Female gamers having a hard time in gaming communites

[Drowsy Emperor]

as we said earlier, a women-only section for the women who ain't posting here is unnecessary.

 

that being said, Gromnir complete recognizes that we don't understand women well enough to be able to speak for them. sure, we can looks at an issue cold and rational and devoid o' gender, but to do so is probable missing the point. example: am recalling we watched Children of Dune (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0287839/) with a girlfriend of ours.  that were 11 years ago? wow. our significant other at the time were hardly a card carrying member o' NOW. regarding economic issues she tended to be a bit conservative, but like many folks, she were more concerned with issues than with party-line philosophies. she were educated (better than Gromnir) and made lots o' money. anywho, when we watched Children of Dune, we were surprised a bit. the fact that the kwisatz haderach were male-- had to be a male-- bothered our girlfriend more than a bit. we saw loads o' strong women characters in Children of Dune. our girlfriend saw the miniseries much different than us, with women needing to be rescued by men and all sorta other misogynist staples. we were wise enough to not argue, but we were mildly shocked at how complete different our girlfriend viewed the miniseries, and how she specifically saw it in terms o' the male v. female dichotomy. 

 

is just an example. we could give dozens o' similar, but different examples oh how we is caught off-guard by female perspective. am not saying that female perspective is right or wrong or that female pov specific deserves recognition-- we let you each decide according to your conscience. regardless, we does recognize that there IS a female perspective and typically we needs to consciously guess at it, 'cause it don't come natural to us.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

That sort of aggressively conditioned feminist reflex is most prominent to the anglo-saxon world and gets progressively less so as you go eastwards, and southwards from France onward (lumping in Australia with the west here). You  may or may not be surprised to know that such observations would hardly arise in a conversation here.

The point being - the female perspective, apart from some genuine gender differences, is heavily influenced by cultural factors.  

 

I'm mentioning this because I find those sort of observations stifling, a sign of shallow reasoning. Only women were the priestesses at Delphi, no? Enough for an accusation of misandry, maybe?...

The cry of misogyny is now one of those blanket terms, like homophobe or fascist  - used to discredit anything and everything on the opposite sides of a debate.

 

I also usually hear it from people who have least reason to complain about their position in life, so I can't help but treat it as a sort of shallow diversion for the bourgeois.

 

I'd also venture that its culturally damaging. Seen more than a few englishmen and americans chasing after asian wives specifically because they don't want to deal with that sort of thing. Didn't understand what it was about at first, only later did I get it.

 

I do agree that there is a specifically female perspective but its not one of those things that's easily defined (which we also agree on). 

[Volourn]

Feminists are sexist.  It's that simple. I prefer equality. Something feminists and misogynists are both against. Both of those groups are evil and all about bashing and belittling the other gender. DISGUSTING.

[Orogun01]

 

I thought the whole point of women emancipating themselves was so that  they  would do all the stuff that we do. Either women and men are equal or do men have a privilege? Cause it always seem that the privilege conveniently presents itself to make up for some woman's shortcomings.

 

I don't really see any inherent contradiction in "men and women are equal and should be treated as such, but they're not".

 

Also, I really don't appreciate the insinuation that women made up the concept of privilege in order to have something to blame their own failures on, but if you could provide concrete examples where you feel that this is the case, I'm more than willing to reevaluate my stance.

 

You may have read more into my comment that was intended, not really your fault since the medium does leave a lot unexplained and is often the cause of misunderstandings.

 

In particular I'm talking about what is clearly preferential treatment to try to give women a handicap in certain fields; some due to customs predating the feminist movement and others for the benefit of the field. So they are clearly being treated different in some areas, though that may not be a bad thing but it does cause some inequality along gender lines. Same as affirmative action when the more competent is wayside in favor of the most ethnically diverse.

 

I can't really say that there is proof other than a feeling I get from having seen a lot of people makeup excuses as if it were an art. There is a common thread among western culture to avoid responsibility; I've seen morbidly obese people blaming their bad eating habits on genetics, or parents excusing their children lack of structure as ADD. So often times I see feminists who use the term privilege to rant that the grapes are sour and they didn't really want to eat them. Which is why I believe competent women are not part of the feminist rhetoric, otherwise the whole concept of privilege disappears.

[BruceVC]

as we said earlier, a women-only section for the women who ain't posting here is unnecessary.

