Masculism

[Alex]

i believe harmless misread this sentence and is mistakenly under the impression that broken iris is questioning harmless' gender:

The current Alex account, whomever is personning (gender-neutral term for harmless) that thing now, is just a symptom of a change in how people interact online.

further, broken iris hasn't revisited his old post to recognize that this is the only possible comment to which harmless could be referring.

[harmless]

I feel better

You shouldn't. There was time when we could just post about all sorts of stuff in N&D and actually talk about the world in a consequence free environment, without people trying to be internet-clever all time. The current Alex account, whomever is personning (gender-neutral term for harmless) that thing now, is just a symptom of a change in how people interact online. Short, sweet, occasionally funny blurbs that have little depth or lasting effect beyond that moment's snark that may end up in a sig somewhere. I'm no better or worse, probably worse really, but I'd like to think on some topics and in some exchanges we can still capture that spirit that we once had... back when Presidents were white.

It was about three or four posts away from the post in which I complained about it. Broken iris whinging about how nobody talks about anything in N&D 'in a consequence free environment, without people trying to be internet-clever all the time.' 'Internet-clever' presumably means people in disagreement with whatever is the default RM opinion du jour. I'm also fairly sure I've been trying to discuss things fairly seriously all along in this thread, and the feminism thread, but my ideas are just fucking hilarious in this sausage factory. And then look, a completely uncalled-for conjecture as to my gender pronoun, in a post that otherwise has nothing to do with me.

None of this needed pointing out.

[harmless]

I don't think my gender is being questioned. I don't honestly think RM could possibly have such a respectful, nuanced conversation as 'What is my gender, really?' The only thing going on here was a supposedly humourous dig at the idea that I might have a different gender pronoun because of the subjects I'm interested in talking about. If anyone genuinely wants to know why N&D is not a hotbed of serious intellectual discussion, it might be because everyone reverts to elementary school discourse whenever issues of identity and social justice come up.

[Alex]

I don't think my gender is being questioned. I don't honestly think RM could possibly have such a respectful, nuanced conversation as 'What is my gender, really?' The only thing going on here was a supposedly humourous dig at the idea that I might have a different gender pronoun because of the subjects I'm interested in talking about. If anyone genuinely wants to know why N&D is not a hotbed of serious intellectual discussion, it might be because everyone reverts to elementary school discourse whenever issues of identity and social justice come up.

just start trolling. it's how i deal with it.

[McParadigm]

I don't think my gender is being questioned. I don't honestly think RM could possibly have such a respectful, nuanced conversation as 'What is my gender, really?' The only thing going on here was a supposedly humourous dig at the idea that I might have a different gender pronoun because of the subjects I'm interested in talking about. If anyone genuinely wants to know why N&D is not a hotbed of serious intellectual discussion, it might be because everyone reverts to elementary school discourse whenever issues of identity and social justice come up.

just start trolling. it's how i deal with it.

Or jump over to a topic that has some overlap, but which involves more direct and actionable debate.

The topics of education or economy are hardly separate from discussions of enfranchisement and control, and while I don't spend much time in the latter I can safely say the former is very much the opposite of what you're describing in bold.

At the end of the day, discussions like gender and religion are influencers that act upon other topics. They shape our response to the problems we face. N&D seems to thrive better when focused on an actionable topic, rather than an influencing one. This is not to say that that's the only way those things SHOULD be discussed, just that this particular format and forum seems to be most successful when it scopes that way.

If you can engage feminism as one part of, say, evaluating educational reform, that might mean more to people than trying to discuss it in a vacuum.

[broken iris]

i believe harmless misread this sentence and is mistakenly under the impression that broken iris is questioning harmless' gender:

The current Alex account, whomever is personning (gender-neutral term for harmless) that thing now, is just a symptom of a change in how people interact online.

further, broken iris hasn't revisited his old post to recognize that this is the only possible comment to which harmless could be referring.

