BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Woman-Friendly Barbelith - commentary and analysis

 
  

Page: (1)23456... 10

 
 
Jack Denfeld
13:50 / 04.03.06
A few people suggested a thread like this, so male posters could kind of interact with the woman-friendly thread without dominating it through sheer number.
 
 
Jack Denfeld
13:58 / 04.03.06
I am nervous this place, hideously nervous, and I'm not sure whether it's because I'm a woman or because I perceive myself to be less educated that other people here or what.
Seaglass, I feel ya on the less educated thing. While I don't feel very stupid in the real world, I almost always feel like a dumbass here which explains why I'm mostly posting goofy cartoons, and hanging out in mostly the conversation. I've been trying to tread lightly into some meatier topics, but I do feel self-conscious when I do.

Was there a general vibe you got from Barbelith that made you think that your nervousness in posting might have been because you're a woman?
 
 
Aertho
14:22 / 04.03.06
Our Lady suggested this space.

I seconded.

Now really, guys, I want to see the women of Barbelith get in there and make it their own. Things might get said or explored without us there too. Where'd Deva go? Whisky Preistess? Bitchiekittie? Shortfatdyke?

Aside: I thought GGM was a guy all this time. Shame.
 
 
Ganesh
14:27 / 04.03.06
Hmm. I'm not sure about this thread. While I can see the reasoning behind it (I think), I reckon we're going to have to guard against being patronising...
 
 
Chiropteran
15:50 / 04.03.06
I reckon we're going to have to guard against being patronising...

Indeed.

Also, re: "Response" in the thread title, I think that we should make an effort to make a clear distinction (in our words/actions) between "responsiveness" and "defensiveness." It's not at all pleasant to read that something one said/did/let-pass-without-comment has hurt or angered another poster, and it's a natural response to try to reframe that interaction to place oneself (or one's actions) in a better light - but when one does so, one also devalues the other poster's experience of the interaction, and (vitally!) devalues their voice on Barbelith.

I'm not claiming that defensive reframing/dismissal is an inherently "masculine" behavior/trait, or that only male-id posters behave that way only toward female-id posters - I think a conscious effort should be made by everyone to avoid that sort of devaluation of any poster - but it is clear, I think, that this type of interaction has been particularly characteristic of many female-id posters' experience of Barbelith. It has already happened several times - and been called several times - since the F101 thread, for instance, started. This thread would be a good place to start really learning to step back and listen before jumping in to "explain" or otherwise reframe another poster's experience.

Of course, if one is being directly misquoted, or something like that, there is nothing at all wrong with setting the record straight, but care should still be taken to acknowledge that what one meant is not always what others heard/read (this gets explained over and over re: racist "humor," etc., but is equally important in day-to-day interaction).
 
 
Hallo, Paper Spaceboy
17:31 / 04.03.06
Jack: Seaglass, I feel ya on the less educated thing. While I don't feel very stupid in the real world, I almost always feel like a dumbass here which explains why I'm mostly posting goofy cartoons, and hanging out in mostly the conversation.

And why I mostly hang out in the Comics, because I seem to automatically have trouble forming articulate arguments for/against/about meatier subjects when I'm on here.

It intrigues me to watch everyone defining their own streams of feminism (feminisms) in the two threads and when Nobody's Girl came into things I wondered if maybe there were more effective ways of splitting or differntiating the "brands" of feminism so that it doesn't feel like an overwhelming CONCEPT (using NG's example of being a woman at odds with the anti-child-bearing aspects of certain earlier branches of feminism)? I'm not even sure what I'm asking, but it can be ridiculously difficult to specify what exactly you mean by feminism and how you relate to it (from what I remember of the Paglia, for example, she said something about gay men hating women because we're afraid of the Vagina or hate it or something - something I can't quite match up with how I actually view women and how I feel as a feminist man).

Does any of that make sense? Has anybody thought of cataloguing any of the streams on the Barbewiki, for example?
 
 
seaglass
18:01 / 04.03.06
I'm not sure where the nervousness came from; I guess I've been watching threads play out and seeing that in most discussions posters are asked to justify or unpack what they're saying. This is, of course, quite a necessary part of debate, but on a lot of occasions it's felt like the folk posing comments and questions are like vultures picking at the carcass of an idea and throwing comments or points of view out of their way.

Me, I'm more into constructive discussion; the kind of conversations that allow new side thoughts to grow and/or wither as the general talk goes on. Whether this is me being all soft and nurturing because I'm a woman, I'm really not sure. It might be because I lack academic rigour, or because I'm just generally averse to anything that looks like argument.