 

that being said, Gromnir complete recognizes that we don't understand women well enough to be able to speak for them.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Gromnir I'll tell you something interesting and true. In life you don't need to know any minority group or person being discriminated against in order to feel empathy. All you need to do is ask yourself " how would I like to be treated like that"

 

If the answer is " no I wouldn't like that"  then I can guarantee you the minority group also wouldn't like it

 

For example, how would  you feel if a group of people refused to allow you into a restaurant with your family or partner because of the color of your skin? They gave no other reason except for " no your type aren't welcome here". How would you feel...hurt ...embarrassed...humiliated....? This are the types of emotionas that people who are discriminated against feel and I'm sure you agree this wouldn't be a nice experience yet I doubt you have ever been stopped going into a restaurant because of the color of your skin?

 

[Orogun01]

 

as we said earlier, a women-only section for the women who ain't posting here is unnecessary.

 

that being said, Gromnir complete recognizes that we don't understand women well enough to be able to speak for them.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Gromnir I'll tell you something interesting and true. In life you don't need to know any minority group or person being discriminated against in order to feel empathy. All you need to do is ask yourself " how would I like to be treated like that"

 

If the answer is " no I wouldn't like that"  then I can guarantee you the minority group also wouldn't like it

 

For example, how would  you feel if a group of people refused to allow you into a restaurant with your family or partner because of the color of your skin? They gave no other reason except for " no your type aren't welcome here". How would you feel...hurt ...embarrassed...humiliated....? This are the types of emotionas that people who are discriminated against feel and I'm sure you agree this wouldn't be a nice experience yet I doubt you have ever been stopped going into a restaurant because of the color of your skin?

 

 

Institutional segregation tends to look like that, individual has more of a personal touch. There is often a few specific reason that are called upon when people try to justify their hate or rationalize it. The sad part is when it becomes hard to argue against it.

 

My point is that people have different experiences regarding races and stereotypes and in homogeneous cultures they usually tend to be limited to a small sample. So while you might think of a normal person of African or Indian descent others might first recall the gangbanger who wore his pants below his underwear, spat when he spoke and was generally just a ****ty human being. I agree that promoting diversity helps avert this problem by increasing the sample size, but I dislike the notion that mentioning certain facts are dismissed as racist, homophobic, or misogynist simply because they are of an antagonistic nature.

[Gromnir]

 

as we said earlier, a women-only section for the women who ain't posting here is unnecessary.

 

that being said, Gromnir complete recognizes that we don't understand women well enough to be able to speak for them.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Gromnir I'll tell you something interesting and true. In life you don't need to know any minority group or person being discriminated against in order to feel empathy. All you need to do is ask yourself " how would I like to be treated like that"

 

If the answer is " no I wouldn't like that"  then I can guarantee you the minority group also wouldn't like it

 

For example, how would  you feel if a group of people refused to allow you into a restaurant with your family or partner because of the color of your skin? They gave no other reason except for " no your type aren't welcome here". How would you feel...hurt ...embarrassed...humiliated....? This are the types of emotionas that people who are discriminated against feel and I'm sure you agree this wouldn't be a nice experience yet I doubt you have ever been stopped going into a restaurant because of the color of your skin?

 

 

as a minority, we believe your perspective is a bit... simple. am actual a teeny bit perturbed, and our knee-jerk reaction is to kinda rub your nose in your error to make a point, but that wouldn't be helpful.

 

*deep breath*

 

regardless. we mentioned above that empathy didn't help us with our girlfriend's pov. she were genuine bothered by the portrayal o' male & females in Children of Dune.  sure, we could, after-the-fact, kinda imagine how the tv miniseries were sexist and demeaning, but that ain't genuine understanding, and only way it helped us were to be realizing that we don't get it-- where "it" is The Female Pov.  the last thing our girlfriend woulda' wanted were some kinda patronizing faux empathy. "i feel your pain." nonsense.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps serious, don't make assumptions that may come back to bite you in the arse.

[BruceVC]

 

 

as we said earlier, a women-only section for the women who ain't posting here is unnecessary.

