"Lean In" to the pit, JC!

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

@Jonathan_Chance

Not my forum, of course, but that’s absolute nonsense. If one requires validation before one can speak then one is ceding one’s right to be heard at all. That’s your choice, certainly. But don’t use it as an excuse to dodge an issue.

It’s pithy, I know, but I’ve long been fond of the saying, “If you take what they give you, you get what you deserve.”

You want to effect change? You want to see new paradigms? Speak loudly and firmly. No one can give you the authority to be self-actualized and possess your own agency. Only you can do that. If you choose not to, then fine. That’s your call and I’ll support you in it. But don’t tell me you need someone else’s permission to speak.

Or, to summarize all that in two words that have aged like a corpse in a storm drain: “Lean In!”

I mean, c’mon. That’s basically what you’re saying here, isn’t it? “Lean in!” “Just work through it!” “Speak loudly and firmly.” “If you take what they give you, you get what you deserve.”

And hey, don’t get me wrong, these are all excellent strategies for a woman who is forced to navigate a space that is unreasonably and unfixably sexist and misogynist, don’t get me wrong. Advice most women should hear.

It’s just… well…

I shouldn’t need to explain that feminists are not particularly happy about “lean in” as a concept. It draws the focus away from “look at this sexist bullshit men are doing to women” and instead focuses on “what can women do to work around sexist bullshit?” - essentially treating the sexist bullshit as a constant, an immovable, unassailable object that women just have to live with.

But… it isn’t. You can actively make cultural changes within spaces to reduce or remove that sexist bullshit. Bosses can reprimand or fire sexist douchebros. Professors can discipline TAs who abuse their position. Community managers can warn or ban people who insist on being huge assholes about it. Moderators can ban misogynistic trolls. Johnathan Chance is one of the people who is in a position to do exactly that!

But instead, he says “lean in”. Hey asshole, you can fix this. You’re just choosing not to, and expecting Manda Jo (and others) to pick up the slack. In fact, good on Manda Jo for calling that bullshit out:

@MandaJo

I’ve been doing this for TWENTY FUCKING YEARS. And what I want is your, as in the moderator’s support. When women say “Wow, that’s offensive” I don’t want moderation to respond with “I hope the OP can see how some people MIGHT FIND what he said offensive” but no moderator instruction to avoid that sort of language. That’s not fucking support.

And this happens over and over and over again. And every time we dance this dance: any discussion of HOW something is said turns into a defense of WHAT was said. There’s this “dude camaraderie” aesthetic and while women are allowed to be here, we are supposed to just understand that this is how dudes talk and it’s unfair to cramp their style.

And it does limit my ability to participate because I can’t participate without coming in loaded for bear. I can’t discuss the issue and just leave the offensive language–to do so is to appear to condone it. Before I can speak at all, I have to throw a fit about the language, because how can I talk about a complex and nuanced issue and ignore the fact that the place of women in this narrative is that of an object. And when I do, I know that the moderation is going to, at most, suggest that “some people might see it as offensive”

Maybe she should just lean in a little harder.

Two quick notes.

Firstly: lean in works almost infinitely worse in online spaces, as the consequences for being a misogynistic troll are usually quite ephemeral.

Secondly: it’s worth noting that people can leave forums a lot easier than they can leave jobs.

[WillFarnaby]

Big deal. Someone’s offended. You have too much time on your hands, bud. You stay coming up with these long ass posts lol.

[AHunter3]

@Budget_Player_Cadet

I shouldn’t need to explain that feminists are not particularly happy about “lean in” as a concept. It draws the focus away from “look at this sexist bullshit men are doing to women” and instead focuses on “what can women do to work around sexist bullshit?” - essentially treating the sexist bullshit as a constant, an immovable, unassailable object that women just have to live with.

Also known as the “weather attitude”. We don’t expect the weather to develop a consciousness of how it treats the people it rains on, so it makes rational sense to tell people to take the weather into account and plan accordingly. But men are not the weather.

But instead, he says “lean in”. Hey asshole, you can fix this. You’re just choosing not to, and expecting Manda Jo (and others) to pick up the slack. In fact, good on Manda Jo for calling that bullshit out:

Agreed.

