Comments

  1. says

    @Salty Current:
    I for one would really appreciate, if you wrote succint summary of your position, because I do not get it. And frankly, “go read/search my blog health tag” is not a reasonable answer. “Go read this specific post on my blog as a start and then we can talk further” would be. Your blog might be the best about mental health ever, but who has the time and resources to read go though thousands of words long articles without a clue what they are supposed to look for?

    I admit I have not read all of the conversation about this now or in the past, I do not have the time to read Lounge or Thunderdome consistently, and I comment very rarely. But even so I noticed over the years your habit of simply saying “depression is not an illness” and when pressed for evidence, you dump simply a lot of book names and an occasional link to isolated study “supporting” your cause. It really is annoying that whenever mental health is discussed, you pop up with this.

    You are dealing with scientifically literate audience you cannot easily intimidate and blind with science in form of some sort of written anti-psychiatry Gish-Gallop. If you fail at convincing this audience for your cause, it should serve you as a pont for self-reflection either about the way you go about discussing it, or about the weight of your actual arguments, or about both. Not shouting equivalent “everyone around here misunderstands me”.

    I would, for example, be convicned if you:

    a) Pointed to peer reviewed metaanalyses of peer reviewed articles, and not to occasional, single, cherry picked stuides without context inispersed inbetween a titles of a bunch of popular books which almost nobody has acces to and some obscure articles.
    b) Explained what depression in your understanding actually is and posted a definition of it, instad of saying, over and over again, what it is not.
    c) Did not unermine confidence of patients in their therapists and doctors. That is a bad thing whatever your intentions are.
    d) Did explain how do you explain recognized patterns? For example I am from a family with history of depression along the male line,and my mother comes from a family where women regularly suffer depression during menopause. This is, admittedly, anecdotal. However there are families with history of schisophrenia and this has been scientifically documented. And there are well documented strong correlations of some types of depression with clear biological changes in hormone levels, so those types of depression even have their own names – like post-partum depression. I am aware that human mind is biased to see patterns even where they are not, but I am talking about patterns, that have been scientifically evaluated and found valid.

    Because on your blog I found statement that says that “No one has a chronic illness called depression, because no such entity exists.”. Which is, obviously, mindboggingly false and I cannot imagine any context, that would justify it as true. Depression as an “entity” exists for sure, even if it is “only” a cluster of symptomps with wildly differing and unrelated causes (which, AFAIK, is the modern psychiatric understanding of it). This cluster of symptoms has been described since Hyppocrates’s times, FFS!

    Look at fever, for example. It is caused by wide plethora of causes from simple exhaustion through chemical/hormonal imbalance to infection. It certainly does not have single cause and single explanation. Does that mean antipyrethics do not work? No. Does that mean that no such thing as chronic fever does not exist as an illnes? Again, no. Do cases of it occuring without know cause undermine the situations in which the cause is known and can be treated? No again.

    Call this a “fever test”. Next time you try to say/write some argument about depression, change the word “depression” for “fever” and look if it works. If it sounds whacky, then drop the argument, it is not sound.

  2. Doug Hudson says

    Brony@499, I’m not quoting specific lines from your post because I agree with everything you are saying! As long as the therapist and client (I hesitate to say “patient”) have established a relationship of trust and honesty, there are any number of tools that can be used, depending on the client’s family and social history, interests, etc.

    And as you mention, the human mind relies heavily on pattern recognition, and symbolic actions and words can tap into that system and allow for changes in behavior that might be harder to achieve with “pure logic”. I sometimes Tarot for this purpose–not to divine anything external, but to let my subconscious mind play with the imagery and symbolism and see if anything useful jumps out.

    I’ve enjoyed your comments, it’s fun to discuss this approach with another person.

  3. Funny Diva says

    Fuuuuuck…
    Some people are sooooo slimy…even the murder of Michael Brown and subsequent terrible events in Ferguson, MO are fodder for feminist-bashing.
    For reals, from comments on a friend’s FB post which was sharing the CBS news video wherein the Ferguson PD FINALLY f*cking released the name of the officer who shot Michael brown:
    (I wish I could do the comic sans thingy…)

    Where are the feminists shouting, “victim blaming!” Oh, that’s right, it was a useless male. And black to boot. So, what do they care?

    Yeah…that friend-of-a-friend has been preemptively blocked. Along with the friend-of-a-friend who “liked” the comment.

    I mean…what IS this I DON’T EVEN!
    *DIVA SMASH!*

  4. Brony says

    @Doug Hudson
    Yes. Emotions get written to experiences and sometimes the memory of the experience becomes lost or changed. For example a person getting traumatized while they were religious and trying to work through it as an atheist might create some unpredictable problems because they don’t have the same relationship with the objects in memory anymore. There is a logic to it but unfortunately it depends on a diversity of examples so large that finding the rules has been very difficult.

    In my case I’m still working though it. I just have not found the symbols, experiences, or references to figure out how to change the way I feel about the future career-wise. I think that I have stabilized because nothing has worsened in a while. But I still have work to do. Becoming more active around here has helped too but I think today I’m having a rebound of some sort from the socialization that I am not used to. Strange stuff.

  5. Doug Hudson says

    Brony@(502)
    Social interaction can be very draining and stressful, especially if one is an introvert. I frequently have to take breaks from commenting to avoid burnout. Do what’s best for you!

    With respect to your comment on trauma (and expanding it to memories in general), in my experience, much of the work of the human mind goes on in the subconscious, out of the direct control (or even awareness) of the “conscious” mind. Triggers, for example, reside in the subconscious, the result of past experiences that have deeply affected the way we operate. Rewriting the trigger itself is generally difficult or impossible, since it functions at a level below our conscious mind. BUT, we have the ability to determine how we respond to a given trigger. For a very silly example, think of an elephant. Most people, when they hear or see the word elephant, will think of an elephant–the symbol “elephant” triggers our memories of an elephant buried in our subconscious, which then rises to our conscious mind as a the concept of an elephant–the spelling of the word, perhaps, or a brief image of a grayish animal with a trunk and big ears. As an experiment, I practiced thinking of the image of the word “CAT” whenever I heard the word “elephant”, and now whenever I hear the latter I think of the former. (Of course, if I really need to think about elephants for some reason, I can override this initial response.)

    This is a goofy example, of course, but the principle can be applied, with effort, to more serious “triggers”. For example, when I start feeling sick I often get the urge to eat excessively. I can’t do anything about the trigger–being sick will always trigger an anxiety response–but I am trying to change how I react to that trigger; instead of eating I will meditate or something (still working on this one…)

  7. Brony says

    I actually know what is bothering me in my case. Pretty sure anyway, it’s always possible that there is something missing. The problem is that I don’t know how to change the way I feel about it yet. I have no “tools” to grab reality with.

    The short version is that I was faced with a difficult decision in graduate school. I had efficiency trouble and got a neurological workup. I simply did not know what to make of tourette’s and adhd in functional terms so I took a masters instead of going on to PhD. I could not imagine trying to do a post-doc and understand what was essentially the stereotype for both conditions and I’m pretty sure I was right about not being able to do that. The problem is that choosing to attempt to retrain for public school science teacher while working as a substitute teacher was a gigantic mistake.

    Despite learning a lot of genuinely interesting and useful things about myself and other people while this was going on, that experience wrecked me. I have never quite gotten the idea of being some damaged thing out of my head. It turns out that social stress is number the one source of stress in a nervous system tuned to respond more strongly to stress, yay me for picking teacher. While I have plans for changes to habits and routines to deal with the adhd, I can’t be sure of anything, and I’m having a hard time finding anyone in science with ts and adhd for advice. There are lots of little psychological things I am trying to account for and while I am going through the routines of applying there is no energy there. I loved doing what I did for over a decade and now hope is not a thing I can fit into a view of the future.

  8. Brony says

    I do have a psychologist. It’s been maybe six months since I started seeing some signs of depression and something that may or may not have been a potential for ptsd to develop. Or maybe it did and I don’t know. Either way I noticed that I was loosing my joy for everything that I formerly enjoyed. Video games, journal articles, lots of shows, going outside. And while I have always had trouble acting on any instincts for trying to make friendships, I became even more intensely socially anxious.

    At this point I think I might be a bit better over the last couple of weeks or I have been holding steady, I’m still not sure witch. I was great early in the week but like I said I think I’m having a strange rebound from too much social activity.

  9. Ichthyic says

    Brony, your history is very similar to mine. I won’t go into details, but know you are not alone, nor are your reactions in any way odd. I have had the exact same series of reactions.

    Forcing myself to get out and do some exercise outdoors (riding bike usually, but even just a walk around the block) usually helps to set me on a pace to make it through any given day.

    I have fish… to remind me just to keep swimming. Seems to work. Also have a very supportive partner, thank fuck for that.

    good luck to you; let us know what you end up finding that works for you.

  10. Doug Hudson says

    Brony, I also have social anxiety issues, and I completely second what Ichthyic says in 509. Exercise and just getting outside can be helpful.

    But as I’m sure you know, there are no easy answers. It took me 3 years of therapy to get a handle on my depression, and I’m still working on the anxiety part. Everyone’s journey is different, but here’s what I did: first, my therapist and I worked to identify various coping mechanisms, putting together a “toolbox”, so to speak, of interventions to help alleviate depression. Each person’s toolbox will be different; you need to find the tools that work best for you.

    Then, once I had assembled my toolbox and was coping marginally better with the issues, my therapist and I started unraveling the deep-seated issues that were at the core of my depression. This was a painful process, but ultimately there was an “aha!” moment where I understood what was going on. I was then able to fix it, and I haven’t had serious depression for over a year now. (The anxiety is harder to deal with, still working on that.)

    My thoughts are with you and Ichthyic and everyone else who suffers from these illnesses.

  12. The Mellow Monkey says

    Not a Tea Party, a Confederate Party

    If the Napoleonic Wars were your model, then it was obvious that the Confederacy lost in 1865: Its capital fell, its commander surrendered, its president was jailed, and its territories were occupied by the opposing army. If that’s not defeat, what is?

    But now we have a better model than Napoleon: Iraq.

    After the U.S. forces won on the battlefield in 1865 and shattered the organized Confederate military, the veterans of that shattered army formed a terrorist insurgency that carried on a campaign of fire and assassination throughout the South until President Hayes agreed to withdraw the occupying U. S. troops in 1877. Before and after 1877, the insurgents used lynchings and occasional pitched battles to terrorize those portions of the electorate still loyal to the United States. In this way they took charge of the machinery of state government, and then rewrote the state constitutions to reverse the postwar changes and restore the supremacy of the class that led the Confederate states into war in the first place.

  16. says

    Do wut?

    The pro-life site Life News on Tuesday published a piece suggesting that an abortion in actor Robin Williams’ past may have contributed to the depression he struggled with throughout his life.

    The story, titled “Robin Williams: Abortion of His Unborn Child May Have Added to Struggle With Depression,” surfaced part of a biography of Williams that mentions that his girlfriend had an abortion in the 1970s.

    “Many are aware that Williams struggled for years with serious addiction issues. However a lesser known fact is that one of those demons was an abortion that took place in the 1970’s,” Life News’ Kevin Burke wrote.

    According to an excerpt from Andy Dougan’s book, “From Robin Williams: A Biography,” quoted by Life News, the actor said that he and his girlfriend decided she should have an abortion “because we were too young and it wasn’t right.”

    Burke then asked if this contributed to Williams’ battle with depression.

    “Is there a relationship between Robin William’s descent into drug addiction and depression that began in the 1970’s and his past abortion?” he wrote.

    The writer analyzed Williams’ battle with addiction and discussion of depression, looking for signs that it was in some way linked to the abortion.

    Burke included a part of an interview Williams gave to the Guardian in 2008:

    “You know, I was shameful…You do stuff that causes disgust, and that’s hard to recover from. You can say, ‘I forgive you’ and all that stuff, but it’s not the same as recovering from it,” Williams said in 2008 about how he behaved while drinking.

    Burke then reimagined the quote to be about abortion and wrote that “Williams may have been making a thinly veiled reference to what society tells us does not exist…his post abortion trauma and complicated grief.”
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/pro-life-site-robin-williams-abortion

  18. says

    Proving that it’s hard to hide your secrets on the Internet, a Google cache version of the article is available.

    Sure enough, the article bases it’s assumptions on not-so-empirical evidence, which “shows” that there’s a link between abortion and addiction or that many men are traumatized by abortions.

    One of the links in that article is to Fatherhood Forever, a site that makes me want to vomit:

    Welcome to the Silent No More Awareness Campaign. An important part of the campaign is our outreach to men who Regret their Lost Fatherhood from an abortion loss. If you are a man who lost a child(ren) to abortion you can join the campaign at any time by visiting our Get Involved page.

    Reach out … Educate … Share

    Our goal, first and foremost, is to reach out to broken and hurting fathers who regret lost fatherhood and are searching for help. Experience has shown that many men who are hurting from the loss of a child to abortion think they are alone in their suffering. They often question their own emotions and wonder if they even have the right to feel pain.

    Jason Baier lost a child to abortion and is the founder of the original Fatherhood Forever outreach. It is upon this firm foundation in the Fatherhood Forever website and materials that we join together with the Silent No More Awareness Campaign to continue and expand this outreach to men.

    No you did not lose a child to an abortion. You didn’t have the abortion.

  19. Seven of Mine, formerly piegasm says

    Tony! @ 16

    There’s an example of using someone’s suicide to push an agenda for all those faux-concerned shitheads invading the Ferguson threads.

  20. The Mellow Monkey says

    Violation after violation: why did Ireland force a woman on a hunger strike to bear her rapist’s child?

    First, a woman was raped (violation one). She sought an abortion but apparently doctors obstructed her from getting the treatment she needed (violation two); although many Irish women travel to the UK in this situation, the woman in this case could not because she was a foreign national with uncertain immigration status, and her limited English likely compounded her vulnerability.

    Desperate at this stage, she expressed suicidal intent and went on hunger and fluid strike: the Health Service Executive (HSE) obtained a court order under the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013 for the forcible rehydration of the woman (violation three). Finally in early August, a certificate was issued allowing for a medical procedure to be carried out upon the woman: the next day, the baby was delivered by caesarian (violation four), at 24-26 weeks gestation, which is the very cusp of viability. The baby is still receiving medical care. The condition of the woman has not been reported.

