But ought we not question why she feels comfortable in it, and to what extent her comfort is just a way of coping with years of internalised misogyny? Granted, you could make similar criticisms of many other religions, but the burkha is arguably the most extreme religious manifestation of it.
I’d endorse such criticisms, but I’m skeptical of the idea that SJWs would make them in the first place, given that they tend to hand wave away even the most tentative criticisms of fundamentalist Islamic doctrine as “Islamophobia”
There’s a difference, however, between not wanting to be ogled, and wanting to be made completely indistinguishable from all other women, and it’s a difference of kind, not degree.
Please. I’d happily quit any job before apologising to a bunch of crybullies kicking up a stink over nothing.
You’re confusing Matt Taylor with Tim Hunt. Flaming moron I may very well be, but at least I’m smart enough to keep my controversies straight.
There have been several threads where this particular poster’s problems with transgenderism has been discussed, by both him and others. Suffice it to say his core objection appears to me to be both emotional and irrational:
You know, I’m not sure I really agree. Which I guess kinda gums up any chance to come to a consensus on the topic, as we would be approaching it from different mental frameworks.
Thank you, Memnon, for the long and thoughtful response.
Why “SJW”? Why not just “asshole”? SJW sounds like a label/insult just like “shitlord” (which I’m not familiar with), but somehow serves to impugn the idea of fighting for social justice. The vast majority of people I’ve seen use “SJW” to describe people are either in or allied with the alt-right (aka modern white supremacists) – wouldn’t you rather not, in any way whatsoever, be associated with those fuckheads?
It sounds like there are very, very few actual SJWs, then. Why use it so frequently when it seems so frickin’ rare?
I think you do yourself a disservice by using this moniker to describe others – it’s a slur on fighting for social justice, and it’s a slur commonly used by white supremacists, whether you like it or not.
Sounds like she had a strongly emotional response. Maybe it was rude or over the top (or maybe not – I’m not going to judge the feelings of people who may have legitimate reasons to feel aggrieved). “Asshole” is such an incredibly minor-league insult that you can’t honestly believe that it triggered a breakdown by Taylor, can you?
No, it’s not constructive. It’s an exclamation of emotion and feeling. I probably wouldn’t do it, but I’m a straight white guy – I’ve never had a feeling of being sexually objectified day after day after day.
I’ll need a cite if you’re saying that she only accepted Taylor’s apology after the “massive backlash” (which included death and rape threats, as I understand it) – I see no reason to believe that she didn’t honestly feel that way.
I don’t honestly think a flippant “…asshole” tweet is that big a deal, especially when accompanied by a thoughtful article on why she is angry.
Why is that not handling it well? Tears aren’t bad, or a result of “bad” or “weak” feelings. They’re just tears. Crying can be an appropriate response when one feels like one has been hurtful to others unintentionally. I think he handled it very well and very bravely, and I think better for him because of the way he responded to it.
It would have been a better outcome had the ESA and Taylor judged that that shirt was probably inappropriate for a TV interview about the mission. Imagine if it had been sexualized and exaggerated imagery of black women – all big butts and big lips – would it have been inappropriate for many black women to be shocked and angry? Would it have been inappropriate for them to write about their feelings, or even make passionate exclamations on twitter about how they feel?
That’s exactly how I see it. It doesn’t mean Taylor is a bad person, but he made a bad judgment, and by his apology, he has learned from it.
There are a few times that I hurt someone unintentionally that I’m still upset over. That will probably help me from making the same mistake over again. Him being sensitive is irrelevant to whether the criticism was appropriate, and I think most of the articles critical of his shirt were reasonable and thoughtful.
Others are addressing this, but I’ll chime in as well. Fundamentalist requirements that women wear burkhas and male objectification of women of a more western sort have a lot in common – they’re about patriarchal culture, control of women’s bodies and how they are portrayed, and women’s subordinacy to men.
