User Tag List

First 67891018 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 263

  1. #71
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bamboo View Post
    Indeed, there are a great many successful feminist figures!

    But it is only out of loss, failure, and inequality that such a movement would exist at all.
    It is exactly the opposite. It is out of promise of equality that is already working.
    Look at England, 1910. France, 1934.
    There is no feminist movement in Saudi Arabia.

  2. #72
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bamboo View Post
    Who loses? What is lost? Time and effort, yes, but assuming that what was put forth was put forth in good faith,
    Ah, yes. That is a very important assumption. While it would be charitable to assume that an argument equating anything to Nazis is in good faith, I am skeptical.

    If it was a coherent argument rather than deliberately inflammatory nonsense, I would have responded for real. It wasn't, so I didn't.
    -end of thread-

  3. #73
    Senior Member Bamboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    XXFP
    Posts
    2,706

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    Ah, yes. That is a very important assumption. While it would be charitable to assume that an argument equating anything to Nazis is in good faith, I am skeptical.

    If it was a coherent argument rather than deliberately inflammatory nonsense, I would have responded for real. It wasn't, so I didn't.
    I don't blame you for not responding. Maybe it was just trolling, maybe not. Sometimes people get hot headed and say things that seem intense and walking away from that discussion is a good choice. That said, I don't think that mutual discussion must halt if someone expresses something disagreeable. I saw some room for discussion - I also saw some ways to encourage discussion instead of discourage it. More on that below.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Okay, I guess you must be feeling all inspirational and such...but how about you just go about your business and stop preaching at the rest of us who know better? Also, save your lessons in feminism 101 for those who need that shit, like DoD.
    I'm responding. I'm trying to demonstrate a different way of approaching how we can have these discussions. And I'm also looking for feedback. If the goal is to try and bring people together to work against prejudice, and I have pushed you away - I failed. To be clear, I refuse to accept abuse, and I won't simply decide to 'be quiet' with no explanation. Perhaps you do know something better than I do, but I'm not going to follow that command without reasoning. I much rather be able to work with you.

    I don't know your background, but everyone who has any interest in this discussion can read what I'm writing. While I'm talking to you, I'm also talking to everyone who is reading along.

    ---

    ---

    There's a few things I've seen in this thread. You'll notice that most of what I'm talking about isn't about feminism, it's about conflict.

    Conflict only occurs between interdependent parties. That is, people who require each other to meet some need. People need each other for resources, for community, for esteem, for all sorts of things. You cannot have conflict without interdependence.

    I'm not going to sing to you praises of a utopic vision where every conflict is resolved with mutual understanding. Often, one or all parties will stubbornly persist, despite evidence, in believing something crazy. What can you do? If you can walk away, walk. If they're still a problem, make them small, make them weak, call them names, and undermine their confidence so you can get what you want. Ugly, but there it is.

    The problem with all of that is, most the time, it's not actually necessary, and the application of these tactics generally destroys any potential opportunity to cooperate or build ideas unless restraint comes into play.

    Note my words - potential opportunity. Maybe it's there, maybe it's not. How that works:

    This whole thread was kicked off with something that looked like an angry rant. Divisive. Possibly entrenched.

    Maybe you can react to this the way of the war path - make them small, insults, all that. Through the lens of interdependence: you can minimize the influence of their ideas on the people you want to influence, or minimize their ability to effect your esteem, or whatever.

    Look, small scale teasing is one thing, but I'm cautious, because here's the thing, if you zoom out a bit. Take someone else, who has similar, but not as extreme ideas, or as entrenched ideas, and have them watch what's going on. And they'll see that guy getting torn to shreds. Do you think they will be more or less likely to want to communicate their ideas? Less, unless they are exceedingly brave or antagonistic.

    If the goal is to actually influence people, if you really want to provide a view point, then I don't think shredding someone is helping that goal. Why not have a discussion, especially if in public, on how those ideas are misled, so people who believe in them can further refine their ideas and those who watch can consider themselves. But who knows, maybe the entrenched will open up a bit - it's pretty hard to be consistently closed off toward people who treat you with civility. But let's not get utopic - some people won't change no matter what. But the non-entrenched, they might be willing to have a discussion with you. That's the potential opportunity.

    This isn't just a tactic to make one side look good, because a discussion, a real discussion, is about give and take. It's not a competition to win a debate. It's cooperation to uncover facts, knowledge, and philosophy for everyone's benefit. That's the greater potential opportunity.

    I'm entirely guilty of getting fed up with people and just telling them off. But when I do that, I'm satisfying a need for me. It feels good, for me, and maybe people on my side. But does it do good for everyone, or does it just take everyone a step farther away from cooperation?
    Don't know how much it'll bend til it breaks.