I guessed it was that, but as you said I was clearly not referring to Harmless as a gender-neutral individual, which would be an insult, I was trying to respect his view by using the gender-neutral term "personning" in place "manning" so that my comment wasn't showing implicit bias in assuming the person behind the Alex account is male.

If anyone genuinely wants to know why N&D is not a hotbed of serious intellectual discussion, it might be because everyone reverts to elementary school discourse whenever issues of identity and social justice come up.

Or maybe it's because everything else on the board has devolved to low-brow sarcasm and trolling where threads look more like school-aged kid's twitter feeds, so people just assume anything here is as well. There is a huge difference between trolling individuals and questioning the validity of the ideas they post, which was the distinction I was trying to make with my post about the Alex account. In other words, it is possible to say "I don't like your idea" without saying "I don't like you", something lost on many posters here.

So harmless, I honestly don't understand why you think people are insulting you or aren't willing to have honest discussions. Is it perhaps that since you are so deeply involved in the topic that you aren't exposed often enough to people who don't have the same depth of experience with it?

[surfndestroy]

I don't think my gender is being questioned. I don't honestly think RM could possibly have such a respectful, nuanced conversation as 'What is my gender, really?' The only thing going on here was a supposedly humourous dig at the idea that I might have a different gender pronoun because of the subjects I'm interested in talking about. If anyone genuinely wants to know why N&D is not a hotbed of serious intellectual discussion, it might be because everyone reverts to elementary school discourse whenever issues of identity and social justice come up.

We don't care about your gender or any abilities or disabilities you have or don't have. It's not all about you. You want respect but don't give any. You don't think think we can be respectful and nuanced and then complain when we live up to your expectations. If you think that's all we're capable of then you're an idiot for complaining about it when it occurs. We all have the right to make fun of made up gender pronouns. I think it's a farce but more power to you. You take take the first step, as a role model to us, by only referring to me as Grand Imperial King and Ruler of Miscreants as that is how I self identify at the moment.

All I know is that people like Rick Hansen and Stephen Hawking haven't done amazing things in life by dabbling in victimhood and pondering their inter-sectionality. The big problem with inter-sectionality is that when one does achieve something in life, that person isn't held up to be a role model nor their achievements celebrated. Instead they just get moved into an oppressor role and follower of the patriarchy.

[malice]

All I know is that people like Rick Hansen and Stephen Hawking haven't done amazing things in life by dabbling in victimhood and pondering their inter-sectionality. The big problem with inter-sectionality is that when one does achieve something in life, that person isn't held up to be a role model nor their achievements celebrated. Instead they just get moved into an oppressor role and follower of the patriarchy.

I've never thought of Stephen Hawking as an oppressor, nor of Harmless as dabbling in victimhood.

[harmless]

You probably shouldn't make pronouncements about intersectionality before you've 1) realised that it's one word, and 2) done some research on it, surfndestroy. If you did the latter, you'd very quickly learn that it doesn't have a hyphen, and that what you've said about it is false. Lastly, where do you get off telling me that I'm 'dabbling in victimhood' in talking about this stuff? I mean fuck, where does that philosophy stop? How many other people in life are 'dabbling in victimhood' from your perspective? Because I'm gonna need a fucking list, or I'll just assume that you're picking me out for that insult because you have nothing intelligent to say in response to my arguments.

