I had an interesting conversation recently with a woman on Twitter who told me that my policy of letting MRAs and misogynists comment here, at least so long as they’re not abusive, was keeping her and others she knew from joining in the conversation; she wanted a place to discuss MRAs where she didn’t have to deal with them.
I know a lot of the regulars here like engaging with the trolls and MRAs who stop by, but I’d like to create some space here for commenters who want to discuss the issues in a Troll- and MRA-free zone.
So I thought I’d try starting a new kind of Open Thread: A No-Troll, No-MRA, No-Misogynist, No-Rape-Apologist, No-Douchebag Thread to discuss the issues I cover on the blog and anything related to that: Misogyny, MRAs, PUAs, MGTOW, the “Red Pill,” and so on. Enjoy!
Oh, and if a troll wanders in, or if someone starts being douchey, ignore them and send me a note. I’ll delete their comments and ban them. No warning, no moderation, straight ban.
For that matter, the history of knitting is a feminist matter, too: its coding has shifted with the level of industrialisation, whether hand-knitting has been a major industry, a cottage industry, a leisure activity. I can track changes in attitudes toward it in my own thinking, and its changing public profile in recent years.
I’m fine about you talking about the book, katz.
Mind you I’m about to go watch Morse, so my opinion’s sort of irrelevant right now. 😛
I’m interested in the book. I write non-fiction reports for part of my living, but really suck at fiction. I like seeing other people’s creative processes, particularly in areas where I would appear to have little-to-no talent. 🙂
As long as we get to read it when you’re done Katz. 🙂
@ Tea for Two let me break it down for you. People got defensive because it sounded like you were stereotyping sex workers/delegitimizing positive experiences of sex work. A very careful reading of your comments says you didn’t, but it *did* sound like it. That happens! Lots of times! And it sucks, and you were more than welcome to clarify your position. And I’m sure people would have apologized,but then you went incredibly defensive and on long rants, that honestly I just glazed over. At the current point, *that’s* what people are responding to. A lot of sex work is problematic, and you were well within your rights to point that out. But accusing us of being clique-y and straw-personing you (i.e. being disproportionally defensive) is making everyone here roll their eyes, even if we would otherwise agree with your point. If you can’t handle mild criticism and can’t explain yourself succinctly without being defensive then yes, this is the wrong place for you.
@katz? Your book sounds interesting. Maybe if you want a … I dunno, more “serious” flaw (?) you could have the character ridiculously defensive about the people they care about. Like if anyone even dares hurt them, your character goes right off? IDK I’m not great with writing, but it sounds great!
Have anyone read any Janet Evanovich books? One of her secondary characters is a sex worker called Lula. She’s a very colourful character. She’s definitely flawed, but very likeable. Which is pretty much every character in the books. Stephanie Plum (the main character) is an interesting and amusing protagonist. It’s a pity the movie adaption did such a terrible job of capturing what’s great about the books. If the dialogue and the characters could be captured more faithfully, they’d make a great tv series.
Yes, I loved those books, I read up to something like #10. They used to make me LOL on the train, which was embarrassing back in the day before everyone started listening to music/movies.
” @ Tea for Two let me break it down for you. ”
Oh thanks, because I’m really stupid!
” People got defensive because it sounded like you were stereotyping sex workers/delegitimizing positive experiences of sex work. A very careful reading of your comments says you didn’t ”
So – maybe they should’ve read “very carefully” to start with, then?
” And I’m sure people would have apologized ”
Not really – because until I said something they were continuing to attack me for positions I didn’t take – aka “straw person” arguments.
” But accusing us of being clique-y ”
Not -y or -ish. It’s a clique, right down to dictating what the comment section will be and who can say what. I’ve only pointed out the headline:
” Non-Personal Stuff ”
Which to me, means, not an endless kaffee klatsch about ourselves. Such as, trading recipes, trading knitting patterns, or diverting blog traffic to publicize one’s book.
I mean I was chided for actually trying to talk about actual feminist issues rather than katz’ book. To me that’s pretty clear a clique has confiscated the comment section(s) for its own use.
” being disproportionally defensive ”
Really? You came close to admitting (if not actually admitting) that you all mistook what I had said. But then you quickly blamed *me* for *their* reactions, and continue to do so. My mistake has been not being able to ignore the attacks and stop calling you all out on your hypocrisy.
” even if we would otherwise agree with your point. ”
Which point was that? The one no one bothered to actually read before jumping onto? No one stopped anyone from agreeing.
Instead they basically said I had no point and that I was demeaning sex workers.
