your post is the same as actually quoting your post? You’re wrong. You’re also wrong about not knowing about the blue arrow. I expect I’m right about you not including your post.
Oh but I have. CAPS are no more convincing than shouting. You’re wrong. And even if I do point to ‘other people’s work’, it’s just to save me time - if someone has collated most everything so well, why would I repeat the effort. Have you read it yet? Would you care to address anything in it? No? No kidding…
Me, I’d work with what I was given, rather than extending my criticism of the messenger to the criticism of his typeface. There are links there (as I’m tired of mentioning, to facts and truths and solid studies). That they appear on tumblr is only relevant if you wish to avoid the facts and truths and solid studies.
So did I, and so did I. Alas, all the links to the facts and truths and solid studies were on a tumblr post. Go read them. Get back to me. Lay out a position a tad stronger than “you don’t agree with me, you poopyhead”.
Ok, Mr “It’s mockery when I do it and only a strawman when you do it” (that doesn’t help me spell your name at all). Let’s talk shirt. It was ‘offensive’. To whom? Whose taking of offence (a choice) must we be concerned with? Who must be made to cry for a “minor” inappropriate choice? Why was it ‘inappropriate’? (I can still only see 'because girls who are keen on science are so pathetic that they would be dissuaded from a career they’re passionate about by a shirt, even though the women we saw who contributed to that triumph weren’t put off by anything, let alone a shirt). Who actually complained about the shirt? Girls who get into science, or girls who have no interest in science but demand equality of outcome at any cost?
Lots of people, apparently. I’m sure lots of people were not offended by it too.
That’s entirely up to you, or to Matt Taylor, or to every individual. I try to listen to anyone who claims to be offended by something I’ve done – it’s very possible that they might have a point. And then I’ll evaluate the assertions on their merits.
No one. I applaud Matt Taylor for choosing to apologize, and I have no problem if he felt emotional enough about his mistake and his apology to cry. Matt Taylor was not forced to apologize and the fact that he chose to apologize speaks well of him.
In my opinion it was inappropriate because it appeared to objectify women. I think objectifying women, in general, is a negative thing (except between consenting adults who desire to be objectified) and should be avoided.
From my understanding many men and women, both in and out of scientific fields, believed that the shirt was inappropriate and complained about it.
So I still don’t know how I feel about feminism. I think both sides of this issue have good points. Some “feminists” are way too radical for me; (The shirt that was worn that caused controversy, the dongle joke that was made that got someone fired, perhaps “elevator gate” - though I can sort of see where a Emma Watson was coming from.)
I hate cat-calling, I hate that women have to fight for their reproductive rights, I hate that there aren’t as many women in politics as there are men.
There’s no way I’m an Anti-feminist or an MRA.
I just want everyone to be happy and chill the f*ck out. I don’t know how extremes on either side can be content, because they’re both so whinny and offended by every little thing. One shutters to think how SJW’s and MRA’s will ever be content.
As, (almost,) always, I’m not 100% sure on where I stand. If I’ve said anything that could be considered ignorant, my eyes are open, and I’m willing to read other people’s opinions.
I’ve followed this thread off and on for as long as it’s been around. Can’t we find some common ground? Do the feminists in this thread REALLY think that all actions made in the name of feminism is appropriate? Do the anti-feminists REALLY think that there’s not a lot we can work on to make the playing field more equal?
Well good for you for actually having something other than me to talk about.
Apparently, the done thing is to demand actual numbers, and citations to prove it. I’d have thought you might have known that. I hate to do a jsgoddess, but I suspect your gracious acknowledgement that some people weren’t offended actually means ‘some misogynist bigoted poopyheads weren’t offended’.
On your merits, surely? I mean, you evaluate their assertions according to your criteria. For example, I’m offended by your post and demand a tearful apology, but I predict your evaluation will be “tough shit”.
“Matt Taylor was not forced to apologise”. Citation needed. Were you there? I have no problem with emotion, by the way, but I do have a problem with show trials.
Seriously? You can’t even commit. It ‘appeared’ to objectify women (though nobody cares about objectifying the pizza boy, whose only role is to bring pizza regardless if his complex inner life, nor about objectifying whichever hollywood hunk is flavour of the month). Yeah, let’s talk about objectification, before we casually accept it as a reason to make someone cry for wearing a shirt made by a woman (why didn’t she have to cry on television?).