[malice]

You probably shouldn't make pronouncements about intersectionality before you've 1) realised that it's one word, and 2) done some research on it, surfndestroy. If you did the latter, you'd very quickly learn that it doesn't have a hyphen, and that what you've said about it is false. Lastly, where do you get off telling me that I'm 'dabbling in victimhood' in talking about this stuff? I mean fuck, where does that philosophy stop? How many other people in life are 'dabbling in victimhood' from your perspective? Because I'm gonna need a fucking list, or I'll just assume that you're picking me out for that insult because you have nothing intelligent to say in response to my arguments.

all women dabble in victimhood by default. so that's one

[harmless]

You probably shouldn't make pronouncements about intersectionality before you've 1) realised that it's one word, and 2) done some research on it, surfndestroy. If you did the latter, you'd very quickly learn that it doesn't have a hyphen, and that what you've said about it is false. Lastly, where do you get off telling me that I'm 'dabbling in victimhood' in talking about this stuff? I mean fuck, where does that philosophy stop? How many other people in life are 'dabbling in victimhood' from your perspective? Because I'm gonna need a fucking list, or I'll just assume that you're picking me out for that insult because you have nothing intelligent to say in response to my arguments.

all women dabble in victimhood by default. so that's one

Quite right.

[malice]

You probably shouldn't make pronouncements about intersectionality before you've 1) realised that it's one word, and 2) done some research on it, surfndestroy. If you did the latter, you'd very quickly learn that it doesn't have a hyphen, and that what you've said about it is false. Lastly, where do you get off telling me that I'm 'dabbling in victimhood' in talking about this stuff? I mean fuck, where does that philosophy stop? How many other people in life are 'dabbling in victimhood' from your perspective? Because I'm gonna need a fucking list, or I'll just assume that you're picking me out for that insult because you have nothing intelligent to say in response to my arguments.

all women dabble in victimhood by default. so that's one

Quite right.

in thinking about this idea of victimhood - it's likely all minorities or all people of 'different' status other than white male, can be made to appear dabbling in victimhood.

I mean, from this set of various conversations over the last couple months, basically any mention of a status being different than white male constitutes dabbling in victimhood

it seems that in order to achieve a status of equality all people not white male must never make mention of their differences to the white males... lest we be assumed to be playing the {whatever} card in order to gain an advantage...

it's kind of stupid to me, but then I'm not a white male so it probably doesn't matter.

[harmless]

You probably shouldn't make pronouncements about intersectionality before you've 1) realised that it's one word, and 2) done some research on it, surfndestroy. If you did the latter, you'd very quickly learn that it doesn't have a hyphen, and that what you've said about it is false. Lastly, where do you get off telling me that I'm 'dabbling in victimhood' in talking about this stuff? I mean fuck, where does that philosophy stop? How many other people in life are 'dabbling in victimhood' from your perspective? Because I'm gonna need a fucking list, or I'll just assume that you're picking me out for that insult because you have nothing intelligent to say in response to my arguments.

all women dabble in victimhood by default. so that's one

Quite right.

in thinking about this idea of victimhood - it's likely all minorities or all people of 'different' status other than white male, can be made to appear dabbling in victimhood.

I mean, from this set of various conversations over the last couple months, basically any mention of a status being different than white male constitutes dabbling in victimhood

it seems that in order to achieve a status of equality all people not white male must never make mention of their differences to the white males... lest we be assumed to be playing the {whatever} card in order to gain an advantage...

it's kind of stupid to me, but then I'm not a white male so it probably doesn't matter.

This is so right.

[BurtReynolds]

whitemailed.

[malice]

whitemailed.

[mookie]

whitemailed.

Seems like we should have been over this focus on white males a long time ago. Intersectionality ought to include white beta males, rights?

[BurtReynolds]

As long as it doesn't include the bitches who have friendzoned me over the years, it can include whoever we want.

[harmless]

Minority perspectives are belittled and made into a joke, yup.

[McParadigm]

whitemailed.

The Scots have given so little to the world. Don't take this away from them.

[malice]

Minority perspectives are belittled and made into a joke, yup.

so I see jokes as a first step to actually dealing with a societal problem. even ones that are belittling.

we're too insecure as a society to handle rapid change that does away with exclusivity so we start with jokes- disparaging and otherwise.
this is actually better than non-acknowledgement.
the next step is a takeover of the joke making by the 'victims' - controlling the message kind of thing. and it's already in process with most 'not white male' society members.