  21. says

    ceesays:
    Your comment that PZ included in his post recently helped inspire me to write this a comment in response to a column at Comic Book Resources. The column is called ‘Things That Turned Out Bad. In it, the author highlights comic book stories of the past and their problematic or offensive nature. In this entry, he covers an old Captain America comic book from the 1940s, which involves a painter who lost his hand in a car accident, only to have it replaced by the hand of a black man who is about to be executed. The hand causes him to become a serial killer and he calls himself the Black Talon. There are multiple images of pages in the comic at the link above, including the pages detailing the origin of the Black Talon.
    My response was to the last commenter in the thread who made the comment that a lot of people didn’t know what racism was:

    Racism is far, far more than vulgar epithets. It runs far deeper and is more sinister than many people realize. People in the US (like myself) are raised in a culture where racism (like sexism and homophobia) has permeated society. At its core, racism is defined sociologically as ‘power plus prejudice’. This isn’t power in terms of physical power, but social, economic, and political power. In the US, the power has, since the creation of this country, been overwhelmingly in the hands of white men. They have had the power to create laws that favor them. The racism in society trickles down from the top and its tendrils reach everywhere. They reach out and affect people on levels they’re not even aware of. Racism is calling anyone, especially a black person the N* word. It’s also the belief that black people are inferior. Or that people from Africa are all tribal and backwards. It’s also the belief that black people are only suited to sports or that black people are not as smart as white people. One of the insidious ways racism manifest is in the various biases and prejudices held by people. Do you think black people are more violent than white people? That prejudicial belief is not based on actual evidence (or more accurately, it is likely based on incomplete evidence or evidence obtained through confirmation bias). It’s a racist belief. Do you think that more black people commit crimes and that’s why there are more black people in jail than white people (despite black people making up a smaller % of the population)? That’s a racist belief. I recommend, and darn near implore people to read more about racism and its effects. The people with the most power to fight against racism are the people in power. The people with the highest amount of social, political, economic, and religious power in the United States are white. This doesn’t mean every white person is a raging racist-that’s not true. But racist beliefs and opinions about black people (and asians and hispanics) are everywhere, and in the people you would least expect to find them (often ourselves-yes, that pronoun choice is deliberate). For the sake of equality, and for building a better world, it is important for everyone to do their part to fight social ills such as racism.

  22. alkaloid says

    From let’s arrest the police, I’m responding to Ichthyic:

    let’s see, adhom in the form of well poisoning, and an irrelevancy.
    how about you tell me why I should even bother answering your “question”?

    If you want to talk about ad hominems why do you assume that I’m a militia member? You even expressed skepticism that investigations work in your response with regards to Rodney King on the “Why would you support a policeman who shoots unarmed people thread”. Does that make you (gasp) a conspiracy theorist?

  25. Xaivius (Formerly Robpowell, Acolyte of His Majesty Lord Niel DeGrasse Tyson I) says

    @ Marcus (from the ‘Why defend cops’ Thread)

    Did some independent research, and it looks like you’re right on the fact that frangibles and glassers are fucking horrible. I’ll consider myself schooled in that regard.

  28. JAL: Snark, Sarcasm & Bitterness says

    Portia (aka Smokey the Advocate)

    Brony,
    Please take your victim complex elsewhere. People dislike bronies for reasons other than reinforcing gender roles.
    (Other Domers, carry on with your regularly scheduled programming. Thank you).

    Wow, that’s extremely dismissive and fucked up.

    Bronies are regularly bullied across the net for being freaks, sissies, gay, and pedophiles. It’s not a joke saying boys and men aren’t safe wearing memorabilia in meatspace. I’d fucking love it if they could, just like I’d wish it was safe to wear skirts or other such items. I didn’t see anything in Brony’s comment to say there isn’t any justified critiques or problems within the subculture, just that they receive a shitton of bullshit for breaking gender norms.

    As far as your article is concerned,
    1.) I don’t agree that bronies is meant to distance themselves from girly things. I think it embraces the cutie pony aspect. Bro+pony came about to claim, yeah we’re still men and like ponies. Sometimes it’s just a way to identify those in your fandom and sometimes it helps to have a label, a sense of belonging and attachment to others experiencing the same thing. For a lot of Bronies, feeling that hate and revolting against gender norms was their first eye opening experience with toxic masculinity.

    Do you know how it came about? It started as a cult following on 4chan made up of male fans who came up with a term for themselves. Just like every other fandom. They were banned, and spammed with porn and gore for liking the show. Yes, 4chan is awful but to understand, you’d have to know where it came from and how far it’s grown. Now that it’s grown into a subculture all fans refer to themselves as bronies regardless of gender from the sites I go to.

    There’s the term pegasisters used by few, often as a “ladies and gentleman” sort of way. I disagree with that due to going along with the gender binary, which is a fair point but calling all bronies misogynist is wrong. Dropping the label because of that and adopting another would be a fine thing. Or included a neutral term. But context is important : mainstream English is struggling being gender inclusive and this a new fandom barely beginning which has grown much in being feminist from where they started. Instead, people are dropping the label due to assholes and no longer fighting the gender norms openly, which is a pity. It’s not just men who are fighting gender norms either by claiming the fandom, it’s women too. Teenage girls are made fun of for liking it because it’s childish and their being pushed into being sexualized. And liking MLP is a total boner killer, it doesn’t reinforce women’s role as sexual objects like other typically feminine things teens and women are pushed into liking.

    There are feminist, social justice warriors bronies. They’ve also done charity work and con accommodations. The label identifies them but doesn’t confine them. That’s like saying feminism needs to change to “equalism”.

    2.) Blaming bronies for the MLP porn is ridiculous. Ever heard of rule 34? That woman needs to turn on safe search and watch her child online anyways. There’s porn of every children’s cartoon out there. Bronies have a term specifically for people that use such porn, cloppers, and are no fans of them because of the backlash they receive due to other’s fetish. Are the anti-bronies going after all such cartoon porn? I don’t see it and find that rather convenient. It smacks of “protect the children from the weird men” whether people intend it or not.

    Honestly, just like furries and other kinds, cartoon porn isn’t harming any person. And the internet is an awful enough place without pony porn, letting your kid go unsupervised and/or without filters in place is just plain stupid. Why so much outrage over MLP porn? Because it’s for little girls and we all know how they can’t be corrupted by sex until society says so?

  30. Brony says

    @ Portia
    I’m not offended Portia because I can imagine the sort of Bronies that you have encountered, but this is a case of a community having a mix that makes it hard to even want to see the diversity. I will not take my “victim complex” elsewhere however. I don’t personally have the problem at this point in time that I alluded to in the Lounge. I can wear a Brony shirt without a problem.

    I saw the ugliness of some Bronies and applied the same sort of attitude to anti-feminist Bronies that I do here to others. I defended the decision of women that took the name Pegasister because of the misogynistic elements and was happy to call them Pegasisters. I aggressively defended subjects like feminism at Ponychan, the site that Bronies flocked to after being perminantly banned from 4chan. I was one of the more well known posters on the serious discussion board and moderated that board until I had to break due to mental health (I went by “Flutterguy possessed by Pinkie Pie” and later “Flutterguy Penitent Parasprite”). I was there providing an aggressive counterpoint to people posting Thunderfoot’s response to Rebecca Watson when she gave her reasonable opinion on men acting creepy in elevators.

    I can understand what you have encountered and have no problem admitting that if you are a woman what you encountered is more difficult to you than it was to me. But it’s just not as simple as the link you posted.

    There are many reasons to dislike those that self-apply the name, not least because they have fetishised and pornified a children’s cartoon to the point that I have to supervise my daughter searching for desktop wallpaper, but I’m cross that the word itself exists.

    Some have fetishized and pornified, and in point of fact Ponychan was a no-porn site. But frankly as long as people have the tools to try to avoid such I’m not really sure that cartoon porn is a bad thing and it’s more like the subject matter is what is a problem like in real porn (objectification and such). Parents should monitor what their children access on the web and it is true that you can increasingly find porn of everything.

    A portmanteau of “bro” and “pony” (and, oh, do I hate bro-culture), its very existence says that these people need to set themselves apart from the target demographic viewers of My Little Pony. That target demographic is, of course, girls. This need to self-apply a special label, for fear they may be associated with anything female focused, is an example of how society deems women and girls as second class.

    I can understand the dislike of what is popularly called “bro culture”. But in the case of Bronies this was a thing that was challenging gender roles and rather than enforcing elements of traditional masculinity so actually would serve as a thing that counters the stereotype, even with the misogynistic asshats. The male fans self-identified as people doing something that we were not supposed to be doing in a gender role (many of us were very very confused about it for a while too) and the name Bronie just stuck because of that. It’s a bit like that silly argument demanding that feminism be retired because something like “equalism” would be better because it will treat everyone equally, the very strange demographic wanted a special name, men who loved a “girls cartoon” about ponies and friendship. Many of us defended it when many female fans wanted their own name (Pegasister), and I also did not care one way or another about women Bronies either.

    The implication about the target demographic is not something I can accept. The author is basically saying that I should not like something made for someone else. I like Luna bars too. Should I not like Bollywood? It’s a bit silly.

    I can’t say much about the quote that the author provided as they did not link the source. But it’s a sentiment that I don’t agree with. I have no problem believing that girl, boy and other gendered fans of MLP:FIM can love the show similarly and differently, it’s a hard thing to measure in any case.

    You’re terrified that liking something that primarily targets girls makes you “girly”, which patriarchy has deemed man’s greatest embarrassment. So you invent a meaningless term to avoid that stigma.

    Some of us were terrified. Some of us were wearing Pinkie Pie shirts and running down the street singing “Smile Smile Smile” the same day we discovered the show. There were a range of reactions to discovering that one was now loving a “girl’s cartoon”. I was very embarrassed about it for at least six months before I told my wife, so this term inventing to avoid stigma did not really work. Now she buys me the toys once in a while. It’s no big deal. But I saw many many threads on Ponychan by people who were literally beaten up over it, or were terrified at the thought of their families finding out. The author is wrong about the word and it’s usefulness with respect avoiding stigma.

    My Little Pony *is* a good show. The characters *are* great. The story lines are warm and funny and full of decent lessons for our children. It’s a great show for girls, because it doesn’t talk down to them, and teaches them that excitement and adventure are not the sole domain of male characters. It’s a great show for boys too, *for exactly the same reasons*.

    And many many Bronies agree.

    If you want to enjoy My Little Pony, do it. But inventing a label just makes you look like a misogynistic prick.

    Only if you ignore the gender-role opposing nature of the thing the label is applied to, and stereotype every group with a “bro-” attached as inherently misogynistic. I’m not denying the aweful excuses for humanity that have been in that group or other groups. But by keeping assumptions like this the author is basically taking work by Bronies like me who were pro-feminist in the face of 4chan’s worst and just deciding that we don’t exist because a pronoun bothers them. That is lazy about reality.

    And definitely stop with the porn.

    Not without an argument. The author should definitely be able to keep it away from their children though.

  35. Portia (aka Smokey the Advocate) says

    I don’t want these thoughtful comments to appear ignored. I’m thinking about it. I appreciate the response, Brony, and yours JAL.

    I need some coffee. I’ll be back.

  37. Xaivius says

    @Brony

    I have mixed feelings on Bronies (and most media-consumption based communities/fandoms).

    It is okay to like a thing. Hell, have fun. And yes, bullying is wrong. Just don’t appropriate when it’s something like My Little Pony, and for the love of god keep the porn well labeled and behind age-gating. That’s really it. Don’t be like the asshole supernatural fans that like to inundate Misha Collins with hand-drawn gay pornography.

    Frankly, my personal opinion (value: miniscule, as they all are outside of that person) is that building an identity around a singular media item (one show, one game, one book, etc) is a bit shallow, but I’m not about to say someone can’t do it.

    I’ll need to think more to see if I can articulate this better, but I’ll leave this here for now.

  38. Morgan!? Militant Pacifist! - Occupy Ferguson! says

    ::Sob:: I don’t know where else to put this. My sweet, brilliant, talented, tormented, driven, black, gay comrade/buddy/friend died in 1968 for fucking nothing! ::sob::

  39. Brony says

    Frankly I was astonished when I encountered the misogynistic Bronies. Lauren Faust explicitly said that she used feminist ideas when she created the show.
    http://msmagazine.com/blog/2010/12/24/my-little-non-homophobic-non-racist-non-smart-shaming-pony-a-rebuttal/
    The resulting arguments, rationalizations, and emotional spinning that these folks had to use to keep on being misogynistic asshats and like the show was a thing to behold. I learned a lot about the sort of shapes of irrational thinking takes from them. They just could not admit it that there is a realm of emotion and feeling that men and boys are normally told to deny by their own sex and society that they were feeding off of when enjoying the show.

    I’m taking a break from not only moderating but the Ponychan community as a whole because I was having trouble maintaining the objectivity I needed to keep my moderator actions and my social and political activism separate. Despite the fact that it was a community that was different from 4chan, it still was rougher than many other places and I had to respect the rules and do my job properly. There were and are plenty of good folks at Ponychan, including my fellow moderators but dealing with the frustrations around the conflicts about things important to me got hard to deal with at this point in my life. I owe them an email letting them know if I am coming back or not. I will probably go back as a user at some point but I don’t think I will be continuing as a moderator.

    @ Pteryxx
    Yeah, many of us were helping out in that situation. There have been worse ones…
    http://www.chicagonow.com/portrait-of-an-adoption/2014/02/11-yr-old-boy-bullied-for-being-a-brony-fighting-for-life-after-suicide-attempt-how-you-can-help/

    @ Xaivius
    I can understand excesses in fandoms being disturbing. Fandoms, conventions and such should mostly be hobbies. But there is a social experience in there that runs deeper and is fascinating. We love narratives and often make hobbies of the ones that we find meaning in. I would be interested in any other thoughts you have.

    It is okay to like a thing. Hell, have fun. And yes, bullying is wrong. Just don’t appropriate when it’s something like My Little Pony…

    Well what do you mean by appropriate? Every fandom and fan takes the parts that are personally relevant that makes them their own. This new experience with “feminine” things also triggered a huge amount of fanfiction, multimedia creativity, and other fan works. It even got a PBS Idea channel video.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Est3UNs-LIk

    …and for the love of god keep the porn well labeled and behind age-gating. That’s really it. Don’t be like the asshole supernatural fans that like to inundate Misha Collins with hand-drawn gay pornography.</blockquote cite=""
    I completely and totally agree. There have been similar incidents in the Brony fandom (someone sent things to Lauren Faust). Those folks got my criticism and verbal abuse when necessary.

  40. Xaivius says

    @Brony

    The appropriation part largely comes from a small group that seemed to be more interested in the ‘bro’ part of brony. The usual fanwanks that get stupid over such things when they aren’t considered the target audience (I believe at the time there was a lot stupidity over how ‘bronies’ should be considered the true target audience).

    I understand that people enjoy the show, but as I said, I wonder at the issues related to this odd self-identification related to a singular piece of media, and not just bronies.

    On that note, it starts getting REALLY FUCKED when these fandoms start using the language of social justice, especially when crossed with things like otherkin, and the claims of ‘discrimination’ start coming out. That’s just really squicky to me.

  41. Brony says

    @ Xaivius

    The appropriation part largely comes from a small group that seemed to be more interested in the ‘bro’ part of brony. The usual fanwanks that get stupid over such things when they aren’t considered the target audience (I believe at the time there was a lot stupidity over how ‘bronies’ should be considered the true target audience).