 

that being said, Gromnir complete recognizes that we don't understand women well enough to be able to speak for them.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Gromnir I'll tell you something interesting and true. In life you don't need to know any minority group or person being discriminated against in order to feel empathy. All you need to do is ask yourself " how would I like to be treated like that"

 

If the answer is " no I wouldn't like that"  then I can guarantee you the minority group also wouldn't like it

 

For example, how would  you feel if a group of people refused to allow you into a restaurant with your family or partner because of the color of your skin? They gave no other reason except for " no your type aren't welcome here". How would you feel...hurt ...embarrassed...humiliated....? This are the types of emotionas that people who are discriminated against feel and I'm sure you agree this wouldn't be a nice experience yet I doubt you have ever been stopped going into a restaurant because of the color of your skin?

 

 

Institutional segregation tends to look like that, individual has more of a personal touch. There is often a few specific reason that are called upon when people try to justify their hate or rationalize it. The sad part is when it becomes hard to argue against it.

 

My point is that people have different experiences regarding races and stereotypes and in homogeneous cultures they usually tend to be limited to a small sample. So while you might think of a normal person of African or Indian descent others might first recall the gangbanger who wore his pants below his underwear, spat when he spoke and was generally just a ****ty human being. I agree that promoting diversity helps avert this problem by increasing the sample size, but I dislike the notion that mentioning certain facts are dismissed as racist, homophobic, or misogynist simply because they are of an antagonistic nature.

 

 

Fair enough, but don't you agree there is a thin line between mentioning facts and a racist\offensive comment ?

[BruceVC]

 

 

as we said earlier, a women-only section for the women who ain't posting here is unnecessary.

 

that being said, Gromnir complete recognizes that we don't understand women well enough to be able to speak for them.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Gromnir I'll tell you something interesting and true. In life you don't need to know any minority group or person being discriminated against in order to feel empathy. All you need to do is ask yourself " how would I like to be treated like that"

 

If the answer is " no I wouldn't like that"  then I can guarantee you the minority group also wouldn't like it

 

For example, how would  you feel if a group of people refused to allow you into a restaurant with your family or partner because of the color of your skin? They gave no other reason except for " no your type aren't welcome here". How would you feel...hurt ...embarrassed...humiliated....? This are the types of emotionas that people who are discriminated against feel and I'm sure you agree this wouldn't be a nice experience yet I doubt you have ever been stopped going into a restaurant because of the color of your skin?

 

 

as a minority, we believe your perspective is a bit... simple. am actual a teeny bit perturbed, and our knee-jerk reaction is to kinda rub your nose in your error to make a point, but that wouldn't be helpful.

 

*deep breath*

 

regardless. we mentioned above that empathy didn't help us with our girlfriend's pov. she were genuine bothered by the portrayal o' male & females in Children of Dune.  sure, we could, after-the-fact, kinda imagine how the tv miniseries were sexist and demeaning, but that ain't genuine understanding, and only way it helped us were to be realizing that we don't get it-- where "it" is The Female Pov.  the last thing our girlfriend woulda' wanted were some kinda patronizing faux empathy. "i feel your pain." nonsense.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps serious, don't make assumptions that may come back to bite you in the arse.

 

 

You see I have no issue admitting I made an incorrect characterization when I assumed you weren't a minority group, I apologize. What minority group are you so I don't repeat the mistake?

 

But I don't see how that changes my point, I don't need to be a minority group to say I can empathize with the victims of bigotry. This is not "I feel your pain nonsense"

 This is something I take seriously and believe in because I live in a country that discriminated against people because of there color of there skin. Fundamentally growing up in the appalling system of Apartheid has helped to shape my views on issues of social justice

Edited May 16, 2014 by BruceVC

[Gromnir]

here of all places it shouldn't matter what is our ethnicity or sex. that were our whole point earlier in this thread. 

 

*shrug*

 

oglala. grew up at pine ridge and other places in south and north dakota, and for as long as we can recall, well-meaning folks has been telling us that they empathize. never asked for empathy. never wanted their brand o' empathy.

 

am gonna back out o' this. am not gonna turn it into a race debate. 

[Orogun01]

Fair enough, but don't you agree there is a thin line between mentioning facts and a racist\offensive comment ?

Not really, I can voice facts with an impersonal tone which focuses on the issue rather than on the ethnic group. However someone may interpret that is up to them, I know myself. The problem is the refusal to even admit to an issue sometimes because of race; unless the race committing the crime is white people who have become synonymous with the establishment.

 

A relevant example to the thread would be saying that feminism's failure to quell its fringe elements has resulted in it being perceived as a movement of hysterical women. In itself not really an accusatory statement but when presented to some people they tend to get defensive.