” If you can’t handle mild criticism ”
My problem with it was it went personal immediately and that I was scolded like a small child. For things I never did to begin with.
And you all continue to defend being off topic and derailing someone’s blog to talk about yourselves – which I was mostly scrolling past to be blunt, (defending myself isn’t okay, but talking about off topic things on every blog topic is?) but I made a mistake to critique someone who *asked for critiques.* Who’s being overly defensive here? Maybe the clique who jumped down my throat for that?
” @katz? Your book sounds interesting. Maybe if you want a … I dunno, more “serious” flaw (?) you could have the character ridiculously defensive about the people they care about. Like if anyone even dares hurt them, your character goes right off? IDK I’m not great with writing, but it sounds great! ”
Ooh passive aggression – nice one.
” NB: knitting is a feminist issue. It is an activity that is coded feminine which is mainstreaming in a positive way. Any time a gendered activity becomes less gendered or a ‘female’ activity becomes less looked down on is something to celebrate IMO. ”
” For that matter, the history of knitting is a feminist matter, too: its coding has shifted with the level of industrialisation, whether hand-knitting has been a major industry, a cottage industry, a leisure activity. I can track changes in attitudes toward it in my own thinking, and its changing public profile in recent years. ”
I didn’t see much on the history of knitting, but yeah that’s an interesting and potentially feminist topic. But recently isn’t the first time hand crafts or weaving, looming, spinning etc., have been industries. And while they’ve gained some respect as art forms, it’s still seen as a woman’s thing, in my opinion. But knitting’s been mainstream a long time – I haven’t noticed it becoming less gendered, though. There’s always been male tailors, weavers, spinners, and even knitters. The issue to me is why does something *have to be* “less female” of an activity *before* it “becomes less looked down on?” Which does seem to remain the case.
The 8 Biggest Lies Men’s Rights Activists Spread About Women
http://www.policymic.com/articles/90131/8-biggest-lies-men-s-rights-activists-spread-about-women
Just 8?!?! How about EVERYTHING they spread!!
Hehe. They should be in the fertilizer business.
In a word, yes. This may not be place you’re looking for, Tea For Two.
Making a test comment because I made a comment in another thread that wouldn’t go through.
Weird. I can’t figure out what I said in the comment I made on the Dean Esmay thread to make it go to mod.
Does that mean we are not the droids teafortwo is looking for?
I admit I was kind of hoping tea for two would pop while I was sleeping. Alas, no such luck. Anyway it’s obviously wasted effort to try to drag her kicking and screaming into a conversation about anything other than herself, so mockery time it is.
…Nope, too easy.
Fuck, no wonder I never make any money: I try to publicize things I haven’t written yet by mentioning them to friends on a blog. (Also, knitting: IT’S PERSONAL.)
*megaphone voice* THIS COMMENT SECTION HAS BEEN CONFISCATED.
For those following along at home, there wouldn’t have been a problem if tea for two had just shown up in the thread and gone “hey, does anyone want to talk about prostitutes in movies?” but it’s quite obnoxious to slide into a conversation that’s already happening and then try to divert everyone to talking about your pet issue. And of course it’s obnoxious to start a long argument about how everyone should treat you, regardless of the context.
This is going to come as a shock, but sometimes people are not talking about you.
Oh good, I’m glad that the knitting conversational, er, thread has met with your approval. We’ll be sure to run all conversation ideas by you in the future to make sure they’re sufficiently feminist.
One day after the Washington Post publishes George Will’s rape apologia bullshit, they post this http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/06/10/the-best-way-to-end-violence-against-women-stop-taking-lovers-and-get-married/
The authors appropriated the #YesAllWomen hashtag to shame single mothers. Ugh.
Oh, an reading the comments section to that editorial I learned that the original title had the phrase “baby daddies in it.”
http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/flames-on-the-side-of-my-face
The Post is on a roll. What a steaming pantload.
WWTH: Oh great, the Washington Post is now blackmailing women.
Wait, I’m confused. How can books and knitting and so on be off topic in the thread that was specifically created for all the off-topic stuff?
Because Tea for Two rolled up and said so.
If only the author(s) of that Washington Post article bothered to look at the sources they cite…
//Skimming the thread//
So katz, tell us more about your book!
Never mind that DV rates in the US have declined since the passage of VAWA even though marriage rates aren’t going up.
I’ve also got love (sarcasm) that the authors seem to think all single mothers are single by choice. It doesn’t occur to them that there are deadbeat dads who choose to abandon their kids.