What if the situation is as I think it was – there were a few assholes, but a lot of reasonable and thoughtful criticism (who then received death and rape threats), and Taylor honesty took it onboard, was strongly affected by it for the better, and gave a heartfelt apology? Wouldn’t that be a good thing?
Would you see it differently if, as I suggest above, the imagery was sexualized and exaggerated renditions of black women’s body parts – giant butts and big lips and big boobs?
Really? You think the alt-right hordes wouldn’t have made death and rape threats if the criticism (which I think was mostly reasonable and relatively mild) was a day or two later? Considering how they’ve treated Leslie Jones for doing nothing at all, I highly doubt that.
That stuff is just so damn mild, especially when compared to the death and rape threats the writers received. I’m not willing to get upset for mild expressions of anger, even when they’re vulgar. I’m sure there was castigation – and there were probably some critics who didn’t accept the apology. I think that reflects poorly on them. But many (and I think most) of the critics did accept the apology and praise Taylor. That’s how this kind of thing is supposed to go – people will make mistakes, some people will get upset about it and criticize or even castigate the person they think screwed up, and the first person will have a chance to apologize and learn, or hold fast and double down, or maybe just ask more questions because they don’t understand. It’s not the end of the world and it’s not even a bad thing at all. It’s a big part of how the world and people improve.
Almost all I saw from the critics of Taylor was reasonable and thoughtful, or at worst passionate expressions of anger. “fuck you douchebag” is almost nothing, and no one will cry over an internet stranger saying that. What people (decent people!) might cry over is realizing that they might have inadvertently hurt strangers and even hurt science, just a little bit, by contributing to a hostile environment for women, even if it’s just in a small way. When I learn that I hurt someone, or something I care about (like science education), I will have an emotional reaction because that stuff matters.
Who are these SJWs? These sound like the fantasy liberals from right-wing radio, not any more than a tiny portion of real world progressives and liberals. I’ve heard this “liberals/progressives/SJWs hand-wave all criticism of any elements of fundamentalist Islamic culture as Islamaphobic” accusation before, but I’ve never actually seen it from a real-world liberal/progressive/SJW. Fundamentalist Islam generally sucks and is a terrible, monstrous, misogynistic culture. But this has nothing to do with Islam as a whole or most Muslims in America – the disagreements happen, in my experience, when Islam-critics say some variation on “Islam is terrible and the enemy” and progressives respond with “no, many/most Muslims are peaceful and not our enemy and your broad-brushing harms efforts to work against fundamentalism” (or some variation)… but that’s very different than the way you characterize it.
You’re calling your opponents, and I quote, “halfwits; petty hare-brained myopic Luddites; selfish agenda-driven spiteful assholes; fucking hateful assholes; and ‘the Sisterhood of the Perpetually Aggrieved’” (how do you know they’re all women?). You seem pretty much equivalent to me.
I know what my boss would do; he’d fire your dumb ass. And he’s not a SJW–he’s slightly to the right of Ted Cruz. You actually wouldn’t have been around to give a tearful apology while wearing a burka shirt; he’d have fired you the minute you walked in covered in pinup girls. In fact, I’d say probably 90% of the working population of America would have been walked off the job the second they showed up wearing something like that. A fairly large proportion would probably be fired if they showed up without a tie.
I’ve been working since I was 14, getting up and dressing myself every morning, and I’ve never accidentally or otherwise shown up wearing a shirt covered in pinup girls, because I’m not that stupid (and I’m pretty fucking stupid!).
There are people who are literally in the bottom 20% of IQ in this country who get up and go to work and know better than to wear a shirt like that. This guy didn’t even lose his job, and you want me to feel sorry for him? Fuck no.
Eh, these idiots spam slander and then if you call them out on it, they whine and cry about it.
Then later they use the experience to claim that some people are attacking them over the other bullshit that was in the same spew, but wasn’t addressed.
“Muslims are evil people who oppress women and kill puppies for fun!”
