Advice to someone who had their belayer drop them (twice)
|
I never said "hottie" was the offensive/objectifying part of the OP. That should be fairly obvious, but I'm sorry if I can't write an encyclopedia that responds in advance to every possible and willful misinterpretation of what I write. In fact, I've probably used that word myself on MP. |
|
Christian wrote: If a mixed gender group went out for drinks after work and one of the men said: " Look at that hottie at the bar in a miniskirt, I want to run my hands all up inside her warm panties." (and part of that is pretty much verbatim from the OP)...Ok, but that quote is given in a context completely divorced from the original post! Fox News would be proud. Christian wrote: You don't think that would be creating a hostile environment for the women in the group? An environment that tends to diminish the power of the women in it just by the fact that they're women and the fact that the men in it don't want to relinquish any power whatsoever?Uh oh. Trigger words! Check your white make privilege! Words equal power only if you let it be so. It's like I used to tell my son when his brother pulled his strings: "Why do you let him control you like that?". |
|
Dan Austin wrote: and furthermore, why don't we have a WHITE history month?!???!?!That's racist. I'm offended. |
|
"Words equal power only if you let it be so" |
|
Glad to see I got everyone fired up: |
|
Christian wrote:"Words equal power only if you let it be so" That's one of the most naïve things I have ever read.In that case you should consider reading more... Christian wrote: I'd go into more detail, but on second thought that would be pointless.It sounds like you're one of those people who likes to frame all human interaction in terms of a struggle for power and dominance. Personally I think this is a form of projection, and those who espouse this view are saying more about their own mental framework than the subject under discussion. I'll say it again: words only have the power the listener decides to award them. Sticks and stones, baby. You can gain zero power over me with words. Null, nil, nada, zilch, the big goose egg. Naive? Well, if you'd like, feel free to give it a shot and we can find out, if that's what floats your boat. |
|
Jake Jones wrote:So, if someone walks up to your mother and calls her the "C" word to her face, you're just going to let it roll off you?Hmmm...so what are you going to do when this happens? Punch the guy? Or just tell them to eff off and go about your business? I really hope the latter. But of course that's up to you, see below. Jake Jones wrote:I call bullshit. Words matter. If they didn't, we wouldn't have volumes of manuscripts that evoke emotion.Yes words matter. How much they matter is up to you. You, the listener, get to decide. Words only have the power that we, as listeners, are willing to give them. |
|
Tom Sherman wrote: But if it's to argue that cat-calling and unwarranted sexual advances are intimidating and that something in society is warranting this male behavior, than I would say yes that's totally fucked up.Absolutely. To be clear, I'm fairly sure this is something we can all agree on. |
|
The OP was just an example of what happens when you try to write satire but you have a shitty sense of humor and writing ability -- winds up exposing much more about the OP than about the subject of the supposed satire. |
|
So, ubu, let's say you own a company. |
|
Jake Jones wrote: I think we're saying kind of the same thing. No, I'm probably not going to punch the person. But it would infuriate me. I have no control over my emotional reaction to some guy calling my mother the C word. I do, however, have control of whether or not I assault the guy. I can choose not to. It doesn't mean that his offensive behavior doesn't bother me. That's all I'm saying. So, in essence, saying "why do you let it bother you?" is bullshit IMO.But you *do* have that control! You don't have to be a Shaolin monk to be able to rein in your emotional response to simple words. They are, in fact, just words. Why would you let another person take control of you in such a trivial manner? Why indeed would you let it bother you? I'm not saying it's always easy, but if you let yourself lose control over nothing more than a bunch of words you ultimately have nobody but yourself to blame. Not that I'm saying any of this is related to this thread, which is really about the fine lines between being funny, being inappropriate, and being offensive in a heterogeneous community like MP. On that topic, I would just urge everyone to err on the side of assuming humor over something darker, and think twice before crying "misogyny" or "racism" or any other ism that happens to be the flavor of the day. Otherwise we'll either all be in a state of perpetual pissed-off-ness, or the forums will become a wasteland of homogeneous Proper Thought. |
|
Christian wrote:So, ubu, let's say you own a company. You figure out that a competitor is going around badmouthing your products.Stop right there. That isn't "just words", that's libel. If you don't understand the difference...well, you know the rest. |
|
They may only be words, and you may be in control of your emotional response to words. But some words are worth a negative emotional response. It's ok to allow yourself to be angered by some words. |
|
