Considering I got us off track, I will take responsibility for getting us back on. (Actually this is my third try doing that; something keeps eating my posts.)
Do people feel that barbelith disproportionately tolerates sexism, as compared to racism, homophobia, transphobia, etc.? I get the feeling that some feel that barbelith disproportionately targets sexism, and I'd like to do a sort of straw poll about these sentiments.
Ibis writes:
I was overemotional and overreacting, I was stupid and had no sense of humor, and of course from there he dragged the rest of womankind into it by complaining that there were too many women on the board and ISN'T THERE A [TOPIC] BOARD FOR MEN OUT THERE? I found his barrage to be a bit overwhelming... it's hard to retort to someone so emotionally invested in destroying your credibility, and sadly, I'm not the wittiest person even in my best moments.
I'm having much the same experience on another forum, which is in fact queer men-only space, where the poster I'm responding to is expounding on the virtues of queer men-only space. Is there any way that space for queer men only can exist without being inherently misogynist? I thought there was, but it's becoming evident to me that this isn't it.
I'm intrigued by iconoplast's statement here:
What makes me stumble, though, is when people point out that I've miscategorized something
Which to me points up a fundamental problem with People. We get defensive when challenged on our sexism because we're invested in categories. Not just categories of women and men, but categories of "value neutral fact," "funny joke," "harmful stereotype," and "hate speech." This is not to say, like some of our Temple posters in times past, that I think categories can or should be dispensed with. But I think something needs to be done about how attached we get to thinking our categorization schema are real.
Cube has this to report:
Certainly, calling people misogynist gets their attention, but wouldn't it be more likely to produce less walls-up defensive and more considered responses to use "sexist"? After all, in most cases, it's more likely that they are unintentionally misogynist by using such symbols and signs in a sexist manner.
Which struck me at the time because I have recently used the word misogynist where I knew I meant sexist, specifically because I felt sexist would have less impact and be dismissed. But to get back to categorization. I don't want to provoke that same violent, defensive response that Ibis received in people I challenge for their sexism. But after all it's not my responsibility to soften the truth of what I say— thus allowing people to be dismissive of it. Getting at those categorization schema which say "sexism = women calling me a name because they are oversensitive, misogyny = men hitting women, things I think in my head = right, Trey Parker and Matt Stone = authority on feminism" and so forth. With regard to sexism on barbelith specifically, what are some of the ways we do that? What should we be doing?
alas intelligently reminds us that: Feminism, at a minimum, means actually listening to women. It means being aware that women have been, in general, granted less authority in our culture for a very very long time. They have been granted less authority over their own experiences and less authority over other subject matters.
Does that mean that on barbelith only women should challenge sexism? Because men using our authority on behalf of women disempowers them? Who can speak to and who should/should not speak for?
Slighter tangent: Some men who share the goal of gender equality call themselves pro-feminist because only women have the right to call themselves feminists. Yes? No? What? |