[Monte Carlo]

 

I dunno, I think Im pretty dead on wrt Bruce. Ymmv.

 

And I think Bruce is attracted to being a Social Justice Warrior (god, how I hate this term) because of his idealistic outlook, not out of any kind of man-hating.

 

 

Bruce is South African. Liberal South Africans are like those Germans born in the 1950s who felt guilty about the war and never stopped apologizing for it. They ended up joining the SPD and Greens while feeling tender towards the Commies who'd stolen the other half of their country. Their liberal self-loathing radiates from them like Polonium 210.

 

Nice people, when all's said and done, but the product of a system that lionises guilt. Mind you, they've plenty to feel guilty about but how you process it is what counts.

 

As for our Social Justice Troll, who seems to want to police an entire gender to suit his tastes... whatever.

[Monte Carlo]

 

Edit: The only people I take responsibility for are my wife, children, staff and some members of my extended family, personal responsibility is an oft overlooked and unfashionable choice, but I have always championed it.

 

+1

 

I don't buy the whole idea of "group guilt" and "group responsibility" among conceptual groups of people who have nothing to do with each other but just happen to share some identifying characteristic.

 

Too much Marxist class theory still floating around in the heads of "progressive" liberals; they transferred it from social classes onto genders etc. but that doesn't make it any less irrational and morally dubious.

 

 

QFT

[BruceVC]

 

 

I dunno, I think Im pretty dead on wrt Bruce. Ymmv.

 

And I think Bruce is attracted to being a Social Justice Warrior (god, how I hate this term) because of his idealistic outlook, not out of any kind of man-hating.

 

 

Bruce is South African. Liberal South Africans are like those Germans born in the 1950s who felt guilty about the war and never stopped apologizing for it. They ended up joining the SPD and Greens while feeling tender towards the Commies who'd stolen the other half of their country. Their liberal self-loathing radiates from them like Polonium 210.

 

Nice people, when all's said and done, but the product of a system that lionises guilt. Mind you, they've plenty to feel guilty about but how you process it is what counts.

 

As for our Social Justice Troll, who seems to want to police an entire gender to suit his tastes... whatever.

 

 

Monte did you read Paradox comments, if not please go back and read what he said. It wont take you long and he makes some very cogent and reasonable points around this issue.

 

Also I don't feel guilty about Apartheid but I am motivated around issues  of social justice because I have seen how people have suffered due to bigotry. This  is an important distinction than saying I am driven by guilt

[Monte Carlo]

 

 

Also I don't feel guilty about Apartheid

 

Really? You should.

[BruceVC]

 

Also I don't feel guilty about Apartheid

 

Really? You should.

 

 

Why? I wasn't involved in the voting or support of the Apartheid system, I was too young . My parents may feel guilty but they supported a liberal political party in South Africa. I prefer to look forward and focus on how I can improve South Africa and not base my actions on some misplaced sense of guilt for something I had no control over

Edited May 16, 2014 by BruceVC

[JadedWolf]

 

Also I don't feel guilty about Apartheid

 

Really? You should.

 

 

I don't know about how old Bruce is, but it could very well be he's young enough not to have had any part in Apartheid, so if that's so I wouldn't hold him responsible for something he has had nothing to do with. Just like I wouldn't hold young Germans responsible for what happened during the second world war.

[BruceVC]

 

 

Also I don't feel guilty about Apartheid

 

Really? You should.

 

 

I don't know about how old Bruce is, but it could very well be he's young enough not to have had any part in Apartheid, so if that's so I wouldn't hold him responsible for something he has had nothing to do with. Just like I wouldn't hold young Germans responsible for what happened during the second world war.

 

 

100 % correct, when you are right you are right Jadedmeister. I think Monte knows this but he is just trying to get a reaction from me

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

Also I don't feel guilty about Apartheid

 

Really? You should.

 

 

I don't know about how old Bruce is, but it could very well be he's young enough not to have had any part in Apartheid, so if that's so I wouldn't hold him responsible for something he has had nothing to do with. Just like I wouldn't hold young Germans responsible for what happened during the second world war.