“Muslims don’t kill puppies for fun”
<later>
“There are SJWs who will attack you for saying Muslims oppress women” :rolleyes:
Here’s something I detest about modern liberalism (and I identify as a liberal, or a progressive, or a social democrat, whatever term you like).
I see, around here (New York City, and particularly Brooklyn, where I live) that “liberals” (for want of a better word) hold labor, and working people, and especially working-class white men, in total contempt.
It’s pathetic to see liberals (or at least this subset of liberals, the Park Slope Food Co-op type) abandon one of the traditional pillars of the Democratic Party. It’s saddening to see this city degenerate into class-segregated enclaves (above and beyond the already-existing racial segregation). It wasn’t like that when I was growing up.
No, I can’t. This isn’t based on something I read, something I could link to. It’s based on my observation over many years, living where I live. It’s what I hear in conversations, in gatherings
It bothers me. It doesn’t make me turn to the dark side, it doesn’t change my political and social beliefs, but it bothers me.
Okay. I know a woman who would not let a contractor (actually might have been a contractor’s employee) into her home in Park Slope because he was wearing some kind of American flag, eagles and so on, T-shirt that she found jingoistic and offensive. So she denied a working person paying work because she found his political opinions unpalatable.
Think that guy went home thinking that liberals and conservatives can make common cause, or have anything in common? Or did he go home angry (and worried about money)?
That doesn’t sound like she did what she did (which, based on that explanation, does seem pretty foolish and unnecessary) because of his labor situation, or that he was a working person, or that he was a working-class white man (I’m guessing he was white since you’re using this anecdote to show your point). If you’re correct, that she denied him entry because of his political beliefs, then presumably he could have been an upper-class, dilettante, non-white woman, and she would have rejected her for the same reason.
I’m betting that he saw it as rejection because of who he was. In conversations about this incident among a group of friends, all pretty homogeneous (including me), there was plenty of talk about “people like that,” and “reactionary white males.” I was pretty surprised during that conversation, held over beers at a pub in the area, that I was the only one who thought this was a grotesquely unfair and downright mean thing to do. It was the wielding of power against a person with less power. It was putting someone in his place.
Do you really think an “upper-class, dilettante, non-white woman” would have been wearing a t-shirt that said “these colors don’t run,” or whatever silly slogan was on that t-shirt?
These are people who identify themselves as members of the “creative class.” I hate that term. Right there, they’re setting themselves apart from people with whom they should be trying to find common ground.
Death and rape threats that feminists and liberals sometimes receive are never actually carried out. (And they aren’t unique to feminists, lots of controversial pubic figures on all sides receive online threats.) Feminists aren’t being gunned down in the street. The threats by feminists/“SJWs” etc to destroy people’s careers are quite real and are actually carried out on a regular basis. There are countless people who have lost their jobs because online activists started a campaign against them. A real threat of unemployment is more harmful than a fictional threat of death.
They weren’t simply criticizing Matt Taylor’s fashion sense, they were threatening to end his career as they have ended the careers of others that they’ve accused of misogyny, such as Tim Hunt and Larry Summers. They reduced him to tears, humiliating him publicly and permanently. That shirt, and his crying apology are going to be the main thing he is remembered for for the rest of his life.
So that woman was an asshole. But I don’t see what that has to do with liberalism or progressivism. If she’s a vocal and prominent liberal activist, then it hurts her causes – but if she’s just a random person, then it just sounds like assholes are gonna be assholes.
Fascinating thread, even if I find the OP rather uncomfortable particularly with the transgender comments.
I try to aim for the middle ground or to understand all sides, which is where if this forum had “likes” I probably would’ve “liked” a lot of Memnon’s posts yet have been called an “SJW” on countless occasions and thought iiandyiiii’s latest response was also very good. You can’t win!