And if anyone asks me to cite illustrative examples I doubt I'll be able to back myself up. I'm speaking from feeling, which is perhaps a sterotypically female way of interacting with the world, but I think feeling is an essential element of good humnan debate and understanding, and I'm not willing to put it to one side in order to interact with a forum like this.
 
 
sleazenation
18:01 / 04.03.06
Hmm. I'm not sure about this thread. While I can see the reasoning behind it (I think), I reckon we're going to have to guard against being patronising...

Isn't this whole girls school and boy school separation inherantly patronising as well as being slightly silly?
 
 
Spaniel
18:03 / 04.03.06
Yep.
 
 
Aertho
18:05 / 04.03.06
Papers, I can empathize with your, and Jack's, feelings that you can't run with the big dogs. I'd made that point earlier myself. But I should hope that neither of you are suggesting we "drop" the level of discourse found in Barbelith. While not a major player in those debates and explorations, I still cheer for the home teams and take pride that Barbelith is home to such fine minds. If nothing else, read the threads! I do.

I do take issue with your second paragraph and feel you should further expand what you are trying to say. It seems as though you're trying to say a lot in a few short leaps. Exploring feminism, in its streams, is important when you are in fact, an outsider -not only in gender, but in sexual/political relations. Take your time and think in bullets.

And I would like to fully endorse the idea of an "educated response" to what's happening all over Barbelith in recent times.
 
 
Hallo, Paper Spaceboy
18:09 / 04.03.06
Seaglass: Me, I'm more into constructive discussion; the kind of conversations that allow new side thoughts to grow and/or wither as the general talk goes on. Whether this is me being all soft and nurturing because I'm a woman, I'm really not sure. It might be because I lack academic rigour, or because I'm just generally averse to anything that looks like argument.

See, I agree with you and tend to think along similar lines with that. I like all the little tangents that go on (half of them linguistic because I like words). I can be a bit "soft and nurturing" too, at times, and I don't think it's exclusively a female characteristic but it might be feminine, and even then I think that's missing something. I just like chatter and talking and such.

Anyway, the boys/girls schools leads to tawdry, saucy times as much as it is patronising. We should all have to wear uniforms and be as smutty as possible.
 
 
Aertho
18:10 / 04.03.06
I don't see this thread as boy's school, but rather "boy's class" about Feminism. S'like when gym class is divided, and not co-ed. Differnet things happen.
 
 
seaglass
18:41 / 04.03.06
I don't think it's exclusively a female characteristic but it might be feminine, and even then I think that's missing something.

Yes, I know what you mean. Feminine is a loaded term because it tends to get used to describe the a lot of the fripperies of womanhood - clothes and hair and physical presentations of female gender - there doesn't seem to be much scope for utilising it to describe characteristics exhibiting by a male without seeming derogatory.

From my limited experience I think Barbelith has trouble when a female poster exhibits excessive femininity, just as it has trouble when a male poster behaves in a non-ironicaly masuline sort of way. There's that much interest and flexibility around gender definitions around here (which, by the way, I think is an excellent thing) that the exponential power of gender x gender normative behaviour creates a tricky spike. Like I mentioned a while back in the heteropanic thread, Barbelith's sensitivity to the specific in general is one of its strengths, but perhaps it's also a barrier to practical inclusion.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
18:54 / 04.03.06
This thread effectively defeats the entire purpose of the other one.
 
 
sleazenation
18:56 / 04.03.06
I'm not entirely convinced the other thread isn't slightly self defeating itself...
 
 
Hallo, Paper Spaceboy
19:33 / 04.03.06
Seaglass: From my limited experience I think Barbelith has trouble when a female poster exhibits excessive femininity, just as it has trouble when a male poster behaves in a non-ironicaly masuline sort of way. There's that much interest and flexibility around gender definitions around here (which, by the way, I think is an excellent thing) that the exponential power of gender x gender normative behaviour creates a tricky spike. Like I mentioned a while back in the heteropanic thread, Barbelith's sensitivity to the specific in general is one of its strengths, but perhaps it's also a barrier to practical inclusion.

I can see the ... I suppose discomfort might be the best word? The discomfort when someone comes in displaying "excessive femininity/non-ironic masculinity" coming from, as you say, our tendency to favour / explore different gender constructions and possibly avoid the old ones. I'm not sure how exactly we work to make our sensitivity more completely positive (ie, removing the barrier aspect), but there must be ways. We tend to want to be thoroughly modern about all matters but occasionally forget that choice means having more than the newest "subversive" (to use a loaded word) choice that's redefining things. And I think we (people, not specifically barbeloids) can occasionaly have difficulty when other people make choices that don't work for us because we feel it undermines some sense of unity?
 
 
Jack Denfeld
20:08 / 04.03.06
I don't see this thread as boy's school, but rather "boy's class" about Feminism.
I didn't mean this was boys only, just that we could talk about subjects in the original thread without having the women's thread having a bunch of guy responses. This one's for girls and boys.
 