    Oh yeah, those folks. At the time I was of the opinion that while some fan service was fine (within limits, MLP:FIM has been enormously generous to Bronies in that respect), the target audience should always remain young girls. That would have more likely destroyed what we loved about the show. Fan fiction and other works were fine for any extra we might have wanted. I wanted the creators to just keep doing what they were doing for the most part.

    I understand that people enjoy the show, but as I said, I wonder at the issues related to this odd self-identification related to a singular piece of media, and not just bronies.

    That is fair to be concerned about. I have seen people get in so deep that it impacted how they started interacting with the world in unhealthy ways. It’s a messy social phenomena and it will have excesses.

    On that note, it starts getting REALLY FUCKED when these fandoms start using the language of social justice, especially when crossed with things like otherkin, and the claims of ‘discrimination’ start coming out. That’s just really squicky to me.

    I agree with you on the otherkin (I am a furry as well). But it is fair to try to have a discussion on elements that are reasonable for social justice and elements that are not. The kids getting bullied at school for liking the show for example. Male fans of MLP:FIM getting harassment for just liking the show and wanting to show that they do is a valid social justice issue.

  42. Crip Dyke, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden says

    Whoa, Fuck! Morgan! Are you okay? There’s serious backstory I’m missing here, but I totally understand how old losses can bite you unexpectedly, like my brother’s around the olympics with that gymnast’s chalk commercial.

    If you want to talk, you should. In the meantime, here’s all my empathy.

  43. Brony says

    This was supposed to be attached to one of my other comments. My apologies.

    @Morgan!? Militant Pacifist!
    It’s not for nothing if the event gets us motivated now. You are not the only one to move me by wondering if the Civil rights era was wasted.

  44. Brony says

    @ Portia
    Don’t worry about taking extra time. I often tell people elsewhere that there is absolutely nothing wrong with waiting and responding later because you want to be careful. In fact a good nights sleep is often just what I need to revisit a draft of a reply that I was emotionally invested in. I often confuse people when I respond to things on Facebook a week after they posted it.

  45. Xaivius says

    @Brony,

    As I said, bullying is wrong. But for some reason it just starts feeling, I don’t know, icky, when people use the language for fighting centuries of oppression to defend their right to watch a TV show. I really don’t know what to do in this situation.

  46. Morgan!? Militant Pacifist! - Occupy Ferguson! says

    CD,
    I’m okay, sort of. Yeah, serious back story. I was in the San Francisco East Bay during the ’60s. Oakland, Berkeley. Lots of riots. I was young, but not too young to participate. I lost so many people to drugs, to suicide, to bullets. Fuck. My black, gay friend, named Tony, was in fact a classmate in high school. He was a singer, among so many other things. Oh gawd could he sing. We sang together. He received a bullet in Oakland. Fuck. It didn’t even make the news. No one was caught. I lost another friend who was also brilliant who jumped off the Golden Gate Bridge. He had been arrested in Berkeley for, I kid you not, lurking with intent to skulk. He was an amateur jailhouse lawyer while he was incarcerated. Helped a lot of people. And remember Seconal, aka “reds.” A very, very efficient killer of young people. There were more. So many more. Fuck. Fuck. Fuck. Fuck.

  47. Brony says

    @ Xaivius

    As I said, bullying is wrong. But for some reason it just starts feeling, I don’t know, icky, when people use the language for fighting centuries of oppression to defend their right to watch a TV show.

    The emotional reaction is understandable for a couple of reasons, and I tend to believe people when they tell me they feel a particular way. Think about it like this (and feel free to tell me if any of this resonates).
    You have seen many many people here at FTB talk about things that harm women and get lots of people distract from those issues with bad things happening to guys. I have almost never brought this up here except when a blogger (I think it was Ms Benson or Ms. Svan) actually linked to the situation with the boy and the MLP lunch box, and I only mentioned it now because the Brony thing popped up in the Lounge between me and a poster with a boy that likes the show. I have in fact helped to drive distraction from women’s problems away by criticizing such trolls. You know there is illegitimate appropriation of social justice, but situations that are contextually similar but with deeper issues like boys getting flack for violating gender roles are more serious.

    Appropriating social justice for other social injustice is fine when the particular justice warriors are not trying to minimize the efforts of others, and they are dealing with a real social justice situation with things like enforcement of traditional gender roles. The so called “MRM” could really be into actual social justice if they were more interested in helping men with their issues instead of hating feminists who worked to get the attention for their issues (they could even learn about it and work with feminists, but…). I won’t go anywhere near what passes for average politicking with respect to men’s issues because the are not really into understanding and unwiring the problems creating bad social outcomes, but I know many feminists that are.

    I really don’t know what to do in this situation.

    That is fair. I’m willing to hash out the issues though.

  50. Morgan!? Militant Pacifist! - Occupy Ferguson! says

    As a footnote, in spite of all the people I loved who died in the 60s, this is not about me, or them. It is about the fucking horror that we accept as normal, always.

  52. opposablethumbs says

    Xaivius, rather than “right to watch a TV show” (sounds pretty trivial? Yes, yes of course it does) I think it’s more like “right to the quiet enjoyment of harmless everyday pleasures – pleasures that take nothing away from anybody else – and to express one’s sense of self in sharing that enjoyment with fellow-enthusiasts without getting verbally and physically abused for it”

    Of course a TV show per se may be a small thing; taking pleasure in life and feeling able to be yourself and share that enjoyment is a big one.

    I have no idea if you have any such activities in your own life – playing a sport, maybe, or supporting a team or gardening or DIY or knitting or whatever – but if there were some harmless thing you really enjoyed and which you enjoyed sharing with friends or family, maybe something which brought you great pleasure – pleasure that, in turn, helped you deal with whatever else there might be in your life that happens to be difficult or draining – then it would be quite an issue if society at large constantly belittled you and yelled at you and spat on your team strip and trashed your garden and kicked down your new partition wall and ripped up your knitting and hit you because you’re not “supposed” to enjoy those things.
    As it ‘appens, I’ve never seen this particular show in my life; that doesn’t mean I don’t get the importance of the mental and social garden spaces in which we invest ourselves.

  53. Brony says

    @ opposablethumbs

    …rather than “right to watch a TV show” (sounds pretty trivial? Yes, yes of course it does) I think it’s more like “right to the quiet enjoyment of harmless everyday pleasures – pleasures that take nothing away from anybody else – and to express one’s sense of self in sharing that enjoyment with fellow-enthusiasts without getting verbally and physically abused for it”

    That’s about right. It just happens that being able to publicly enjoy this show at the same level that most would display a love of Game of Thrones violates the sensibilities of lots of people in the gender realm. Sensibilities of the same sorts of people that feminists often complain about (despite the presence of misogynists in the fandom itself, it’s amazing how irrational justifications and selective perception can work). It is a social justice issue, but I have a sense of perspective about it and I try hard to understand what people who normally try to push for men’s issues do wrong and avoid/oppose those things.

    …some harmless thing you really enjoyed and which you enjoyed sharing with friends or family, maybe something which brought you great pleasure – pleasure that, in turn, helped you deal with whatever else there might be in your life that happens to be difficult or draining –

    It was like a drug for a while. Relentlessly happy, optimistic, friendly, focused on basic community values that are as universal as you could get, relate-able characters, realistic plots… I don’t think it was a coincidence that a bunch of people from 4chan got hooked by it. There was something there they wanted but did not have the tools to get or create for themselves. The ultimate effect of everything is still uncertain.
    Interestingly I met and got to know more trans people in that community than in any other part of the internet. That community was very complicated in terms of gender issues.

    …then it would be quite an issue if society at large constantly belittled you and yelled at you and spat on your team strip and trashed your garden and kicked down your new partition wall and ripped up your knitting and hit you because you’re not “supposed” to enjoy those things.

    Many did not even try to show they liked it because they knew that their communities would not tolerate it. I saw more than one post by a person living in a small town in the south who had no chance of getting some community with others, and in many ways the Brony phenomenon has been about an excuse for community.

  54. chigau (違う) says

    There has been a fair amount of stupid out there this ‘morning’.
    Will the ‘afternoon’ be better?

  55. Brony says

    There will always be stupid. It only changes form. Is the morning stupid different than the afternoon stupid? How could I possibly test this question?

  56. Crip Dyke, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden says

    @morgan –
    I hear you about accepting horrors against which we should rage.

    @brony –
    I’ve been known to refer to Ms Benson as a certain fictional TV detective. Persistently. Even after corrected. I even told myself (many times), “Okay, this time you can’t say ‘Ophelia’!” so you’ve got nothing on me.

  57. Xaivius says

    Opposablethumbs, Brony:

    I think I can see what you’re getting at. I’ve realized that what I have is more of a marginal quibble where the 1%ers of fandom start getting REALLY loud and obnoxious. I completely agree with the point of media consumption and stigma attached being a dogwhistle for more serious social justice issues, and those DO need addressed. I guess my squickyness falls on the actual appropriation of terms by idiots, not by those with substantiated issues. Case in point (and rolling with the theme): One is not ‘oppressed’ or being ‘discriminated against’ when someone tells you to go away because you just HAVE to tell them about your pinkie-pie/Derpy OTP slash you just finished. But when someone gets jumped or harassed out of the blue just for wearing a MLP shirt.

    Oppsosablethumbs:

    Xaivius, rather than “right to watch a TV show” (sounds pretty trivial? Yes, yes of course it does) I think it’s more like “right to the quiet enjoyment of harmless everyday pleasures – pleasures that take nothing away from anybody else – and to express one’s sense of self in sharing that enjoyment with fellow-enthusiasts without getting verbally and physically abused for it”

    I do understand this point. People get engrossed into all sorts of things. I think I’ve just been people-watching too many toxic fandoms on tumblr again. Fandom seems to be like any other, let’s call it ‘media cult’, like die-hard single team sports fans and whovians and whatnot. A lot of very basic “I like thing!” and a pinch of “THING IS MY LIFE AND ONLY THING CAN MAKE ME HAPPY”.

    In summary: I agree that there are real social issues behind many of these issues, and I really need to stop watching the more toxic parts of tumblr and reddit :doublefacepalm:

  58. Xaivius says

    In hindsight, I don’t think I used dogwhistle correctly there. Wondering if there’s a word for this instance of ‘Attacking a choice in [x] that is actually endemic of systemic discrimination against social issue [y]”

  59. Brony says

    It’s alright Xaivius, I think I get what you are saying.

    People all run off of statistical approximations of what we experience and we do tend to do negative assumptions more often, but I think that some people get to have false positives excused more often and talking about why that is is useful.

    There are people that try to gain attention for things that are not as important as others and a lot of those people try to get attention in really crappy ways. There is really not much relative harm in expressing distaste for hearing about someones sexual fantasies out of the blue. Too often the people trying to push attention to suffering like the one I posted above are doing it for terrible reasons so there are bound to be false positives. At some point I hope we will get better at drawing attention to problems without having some perspective as a group.

    As for the fandoms, well I think some elements of religious behavior are more natural than we want to admit. And when we figure out how it works that may end up being an awesome thing as well as bad. These instincts will be neutral things in the end.

    I believe that “dog whistle”is basically a psychologically triggering word or set of words in a political sense. That applies here because this would have to do with patterns that can sometime create false positives.

  60. Brony says

    #59 should have said,

    At some point I hope we will get better at drawing attention to problems while having some perspective as a group.

  62. Goodbye Enemy Janine says

    I have to laugh every time I see people call out Todd Starnes for his latest bit of race baiting or whining about how oppressed christians are because I remember when slyme were linking to Todd Starnes’ hack job essay about how PZ suppressed a conservative student.

  63. opposablethumbs says

    Xaivius #57, yes, I think I see better what you mean now – there’s certainly scope for that kind of rather entitled behaviour in any group activity I guess, and maybe I’m just fortunate in that I haven’t ever encountered it myself in this particular context (so it’s not the aspect that first comes to mind for me). And on that aspect I’d agree with you – eh, an entitled attitude can ruin anything :-\

  64. Lofty says

    chigau

    Well, shit.
    Geese flying south.
    in august

    Seasons are fucked up Down Under too, its already spring, a month earlier than usual. Must be the Earth’s moral compass tilting to the right that has done it.

  67. dianne says

    I’d just like to announce that I just jaywalked twice without getting shot. Soft on crime, these eastern seaboard police. Or maybe it’s my skin tone.

  69. Brony says

    It’s amazing.

    I watched my parents ripple out from my first F-bomb laden post drawing attention to what is going on in Ferguson, to image macros and articles completely focusing on the protestors as rioters with no necessary and legitimate discrimination among that group to give it a realistic treatment, to general complaints about general complaints about needing to be “tough on crime” that characterize efforts focused on rehabilitation as “criminals being treated more kindly than victims”.

    Just WOW. Part of me is saying “I want to learn to murder this biased way of looking at the world” but I know that the reality will be much more personally nuanced and less metaphorical. You really can’t stop seeing it when you learn how. Damn but it’s worth it though.

  70. toska says

    Brony

    general complaints about needing to be “tough on crime”

    Tough on the crime of….. jay walking??? Ugh. I’ve been posting a lot about Ferguson, but I’ve limited who on my friends list can see it because of that very reason. I know that those are the people I should be talking to the most, but last time I did an open post about victim blaming (in a rape case), it didn’t go very well and caused more stress for me than it made any headway with them.

  71. Brony says

    @toska
    I’m actually glad I started with the f-bomb post but every person will have different things that work for them.

    The psychological need to completely avoid actually looking at what is really going on was set up in it’s strongest contrast making addressing the behavior easier. I had people privately telling me that they thought it was strange that they completely and utterly ignored everything but “Fuck” so hopefully some level of social awareness is working on them. I got to claim the battlefield and define it.

    After that it’s a matter of seeing the tendency to look away and not towards get diluted into other examples as the justification tries to take hold. This will probably be useful.

    Tough on the crime of….. jay walking???

    The trick here is that they stopped talking about Ferguson, but kept on with the same behavior of looking away from anything that would let them see what is really happening. It’s way too similar to how Dawkins made his bad comparison in “Dear Muslima” and then continued to find reasons to keep making bad comparisons, and specifically avoided listening to the people whose experiences would inform him on the things he was trying to compare.

    It’s still hypothetical, but damn suggestive.

  72. toska says

    Brony

    It’s still hypothetical, but damn suggestive.

    I’ll say. The disclaimer, “This viewpoint brought to you by White Privilege,” would seem to apply there. The only reason I can think of that someone would bring that up on a post about Ferguson is to suggest that people who experience police brutality are all criminals who deserve it. Maybe they thought they were being subtle?
    Anyway, good on you. I don’t mind having these conversations with strangers or people on the internet, but I’m still working myself up to addressing conservative friends and family members.

  73. Daniel Schealler says

    @Brony

    It’s way too similar to how Dawkins made his bad comparison in “Dear Muslima” and then continued to find reasons to keep making bad comparisons, and specifically avoided listening to the people whose experiences would inform him on the things he was trying to compare.