  4. #74
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bamboo View Post
    I don't blame you for not responding. Maybe it was just trolling, maybe not. Sometimes people get hot headed and say things that seem intense and walking away from that discussion is a good choice. That said, I don't think that mutual discussion must halt if someone expresses something disagreeable. I saw some room for discussion - I also saw some ways to encourage discussion instead of discourage it. More on that below.
    Oh lord. Have you ever seen any of the gender-related discussions on this forum? They're nasty, awful shitholes that are only slightly less horrendous than gender discussions on more populated fora, and the posts in this thread that you are trying to salvage/convince us were written in good faith contain shades of all that, and portend only shit to come. You can be there to catch it full force if you want, but you're never going to convince me to join you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bamboo View Post
    I'm responding. I'm trying to demonstrate a different way of approaching how we can have these discussions.
    And that's good...for you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bamboo View Post
    If the goal is to try and bring people together to work against prejudice, and I have pushed you away - I failed.
    That was only ever your goal. I'm not so naive.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bamboo View Post
    To be clear, I refuse to accept abuse, and I won't simply decide to 'be quiet' with no explanation. Perhaps you do know something better than I do, but I'm not going to follow that command without reasoning. I much rather be able to work with you.
    Have I abused you?

    I was merely attempting to communicate to you that (1) you're being insufferably self-righteous, (2) I don't need to be told things like, "women have been reminded, over and over, that their opinions just aren't worth it," and (3) I don't appreciate that you tried to convince me that the systematic devaluation of women's opinions (due to prejudices against their intellectual capacity and ability to be objective) is anywhere near equivalent to ignoring the "unpopular" opinions of a troll on the internet. Please.

    Like I said, if you want to try and reason with some troll, you are welcome to continue trying. Just stop preaching to those of us who would rather not waste our time...we don't have to do as you advise, no matter how sagely you think you are.

    In fact, I'm not convinced at all of the merits of your proposed rhetorical strategy, even if I were aiming at maximum opinion conversion. It might be seen by our vague internet audience as long-winded, repetitive, and middling/weak.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  5. #75
    Senior Member Bamboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    XXFP
    Posts
    2,706

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Oh lord. Have you ever seen any of the gender-related discussions on this forum? They're nasty, awful shitholes that are only slightly less horrendous than gender discussions on more populated fora, and the posts in this thread that you are trying to salvage/convince us were written in good faith contain shades of all that, and portend only shit to come. You can be there to catch it full force if you want, but you're never going to convince me to join you.
    Perhaps my posts were too long, because this isn't what I'm saying. And yes, I do see what usually counts as a discussion - it doesn't work. Maybe we define good faith differently. I meant it as "honest representation." I didn't mean it as "something positive" - far from it. But I think it's what he believed.

    So, we can get angry and spread more of that, because 'that's what's going to happen anyway', or try something else. Chances are, no matter what, someone is going to come in and trash your opinion, sure, but with a broader, productive discussion going on, that can be something that rolls of your back.

    And that's good...for you.
    You might disagree, but I think what I'm suggesting has more potential than the competition that we've BOTH seen does nothing. The other way is pretty much assured NOT to work. Is that good for anyone?

    That was only ever your goal. I'm not so naive.
    What do you think my goal is? This is just a small internet discussion, part of this is trying to learn skills which will create benefit, part of this experimentation. But, honestly, this is what I want to do. I've seen the boring repetitiveness of failed competitive arguments all around me. And I've seen some examples of there being a better way, so I'm trying to emulate those.

    Have I abused you?
    No, though you did basically say "stop talking" without explanation, and you seemed readily agitated. I was making a clear line - perhaps prematurely, but clarification is worthwhile.

    I was merely attempting to communicate to you that (1) you're being insufferably self-righteous, (2) I don't need to be told things like, "women have been reminded, over and over, that their opinions just aren't worth it," and (3) I don't appreciate that you tried to convince me that the systematic devaluation of women's opinions (due to prejudices against their intellectual capacity and ability to be objective) is anywhere near equivalent to ignoring the "unpopular" opinions of a troll on the internet. Please.
    Well, this is good feedback. Inevitably, anyone who is passionate about an idea may be seen as self-righteous. I can't say for sure what anyone else saw here. I'm sure I could approach differently to avoid that impression. I think you mistook the intention of me saying that not as a history lesson - I KNEW you knew that. And I'm sorry that you interpreted it that way. I can see why you'd find that condescending. That's why I put down the long explanation. To clarify:

    Like I said, if you want to try and reason with some troll, you are welcome to continue trying.
    ...This is a public discussion. Here is the point I'm trying to make, highly condensed: you probably can't reason with truly entrenched audiences. But when their viewpoints crop up, why not go about debunking the myths and half truths that they come from for public benefit? It let's everyone learn something from something unpleasant, and maybe those entrenched people will open up a bit. Maybe. Because angry people WILL show up and want to debate. Why let that ruin things?

    Just stop preaching to those of us who would rather not waste our time...we don't have to do as you advise, no matter how sagely you think you are.
    I agree, I feel like I tried to make an effort to avoid saying that anyone should or must follow my advice. Truly, I'm trying to convince you, at your option, to consider having more of a discussion.