 

 

100 % correct, when you are right you are right Jadedmeister. I think Monte knows this but he is just trying to get a reaction from me

 

well, to be fair, if you benefit from another's misdeeds, there is an argument that you should feel guilty. if Gromnir's father swindled an oil well from bruce's father, then am thinking we should feel a bit guilty 'bout enjoying the fruits o' our father's crimes... particularly if bruce were living in abject poverty. that being said, all empires in history have left behind veritable mountains of innocent casualties. am suspecting that IF monte feels bruce has justified guilt, then monte is likely having an equal difficult time sleeping at night. or not.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps we were raised catholic, so guilt is kinda our normal. ever have underwear with a loose tag or thread that constantly scratches you? guilt is a bit like that-- is annoying, but like everything else, you can get used to it.

Edited May 16, 2014 by Gromnir

[SusurrusParadox]

 

There is a big difference between a group of men who create a mens only club because they don't respect women or think they are superior to women ( this was historically the reason for  most mens clubs) and a group of women who want a womens only club because

they are the victim of abuse from men

 

I don't think it's reasonable to use speculation/fantasizing on likely common intentions as the basis for drawing up a moral line along gender boundaries à la "if women do it praise them, if men do it condemn them".

Individuals have intentions, not groups.

 

 

Personally, I think that the whole idea of trying to forbid "discrimination" in the realm of private interaction is unrealistic and incompatible with the idea of individual liberty.

When people choose to associate with others in exclusive spheres, I prefer to give them the benefit of the doubt, because (regardless of who they are) they may have valid reasons to do so.

And even if I found their reasons stupid, it wouldn't give me the right to try and stop them.

 

 

So I guess my opinion on the topic of "safe spaces" can be summed up like this:

 

• Some people want to interact in private spaces from which I am excluded? Well, good for them. I'm not in the business of forcing people to interact with me.

   

• People want gaming companies to give moral and infrastructural support to some of those private clubs? I don't care about that either, as long as developer updates and other services provided by the company remain available in the public space (and thus to me).

   

• Will the existence of such exclusive spaces help to solve inherent problems in the larger community such as sexism / trolling / world hunger? I have no idea. If people are convinced it it will help, let them go ahead and try it out.

 

Groups are made for individuals, therefore groups do indeed have common intentions.

(Kind of an "avalanches are made of snowflakes" analogy. Individual snowflakes might not mean to cause an avalanche [snowflakes definitely don't have intentions, but work with me here] but their cohesion with others tends to cause a, uh, snowball effect. ... if you'll pardon the incidental pun.)

In most instances, individuality is subsumed into the group identity.

 

It's kind of how humans tend to work; very much an "us vs them" mentality.

Can possibly be seen in those that decry anything they perceive as "SJW" territory as.. over-sensitive or preachy?

(Although if anyone's going to label me with that, I'd like to at least make the point that I favour Rogues; warrior types are so bloody boring.)

 

In that instance, I would hypothesise that they value their own freedom to be prejudiced & behave in offensive/abusive manners over avoiding unnecessary harm to others and maintaining intellectual integrity.

(Which might be considered almost fair..? Whilst I don't personally agree with it, I can at least see the reasoning for it. Personal freedoms are something I value myself, but I would consider most of those to terminate where they encroach on another. To rephrase it: I'd rather that liberty be tempered with reason and respect, for others and the/their environment.)

 

(On the note of groupthink and identity: there're a whole load of weird flaws in typical reasoning that critical thinking is designed to attempt negation or limitation of, and the lack of critical thinking in general tends to be the cause of quite a few perceptibly irrational views including that sort of behaviour as well as bigotry. Since bigoted views are usually inconsistent or based on faulty reasoning and/or misinterpretation/misrepresentation of evidence.)

[in most cases one can shift perspective and sort of see how they'd arrive at the conclusions, but it makes them no less flawed.]

 

[Meshugger]

Men and women think and behave differently? Whoa! Who would've thought?

 

I am sensing that these 'privileges' are more a result of people with similar values and creeds banding together than any institutional -ism. Take hiring someone for work, do you tend to hire the wildcard or someone with the same ideas and values....someone that even reminds of yourself?

[SusurrusParadox]

 

as we said earlier, a women-only section for the women who ain't posting here is unnecessary.