    Dawkins eventually apologized for that.

    You may already have known that. Just thought it was worth mentioning because it was so easy to miss.

    Still a lot worth criticizing in how Dawkins approaches social justice issues. But still, credit where credit’s due.

  74. Brony says

    @ Daniel Schealler
    Apologies are only as meaningful as they reflect changes in behavior. As long as he continues to have problems looking like he actually understands why he is bothering people (independent of any specifics on disagreement), I’m free to be less and less persuaded by them. I’m not convinced he knows why his comparisons were causing problems because the same root lack of ability to understand the perspectives of others in a general sense seems to remain.

  75. says

    Brony sez:

    Apologies are only as meaningful as they reflect changes in behavior.

    Yep, and I don’t see much change in Dawkins’ behavior. He’s still an insensitive asshole who arrogantly pontificates on things he has very little awareness or understanding of, while simultaneously causing great amounts of splash damage.

  76. Daniel Schealler says

    @Brony

    I’m not trying to persuade you to change your mind. You are of course free to follow you’re own conscience.

    The apology was underwhelming and Dawkins’ behavior on these issues still has much to be criticized.

    Even so, in my view apologies can be hard. In my view, even an underwhelming apology is deserving of some small credit, and is better than nothing at all.

    Worth noting that Rebecca Watson accepted it. Not graciously (it was not a particularly gracious apology, so an ungracious acceptance is justified), but she accepted it.

    Again: I’m not trying to persuade you to change your mind. You are of course free to follow your own conscience. :)

  77. Brony says

    @ Daniel Schealler
    I am sensitive to what the people who are primarily bothered think.
    https://proxy.freethought.online/butterfliesandwheels/2014/08/good-bye-dear-muslima/comment-page-1/#comment-2601248

    …and I have put considerable thought into what “making amends” looks like (naturally Dawkins would have to do a lot less than that list which represents big social violations).
    https://proxy.freethought.online/pharyngula/2014/08/08/brian-dunnings-justification/comment-page-1/#comment-832398

    So I’m not insensitive to his situation. But I also won’t ignore it or it’s broader relevance to larger human problems that it bears more than a passing resemblance to. But I understand defending someone that you have some respect for and making sure people are trying be fair.

  78. toska says

    Daniel

    in my view apologies can be hard

    I think this can absolutely be true on a personal level, but often apologies from public or political figures are more in the spirit of “Ok, I apologized, can you all please stop bugging me about it now?” rather than genuine feelings of regret. I don’t know what RD was thinking with his apology, but since his behavior hasn’t changed much, I’m not going to make any bets that he was genuine.

  79. Lofty says

    Cardinal George Pell, head honco of Australian Catholics Ltd, avoids moral responsibility for the church’s failure to punish its wrongdoers thoroughly:

    Saying it would not be appropriate for legal culpability to be “foisted” on church leaders, he drew an analogy between the Catholic Church and a trucking company, citing a hypothetical example of a case involving a woman who was molested by a truck driver. “It would not be appropriate, because it’s contrary to the policy, for the ownership, leadership of that company to be held responsible,” Cardinal Pell said.

    Trucking company indeed.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-22/victim-support-groups-outrage-pell-royal-commission-testimony/5688570

  80. Desert Son, OM says

    Brony at #68:

    Sorry I missed your note earlier. I had a meeting to attend and then wiled away some time amidst automobiles in their natural habitat: rush hour traffic.

    If you’re referring to the thread I linked to in my exasperation at #65, I’ll take a look again later. If you posted to help, then my thanks for engaging. I was just really frustrated over there and knew that the occasional therapeutic yell would pass muster in Thunderdome (which locale intimidates me sometimes, so I don’t often post here).

    Thank you for your comment.

    Still learning,

    Robert

  81. Desert Son, OM says

    Brony at #68 (follow up):

    Caught up on reading, and thank you for your post. It’s an important thread, with lots of good contributions (as so many Pharyngula threads are), and I’m grateful you added your voice among them. I apologize: That sounds a bit like it’s “my” thread, which, of course, it isn’t. I’m as much a student there as any might be. Thanks again.

    Still learning,

    Robert

  82. says

    @ Josh

    {A toga-clad tardigrade wheels a large hippopotamus onstage. A loud catcall summons a young maribou too. With much urging the chorus prods and wheedles two ewes into the limelight.}

    Happy solar circumambulation Josh!

    @ Desert Son

    Thunderdome (which locale intimidates me sometimes, so I don’t often post here).

    {theophontes draws back curtain to reveal large pallet of Heinz Ketchup ™ }

    See, … not real blood!

    {… Scratches large poster of Heironymus Bosch’s hell with a razor sharp claw.}

    See, just paper. None of it’s real.

    Welcome nonetheless.

  87. Brony says

    I took another look at my response in #77 and I realized that in my description of what “making amends” looked like that I linked, actually Dawkins would have to do all of those things if he wanted the best chance of being successful. What I meant to convey was that his violation was less serious compared to Dunning so the act of doing those things should be easier. It’s of course possible that he could make amends without all of those things. It’s a pretty general list.

    @Desert Son
    No problems and welcome! I just saw someone frustrated and took a look and thought I could help. I was not really looking for details but welcome them anyway. The Thunderdome is just less “kid gloves” so we are allowed to be more pointed and possibly justifiably mean in here. Naturally it’s more complicated than that.

  88. gog says

    Two days after Micheal Brown was shot to death, another young man was gunned down in Salt Lake city by a cop.

    Conservatives have started framing this as the media not paying attention to a white kid getting killed and giving disproportionate attention to a black kid getting killed. Lately I’ve been getting more attuned to statements of this sort… because my memory (if it serves me correctly) is that the media wasn’t reporting very much on Ferguson, either. All of the news outlets were still talking about Robin Williams. And because Ferguson has erupted into a police riot, it’s now getting all of the media attention for better and worse.

    It bugs the shit out of me. “THE MEDIA IS IGNORING THE DEATH OF A WHITE KID THAT WAS KILLED BY A BLACK COP AND HIDING THE COP’S RACE!” Not only that, the article says some shit “no evidence of having committed a crime.” There was no evidence that Michael Brown had committed a crime, either! None! Fucking zero percent of it has been independently verified! Now, as of two days ago Fox News is claiming that Darren Wilson was severly beaten… Why is this “well-placed” source only coming out now? Why are all of these important fucking details coming out nearly two weeks later?

    Oh, I have a guess! Because they’re making all of this shit up as they go knowing that it’ll be bought by the racist assholes that think it’s okay to shoot black people for no good reason!

    Watch the racist spin machine turn and pretend that the situations are so very different from one another because they can’t even for a second subtract the racial components and examine the outcome! Are they oblivious to subtlety? Do they not understand institutional racism? You know what, I have the answer to that. They wouldn’t be right wingers if they weren’t absolutely convinced that there’s something intrinsically wrong with black people. It’s fucking shameful.

    As for Dillon Taylor: how many people (regardless of skin color) have to be shot to death by cops this week for us to really grasp the problem at hand? Race certainly has to do with whether you’re more likely to have guns pointed at you by cops, though.

    God damn I’m so tired of this racist culture war bullshit that’s being fed to us. I’m sick of it. It’s so much easier to deal with overt racism than this under-the-radar suggestive fucking tripe.

  89. numerobis says

    Spreading this from my g+ stream to the horde, because it deserves wide dissemination:
    ===
    Tim Johnson originally shared:
    Overheard on FB: “Schrodinger’s douchebag: A guy who says really offensive things and decides whether or not he was joking based upon the reaction of people around him.”

  90. Arawhon, So Tired of Everything says

    The video gaming community is currently in a shit show. 4chan has apparently decided to punish all the SJW Indie Devs after an ex-boyfriend of Zoe Quinn, creator of Depression Quest, posted a blog entry accusing her of corruption, ethics violations, cheating, and all kinds of other shit.

    Problem is that several of those claims are false, and if you arent a raging misogynist, raise giant red flags about the honesty of the blog post. Since the blog post was put up, 4chan has been on a harassment and doxxing spree involving Zoe, her friends, her famliy, any devs that defend her, and pretty much anyone that gets the attention of the hackers that are involved. In the some of the comment sections of articles dedicated to explaining this, the usual shitstains (mykeru, a false A+ Blockbot account) from the pit can be found defending the harassment and trying to make it that Amanda Marcotte isnt a journalist so dont listen to a word of her reports.

    Im so tired of men and white people.

  91. Arawhon, So Tired of Everything says

    Forgot the end of my post: And I’m both.

    Also, I hate posting something and then realizing I forgot a sentence or part of one.

  92. gog says

    @Arawon #90,91

    I’ve read a few articles on that and I really… I wish I could understand why this stuff makes waves so quickly. I mean, I know on an intellectual level: there’s a lot of overlap between gamers, men, and internet trolls. Zoe Quinn is also an easy target for having made a game that doesn’t appeal to a large cross-section of gamers AND it’s on Steam Greenlight (which is gaining a reputation for putting up games that are either uninspired and poorly done or straight-up vaporware). Many gamers take this stuff personally and allege to be passionate about the quality of content that’s put out on the market. I’m not convinced this is true, what with the trappings of fanboyism and groupthink that undermine any sense that there’s a critical focus on what’s produced and consumed. It’s this same groupthink that’s put Zoe in the crosshairs of the “community.” One guy says something bad about her, two of his buddies repeat it as truth, two of each of their buddies, ad nauseum.

    If that’s the nature of the gaming community, then you can count me out. I’ll go start my own community of one.

  95. Ichthyic says

    just to be clear… are you trying to say that sympatric speciation was not considered by Darwin?

    In fact, he did. he just thought of it in terms of “niche diversification”; it’s what he meant when talking about local variation to different environments within a single domain.

  96. Ichthyic says

    Jerry Coyne is very much an expert on the status of research involving sympatric speciation, btw. If you are more curious about the subject, I’m sure he would enjoy sending you a list of recent pubs on it (his own/students, and others).

    He also gave a great talk on the subject during the Darwin Anniversary lectures in Chicago a few years back… i might still have the link to that.

  98. Ichthyic says

    Still a lot worth criticizing in how Dawkins approaches social justice issues. But still, credit where credit’s due.

    Say you take your car to someone who is quite famous as a race car driver. You ask him if he can fix your car, and he agrees to.

    You come back two days later, to find the car is not only not fixed, but now has a broken taillight.

    the “mechanic” apologizes profusely, tells you that he somehow thought you wanted him to break the taillight, and wonders why you’re so mad at him, since, after all, you asked him to fix your car.

    so, you take your car to a different mechanic, who promptly fixes all the problems.

    a month later, you’ve convinced yourself that somehow, the race car driver must have misheard what you asked for, as he’s a famous race car driver, and simply can’t be wrong about cars, right? Besides, his apology seems sincere.

    so, another problem comes up with the car, and you take it back to this guy to see if he will offer his services again to fix it.

    this time, he flattens all your tires.

    “What the hell!” you say. to which he replies, “What? you ASKED me to fix your car.”

    now, how many lines of this joke do I have to tell before the punchline becomes not only obvious, but not even worth telling any more?

  99. says

    Thanks Ichthyic.

    My mind is a little boggled at the idea. Not least: my imagination fails to understand what the “niche” in this case may be. The ants are living, and transforming, right there in the selfsame colony.
    It all seems so delightfully subversive.

  100. Ichthyic says

    The ants are living, and transforming, right there in the selfsame colony.

    yeah, it does sound a bit odd, but I’m just saying that sympatric speciation itself is a well proven concept.

    I’m really not sure what’s going on there, but I would suspect extreme behavioral isolation.

  104. Brony says

    @ numerobis 89

    “Schrodinger’s douchebag: A guy who says really offensive things and decides whether or not he was joking based upon the reaction of people around him.”

    I like that. I think I’ll use it but change it to “Schrodinger’s asshole” (I’m a bit unsure about the appropriateness of “douchebad”). I once told a commenter elsewhere that based on the offensiveness of what they were saying about the topic of rape, and the statistics about the population in terms of how many people around there are likely to be affected by it, they were statistically likely to be an asshole.

    @ Arawhon 90, gog 92
    I feel like I should say something about this but I’m unsure about the usefulness, and I’m unsure how I should feel about some of it (and I’m open to any sort of comment as a result). I’m the sort of person who has morbid fascinations and a high tolerance for offense. Pretty much the only thing that triggers me is someone else suffering and especially if it involves victimization. I think that it comes from having been badly bullied when I was young, and a combination of inheritance and culture (highly suspicious military/religious culture). I think that over my life I have developed this instinctual need to look at and study bullies in action, and social conflict in general. The evolution/creationism conflict was a natural way in and after that I used to read things like Encyclopediadramatica (massive general trigger warning on that one) because there was so much about such things that I seemed to just have to know about no matter how terrible it was.

    Before I discuss my experience of 4chan and how it might help, let me say that any terrible outraged opinion about something 4chan related is a thing I take seriously and would treat respectfully. There has been some truly awful abhorrent behavior on that site and associated with it. Even though I have found some value in it that is no attempt at an argument for anyone else to find value in it, especially people who have been hurt because of it. But as a phenomena 4chan is truly fascinating in terms of a lot of raw, simple, knowledge on how people do things in groups and how communities evolve over time. In a sense while I was enjoying the things that did not cross my moral and ethical lines, I spent time watching and was basically like “I’m going to remember that you did this” in a larger human sense. Being a scientist helped.

    4chan has apparently decided to punish all the SJW Indie Devs after an ex-boyfriend of Zoe Quinn, creator of Depression Quest, posted a blog entry accusing her of corruption, ethics violations, cheating, and all kinds of other shit.
    Problem is that several of those claims are false, and if you arent a raging misogynist, raise giant red flags about the honesty of the blog post.

    One of the downsides to that community (especially the /b/ board) is that it’s a place where people tend to give in to their reactions to things and “do something about something they don’t like”. Because of the fast-paced and anonymous nature of much of the community there is an emphasis on rapid collaborations and responses to things that some of them don’t like which often does not allow for good research (if they were even willing to research claims they were already friendly to). So the dynamic allows misogynistic people and people who are having relationship problems of their own feel like they are “helping”. Since we often tend to justify things we do after the fact you end up with lots of people that take really bad conclusions from their experiences.
    It’s a place that can make bad people into worse people quite easily and I think demonstrates that “you are what you do” can have serious consequences. I wish there was a good social response to the threat that the place can pose, other than slowly evolving internet standards of expectations and behavior. Sometimes I wonder how much of social evolution on the internet mirrors the way society evolved in the city-state days. At least the article demonstrates that there is some level of vulnerability since the harassers and abusers needed to invent BS to justify what they were doing. I wish I still skimmed /b/ and saw how the “ethics violation” excuse came about. I have no problem believing that the source of this is a bunch of people pissed at having to explain or moderate how they act on and what they believe about women. Internet harassment and abuse campaigns very often justify what marginalized groups complain about. I’m optimistic in the long run.