My brand of feminism boils down to freedom of choice. No one should push roles on women, it’s best not to objectify them against their will, and the genders deserve equal rights, opportunities and pay. I’m also against indoctrinating children into gender roles by saying toys are for specific genders, for example. But if a woman chooses to express a certain brand of sexuality (or design a shirt that does such), or to have what are known as “traditional female interests and roles”, or likes the colour pink, or even says they want to wear one of the various forms of veil (commonly a hijab in western society, I believe) and doesn’t feel that it’s a form of oppression because that’s how they’ve chosen to express their faith, I think those are all fine too. If a little girl says she loves dolls and ponies, fine! If a boy does, that’s also fine! If a girl says she loves cars and superheroes, fine too! I believe it’s just as oppressive to pressure someone into opposite or ‘liberal’ roles as it is to pressure them into conservative/traditional ones.
The problem is not the ‘right’ or the ‘left’, but tribalism and lack of compromise. Disagreeing with someone on one side is seen as being in bed with the other, when that’s not necessarily the case. You then get the insults hurled all over.
And yeah the term SJW is, to use a term associated with the kind, problematic. No one can agree on a definition for it. If I had to pick a ‘bad leftie’ and maybe use the term for that: look up “Hugh Mungus”. Watch crazy woman screaming at a guy and accusing him of sexual harassment because he called himself a silly name (referencing his own body weight). An ideal name free of slight fat shaming notes if one were to read the worst into it? Nah. A bit of a poor decision (but he was under pressure). Worth screaming at him over and over and accusing him of sexual harassment though? Are you crazy?
The problem is though - you then have the alt right sharing it everywhere saying “see! This is how crazy the left are!”. No! That’s how crazy a crazy person is.
This is supposed to make it better? Death and rape threats are horrible by themselves.
Countless? Cite, please. And cite these threats to destroy people’s careers. Sometimes people say things outrageous enough that it harms them, but that’s their own fault, not the fault of critics.
Who threatened to end his career? I didn’t read that in any of the articles criticizing him (that I read) – I read a lot of reasonable and thoughtful criticism. His crying apology made him look better, not worse, and earned him the praise of many of his critics. If you won’t look past it, that’s your choice, but I and his critics are looking past it and look forward to his future scientific endeavors.
But it wasn’t. You yourself said that it was because of his political beliefs, not his labor status, his class, his race, or his gender.
Nor, from your explanation of the story, is there any reason for him to think otherwise. If, maybe, the woman in the anecdote had said, “Fuck off, peon, I don’t let jingoistic, lower class, cracker man-pigs into my home”, then he’d have good reason to think that she was denying him entry because of who he was as well as his political views. But if she said “Fuck off, I don’t let jingoistic assholes with t-shirts like that into my house”, she would be a jerk (depending on the t-shirt, I guess), but there’s no particular reason for the man to think that anything other than his t-shirt’s declared political viewpoints were the problem.
Do you think that the man’s perception, in this case, even though it was inaccurate, is enough to assign blame to the woman for the faults he incorrectly and without apparent reason sees? Unless there’s more to the story, that doesn’t seem fair.
Ah, now, this sounds like a better anecdote to use to show your point. A specific reference to the factors you listed. I know it would be asking a lot of myself to remember a random conversation I had once, but could you go into more detail on this part? I think it would show your point better.
There isn’t any difference. To a certain ***subset *** of liberal people (that’s important - remember that that’s what I’m talking about here - a subset), people who have less “progressive” beliefs than they do *are *“jingoistic, lower class, cracker man-pigs.” That’s kind of my point.
It is enough, and he wasn’t incorrect.
No, don’t feel like going into more detail. Well, one more. This group of people regularly refers to working-class men as “workies.” You don’t think that’s condescending? Insulting?
But you seem more interested in saying this didn’t happen, or isn’t happening, than understanding it.
This is something I’ve observed over a period of time, in a particular place, among a particular set of people. It’s real. It may well be a local phenomenon. It disturbs me. I don’t like it. I don’t think it’s healthy. I think the (accurately) perceived contempt of *some *for working people, and particularly working men, along with the Democratic Party’s (not the same thing as liberals, or progressives, to be sure) more-or-less abandonment of labor, has played a role in working people moving towards a certain brand of conservatism.