 
*
21:02 / 04.03.06
Want to elaborate, sleaze?
 
 
Olulabelle
21:05 / 04.03.06
Seaglass, I can't find you in the heteropanic thread on the page you linked to. Which post is it you are referencing?

Sleaze, I don't think saying that the other threat is self-defeating is the way forward. It's the kind of post that makes me concerned with why this thread was set up. I absolutely understand the reasons behind setting it up, but comments like that are just going to reinforce the opinion some people are holding that this thread is just a space to say things like that.

I'm slightly leery of posting this because I absolutely don't want this to turn into a boys/girls thing, but when we're trying to have a constructive conversation about specifically how females are dealt with on-board, someone telling us that the thread we're doing it in is self-defeating in a thread specifically for male identified posters is supremely unhelpful.
 
 
seaglass
21:13 / 04.03.06
The comment's on the third page in the middle, about 17 posts down.

And I agree; it doesn't help much to talk about talking. All threads are readable by all readers, aren't they? The room I'm standing in when I say something (or the dress/trousers I'm wearing at the time) surely don't make as much of a difference as the sentences I actually say.
 
 
Hallo, Paper Spaceboy
21:26 / 04.03.06
I more think of this thread as the thread for males and females to discuss issues raised in the women-friendly thread, rather than just men talking - there's a space for women to discuss the problems at the Barb without male interference/overwhelming, and then there's a space for the men to ask questions / contribute on their own. Neither is self-defeating, and they should be working together. I think they are, for the most part.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
21:39 / 04.03.06
Well, no, they're not. This has been set up as a response thread, specifically for replies to comments raised in that other one. I mean, christ, you may as well just go and post in that other thread if you're going to do that, you know?
 
 
sleazenation
21:57 / 04.03.06
I'm slightly leery of posting this because I absolutely don't want this to turn into a boys/girls thing, but when we're trying to have a constructive conversation about specifically how females are dealt with on-board, someone telling us that the thread we're doing it in is self-defeating in a thread specifically for male identified posters is supremely unhelpful.


I would probably define it more as being more slightly ridiculous than supremely unhelpful.

There are a number of things about both this thread and the woman friendly thread that strike me as ridiculous and/or self defeating.

That it was a m-iding poster that waded in in an attempt to make the other thread a place for F-iding posters exclusively for a periodof 24hrs. That another M-iding posters couldn't stay away from such a thread for even such a short period and further that he was asked to post by a F-iding poster because she was so angry that was worried that she was going to say something stupid.

I would even go so far as to suggest that there are some elements that are vaguely amusing were it not the case that I agree that there is indeed a less than desirable level of unexamined and casual misogyny on barbelith.

I think there is a valuable discussion we could be having as a whole comunity over how best to approach this, (personally, I'd favour confronting it in a manner similar to other forms of lazy thinking), but we appear to have gotten slightly side tracked...

And strictly by the by, I think by dint of how this whole subject has already been handled it may well be too late already to prevent this turning into a boy/girl thing...
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
22:21 / 04.03.06
Well, my suggestion would be that:

a) The thread for female-identifying members has the invitation to male-identifying members to post as long as they do not dominate or derail removed, since there is no confident way to determine whether somebody is going to dominate or derail.

b) Moderators police this by moving boyposts to the thread for deletion, as an encouragement - initial delete requests probably should come from a female-identified moderator, to maintain agency, but we have a good few of those active in the Policy, so that shouldn't be a huge problem.

c) Issues arising can be discussed in the Conversation thread, preferably not with direct quotation.

d) At some later point, the topic can be opened to male posters also, or findings can be summarised and opened for discussion; it might be instructive for the boys to try keeping their opinions in their pants for a bit.

e) This thread is locked, interesting and relevant posts (seaglass', primarily) relocated and this allowed to sink gently through the Policy - Policy moves slow, so it will be available for reading for the near future in any case.


I imagine those in the thread can sort out what they want to do about transpeople posting...
 
 
sleazenation
22:28 / 04.03.06
So is this thread locked now? Because, while, as i think i alluded to above, I think this thread is slightly ridiculous, I'm not entirely convinced it should be locked...
 
 
Lurid Archive
23:47 / 04.03.06
Well, my suggestion would be that

I appreciate what you are trying to do, Haus, but doesn't it seem to you to be a bit...inappropriate...that these detailed suggestions about how to deal with the Woman-Friendly thread are coming from you? Again...
 
 
iconoplast
23:55 / 04.03.06
Why would it be?

Haus is a member of the Barbelith community. Another member created a thread for certain posters to discuss things pertaining to their identification and the way they interact with the boad. Why shouldn't Haus help them to create a discussion space within barbelith?