    The hypocrisy is pretty stunning too. Anyone with a role in a social conflict is a warrior of sorts. Lashing out at “SJWs” is self-negating because what they are doing IS their own brand of social justice and they are quite obviously the ones acting closer to militancy. Rather than argue about the social issues on an equal playing field they take a “scorched-earth” approach and target friends, family, businesses and anything else that people they don’t like might need for material and social support. It’s quite cowardly and at some point enough people will get fed up with it and they (and any celebrities and others with more power that get affected by it) will create tools to create consequences. It’s a little blind of a group that places so much value on freedom and anonymity to allow behavior that will eventually threaten it.

  105. chigau (違う) says

    It would probably be annoying to put this over there.
    .
    If we still doing Logical™ Thought™ Experiments™.
    What if it is discovered that The Cure For Cancer is found in the pancreas of 13.5 week fetuses?
    But only the one who compose poetry.

  106. says

    [Mycocepurus castrator]

    There is an article in Ars Technica (link here) that gives a plausable explaination as to how speciation could have occured within an ant colony:

    Most of the descriptions of ant and bee colonies suggest that they have a single queen that is the only individual to lay eggs. As with most things in biology, however, it’s rarely quite so well defined. For the host in this example (M. goeldii), having a single active queen is optional. In some colonies that have been studied, there is more than one active queen.

    This, the authors note, is a recipe for “cheating” in social insects, where some individuals start reproducing to pass their genes on at the expense of the queen’s. They suggest this is how the parasitic species, M. castrator, got its start—simply as a group of cheaters within the main colony. If the cheating behavior was inherited, then it could be passed on stably within the colony. But that wouldn’t create any reproductive barriers; the cheaters could still breed with any of the colony’s ants.

    What the researchers found, however, is that reproductive barriers seem to have formed. In the host species, new queens typically leave the nest by flying, and they mate during that flight. By contrast, the parasite species mates within a nest, and new queens leave simply by walking. In addition, there have been anatomical changes to the species’ genitalia that make mating much more difficult between the two. These differences are part of a larger set of anatomical differences that now separate the two species, which includes a significant reduction in size among the parasites.

    (It would be interesting to know what the effects of all those “moochers” is on the the caolony of working ants. It must certainly place the colony under unnecessary stress, though to what extent this endangers the colony I cannot guess. At least the parasites have been considerate enough to shrink in size, and thereby shrink the problems they create.)

  110. says

    @ chigau

    How are things in Chinaland?

    Same-old-same-old, not much excitement here (which is always a good thing).

    Spent some time in South Africa, which was exiting (in a good way). Smashing of tricopters and a small operation notwithstanding. I got to visit a maggot farm for the first time in my life! Agriculture in SA is transforming rapidly. Not just in terms of labour relations, but also in terms of technology. I got to look into everything from drip-systems, through hydro/aqua/aeroponics. How to be doubling production – without GM.

    Are you still safe?

    As houses.

  113. says

    @ Tony

    No worries, these are not the nasties. Hermetia illucens (Black Soldier Fly) doesn’t vomit into your food like other flies. On the other hand, their maggots can be spun in centrifuges to provide protein, and oil for making biodiesel. Very useful little critters.

  115. says

    @ chigau

    … or (very) tall buildings …

    @ Brony

    Got a link? I’m curious.

    Which link?

    Tricopters … (will post here soon)
    operation … (Google: “basal cell carcinoma”… quite common in South Africa, due to sun exposure. Very survivable if treated early.)
    Maggot farm … (Sadly, I have only this picture to share: Maggots in restaurant waste. What looks like rice, are actually little maggots. The farm does not have a website for this. Also, I cannot find online. This is all quite new, AFAICT. Sites tend to focus on the use of these flies as food/bait for fish, or other animals, rather than for humans. Though I hope this changes soon enough.)
    hydro/aqua/aeroponics … My own efforts to date only concern aeroponics. Here is an example of tomato plants growing out of an old trash can: Link. All the nutrients and water are provided in one go. Perfect for tomato munching lazy tardigrades. I will try and cobble together a report here as things develop ( I am experimenting on my rooftop). If you want to try hydro/aqua yourself , I’ll be happy to share what little i know.

  121. Beatrice, an amateur cynic looking for a happy thought says

    Well, I have never connected the dots before.

    That didn’t look good in the end. But the flight was cool.

  123. Pteryxx says

    *off topic rage*

    I looked at Jonny Scaramanga’s post previous to the one PZ cited. (To be clear, it’s a guest post, not Jonny speaking.)

    (warning for ACE fundie christian education brainwashing absolute bullshit)

    I Am Officially Heartbroken

    Point is: at this moment I want to burn the A.C.E. sons of bitches down. To be perfectly legally clear, that’s hyperbole. I don’t actually want to hurt anyone, nor burn anything. Nor, for that matter, do I think that the leaders of ACE as a corporate entity or as schools are the children of prostitutes. Maybe some, I don’t know. But at this moment, I really want to find some way to legally dismantle their organization, or starve it to death of students and teachers. I recognize this is over-reaction, and emotional, but I’m angry. I’m really angry.

    They made my kid afraid to create.

  124. Pteryxx says

    *off topic rage*

    I looked at Jonny Scaramanga’s post previous to the one PZ cited. (To be clear, it’s a guest post, not Jonny speaking.)

    (warning for ACE fundie christian education brainwashing absolute bullshit)

    I Am Officially Heartbroken

    Point is: at this moment I want to burn the A.C.E. sons of b*tches down. To be perfectly legally clear, that’s hyperbole. I don’t actually want to hurt anyone, nor burn anything. Nor, for that matter, do I think that the leaders of ACE as a corporate entity or as schools are the children of prostitutes. Maybe some, I don’t know. But at this moment, I really want to find some way to legally dismantle their organization, or starve it to death of students and teachers. I recognize this is over-reaction, and emotional, but I’m angry. I’m really angry.

    They made my kid afraid to create.

  128. says

    @ chigau

    If it doesn’t end in crash-n-burn, you aren’t trying hard enough!

    @ Pteryxx

    Bleeaugh… Goddist shits.

    If it cheers you any, Spawnphontes and I recently won a major battle with like ilk. (It is a little too topical to share right now.)

    Don’t be shy to call them on their crap. They only win while they are making the most noise.

  130. says

    Oy vey…

    This Man Has Nothing to Hide—Not Even His Email Password

    Until age 21, Noah Dyer was a virgin. In fact, he’d never made it as far as second base. A devout Mormon, he then married, had four children, and decided that maybe there isn’t a God after all. This caused him to rethink all of his ethical beliefs. Now in his early thirties, he insists that he hasn’t changed much in the big picture.

    “Zero is still the amount of times I’ve killed someone, robbed someone, raped someone, taken illicit drugs, or even had alcohol or other substances,” he says. “What I did reevaluate and decided to change drastically was my behavior in regard to sex. Don’t get me wrong. I loved my wife. I loved our sex. I was happy with all matters in our relationship except for one thing. I really wanted to have sex with other people. And in the absence of a jealous God who is overly concerned about where I rub my genitals, I couldn’t figure out why I shouldn’t.”

    Two years of counseling ensued. After much reflection, Dyer decided that a polyamorous lifestyle was, in fact, for him. He is now a divorced professor at a technical college with no credit cards and extremely uninteresting finances, largely because the bulk of his paychecks are directly deposited, per his preference, in the account of his ex-wife.

    And having been transparent with his coreligionists about his loss of faith and with his ex-wife about his lost willingness to be monogamous, he gradually came to this life philosophy: Society would be better if no one had any secrets. Email and bank accounts are just a small piece. A person who truly had nothing to hide would also consent to footage being captured when they’re, say, fighting with their kids, sitting on the toilet, masturbating, and negotiating with their boss for a pay raise. Dyer is trying his damnedest to do just that. He doesn’t necessarily want you to see every moment, but doesn’t think he should have a right to stop you.

  132. Christopher says

    So why the fuck is everyone butthurt over the word butthurt?

    How does the accepted meaning of butthurt relate in any way, shape, or form to any type of anal sex?

  133. says

    Christopher:
    Did you even read the link I provided on that?
    It has multiple uses. One of them is homophobic (not to mention it hints at being raped). The English language is large. Use another word.

  134. ironchew says

    Wow, I had no idea people would get this butthurt over an imaginary definition of the word “butthurt”.

    I mean, really. Pharyngula commenters are entitled to their own opinions, but they don’t get to rewrite the dictionary.

  135. says

    ironchew, Christopher:

    You’re butthurt.

    Both “u mad?” and “u jelly?” are reductive and bad, but “butthurt” probably does more to signal the clanging approach of a moron than any other word short of “Ayn.” Butthurt surpasses the others, because it can mean almost anything. Someone who’s butthurt can be furious or whiny or victimized or petty or jealous or devoid of perspective. There’s nothing you can’t apply it to, so long as you want to signal a total lack of respect for the other side.

    For example:

    “Palestinian representatives outlined a list of butthurt to the UN last week, hoping for a UN Resolution on Palestinian Butthurt. The UN failed to tell them to get over it and just move to some other Arab country.”
    “President Franklin Delano Butthurt addressed the nation, claiming that December 7th, 1941 would ‘live in infamy’ just because America got its butt hurt by the Japanese.”
    “I’m sick and tired of the butthurt over at Jezebel from all their PC Meter Maids being afraid of men telling it like it is about how girls get themselves raped.”
    That’s the other aspect of “butthurt” that makes a legitimately awful term. Because jealousy and anger are emotions; they spring naturally from our thoughts and feelings. There is no mode of argument, no state of grief, no kind of righteous anger that actually results in your butt hurting. No one suffering a breakup feels “butt ache” from listening to love songs on the radio.

    There is, however, a pretty obvious cause of butthurt that everyone envisions when they try to think of its point of origin. It’s called getting fucked in the ass.

    Look, obviously many people don’t intend that interpretation when they use the word. Doubtless, a lot of people recognize it simply as an effective term in the discourse that can be used to put someone down. Like kids with gay uncles or aunts who would never dream of wounding their family but nevertheless say, “Ugh, that is so gay,” on the playground, butthurt is likely just a weapon in the arsenal of many people who’ve never stopped to think what it means.

    That’s unfortunate, but it’s not an excuse. The imagery of forced humiliating sodomy (or at the most optimistic, a thorough ass-kicking) immediately conjures up pretty clear pictures of the victims, and those people are bitches. Bitches like women, who aren’t as strong as men, who are subordinate to them because God or biology made them weak, who are meant to have things shoved in them, in areas around the butt. Bitches like male weaklings in prison populations, who can’t fend off attackers with their fists and have to preserve their safety by being regularly sodomized at another’s behest, who only get what they deserve as criminal subhumans anyway.

    http://gawker.com/5965417/on-butthurt

    ironchew, dictionaries aren’t prescriptive.

  138. says

    http://gawker.com/5965417/on-butthurt

    Both “u mad?” and “u jelly?” are reductive and bad, but “butthurt” probably does more to signal the clanging approach of a moron than any other word short of “Ayn.” Butthurt surpasses the others, because it can mean almost anything. Someone who’s butthurt can be furious or whiny or victimized or petty or jealous or devoid of perspective. There’s nothing you can’t apply it to, so long as you want to signal a total lack of respect for the other side.

    For example:

    “Palestinian representatives outlined a list of butthurt to the UN last week, hoping for a UN Resolution on Palestinian Butthurt. The UN failed to tell them to get over it and just move to some other Arab country.”
    “President Franklin Delano Butthurt addressed the nation, claiming that December 7th, 1941 would ‘live in infamy’ just because America got its butt hurt by the Japanese.”
    “I’m sick and tired of the butthurt over at Jezebel from all their PC Meter Maids being afraid of men telling it like it is about how girls get themselves raped.”
    That’s the other aspect of “butthurt” that makes a legitimately awful term. Because jealousy and anger are emotions; they spring naturally from our thoughts and feelings. There is no mode of argument, no state of grief, no kind of righteous anger that actually results in your butt hurting. No one suffering a breakup feels “butt ache” from listening to love songs on the radio.

    There is, however, a pretty obvious cause of butthurt that everyone envisions when they try to think of its point of origin. It’s called getting fucked in the ass.

    Look, obviously many people don’t intend that interpretation when they use the word. Doubtless, a lot of people recognize it simply as an effective term in the discourse that can be used to put someone down. Like kids with gay uncles or aunts who would never dream of wounding their family but nevertheless say, “Ugh, that is so gay,” on the playground, butthurt is likely just a weapon in the arsenal of many people who’ve never stopped to think what it means.

    That’s unfortunate, but it’s not an excuse. The imagery of forced humiliating sodomy (or at the most optimistic, a thorough ass-kicking) immediately conjures up pretty clear pictures of the victims, and those people are bitches. {word removed by me-Tony} like women, who aren’t as strong as men, who are subordinate to them because God or biology made them weak, who are meant to have things shoved in them, in areas around the butt. {word removed by me-Tony} like male weaklings in prison populations, who can’t fend off attackers with their fists and have to preserve their safety by being regularly sodomized at another’s behest, who only get what they deserve as criminal subhumans anyway.

  140. JAL: Snark, Sarcasm & Bitterness says

    Christopher

    I think we can all agree on the accepted definition of ‘butthurt’: whining about an inconsequential perceived slight, annoyance, or insult. The implication is that the person has no reason to complain and should buck the fuck up.

    No.
    Even if it’s not a reference to rape or anal sex, I’d still object because it makes spanking trivial. Punishing your child by inflicting pain and violating their bodily autonomy is not inconsequential. The view that children are property is a problem. Of course, the child is crying and upset over it. Even if it’s just a swat not made in anger, you just sent a powerful message about their body, their worth, and their rights.

    I loathe the phrase. But it’s not just the definition, it’s how it’s used as well. It gets thrown around by privileged people a lot in serious discussion because hey, those gays, women, POCs and others just need to get over it! Their petty feelings are just in the way, they’re being overly emotional as always.

    It has seriously problematic connotations and says a whole lot about our society. Word choice not only sends a message to those you communicate with, but yourself as well. That was the first time you used it. Continuing to say it and defend it when you’ve been given information and warnings, sends up a bunch of other red flags as well.

    Congrats, Christopher. You’re being an excellent communicator, but a shitty person.

  141. says

    Re: Butthurt

    I don’t personally have any strong feelings on the matter. However, since other people do, and since I don’t consider the term to be important in any way, I prefer avoiding it. If there are reasons to avoid it and no reasons to keep it, why keep it?

  142. says

    Chas, in a comment from August, last year:
    In an attempt to cut off a derail:

    “Butthurt” is homophobic.

    Thank you for confirming my suspicion.
    …
    I always thought “butthurt” was about getting spanked.

