[PREV - POLAR_TRAP] [TOP]
CONTROLLING_THE_NARRATIVE
July 28, 2009
Let's look at the people October 30, 2009
taking the offensive side May 12, 2010
against this allegedly
offensive talk:
POLAR_TRAP
The strongest criticism has
come from people who describe
themselves as feminists.
They claim to be
representing the A continual problem with
interests of women feminist activists is that
in general. they have a tendency to
act like they're speaking
Is geek culture driving for all women, everywhere.
women away with a boy's
club atmosphere? But then, maybe this is
characteristic of
One of their premises: "identity politics" in
sexual material is general. Holding the
inherently offensive power to define that
to women. identity is critical.
The number of un-examined
assumptions there is amazing.
Am I allowed to think that sexual
humor is often heavy-handed and
dorky, or am I being a traitor to
my own sex?
Are women who think sexual
humor is funny being
traitors to their own sex? Or is it just: "we
don't have to pay
any attention to
them, because
they're not normal
like us."
I would've thought we were
long passed this by now,
the "Sex Positive" style of [ref]
feminism should be old news...
We've been down this road before:
the 70s feminists that gave rise
Dworkin/MacKinnon, the eventual
counter-attacks from Susie Bright, CORRECT
Camille Paglia...
SCREAMED_WITH_JOY
[ref]
"Third-wave feminism seeks to challenge
or avoid what it deems the second
wave's 'essentialist' definitions of
femininity, which often assumed a
universal female identity ..."
But then this is not quite
the revival of Dworkin:
Quoting jarich:
"Porn does not belong at conferences,
or in user group talks, or in the
board room. Porn, although a
wonderful and fun thing, should be
private; or at most - shared with
close friends in an intimate setting."
Once upon a time, people
did not say anything this
positive about pornography
in public... certainly
feminists would not say this.
We're living in a
different world:
post-internet,
attitudes towards
pornography are
changing rapidly:
PORNFRIED
Jarich again:
"It's always a bad idea to
distract your audience's
attention away from the
topic at hand"
But don't arguments like
this apply equally well
to things like Star Wars Really, when talking
and Star Trek jokes? about technical
material, it's a
People have a way of common technique to
making up new, try to supply
Never kiss selectively applied colorful examples.
in public! rules when you get
(if you're near the edge cases. Consider the Josh
queer). Berkus talk about
The actual rule is not combinatorics that
"never go off topic", uses David Bowie's
it's more like "you must love life to
be conventional to avoid illustrate the material.
giving offense".
Would the people
offended by the
"Perform Like a Pr0n
Star" talk be bothered
by that Berkus talk?
I suspect not, because
a lot of what was
irritating about the
"Pr0n Perform" schtick
is a little more
subtle than just that
it was "sexual" -- the
imagery used was too
close to diet soda
commercials. The
slick-looking, tight
skinny bodies aren't
Here, the traditional just sexual, they're
70s-style feminists might sexual in a way that's
dial-up a phrase like very mainstream and
"objectification of women", yet distinctly uncool.
but what I'm arguing is that
sometimes sexual imagery It's entirely possible
seems like "objectification" that the trouble with
*and sometimes it doesn't*, that talk wasn't that
and the reason why or why it violated convention,
not isn't anything you can but that it was *too*
look up in your doctrine. conventional.
Amy Newell: "I understand that the
ruby community prides itself on its
un- or anti-professionalism. But [ref]
some professional norms exist for
very good reasons: because they
make it easier for people of I've always been skeptical
different backgrounds and life that you can flip on the
experiences to come together and "bland" switch for half of
work productively and respectfully." your waking life, and then
go back to being a real
person for the other half.
MASKS
Amy Newell again:
"One doesn't have to be an uptight
square to suggest that aggressive
displays of sexual content at
programming conferences perhaps
decrease, rather than increase the Making a big deal out
ability of those attending to learn of the issue of sexual
and focus on the technology itself." content at programming
conferences can also
Okay. Couldn't one argue be a distraction...
that, for example, it's a
distraction to have openly Self-consciousness about
gay people around at work? these behavioral codes
can be counter-productive
There was a time when to the acceptance of
people argued that women women as equals.
in university settings
were a distracting element. Some of the critics
say that the sexual
The critics here are seeing a material is jarring
hard line between "appropriate" because it suddenly
and "inappropriate", but it reminds the women
strikes me as being much more present of their
provisional and temporary. specialness, it
pushes them outside...
The story here is not the
enlightened feminists up But it would appear
against the insensitive males, that they're
it's more like the arguing that women
are indeed special:
more-normal-than-thou they need special
treatment in order
up against the to feel accepted.
trying-too-hard-to-be-cool HIVE_VAGINA
--------
[NEXT - BEHAVIORAL_CODE]