The question of how we as a community are going to deal with misogyny is certainly open to everyone. Haus has suggested maintaining a female-id-only thread to discuss specific issues of misogyny. I don't really know if that's a good idea, a helpful idea, or what. I don't think it's going to hurt, and I don't think that male-identifying posters should feel prevented from offering their views on the direction this community ought to take.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
00:00 / 05.03.06
Absolutely, Lurid. However, I'm also a moderator in the Policy, and trying to help threads in the Policy to achieve their aims. This thread, I think, is inimical to the aims of the other thread, and does not hold a vast advantage to justify its existence. Having the alpha males of Barbelith helping out the ladies in a thread designed for female-identifying members to discuss what may be generally invisible or accepted sexism on Barbelith in an environment purposed towards removing as many of the obstacles to that discussion as possible seems to me also inimical to its aims.

Others, however, may disagree. I'm certainly not proposing any moderation here, and thanks to distributed moderation one person will be able to prevent any changes proposed. They will, however, have to think about why they are doing that...
 
 
Olulabelle
00:03 / 05.03.06
I had a conversation with a female poster off board about one of the responses to the female thread and we both agreed not to post what we actually wanted to, because it would have been very, very rude. Haus actually posted the 24 hours suggestion at the same time as that conversation and probably did so as a result of the post in question. I for one, am very glad for Haus's intervention.

The men here seem a little bit unable to let that that thread happen as it should, as ER9 has pointed out already.
 
 
Olulabelle
02:16 / 05.03.06
This thead is already creating controversy. My previous post explaining exactly what my issues were has already been quoted in the Barbannoy thread.

I deliberately didn't say who, or what, because this was supposed to be productive, but if things people say here are going to be quoted as annoying there really is no fucking point.

I think the whole womens'space/men's space thing is utterly pointless if that's what's going to happen.

You can put this post down to pre-menstrual hysteria because I'm a female. I'm angry and that's what we do, isn't it?
 
 
All Acting Regiment
02:44 / 05.03.06
Is there a checklist of things that the average male poster needs to watch out for when posting, to avoid mysogyny?
 
 
Isadore
04:00 / 05.03.06
'Don't get defensive; try listening instead,' would be a good start.
 
 
*
04:19 / 05.03.06
A given post might be perpetuating sexism/misogyny if:

It is dismissive of another poster in a way which would not occur to me if I believed hir to be male.
It indicates that there is a certain acceptable way for women to behave and a certain acceptable way for men to behave, which are distinct from one another.
It uses female-gendered language in an insulting, belittling, or diminutive fashion ("girls," "pussy," "hysterical").
It assumes that something about another poster's comment is due to their gender/identity, when this is not made explicit by the content of their words.
It assumes something about another poster's gender/identity based on something about their posting style or position, when this is not made explicit by the content of their words.
It perpetuates or relies upon stereotypes which pertain to gender.
It has the effect of shouting down the opinions of female-identified posters without the courtesy of listening to them with an open mind first.
It has the effect of speaking for female-identified posters without the courtesy of listening to them with an open mind first, and giving them the opportunity to speak on their own behalf if they choose to.
It otherizes women as exotic strangers which no right-thinking (male) person could hope to actually understand— rendering futile, by implication, the act of listening to women.
It demonizes women who speak up about their opinions as shrill, negative, overreacting, man-hating, bitchy, or hormonal, which tends to have the effect of silencing them either literally or figuratively.

This is by no means an exhaustive list.

Like posts which contain coded racial prejudice, posts may contain gender bias without rendering the poster Irredeemably Evil. Who was it who offered the analogy of trying to throw a paper ball into a trash can and accidentally hitting someone with it? It doesn't make you a bad person, or weak, to say you're sorry and will try harder not to hit them next time. But if one keeps getting hit with paper balls by someone who refuses to apologize, it's within reason for one to assume there's some intent behind it.
 
 
*
04:19 / 05.03.06
Or you could listen to Celane, who is much more concise.
 
 
eddie thirteen
06:19 / 05.03.06
I don't think I've ever had a stronger sense of myself as stereotypical Dude than I have had reading these threads. Seriously, I think I'm about to subscribe to Maxim. Rarely has a subject so scrambled my radar that I've found myself arguing points never actually raised, and realizing halfway through that I not only don't think I agree with what I'm saying, but have little or no idea what it is I am saying, except that I think I just argued that women are irrational and we should all respect them for it, which I'm pretty sure is not the idea I first set out to promote. All of which I say to say, yeah, I guess there's a problem (one that extends well beyond this board), and yeah, I'm part of that problem, and yeah, it probably is just as simple as self-examination and according positive action (or at least not negative action). Since the total fuckin' tool component of my personality (it's not my good side) seems to be the most vocal on the subject, I figure it's best to just listen, but I'm glad the subject's been raised.
 
  

Page: (1)23456... 10

 
  
Add Your Reply