    We’ve had this discussion before. It’s incorrect to make the blunt statement that it “is homophobic,” because a lot of people read it and use it and always haved in the ‘spanked’ sense. However, others testify to interpreting it as a reference to anal sex/rape instead, no matter the intent, and worse, evidence was presented to show that many people not only interpret it that way but also use it intentionally in the perjorative homophobic sense.
    So once you know that, you have to decide whether your intention is pure and obvious enough to risk misinterpretation. Best to drop it altogether.

    ****
    Me: Now, there are all manner of fine words to use. Perhaps you should take the time to think about why you think butthurt is an appropriate word to use in regard to another person. If you actually think about it, you’ll most likely conclude it’s an ugly word to use, no matter which sense you are thinking of when you use it. Short form: used in either way, it’s punching down. Don’t do that.

  143. The Mellow Monkey: Singular They says

    JAL

    Even if it’s not a reference to rape or anal sex, I’d still object because it makes spanking trivial. Punishing your child by inflicting pain and violating their bodily autonomy is not inconsequential.

    This.

    I loathe the phrase. But it’s not just the definition, it’s how it’s used as well. It gets thrown around by privileged people a lot in serious discussion because hey, those gays, women, POCs and others just need to get over it! Their petty feelings are just in the way, they’re being overly emotional as always.

    And this, too. It’s used to say “your suffering is trivial”.

  144. ironchew says

    Pharyngula is a rude blog; PZ likes it that way, and there is much to be said for people who have the preparedness and conviction to say what they mean without feeling the need to obscure their point with sugar coating designed to spare the other side’s feelings.

    And that is why I will continue to use the word “butthurt”. Not only because Pharyngula commenters came up with an imaginary definition that no one else recognizes, but mainly because it’s a fitting term and I won’t sugarcoat my language just because some 12-year-old allegedly uses the term on /b/ to imply anal rape. No word in the English language is safe from that.

  145. chigau (違う) says

    ironchew
    If you want to continue to use ‘butthurt’ elsewhere, go ahead.
    Don’t use it here.

  146. says

    ironchew:
    So the link I provided in the other thread, as well as the one I provided here in the Dome are insufficient to show that there are people that associate ‘butthurt’ with anal sex, rape, and/or homophobia? Why are you so determined to hang on to this one word when you have people telling you it can be offensive? Why is it so hard for you to say “I didn’t realize it had homophobic connotations. Since I don’t want to accidentally offend anyone by using the term, I’ll work to stop using the word and find something else to use”?

  148. Goodbye Enemy Janine says

    Ironchew, go ahead and be rude back. But pleased do not be surprised when you are treated like the loud know nothing shitheel that you have been acting like.

  149. ironchew says

    Since I don’t want to accidentally offend anyone by using the term, I’ll work to stop using the word and find something else to use”?

    There are plenty of religious people out there who honestly believe that anyone labeling themselves an “atheist” (or god forbid, an “anti-theist”) is highly offensive. That doesn’t mean I listen to them.

  150. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    And that is why I will continue to use the word “butthurt”.

    Who give a shit what an asshole doesn’t think, since you aren’t thinking? The banhammer will not come soon enough for fuckwits like you. You don’t decide what is the usage here, the regulars and PZ do. So fuck off fuckwit. Either conform or fade into the badwidth….

  151. says

    ironchew:

    And that is why I will continue to use the word “butthurt”.

    You can be an offensive jackass all you like, using butthurt, elsewhere. You can continue to be an offensive jackass here, of course, sans your new favourite word, because if you continue to use it here, you’ll not only be needlessly upsetting people, you will be in violation of the commenting rules, and then PZ will have to get involved.

    Not only because Pharyngula commenters came up with an imaginary definition that no one else recognizes, but mainly because it’s a fitting term and I won’t sugarcoat my language just because some 12-year-old allegedly uses the term on /b/ to imply anal rape.

    It’s not an imaginary definition, ironchew. There were multiple, long discussions about this terminology, and a number of the commentariat who are gay had had it used in a homophobic way against them. It might not happen to you, or someone in your circle, however, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen to others. When hanging out here, people are expected to think. You’re also expected to, at the very least, consider other points of view, such as JAL’s and mine, in this very thread, right up there ^ a little bit. No one brought 12 year olds in to this, either. Obviously, adults indulge in using the word in an offensive manner, which you are happily doing, or are we to conclude that you are 12 years old, ironchew?

  152. says

    One more point, ironchew. JAL pointed out that spanking a child is a violation of their autonomy. It really shouldn’t need pointing out that rape is a violation of autonomy. Once more, I invite you to think. Why are you so attached to a term that involves violating a person’s autonomy?

  153. Goodbye Enemy Janine says

    There are plenty of religious people out there who honestly believe that anyone labeling themselves an “atheist” (or god forbid, an “anti-theist”) is highly offensive. That doesn’t mean I listen to them.

    You do realize that atheists do not object to being called atheists. Piss poor comparison.

    But I will act on one part of your statement. I will not listen to you.

  154. says

    ironchew:

    There are plenty of religious people out there who honestly believe that anyone labeling themselves an “atheist” (or god forbid, an “anti-theist”) is highly offensive. That doesn’t mean I listen to them.

    This is not the same thing. The word ‘atheist’ does nothing to a theist. The word ‘butthurt’ is used to punch down on both women and gay men. Given your continued defense of the word, it’s clear you don’t give a shit about offending people who are part of oppressed or marginalized communities.

  155. says

    One word that is particularly common on the internets is “butthurt,” typically used sarcastically or to ridicule someone who is whining about something they don’t like. I mentioned my distaste for the word to a friend of mine earlier this week. “I had no idea that the word even meant that,” she said. Her first thought was that it was some rape joke, and she found it to be rather confusing in the context. She had to look it up in order to discern its common meaning. But her first thought was right. It can’t be separated from that meaning, and that’s my problem.

    Just think about it. The term implies less of “pain in the ass, I sat on something unpleasant” and something far more sexist and homophobic. This is mostly because of the context the word is typically used in. Sandra is in a bad mood because Hugo took her parking spot? She’s just butthurt. Mike won’t stop complaining that his bro beat him playing video games? Butthurt. Essentially, the term is used when someone is upset that someone else has gotten the better or them or beaten them or bested them in some way. That is to say, they dominated them. You know, like when someone is raped. This just isn’t funny. Not only is the term sexist, because it hinges on domination and anal rape, which is primarily a male device, but it is also homophobic. I’m pretty sure that gay men don’t think the threat of anal rape is hilarious, and I’m also pretty sure they don’t enjoy an act they enjoy once again being used as a display of cruelty, disgust, and derision.

    http://persephonemagazine.com/2013/01/can-we-please-stop-using-the-term-butthurt/

    ironchew: So all of the above means nothing to you?

  156. says

    Tony:

    The word ‘butthurt’ is used to punch down on both women and gay men.

    And children. Also, while I can’t speak for anyone else, as someone who has been raped, I find it loathsome, and in some cases, triggering.

  158. says

    Daz @ 154:

    Oh. Yes, well, that’s all clear now, isn’t it? Someone who can’t figure out when and why people are outraged isn’t likely to score much on the empathy scale.

    Perhaps Christopher will be a shining example of someone who gets it. (Hey, I can hope, right?)

  161. ironchew says

    Eh, I guess I don’t loathe Dawkins with a fiery passion. That sets me apart from the Pharyngula consensus in important ways, I’m sure.

    Congrats on your somewhat disturbing stalking skills there, Daz.

  162. says

    Janine:

    Careful, Inaji, Ironchew might accuse you of turning off your brain.

    My, how interestin’. I see my exhortations to think were wasted on ironchew.

  164. says

    ironchew:

    Congrats on your somewhat disturbing stalking skills there, Daz.

    It’s not stalking, you bloody idiot. A commentator’s history is important around here. Besides, why are you acting as though what you wrote was shameful?

    Also: I don’t hate Dawkins at all, let alone with any passion. The man is mind-bendingly stupid on quite a lot of social issues, and it’s frustrating as hell when he encourages and gives quarter to other mind-bendingly stupid people, who have an axe to grind when it comes to things like women speaking up, or rape victims speaking up, and so on. I won’t bother with the full court explanation, because you’ve made it abundantly clear that you’re more than a bit of an idiot, who has little empathy or insight.

  165. JAL: Snark, Sarcasm & Bitterness says

    Tony #52,

    Yep. I usually see it in the gaming community where rape is explicitly used as dominating someone and say “stop being butthurt” for just about everything, especially if you disagree with their douchbro cesspool. It’s about weakness, same, and toxic masculinity.

    Spanking plays a huge role in toughening up children, boys are taught to “man up” and girls to suffer silently.

  167. says

    ironchew:

    Eh, I guess I don’t loathe Dawkins with a fiery passion. That sets me apart from the Pharyngula consensus in important ways, I’m sure.
    Congrats on your somewhat disturbing stalking skills there, Daz.

    I never got the memo that said the consensus was “we are supposed to loathe Dawkins with a fiery passion”. Personally, I don’t like the guy, as he’s displayed callous insensitivity to women and victims of rape, as well as minimized the harm of child sexual abuse (bc indoctrination into religion is worse in his book). I don’t like his tweet about abortion, nor his tweet about a mother faced with giving birth to a child with Down’s Syndrome. I think Dawkins is an asshole with an empathy deficiency.
    Doesn’t mean I loathe him with a fiery passion.

    Also, it’s not uncommon for people to go digging through the archives bc they remember someone being an asshole. It’s hardly being a stalker.

  168. JAL: Snark, Sarcasm & Bitterness says

    I submitted that too early. (My browser keeps going back and forwards on pages randomly. )

    “Toughening up” should be hardening and there’s a missing sentence about reinforcing the status quo.

    *sigh*

  170. JAL: Snark, Sarcasm & Bitterness says

    Tony

    Also, it’s not uncommon for people to go digging through the archives bc they remember someone being an asshole. It’s hardly being a stalker.

    (Continuing off your comment)

    It’s called context and history. We’re not living in a vacuum. Are we not supposed to remember you or your comments? Then what’s the point of making them? Might as well go scream into the wind. Far more therapeutic and doesn’t cause any harm.

    Calling that stalking is so fucking ridiculous and dismissive. That’s offensive with splash damage to everyone who’s been stalked.

  172. Daniel Schealler says

    @ironchew

    Consider again what Tony wrote here:

    Why are you so determined to hang on to this one word when you have people telling you it can be offensive? Why is it so hard for you to say “I didn’t realize it had homophobic connotations. Since I don’t want to accidentally offend anyone by using the term, I’ll work to stop using the word and find something else to use”?

    ‘Butthurt’ is not a term that I used particularly often. But I have occasionally used it in the past.

    Up until this exact conversation, I had thought it only had to do with complaining about having received a deserved spanking. I actually liked it on account of being gender neutral, as both men and women have butts. I was completely unaware of connotations to do with rape.

    However, as a result of this conversation, now I know better. I’m not in the habit of using the word anyway, so it’s not a particularly big sacrifice for me to avoid using it in the future. But even if it had been something I said frequently, as a result of the conversation here I would have been persuaded to stop immediately.

    For the sake of argument, even if someone who connotes ‘butthurt’ with rape could be said to be ‘incorrect’, I would still think that the very fact that some people are triggered by the term in that way to be a good reason to stop using it on simple grounds of courtesy and basic human empathy.

    Please reconsider your position.

  173. says

    In light of the recent discussion, I give you House Candidate Called Female Senators “Undeserving Bimbos in Tennis Shoes”

    In an entry on the Supreme Court’s 2003 Lawrence v. Texas decision, which ruled that state bans on sodomy were unconstitutional, he wrote: “Butt (sic) never have winners lost so dearly. The Court’s voyage into uncharted, untreated cultural bathhouse waters was designed to offer a gentle push from behind…to generate a small skip forward for the pink triangle class…to throw them a bone, so to speak.”

  174. numerobis says

    I never knew butthurt could refer to spanking; I always thought it was about anal. It was used in another forum I used to participate in — principally by a commenter who used flamboyantly homophobic language in an effort to normalize it (e.g. using fag as a normal word *specifically* to negate the slur). I assumed butthurt was the same: homophobic in general use, used by him to mock homophobia.

  176. says

    The Sorbo thread, it’s doing things to my head. Now I’m all sidetracked (in mah head) with the intersection of spices, food, and religion (large sections of Spice: The History of a Temptation are floating about in all the stuff about commandments now.)

  178. Seven of Mine, formerly piegasm says

    ironchew:

    Congrats on your somewhat disturbing stalking skills there, Daz.

    Things which are apparently the same:

    1) Remembering something someone said in the past.
    2) Stalking.

    TIL

  179. Brony says

    @ ironchew

    Wow, I had no idea people would get this butthurt over an imaginary definition of the word “butthurt”.

    The whole problem is encapsulated in your wording. You had no idea because of a range of experiences not in your experience. And when you discover those experiences your reaction is to proclaim the experiences of others as imaginary. Other people and what they experience are quite literally not real to you by choice.
    Your willingness to act this way would give us the implicit right to treat you in similar fashion, if we wanted to be that sort of person that refused to accept reality on it’s terms. Your experience of being annoyed by people with a different experience than you is something you cannot defend here if you are unwilling to recognize other perspectives in fair trade.

    I mean, really. Pharyngula commenters are entitled to their own opinions, but they don’t get to rewrite the dictionary.

    Actually we do along with the rest of society. You know that the dictionary changes depending on usage right? We all individually get to fight about usage. You can at least be honest about your role here. You want to tell people to stop feeling a certain way about a word without having any concern for what it is that made them feel that way. You will not be persuasive with such an approach.

    And that is why I will continue to use the word “butthurt”. Not only because Pharyngula commenters came up with an imaginary definition that no one else recognizes, but mainly because it’s a fitting term and I won’t sugarcoat my language just because some 12-year-old allegedly uses the term on /b/ to imply anal rape. No word in the English language is safe from that.

    And there is nothing in there that dismisses the idea of some words being entirely unhelpful because of how others experience them. That policy was contextualized in social arenas having to do with challenging the dominant culture. There is good reason to not care as much about the feelings of creationists, or global warming deniers (and even manipulate them without dishonesty in specific arguments).
    When it comes to oppressed minorities this shit starts mattering in a different way because society loves to create “tool words” meant to do certain things in communication. The dictionary meanings that you are so fond of are how the tools are used but they are not exhaustive and language is constantly evolving. Ignoring the way words like “butthurt”, are functionally used on others is to choose to remain ignorant to what society does in a larger context. Not a good characteristic for someone who would be prepared to know what reality is really like and respond to it as it is.

    Ignorance of, and refusal to understand and respond to this system is to leave yourself open to manipulation by all kinds of “dogwhistles”, stereotypical terminology, and other simplistic characterizations that get attached to social conflicts. I wonder what other politically charged object words you might also refuse to allow to be altered by reality.

    You last comment is just petty distraction.

  180. Amphiox says

    Congrats on your somewhat disturbing stalking skills there, Daz.

    Way to minimize the negative impact of REAL stalking, there.

    Somehow, I am not surprised that ironchew would go there, given the prior commentary.

    You know, in the early days of my participation on pharyngula, I used the insult “twat”, twice. I was never called out on it. I don’t know if anyone even noticed me using it. But then I saw others use that word and be called on it, and I saw the explanations on why that word was offensive, which I had not known at the time. So I stopped using it.

    It’s called basic politeness and human decency.

  181. knowknot says

    – OK… I have a horrible question. I decided not to ask, and then it gnawed at me, and here I am. PLEASE understand that I’m not wanting to reopen the original thread, I’m only trying to understand some reactions on that thread. From a position of obvious ignorance.
    – In the recent “Beyoncé Strikes a Mighty Blow” thread, user Thomas Hobbes brought up an issue related to how women’s choices are affected by overarching paternalism. It appeared to me that this was as issue that has been previously been forwarded by people self identifying as feminist.
    – The position or the reaction to it may or may not be viewed as valid, but as far as I can tell, it’s out there. So, I assume anyone attempting to educate themselves on issues overall is likely to run into it. And, as a result, I assume that it might be a legimate point of discussion, or at least worth addressing at face value.
    – Now, I am not advocating ANYTHING, because I’m still awash in some of the issues (and may be so forever), but I didn’t understand the reactions. I didn’t see anything caustic or baiting in the posts that caused the reaction, nor did I see anything glaringly out of line with statements I’ve read from at least some feminists.
    – It would be to character for me to have missed something. Honestly, it would.
    – So… what was it? And what actually happened?
     
    (I ask, because I’m used to them”roughness” here. I actually kinda like it, in general. It’s direct. But I’m not used to the APPEARANCE (to my discrete, personal eyes) that potentially discourse is shut down. All kinds of other things, but not that. And again, I’m NOT asserting that that’s what happened. Just… um… help?)

  182. Seven of Mine, formerly piegasm says

    @ knowknot

    The problem isn’t that those people pointed out the impact of a patriarchal culture which works to limit the choices women make. Or at least not that in and of itself. The problem is that idea being brought up in a thread about someone who had made a conscious effort to get outside that patriarchal mold. It looks very much like someone being more motivated by wanting Beyonce back in that mold than an actual desire to honestly engage about that concept. As others pointed out in the thread, it’s possible to be aware of the constraints our culture puts on the choices women make without completely denying their agency.

    There was also the issue of race involved there too because Beyonce isn’t just a woman, she’s a black woman. These patriarchal expectations that these concern trolls insinuated Beyonce is pandering to (consciously or otherwise) are patriarchal expectations of white women which are often considered off limits to black women. There’s a whole other dynamic there that these people are reckoning without.

    And you’ll notice that, when pressed on it, he went full troll.

  183. Seven of Mine, formerly piegasm says

    re: me @ 182

    Beyonce isn’t just a woman, she’s a black woman

    This is really badly worded on my part, IMO, for reasons I’m not sure I can articulate (or maybe I’m full of shit, I dunno..either way I don’t like it). Please pretend I just said “Beyonce is black.”

  184. Beatrice, an amateur cynic looking for a happy thought says

    knowknot,

    As I wrote over there; how women’s choices are influenced by the patriarchy and a sexist society is a topic worth discussing. But in that particular thread, the criticism was aimed at a single woman who was deemed unworthy of spreading feminist messages because some of her choices may or may not align with patriarchal expectations of women.

    That isn’t productive. That isn’t a fair discussion. That is using a pretence of being a thorough little feminist to subvert feminism.

  185. ceesays says

    – In the recent “Beyoncé Strikes a Mighty Blow” thread, user Thomas Hobbes brought up an issue related to how women’s choices are affected by overarching paternalism. It appeared to me that this was as issue that has been previously been forwarded by people self identifying as feminist.

    er, what issue? I suspect that I know but I don’t want to write you a hugelong explanation on the wrong thing.

  186. says

    Seven of Mine #183

    This is really badly worded on my part, IMO, for reasons I’m not sure I can articulate

    I tried reading what you said in a purposefully bad light, to see if I could find your problem with it, ’cause it seemed fine to me. All I can think of is that the word “just” or any synonym (merely, only) could be read in the sense that it implies inferiority. (Yeah, I’m having trouble articulating it as well.) That would have to be a pretty mean reading though IMO; I read it, and I suspect most people would, to mean “It isn’t only that she’s a woman…”

  187. ceesays says

    I saw it. “she’s not just (a normal) woman, she’s a black woman”

    that said, I knew what seven of mine meant.

  188. Seven of Mine, formerly piegasm says

    yep that’s why it squicked me…it read like “she’s black, as distinct from being normal.”

  189. knowknot says

    @183 Seven of Mine
    Didn’t seem poorly worded to me… and thank you. I think I get it.
    @184 Beatrice
    And this. Thank you.
    @185 ceesays
    Yeah… I wasn’t clear there. It’s an argument I’ve seen against “choose your choice” that essentially states (as I understand it) that choices made within the confines of what is allowed by an overarching oppression are effectively invalid. Gloria Steinem once rebutted with something to the effect of “you can’t use tools you don’t have, yet” (NOT a quote).
    BUT…
    Just checked, and Seven of Mine mentioned, it’s all overboard on that thread, now. Knowing this, I probably still would have asked, wondering if it had been thrown overboard. But it doesn’t appear so.

  190. says

    – In the recent “Beyoncé Strikes a Mighty Blow” thread, user Thomas Hobbes brought up an issue related to how women’s choices are affected by overarching paternalism. It appeared to me that this was as issue that has been previously been forwarded by people self identifying as feminist.

    It seems to me that it doesn’t matter what a woman chooses or does, it can be twisted about under patriarchal ideas and ideals, and twisted even more under the overarching kyriarchy. Going by patriarchal notions, there is nothing a woman can choose that will be ‘right’, outside of “seen, not heard, obedient, self-effacing, modest/virginal in all things, but be a whore in my bed” type of shit.

    When it comes to women being oppressed, the oppression and suppression of WOC runs deeper and hits a hell of a lot harder. A WOC being out, happy, and proud of her self and her sexuality is a very scary thing to a lot of people, white men in particular. You’ll see a need surface, a need to knock that woman down to her knees, head bowed in submission, which is what Thomas ended up attempting in the thread, using every means possible to dehumanize a strong, sexually dynamic woman.

    For much of history, men have been busy categorizing and defining women, and they still do this, no matter the choices any woman makes. They will find a way for those choices to be wrong. When I was young, it was “women libbers, nasty, unattractive, hairy creatures who won’t be purposefully and properly feminine for the male gaze, and they hate men!” Now, if a woman chooses to embrace her own brand of femininity, she can’t possibly be a feminist, and besides, she’s scary sexual, y’know, slut, and so it goes.

  191. Brony says

    @ knowknot
    I don’t think you need to worry about your approach. The sensitivity around here is because of the crap that we experience from people who are here for socially strategic reasons (knowingly or unknowingly) and are not really interested in a discussion or argument. That sort of thing is associated with particular patterns of behavior that suggest dishonest, deceptive, manipulative and other intentions and it can be a bit tiresome because it’s like a fucked up “primate chess” that takes some moves to detect if the person is dishonest or just lacks experience.

    You don’t display any of the bad signs and you in fact are including statements indicating your intentions. The more “alpha-male” types might say that you are being submissive or some other crap but they are useful social signals and I use them myself.

    The position or the reaction to it may or may not be viewed as valid, but as far as I can tell, it’s out there. So, I assume anyone attempting to educate themselves on issues overall is likely to run into it. And, as a result, I assume that it might be a legimate point of discussion, or at least worth addressing at face value.

    Yes. It’s not a “this is something that we can’t talk about”. The problem is that if a person shows no signs of understanding the points that others are bringing up, and the person is functionally displaying behavior that is part of the problem, the nature of the resulting conversation is going to be complicated at best.
    If you look at TH’s first comments at 72 and 73,
    https://proxy.freethought.online/pharyngula/2014/08/26/beyonc-strikes-a-mighty-blow-for-feminism/comment-page-1/#comment-842323
    …he is essentially coming in and doing precisely what many woman complain about. We all individually have a certain amount of sensitivity to being accused of that which we are simultaneously complaining about.

    The cognitive dissonance is dealt with my different people in different ways and the people that don’t deal with personal criticism well tend to do so in combative fashion (It’s a general human problem and I screw up too). Combined with a lot of woman tired of seeing this pattern (who I think are entitled to critisize a behavior they are tired of dealing with, I like to be a “combat support specialist” when things start getting heated) the results are often predictable. Criticism of personal behavior is often interpreted as an attack. If there are openings for things to deescalate I do try to use them, but I would feel guilty pressing too hard because women don’t get to be dominant in a social sense nearly often enough. It’s a general behavioral skill that society denies women far too often.

    I think your questions have been fine so far.

  192. ceesays says

    okay, that is related to what I was thinking.

    what hobbes, and earlier on in the thread mudpuddle was doing was pointing up precisely why #feminismisforwhitewomen got started – the ovewhelming amount of common belief about what feminism is centers on white middle class women and their concerns while erasing or degrading the concerns of most of the other women on the planet.

    Beyonce stands up and declares herself feminist, for the jillionth fucking time, and people pile in to say that she’s not.

    This time, they’re saying she’s not because she’s beautiful and sexy, therefore she’s pandering to male gaze, therefore she’s not a feminist.

    but for black women there is a struggle to be seen as beautiful. And let’s not get that twisted. Racist beauty standards deny black women that standing. Black women are not beautiful. We’re not delicate, we’re not feminine. What do we have instead? Why, we’re strong – so strong we can’t feel pain and don’t need companionship or support or love or to be taken care of, and we can do most of the mule work while we’re ignored, disparaged, erased, and shunted aside for the interest of the true feminism, which is for white women.

    but how do you erase a billionaire? how do you erase a pop music star? how do you solve a problem like a woman with so much admiration and power in the music industry that she can drop an entire album and series of videos at 3 am one night with zero promotion or advance warning and have that album skyrocket to #1 in a single day?

    you deny her assertion that she’s a feminist because she’s standing next to eight foot tall letters in an outfit that silhouettes her sexually appealing body, her long hair, and her enviable skill of maneuvering in high heels. you mumble about patriarchal beauty standards even though she produced songs with unabashedly, undisputed feminist sentiment and songs specifically about the respect black women deserve. You deny her womanhood and her humanity by calling her a “barbie doll” – and when you reach for a “better” example of a beautiful feminist woman, you make sure all your choices are true feminists – white women.

    I personally have a relationship with male gaze that goes this way – look I like my long hair and my makeup and my pretty clothes. I like them, and liking them has everything to do with my feminism as a black woman, because I am taking an image that has been denied to me for as long as the black diaspora has existed and I am making it mine.

    I am not pretty for a black girl. I am pretty, end of sentence. This is a part of my humanity, and to deny it to me and to deny it to beyonce just keeps feminism centered on white women, and continues to push us out.

  193. Crip Dyke, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden says

    @knowknot:
    first quoting you:

    Thomas Hobbes brought up an issue related to how women’s choices are affected by overarching paternalism. It appeared to me that this was as issue that has been previously been forwarded by people self identifying as feminist.
    – The position or the reaction to it may or may not be viewed as valid, but as far as I can tell, it’s out there. So, I assume anyone attempting to educate themselves on issues overall is likely to run into it. And, as a result, I assume that it might be a legimate point of discussion, or at least worth addressing at face value.

    This is the part to which I intend to respond, despite that everything that I say can be extrapolated from the basic observations of Confluence Feminism + Beatrice’s #184:

    …in that particular thread, the criticism was aimed at a single woman who was deemed unworthy of spreading feminist messages because [of] some of her choices….
    …
    That isn’t a fair discussion. That is using a pretence of being a thorough little feminist to subvert feminism

    In the initial Thomas Hobbes position, race and racism do not – in any way – affect sexist expectations, sexist judgements of beauty, internal sexist socialization, sexist limits on economic/business opportunities, sexist media coverage, different women’s experience of sexism, or different women’s experience of feminism.

    They are entirely irrelevant. In Thomas Hobbes words:

    …to those who cannot read: I am not talking about race at all.

    So when Thomas Hobbes says that Beyoncé deserves less credit for her feminist stance, because, hey, her body made everything easy, right?, he is deliberately and purposefully *not* talking about how her body maybe-kinda-sorta *didn’t* make things easy.

    Further, whose beauty standard is Hobbes using? mary hope lee’s?

    I rather think not. It doesn’t occur to Hobbes that Beyoncé might have been raised in an environment where her lighter skin opened white music producer’s doors only after her lighter skin closed off Black friendships, Black body-positivity, Black community, Black love. Or perhaps her lighter skin was embraced by her local Black community in a too-frequent example of internalized racism and she had to watch people she loved saddened by the look of her lighter skin. What does it do to a child when an aunt can’t hide her pain at being born dark whenever the aunt looks the child in the eye? What does it do to a child to know your existence is a source of pain to people you love but to have no idea why? What horrible qualities must a child impute to herself in an attempt to understand such an aunt’s tears?

    Read his initial, oh-so-tentative and reasonable comment again:

    Though I agree with the message, I am having some problems with the messenger. Beyoncé is using her position to make a feminist statement. Which by itself is great. However, she reached that position not only by her skills but also by her looks, that conform to every damn cliché about female beauty. No doubt she is sincere about how being sexy is her own choice. But how it shows totally agrees with what is dictated by a heterosexual male dominated society.

    What makes Beyoncé’s body-loving feminist stance less valuable isn’t that, y’know, white women copy her haircut or her album releases spike sales of chemical straighteners and bleaches in inner NorthEast Portland, Oregon.* What makes it less valuable isn’t that Beyoncé has an acquired socio-economic class that makes her [at least occasionally] oblivious to how fat shaming functions. What makes it less valuable isn’t that despite her current attempts to embrace a body-loving feminist stance, in her past she has attempted to avoid discussing and/or otherwise hide the degree to which her appearance is actually that of clothing or makeup or lighting tricks or photoshop or other things that aren’t her appearance.

    No. What makes Beyoncé’s feminism less valuable is that Beyoncé gets dicks hard. Lots of dicks. Even worse? The dicks she gets the hardest are the dicks who most heavily buy into sexism. Look at the dicks! Look how hard!

    Thomas Hobbes wants you to make sure that when you’re gauging Beyoncé’s contribution to feminism you calibrate your plethysmograph. It’s really the only way to objectively value a feminist’s contributions after all, isn’t it?

    So, yeah. Freedom of choice: “Did Beyoncé have freedom of choice in getting dicks hard?” is potentially a question that has feminist utility. “Hey, y’all, before we get too excited about Beyoncé, shouldn’t we take a moment measure her feminist legitimacy by counting how many dicks get hard looking at her?” is a question that has rather less.

    Beyoncé needs feminism for the same fucking reasons that mary hope lee needs feminism, and she embraces feminism for the same fucking reasons. That Thomas Hobbes believes that the beauty standards relevant to understanding Beyoncé’s positive embrace of feminism are the beauty standards of random dicks and not the beauty standards that seeped into her own head, her own assumptions, her own perceptions, her own judgements of her own worth since 4 September, 1981, shows a profound lack of understanding of how sexism hurts women.

    We can usefully ask about the tradeoffs Beyoncé must make in a sexist culture between earning money and maintaining a certain body shape, a certain fashion, a certain style. We can usefully ask about how this constrains Beyoncé’s freedom. We cannot usefully ask how much those constraints, or her individual choices in navigating them, de/legitimize her feminism.

    FUCK. THAT. NOISE.

    I think that’s more than enough to get on with in discussion the initial reaction to Thomas Hobbes’ initial comments.

    But of course it gets worse. Much of this has already been addressed, but I want to particularly point out:

    I am not talking about attractiveness. I am talking about conforming to every sexist stereotype in the book.
    …
    Her appearance, her music, her movie, every damn thing about Beyoncé is a submission to the standards of the masses.

    Remember Thomas Hobbes’ resort to the Feminist Legitimacy Plethysmograph?** Bad dicks get hard at the stereotype-compliant Beyoncé. Therefor, Beyoncé’s feminist legitimacy is low.

    The good news is that when considering stereotype-compliant women, Thomas Hobbes is willing to divorce attractiveness. That’s right, it’s the “standards of the masses” which are met – not Thomas Hobbes! While the dicks of the masses [the masses being, of course, male men] salute Beyoncé’s anti-feminist submission, Thomas Hobbes wants you to know that he doesn’t imbibe the Viagra of the masses. His boner is FLP-tested, MenFeministApproved™.

    That Thomas Hobbes feels it necessary to include in his comment sufficient information for us to realize it’s not his dick that gets hard at Beyoncé: it’s those bad dicks of the/m/asses, is the worst kind of snobbery.

    He pats himself on the head for disliking a woman.

    Why shouldn’t we puke at reading such dickish comments in a thread celebrating a woman and her choice to embrace her real body as sexy, and to give credit to feminism for helping to make that choice available?

    *Speaking of, you want something ThunderDome-Rage-Worthy? Check out this google search. That’s right. The Huffington Post has a “news” category “www.huffingtonpost.ca/news/beyonce-hair/”. Time to jack a round into the shotgun, Eldridge.

    **That’s a thing, right? I’m calling it a thing right now. I’m tired of men judging feminist legitimacy by how many dicks get hard and by **which** dicks get hard. They positively judge their own legitimacy by getting hard at fatties and trannies and darkies and cripples [but not crazies or retards! that’s sick, don’tcha know!]. They negatively judge their own or other men’s feminist credentials when those other men’s penises swell for boobs or after-diet “success” photos or milk white skin or just a woman who is a little too popular without a MenFeministApproved™ reason for such popularity.[Those using FLP to determine themselves NotFeminist!™ aren’t any more sad about it than those using FLP to determine themselves MenFeministApproved™.] But they don’t stop there! No, that would be fucked enough. Yet they feel compelled to continue on in their judgements until they reach women. And what a clusterfuck that is! At least the anti-feminists and the FLPSelfApproved MenFeminists agree: a woman’s philosophical legitimacy matches the man who gets a boner looking at her. Beyoncé? FLP check: feminist dick says? Flabby. Anti-feminist dick says? Stiffy. Thank goodness we have a winner: the FLP itself! Inter-rater reliability is always necessary to prove a test objectively useful.

  194. knowknot says

    @191 Brony
    – Excellent. Really excellent. I know I’ve been overly congratulatory today, but I’m sure it’s been warranted.
    – And re the submissive vs alpha thing… due to the way I was raised, I learned to bark a little late, but managed to end up OK. As a result, and in a manner somewhat related to the “sensitivity regarding accusations similar to complaint,” I tend toward excessive fussiness when I feel clarification is required, or clarity is in some sense imperative.
    – Insightful and informative. Respect.

  195. says

    I’d live in high heels if my spine would allow it. I love them, always have. I like my long hair, and I don’t care if a lot of people think a 56.5 year old shouldn’t be running around with long hair. Fuck ’em. It’s my hair. I can still do sexy, and when I do, I enjoy it. As for the male gaze? Who cares? I do what I do because it makes me happy.

    All women should (and do) have that right. Why in the fuckety fuck does it always have to come back to “well, how will men see that?” I don’t give a fuck, and no woman should feel that she has to give a fuck about that, or conform, in any way, to someone else’s notion of acceptable.

  196. knowknot says

    Crap.
    Should have been “I know I’ve seemed overly congratulatory…”
    What was that clarity thing?

  197. knowknot says

    Inaji –
    – Right.
    – Beyond irksome… sick, really… that “sexy” and “looking” are so entwined. I’m not even sure they’re that closely related, except in less common circumstances, or in strange ways.
    – And even when the “looking” is wanted or delivered, it’s a very different thing from “viewing,” I think. A different texture, a different intent, a different respect… a different everything, pretty much.

  198. knowknot says

    Oh… I should also say that none of that is in any way an argument against intentional attractiveness, or any other sort.
    Bla bla bla.

  199. says

    Knowknot:

    – Beyond irksome… sick, really… that “sexy” and “looking” are so entwined.

    What really burrows under my skin is that women are not supposed to enjoy their bodies. I remember when I was young, how utterly fantastic it was to simply revel in the physical me, whether I was walking, or riding, or sitting and reading, whatever. I looked good. I felt good. Every day was a celebration of joy in my physical bod. That’s a good thing, and so much time is spent on insisting that women shouldn’t do that, not really, it’s…unseemly. It’s unladylike. It’s crass. It’s slutty. It’s low class. It’s vulgar. It’s wrong. All of that, while we grow up seeing celebration of the male body, and celebration of male sexuality.

  200. Beatrice, an amateur cynic looking for a happy thought says

    Of course I can’t possibly try to look good for myself. That’s only what us silly women claim because we want to make it seem like we are not doing everything for men.
    But we are. Everything.
    Because that’s all that matters to us, what men think. Always.
    Sure.

  203. knowknot says

    @193 Crip Dyke
    Seconding ceesays.
    Damn. Just damn.
    Thank you and bless you.
    thankyouthankyouthankyouthankyouthankyou

  204. Brony says

    I should also mention that I am aware of how race is involved here, but that is one where I am still listening so I don’t speak so casually about it yet so I framed things in terms of women. But society also has lots of ways of dismissing, obfuscating, redirecting and other ways of minimizing when it comes to race. You folks get to be aggressive and dominant when it matters too. That is a new arena for “combat support” for me.

  205. Brony says

    @ knowknot 197
    Just take the time to notice and respond to the people themselves. When I do “combat support” the idea is to do my thing, back off, and let them talk. If anything I’m using my perspective and privilege to translate. The best you can do for your perceptive skills is to get skilled at the source.

  206. says

    Brony:

    You folks get to be aggressive and dominant when it matters too.

    Well, thanks. You might want to be a bit more thoughtful with your language choice and framing.

  207. Brony says

    @ Inaji
    Maybe that sounded too much like “you get permission”. If that is the case I apologize. Sometimes I state the obvious from a perspective like yours because I am speaking to the people that are in “my group”.

    What might work better? Assuming I am right about why it sounds bad.

  208. Brony says

    “…because I am speaking to the people that are in “my group”.”
    That was not what I meant. That is an example of trying to speak to more than one group, having the same meaning, and failing.

    See what I mean? It’s a process…

  209. Daniel Schealler says

    Feminist Legitimacy Plethysmograph

    Well coined. :)

    The claim is made by Hobbes that Beyonce’s feminist image is ‘less feminist’ because it happens to appeal to the male gaze.

    The claim itself privileges the male gaze as being more important than the subjective experience and expression of the woman.

    Thus, the claim itself demonstrates the very sexist attitude that it pretends to decry.

  210. Daniel Schealler says

    Bugger. Bad word choice.

    Thus, the claim itself demonstrates the very sexist attitude that it pretends to decry.

    ‘Demonstrates’ was the wrong word – it implies Hobbes carries or secretly intended a sexist attitude, which is not an implication I intended to make.

    I should have said: ‘Thus, the claim itself performs the very sexist attitude that it pretends to decry.’

    The use of ‘performs’ keeps the criticism focused on the claim and leaves the person making that claim out of the picture, which is what I intended.

  211. Seven of Mine, formerly piegasm says

    @ Brony

    I think you’re right about the giving permission tone but also, “you folks” is kind of an othering phrasing. It’s like “you other, different, non-normal, non-default people.” Very much the same reason I squicked myself out earlier by saying “Beyonce isn’t just a woman, she’s a black woman” although it’s obviously less specific.

    As far as what would be better? “Everyone has a right to blah blah blah, etc. etc” or some variant thereof, IMO.

  212. says

    Seven of Mine:

    I think you’re right about the giving permission tone but also, “you folks” is kind of an othering phrasing. It’s like “you other, different, non-normal, non-default people.”

    Yes, this. Especially the othering, which I despise. Being half Indian, I get to hear one form of that or another all the damn time from people, primarily white people. It’s a microaggression which no one needs. So, taking the time to make sure your language is inclusive, rather than exclusive, is best.

  213. says

    re: ‘You folks’
    I didn’t think about how it could be perceived as ‘othering’. I’ve often used it at various restaurants I’ve worked at as a greeting to guests (i.e. “Hey, how are you folks doing”) in place of ya’ll, or you guys. Is the opposition to the phrase dependent on context, or is it a blanket opposition?

  214. Brony says

    Thank you Seven of Mine, Inaji.

    It’s a bit tricky from this side because I’m trying to dance between the social reality of the in-group psychology in order to get things across to people who are influenced by it, and the sensitivities that exist because of how culture is creating the problems associated with the groups that it creates. Desert Son has the best signature for this, “still learning”. I’ll let it sink in for a bit.

    @ Tony
    I did not think of it either. In my head I see it as a more a casual and friendly way of saying “people” and I use it on groups that society would say I am part of. But the social reality of the word is still relevant. I imagine if I were to pay attention to some Texas Republicans using the word when referencing minority groups I might see the problematic use.

  215. says

    Also, Brony, I know it wasn’t at all intentional, and I really appreciate your willingness to look at how language shapes intent. Othering is a big issue with me, because no matter the way it’s used, (only a monster could do something like that! or well, those people are prone to laziness), the only purpose is to disconnect a person or people from humanity and humanness.

  216. says

    Tony:

    Is the opposition to the phrase dependent on context, or is it a blanket opposition?

    From where I sit, it’s entirely dependent on context. You’ve certainly read your way through enough rants of mine on othering. That said, I’m also perfectly comfortable using ‘you folks’. Say I’m on walkabout with my camera, and pass by neighbours out on their porch. I might say “how are you folks doing today?” Instead of “how are you neighbours today?” or “how are you today, Mary & John?” There’s a pre-existing acquaintance there, and in the case of customer service, it’s expected to draw on a acquaintance like level of chat.

  217. says

    Now I’m thinking of a scene from an old Sherlock Holmes movie. Two people are in a room talking. A third person enters the room and says “Hello, you nice people.” I’ve always liked that.

  218. Pteryxx says

    Passing through to drop a link, for those not following the Good Morning America thread (where we’re still posting Ferguson-related news).

    …from Cracked, an overview so comprehensive, so exhaustively referenced, and so on point (for Cracked) that I swear I will never use the phrase “…from Cracked of all places” again.

    7 Important Details Nobody Mentions About Ferguson

  219. The Mellow Monkey: Singular They says

    Pteryxx, I’d seen they published something about it and was so horrified at all the different bad Cracked scenarios running through my mind I couldn’t bring myself to read it. I’m blown away by how good this is. The author Cody has really surpassed my best expectations.

  220. knowknot says

    @215 Inaji

    Othering is a big issue with me, because no matter the way it’s used, (only a monster could do something like that!     …

    – OK, I just plain love you.
    – I don’t know if it’s similar, I don’t mean to isolate your points, and I love you for more than this… but I’ve never been able to get across my gut (I think) feeling that the concept of evil is an almost metaphysical distancing tactic… and sometimes a purely metaphysical one. In fact, interchanges following my statements in that direction tend to end in sad sputtery noises.
     
    @213 Tony
    – I’ve always used it, but am at least somewhat aware of its potential as an othering tool.
    – In modern vernacular, the feeling I get is that it becomes othering when pointed at individuals or groups without some directly implied, clearly demonstrated or previously understood identification, ie shared feeling, shared experience, etc. Absent that, it becomes cold.
    – Then again, something similar can probably be said for almost many words. A common example might be the famous characterization of English upper class use of as pristine a word as “people,” when spoken by a person who is “looking at you with their teeth,” a la Python.
    – But it begins to appear that these distinctions do not function for all.

  221. says

    Knowknot:

    but I’ve never been able to get across my gut (I think) feeling that the concept of evil is an almost metaphysical distancing tactic… and sometimes a purely metaphysical one.

    Enter the devil, one of the most successful cases of othering ever done. People will go to damn near any length to dehumanize people who have committed acts which they find shocking and horrible. In most cases, I think people use it as a coping tool, in trying to comprehend just what bad actors we humans can be. It’s a way of patting yourself on the brain, of answering the unanswerable.

    If all the regular othering routes don’t work (monster! mental illness! loner!, etc.), evil slouches in through the cracks in the brain. The concept of evil doesn’t answer anything, either. It simply allows a finger of blame to be pointed at an ethereal and nebulous excuse when no other excuse can be found.

  225. Brony says

    @ Inaji
    No problem. It had to happen. I too often become my own example XD

    The funny thing is the people who fight so hard to keep other perspectives out are in fact missing out. You don’t lose anything by learning this stuff. You just gain awareness and that ends up making one stronger. For example seeing all the correlating patterns in the BS that are faced by marginalized groups, but differ in the details. That’s a really nice thing to have.

  226. chigau (違う) says

    how hard would it be to identify the ‘plastic’ used in those stylus-thingys?

  230. Seven of Mine, formerly piegasm says

    Tony! @ 213 re: “you folks”

    I agree with Inaji: It’s about the difference between referring to an entire demographic of people as “you (other) folks” as opposed to you very specific folks right here in front of me that I’m directly addressing.

  231. Beatrice, an amateur cynic looking for a happy thought says

    theophontes,
    Samples:

    If you weren’t an ovine simpleton you’d comprehend that I’m always right.

    Apologies to whales for your hurt “feelings”, but you misunderstood my point!

    Furthermore, Muslims!

  232. rq says

    Beatrice
    I got: “If you understood rhetoric you’d know that you’ve been blinded to truth.”
    Umm, okay…

  233. rq says

    There’s a Brony-specific one, too: “My sympathies to Bronies for upsetting you, but you simply don’t understand.”