 

that being said, Gromnir complete recognizes that we don't understand women well enough to be able to speak for them. sure, we can looks at an issue cold and rational and devoid o' gender, but to do so is probable missing the point. example: am recalling we watched Children of Dune (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0287839/) with a girlfriend of ours.  that were 11 years ago? wow. our significant other at the time were hardly a card carrying member o' NOW. regarding economic issues she tended to be a bit conservative, but like many folks, she were more concerned with issues than with party-line philosophies. she were educated (better than Gromnir) and made lots o' money. anywho, when we watched Children of Dune, we were surprised a bit. the fact that the kwisatz haderach were male-- had to be a male-- bothered our girlfriend more than a bit. we saw loads o' strong women characters in Children of Dune. our girlfriend saw the miniseries much different than us, with women needing to be rescued by men and all sorta other misogynist staples. we were wise enough to not argue, but we were mildly shocked at how complete different our girlfriend viewed the miniseries, and how she specifically saw it in terms o' the male v. female dichotomy. 

 

is just an example. we could give dozens o' similar, but different examples oh how we is caught off-guard by female perspective. am not saying that female perspective is right or wrong or that female pov specific deserves recognition-- we let you each decide according to your conscience. regardless, we does recognize that there IS a female perspective and typically we needs to consciously guess at it, 'cause it don't come natural to us.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

That sort of aggressively conditioned feminist reflex is most prominent to the anglo-saxon world and gets progressively less so as you go eastwards, and southwards from France onward (lumping in Australia with the west here). You  may or may not be surprised to know that such observations would hardly arise in a conversation here.

The point being - the female perspective, apart from some genuine gender differences, is heavily influenced by cultural factors.  

 

I'm mentioning this because I find those sort of observations stifling, a sign of shallow reasoning. Only women were the priestesses at Delphi, no? Enough for an accusation of misandry, maybe?...

The cry of misogyny is now one of those blanket terms, like homophobe or fascist  - used to discredit anything and everything on the opposite sides of a debate.

 

I also usually hear it from people who have least reason to complain about their position in life, so I can't help but treat it as a sort of shallow diversion for the bourgeois.

 

I'd also venture that its culturally damaging. Seen more than a few englishmen and americans chasing after asian wives specifically because they don't want to deal with that sort of thing. Didn't understand what it was about at first, only later did I get it.

 

I do agree that there is a specifically female perspective but its not one of those things that's easily defined (which we also agree on). 

 

Ooh, boy.

See that fetishisation of the "submissive Asian wife" stereotype?

That's racist as all hell as well as pretty obviously misogynistic.

 

That said, I don't believe you'll listen to any argument on the matter.

You seem to have quite firmly set yourself in the "I don't see a problem, so there mustn't be a problem" camp.

(In which case I might refer you to a recent interview of Russell Brand: http://huff.to/1jl1JMb )

[skip to the bit about sexism, or if you don't fancy listening to it or have hearing difficulties then there are paraphrased snippets somewhere down the page.]

{The summary is: You aren't in the position to really make that call.}

 

I'll make the attempt anyway by pointing out that if you think women in the region of the world commonly demarcated as "The West" don't have issues with sexism and misogyny and abuse then you are either amazingly sheltered from reality or you've become oblivious to it as normal.

(On a related note, "Some people have it worse elsewhere" isn't a legitimate justification for not doing anything about things you perceive as comparatively minor. A bad thing is still a bad thing, regardless of whether worse things exist.)

 

Furthermore, "misandry" doesn't really hold any water because in the current Western systems there isn't really any sociocultural nor judicial nor political oppression being perpetrated towards men.

I won't disagree that some people really do genuinely despise men and take every opportunity to be abusive monsters towards them (I've encountered one myself, though in that case it was a maladaptive reaction to having suffered sexual abuse), but that's one instance in my lifetime compared to every woman I know having experienced sexual abuse or harassment throughout their lives.

(Most of them from early teens onwards, which is frankly disgusting and the prevalence of which should be a major red flag that something is seriously wrong on a societal level if so many men are behaving in such a reprehensible manner.)

 

Also, on a minor note, the repeated use of "females" instead of "women" makes people sound... well, vaguely creepy.

A friend once described it as making people sound like Ferengi. Not a flattering comparison, but an apt analogy as far as sexism.

(I haven't really seen Star Trek myself, but I have a couple friends that are heavily into it.)

 

Gromnir actually raised a very good point, which is that most men won't realise how women tend to view the world.

(That is obviously a sweeping generalisation in the latter point, but distinct groups do tend to have shared experiences.)

They haven't experienced the way things they take for granted affect those of other backgrounds, nor have they (until a point; with Gromnir, it was watching Dune) actually paid attention to the way others perceive things based on their own experiences of sociocultural norms.