I think objectifying women, in general, is a negative thing (except between consenting adults who desire to be objectified) and should be avoided.
On what basis? Leaving aside the whole 'Don’t judge women on what they wear! Judge male scientists on what they wear!" issue, what was inappropriate about the shirt? The argument I heard was that it might dissuade girls from getting into science (that’s the tyranny of equality of outcome that I mentioned before - I get that you might have difficulty grasping concepts outside your ideology, that’s common enough, but you’re a step ahead of most folk round here by at least talking about the issues rather than me. So consider that for a moment. The shirt was inappropriate because women are so weak, yet equal, that they can be dissuaded from something by a shirt that didn’t dissuade anyone who worked with him.)
Well I’ve repeatedly said that I wholeheartedly support gender equality (though part of the difficulty is that I think men are owed some too). I’ll also mention that, for example, when it comes to equal parenting, some feminists have actively worked against equality.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I don’t think anyone has said that anti-feminism = anti-equality (though some of the feminists have implied it, I mean no antifeminist has said it).
No. I’ve pointed out (I don’t know which post it was, but I can find it if you want) some criticisms I have of some feminist tendencies.
I also don’t support the idea, whether real or strawmanned (or both, because it can be a narrow viewpoint that people like the OP trumpet as mainstream), that women don’t need men, that men are in any way inherently violent or monstrous or poor at caregiving. I loathe and ridicule as bullshit claims that if women were in charge there would be no war. All sex is not rape. All men are not rapists in disguise. Women as a whole are not more noble, more kind, more empathetic, more forgiving, smarter, wiser, or better than men as a whole.
Every pushback against anti-woman sexism can go to far into ant-man sexism (that was a typo, but it made me laugh. Down with Paul Rudd!).
Ah, the rule of ‘so’. No, I think some people who claim to be feminists (and apparently anyone who says they are, is - hence my being a feminist anti-feminist earlier) genuinely do want true equality. Which is why I’d encourage them not to be feminists…
I’ve been vocal about it, and I’ve seen others do it as well. Disagreement has always been a part of the movement, as with any other mass movement or ideology.
That’s been part of the problem with the OPs position. He seems to hold feminism itself responsible for the “incoherence”. However he has no problem simply disavowing the words and actions of openly misogynistic and violent anti-feminists, and wants his anti-feminist ideas presented here to be judged on the merits alone.
Nope – I’m not entirely sure that I’m offended by the shirt.
What part of my post offends you? If I said something offensive I would certainly consider apologizing.
Okay, it’s possible that he was forced to apologize. It’s also possible that a lizard-person took over Matt Taylor’s identity after consuming him, and faked human emotions and an apology for his own nefarious lizard purpose.
For me to accept either claim as factual, I’d need evidence. Without such evidence I assume that he chose to take the actions that he took. I assume that he chose to wear the shirt, even though I have no proof for certain that he wasn’t forced to wear that shirt by the evil feminists to set him up, and I also assume he chose to apologize, even though I have no proof for certain that his family wasn’t secretly taken hostage and threatened until he apologizes.
So you’re right, there’s a possibility that he was forced to apologize.
I haven’t accepted your zero-evidence assertion that anyone was made to cry for wearing a shirt, so that part is irrelevant.
As to the objectification, in my view depictions of scantily-clad women as primarily objects of male sexual desire is objectification, and in my opinion that shirt may qualify.
That it may have displayed women in an objectifying way.
That’s not the argument I’ve heard – I’ve heard that acceptance of objectifying images of women might contribute to an environment that may make some women feel less welcome to contribute, just as acceptance of racist imagery might contribute to an environment that may make individuals of various minorities feel less welcome. I believe this is a negative thing and should be avoided.
So this was not a huge deal. Matt Taylor wore a shirt that maybe he shouldn’t have, then apparently he agreed with some criticism that he shouldn’t have worn the shirt, and made (what seemed to me to be, anyway) an honest apology. Good for scientist Matt Taylor, and I wish him well in his future endeavors.
We are very vocal. Some people don’t want to hear it, and will ignore the rational voices in favor of cranks. This thread is “in general,” really. And in the next thread LinusK starts, he will probably trot out exactly the same lines he’s used in this thread and say “If women were for equality, they would talk about prison rape. But you don’t hear that.”