Christian wrote:"She's a hottie, she can't possibly belay or climb well." "She slept her way to that position!" "Women are not good scientists!"Most people who are saying things such as these are in a lower position in the social hierarchy so the hypothetical women shouldn't care about their remarks. They should be able to tell that the critics are fueled by jealousy and therefore dismiss their importance. I learned to pick and choose who's words to give value to when I was 17. If you're in your adulthood and still haven't figured this out, I really feel sorry for you because you're inflicting so much emotional pain on yourself. Christian wrote:the whole subtext of the post was that attractive women cannot quickly be taught to belay well, that they need to be talked to like children and be given twice the amount of instruction that any other type of person would.I can't speak for the original post, because I didn't get the chance to read it, but, from what I read, this was not the intended meaning. what he describes is about the amount of instruction the average person would require, in my experience. We perceive belaying to be an easy task because it requires little thought and is mostly muscle memory. developing this muscle memory, however, can be very difficult because it involves many motions to be preformed simultaneously that most people don't do on a regular basis. as I have only been climbing for 2 years, I can still remember how hard it was to develop the muscle memory. it took a lot of mental energy and practice to develop. |
|
Tom Sherman wrote:Still trying to figure out what I think. But if it's to argue that cat-calling and unwarranted sexual advances are intimidating and that something in society is warranting this male behavior, than I would say yes that's totally fucked up. I really don't think the latter example is what was going on hereThis is EXACTLY what is going on here. The original post was sexually intimidating, not because it made funny sex jokes, but because it treated the female student like an object. Just a "thing." A dumb, ignorant creature. She's not a human, she's a hole. You might not have picked up on that, reading the original post. You are a dude so you do not walk down the street or go out on a date (or go climbing with an MPer for the first time!) feeling like you could be potential prey. But that is a day-to-day reality for women. That's our context. And the original post just screamed RAPE CULTURE. rantpolitical.com/2015/06/1… |
|
eli poss wrote: Most people who are saying things such as these are in a lower position in the social hierarchyIt's exactly the opposite, a lot of people that say or imply these kinds of things are actually higher in the hierarchy. Nobel Prize winning scientists, billionaires, the people who run the big companies, advertising agencies, studios, etc.. The people in power are trying to preserve that power, and they wouldn't even bother with this kind of stuff if it wasn't effective.. And that's not to mention how it is in the rest of the world, the US is a paradise for women's/minority rights compared to some countries I've lived in.. |
|
Jake Jones wrote: Agree to disagree. I don't have that control. I barely have the aforementioned control not to act on my urges. To some, that discipline is that of a Shaolin monk. But I see the other side too. It takes quite a bit to offend me, and there has to be a perceived intention of offense most of the time. I'm ok with my level of control, and also my threshold for things that offend me.I wonder. There is a difference between having control, and deciding not to exercise it, no? People who lack this control, and aren't able to modulate their response to the words or opinions of others, are somewhat broken. Take it to the extreme and you end up with the asshats who decided to assault the Charlie Hebdo office. For my part, I'll err on the side of trying to be offended by nothing than to be offended by everything. csproul wrote:They may only be words, and you may be in control of your emotional response to words. But some words are worth a negative emotional response. It's ok to allow yourself to be angered by some words.If you're bringing this up in the context of Donald Trump bloviating, then I agree wholeheartedly. |
|
I have my own story to tell, and this seems as good a place as any for the telling. Any similarity to, or perhaps direct plagiarism of, a prior in this thread is entirely maybe not unintentional. |
|
ubu wrote:Is it as offensive as Billcoe's story? If so, why? If not, why not?.It's not (you troll), because our culture is and always has been male dominated. Pejorative objectification of the dominant group (males) isn't offensive. In the past and present have males ever been regarded as not being as intelligent/competent as females? No. Not afforded rights and privileges enjoyed by females? No again Treated as outright property of our wives? No. |
|
snobbit wrote: This is EXACTLY what is going on here. The original post was sexually intimidating, not because it made funny sex jokes, but because it treated the female student like an object. Just a "thing." A dumb, ignorant creature. She's not a human, she's a hole. You might not have picked up on that, reading the original post. You are a dude so you do not walk down the street or go out on a date (or go climbing with an MPer for the first time!) feeling like you could be potential prey. But that is a day-to-day reality for women. That's our context. And the original post just screamed RAPE CULTURE.The terrible truth it that this is exactly how some guys see women; as a hole. Would you rather they be obvious about it, or hide it? Speaking as a man who is engaged, I'd rather these individuals be as overt as possible. Much easier for my fiancé to spot that way. |