Now, Gromnir said that he would leave it to others to determine validity, but I'm going to pretty firmly stand with the experiences of.. pretty much every woman I've ever spoken to (as well as my understanding of cultural myths and the influence of narratives on societies) and say that yes it is indeed a valid perspective and one that bears discussion and merits action.

Similar arguments are made about LGBTQIA representation in media & representation of non-white people & representation of disabled people.

(Usually of the form "Why on earth is [x] character not being played by someone that's actually got the traits of [x] character?" OR the form "... okay, why is every member of [x] group being killed off or portrayed in a negative light?". Valid questions to be raising.)

[Although, as far as Dune: Weren't the Bene Gesserit all women and semi-secretly pulling all of the strings in most instances? Perhaps sexist in the roles, but I wouldn't necessarily call it misogynistic. Perhaps the movie was; I haven't personally seen it.]

 

So yes.

I think Step 1, if there is to be guidance on this, is: Actually listen and pay attention to things, & double-check your worldview.

(Although, just as a heads-up: Once you start noticing, you may be disturbed or aggravated by the prevalence.)

[SusurrusParadox]

 

Fair enough, but don't you agree there is a thin line between mentioning facts and a racist\offensive comment ?

Not really, I can voice facts with an impersonal tone which focuses on the issue rather than on the ethnic group. However someone may interpret that is up to them, I know myself. The problem is the refusal to even admit to an issue sometimes because of race; unless the race committing the crime is white people who have become synonymous with the establishment.

 

A relevant example to the thread would be saying that feminism's failure to quell its fringe elements has resulted in it being perceived as a movement of hysterical women. In itself not really an accusatory statement but when presented to some people they tend to get defensive.

 

One might argue that, rather than a minority of rather obviously extreme bigots (which is what those fringe elements are, considering they tend to harbour transphobic views and some rather.. odd "solutions" ), the issue is more deliberate misrepresentation and propaganda from those that would rather retain the status quo and will resort to any and all weaponry they can find to malign and demonise the "other side".

 

You seem to have a touch of a victim complex, though you pay lip-service to being impartial and objective.

(In fact, such claims have an air of the racist "science" perpetrated through the previous century/centuries.)

 

Facts are facts (except when they're not), but their presentation and the motivations behind such will often quite clearly reveal (if not bias) where someone stands on an issue.

What also would seem to be important is not taking facts as if they exist in a vacuum, and making a point to research the whys and wherefores of a situation/statistic.

[Drowsy Emperor]

I wasn't talking to you, I was talking to Gromnir. Because I can expect a reasonable response from him. Peddle your petty ideology elsewhere

[aluminiumtrioxid]

I am sensing that these 'privileges' are more a result of people with similar values and creeds banding together than any institutional -ism. Take hiring someone for work, do you tend to hire the wildcard or someone with the same ideas and values....someone that even reminds of yourself?

 

Yes, this is a big part. I don't think anybody suggests a conspiracy with malicious intent among those who uphold the status quo. But regardless of the intent, the resulting system is unjust and wasteful.

[SusurrusParadox]

Men and women think and behave differently? Whoa! Who would've thought?

 

I am sensing that these 'privileges' are more a result of people with similar values and creeds banding together than any institutional -ism. Take hiring someone for work, do you tend to hire the wildcard or someone with the same ideas and values....someone that even reminds of yourself?

That would be pretty much the definition of bias and prejudice when those "ideas and values" are based on skintone or gender or sexuality or any other superficial irrelevant trait or set of traits.

(As I've mentioned before, the reasoning can be seen but that doesn't mean it's not faulty.)

 

"Privilege" is more the concept that certain groups are inherently advantaged in terms of societal prejudices and systemic bias.

(That doesn't mean that members of those groups cannot be disadvantaged in other ways, most commonly economically. The standard way of describing it is: In the majority of instances, all other things being equal, someone of the privileged group/s will fare better in the same situation than someone of a disadvantaged group.)

[For most areas of the West, such disadvantaged groups include: non-white people, individuals that are LGBTQIA, women, and those that are disabled.  A short but by no means comprehensive list.]

I wouldn't think anyone could reasonably argue that prejudice and bias don't exist, or are not things which most people perpetrate without being aware of, nor that socioeconomic and political/legal systems tend to be apply in a rather unequal manner.