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

@AHunter3

Also known as the “weather attitude”. We don’t expect the weather to develop a consciousness of how it treats the people it rains on, so it makes rational sense to tell people to take the weather into account and plan accordingly. But men are not the weather.

An apt metaphor, given that what I keep thinking is, “Don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining”.

[octopus]

Is this yet more spinoff from a thread, which is 100% optional to click on, read, or participate in? C’mon now! Someone somewhere is turned on! So what?

Just do what I do. If you start reading something you don’t want to read then stop. It’s real easy. Granted it does deprive one of opportunities to demonstrate wokeitude or to participate in a recreational outrage party. But ultimately it is healthier and more productive.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

I have to admit I don’t know a great deal of the back story here, and admittedly did not click the link to the original thread.

But when two of the SDMB’s most notorious trolls and assholes weigh in against the OP, I simply am 100% confident that BPC is on the right track here. That’s really the only data point I need. These two shitheads are on the wrong side of EVERYthing.

[Bryan_Ekers]

Indeed. If octarnaby is against it, it’s probably worth supporting.

[Atamasama]

@octopus

Is this yet more spinoff from a thread, which is 100% optional to click on, read, or participate in? C’mon now! Someone somewhere is turned on! So what?

I don’t care that someone somewhere is turned on.

But what’s relevant is that someone on SDMB is using profane, objectifying language casually and without any caution from moderators.

[octopus]

@Euphonious_Polemic

I have to admit I don’t know a great deal of the back story here, and admittedly did not click the link to the original thread.

But when two of the SDMB’s most notorious trolls and assholes weigh in against the OP, I simply am 100% confident that BPC is on the right track here. That’s really the only data point I need. These two shitheads are on the wrong side of EVERYthing.

@Bryan_Ekers

Indeed. If octarnaby is against it, it’s probably worth supporting.

How catty!

@Atamasama

I don’t care that someone somewhere is turned on.

But what’s relevant is that someone on SDMB is using profane, objectifying language casually and without any caution from moderators.

It happens all the time on this board. Read any of the political discussions.

[bobot]

@Bryan_Ekers

… octarnaby …

Bryan Ekers, you have fully lived up to your internet responsibilities today. Have a cigar, or whatever you like to have.

[Wolf333]

@octopus

Is this yet more spinoff from a thread, which is 100% optional to click on, read, or participate in? C’mon now! Someone somewhere is turned on! So what?

Just do what I do. If you start reading something you don’t want to read then stop. It’s real easy. Granted it does deprive one of opportunities to demonstrate wokeitude or to participate in a recreational outrage party. But ultimately it is healthier and more productive.

Says the shithead who keeps complaining about foul language in the pit.

[octopus]

@Wolf333

Says the shithead who keeps complaining about foul language in the pit.

Potty mouth!

The difference being is that I don’t make a pet peeve of mine over a truly stupid decision by the administration into a multi year crusade that spans multiple message boards. Hopefully, you are able to respond with an original thought but I don’t have much hopes for some of addled, syphilis ravaged brains that comprise the hive-mind around here.

[Emiliana]

This pitting is much deserved, but will be closed shortly due to the rule against pitting moderators.

[bobot]

But octarnaby will live on!

[octopus]

@Emiliana

This pitting is much deserved, but will be closed shortly due to the rule against pitting moderators.

I thought the rule was you couldn’t pit moderators for their moderation not that you couldn’t pit mods in general.

[Atamasama]

@octopus

It happens all the time on this board. Read any of the political discussions.

I’m sure you’re right, but I don’t have to like it.

[BlankSlate]

@Emiliana

This pitting is much deserved, but will be closed shortly due to the rule against pitting moderators.

He was pitted for his opinion as a poster. Since he obviously doesn’t plan to do anything about it in his capacity as moderator, it should be fair game.

[Miller]

[Moderating]
It’s against board rules to Pit a moderator for decisions we make as mods. It’s NOT against the board rules to Pit a moderator for things we post as regular posters. Unfortunately, the OP here appears to be more the former than the latter, particularly here:

@the OP

Johnathan Chance is one of the people who is in a position to do exactly that!

But instead, he says “lean in”. Hey asshole, you can fix this. You’re just choosing not to, and expecting Manda Jo (and others) to pick up the slack. In fact, good on Manda Jo for calling that bullshit out:

So, I’m going to have to close this thread.
[/Moderating]