    Moreso, you don't owe me any explanations, you don't have to respond. However, I thank you for at least giving me some feedback. Not because I think I'm a sage - because I know I'm NOT a sage.

    I believe this is very much on topic. A thread full of conflict - so talk about conflict.

    In fact, I'm not convinced at all of the merits of your proposed rhetorical strategy, even if I were aiming at maximum opinion conversion.
    You shouldn't be convinced just because I say so! I'm saying, here's some possible benefits, consider trying it, and make up your own mind. What are you aimed at?

    It might be seen by our vague internet audience as long-winded, repetitive, and middling/weak.
    Perhaps, but if it's never put out there, how can it be refined? It will either never be discussed, or it might be discussed a little bit. See, talking with you right here gave me some ideas and some pointers on how to do this better. Why not persue that on a larger scale?

    I don't think it has to be long winded. It can be quick and to the point - I'll admit I'm not so good at this, but I think it can be done. It might be seen by the hyper competitive as weak, but that's not really important, for me. Let them think what they want. But keep up the valuable discussions anyway.

    What do you think works?
    Don't know how much it'll bend til it breaks.

  6. #76
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    1,232

    Default

    I touched a nerve with this. Good.

    The "point" of this thread was to discuss the hypocrisy of modern feminism (plenty of that).

    If you allow me, I'll be blunt and explicit this time out:

    These people don't want "equality" or any of that bullshit.
    They just need an excuse to complain because they suck and they know it.

    They expect everyone else to suck as hard as them and that is where the elementary brainwashing techniques come in.

    It ain't my fault they're full of shit.
    And I sure as hell didn't make them this way.

    Fuck 'em.

  7. #77
    Senior Member Bamboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    XXFP
    Posts
    2,706

    Default

    Sorry wildcat, I saved this in my email cause I wanted to reply to you in a separate post but forgot, twice.

    Quote Originally Posted by wildcat View Post
    It is exactly the opposite. It is out of promise of equality that is already working.
    Look at England, 1910. France, 1934.
    There is no feminist movement in Saudi Arabia.
    What was France 1934? And what was England 1910?, that wasn't what I thought it was.

    I think if it's something you never even think to question then you don't. So it's the disparity between two visions that causes you to question what's going on. That's where the change comes, I think. I think that things, even in Saudi Arabia, will be changing as the questions begin to be asked (even if they aren't allowed to be asked, outside contact will come in). Of course, sometimes people find answers for questions that suit them in different ways.

    I wonder what answers they will find palatable.
    Don't know how much it'll bend til it breaks.

  8. #78
    Senior Member Bamboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    XXFP
    Posts
    2,706

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Duck_of_Death View Post
    I touched a nerve with this. Good.

    The "point" of this thread was to discuss the hypocrisy of modern feminism (plenty of that).

    If you allow me, I'll be blunt and explicit this time out:

    These people don't want "equality" or any of that bullshit.
    They just need an excuse to complain because they suck and they know it.
    Broad brush here. There's a lot of variation in any one group - who are you talking about? What do you describe as "modern feminism"? Was there a time or type of feminism that was less hypocritical, in your mind?

    I would agree on some level - I think that some members of any given group latch on to the idea of victimization to justify their personal failings - they put blame on the other party for factors that they couldn't have controlled. I think that is a real thing, and I'd generally say that the reason why people do that is based in their own low perception of themselves.

    However, sometimes people really are prevented from reaching goals because of outside social influences. Would you agree or disagree?

    It ain't my fault they're full of shit.
    And I sure as hell didn't make them this way.
    This poses a separate, larger problem, but raises some questions. You clearly don't have control over the factors of your birth. Do you feel like people are telling you that it's your fault personally they are experiencing problems?
    Don't know how much it'll bend til it breaks.

  9. #79
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,540
    Quote Originally Posted by Duck_of_Death View Post
    The "point" of this thread was to discuss the hypocrisy of modern feminism (plenty of that).
    It's just as good as discussing the hypocrisy of slaves or the hypocrisy of abused children.

  10. #80
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    1,232

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    It's just as good as discussing the hypocrisy of slaves or the hypocrisy of abused children.
    The two parties you mentioned are helpless.
    These people? They aren't fuckin' helpless.

    They're simply weak and entitled.

Similar Threads

  1. Guns ARE equal rights.
    By SpankyMcFly in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 294
    Last Post: 06-28-2016, 10:08 AM
  2. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-11-2013, 11:20 PM
  3. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-13-2011, 03:32 PM
  4. Catholic ban on women priests 'illegal under Harriet Harman equality bill'
    By Sniffles in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 126
    Last Post: 01-14-2010, 06:59 AM
  5. UK Lesbians Given Equal Birth Rights
    By 01011010 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-01-2009, 04:02 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO