[Politics] What matters more? My Sex or my Race? (Interesting MCU conversation explored)

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

So, I had a fun little conversation about Marvel's own Beloved Polarizing figure, Captain Marvel. The person I was talking to was coming to me from what it meant to her as representation. I still haven't seen the movie because I'm not big into comic book movies due to knowing the Lore and how much is cut out or reworked for the MCU fans. The topic was mainly how I need to see the movie regardless.

I like Danvers more as Ms. Marvel. I've said that a few times. I think there were a ton of better picks for Marvel's breakout female Nuke. Ms. America could probably wipe the floor with Captain if pushed. Spectrum was the original female Captain Marvel and has been that way for a better part of a few decades. The new Ms. Marvel I happen to like, but I realize that Shape Changers do not make compelling heroes in a lot of people's minds. Especially in terms of action.

Regardless, I haven't felt compelled to see Captain Marvel, like I haven't been compelled to see any of these films. And that was a non-starer with my friend. Eventually, she played the "as a minority, you should know about representation" card as a way to guilt me into seeing it. Which I wasn't ok with. I am a huge Wonder Woman fan. I've been one since back in the 80's, where people couldn't even understand that a black kid likes comics. Back when admitting you liked a Female Superhero would be tantamount for asking for a beating... Especially in the Bronx.

And I didn't even see Wonder Woman! Again. Same problem. I know too much of the lore to trust they got it right. It's an impossibility that they can. That's one of the reasons I actually saw Spiderman Into the Spider-Verse. I know NOTHING about Miles Morales so I could see it fresh.

I pointed out while they had Black Panther, Falcon, James Rhodes, and Nick Fury, there doesn't seem to be a lot of black guys being represented in the films as stars. Her response? "It doesn't matter, all comic book movies star guys and you're a guy at the end of the day".

The conversation devolved from there. But this is actually a conversation I'm having with distressing frequency. That somehow being a guy makes things easier for me, so I should just roll with it. For other guys, that might be the case, but having the cops called on them doesn't tantamount a death sentence for most other guys. I have to live with that fear. I had to shorten my name just to get call backs for jobs. I can't get the same level of loud because the perception I'll create if I act like a regular person.

In short, I have plights that are actually expressly tied to my being a man. That black females do not have. In this matter, Black males are uniquely a little more disadvantaged than Black females. My mother taught me that, my aunts, my family, and my eyes did as well.

Yet when I talk to people outside the race, My maleness in their eyes makes up for everything.

And yes, I explained this to my friend. To which, her wavering went as far as "Well.. then you know what it's like!".

We're not all built the same. We might have the same skin tone or the same outwardly expressed sexual characteristics, but that doesn't mean our experiences are monolith. I want to understand everyone's point of view and why they feel the way they do, but I find myself wondering what's the point if they don't want to actually bend and see that me being tall doesn't make my life easier just because they aren't tall, or me being strong makes up for everything because they are weak...

Or that me being a male doesn't make it expressly easier for me in life than a woman because I'm more likely to catch a bullet for that exact characteristic.

So what are your thoughts? Does what I say suck, but still being a man for the most part makes up for whatever I have to endure? Should people be more open minded than what it appears from the outside? Or should we all stop talking to each other and just ask about the weather like we're British or Canadian?

Well I am glad I am male because I don't have to go through Pregnancy and Periods. Those sound like agony.

These kinda questions are why oppression olympics are a failed cause. Even if you satisfy this quandary, next time someone will add sexuality or disability into the equation. Someone will add immigration status.

You're not really saying anything about you yourself, you're just using generalizations (which are by default wrong) to judge things, and since there will most likely never be a MCU movie about transgender gay mixed race with ancestry from all over the planet amputee midget with hiv and cancer who was born with no nose but seven toes on his right leg, which incidentally is his only leg btw, someone will always be able to one-up you and claim you can't POSSIBLY understand or opine cause you have 5 toes in you single midget leg and those toe privileges you enjoy make all the difference.

Just use your normal logic and opine and deal with other logical arguments about facts and stuff. If something is purely subjective and opinion based don't try to dominate other's opinions and just agree to disagree respectfully. It's really just that easy. All this is is people trying to force other people to see their opinions as fact because of the groups they belong in. It's BS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersectionality

It is not a one beats all. We all have privileges and disadvantages.

I have privilege for being an American, and white and living close to New York in a good neighborhood.

I am disadvantaged by being LGBT, particularly trans.

And yes, there are sexist women, racist black people, even homophobic gay people of all things.

Though another important point is who is bigoted, the power they have, and how they use it. The President of the US being bigoted is worse than an average citizen being bigoted.

Saelune:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersectionality

It is not a one beats all. We all have privileges and disadvantages.

I have privilege for being an American, and white and living close to New York in a good neighborhood.

I am disadvantaged by being LGBT, particularly trans.

And yes, there are sexist women, racist black people, even homophobic gay people of all things.

Though another important point is who is bigoted, the power they have, and how they use it. The President of the US being bigoted is worse than an average citizen being bigoted.

The point is you can infinitely go into these sub-facets of people's being and keep dividing and dividing forever. Maybe someone was short and has a complex with that. I had bracers growing up which I consider to be isolating and make you stand out negatively. Stuff like that. You can always find stuff like that to make yourself seem harmed by something that's not your fault. That's just life and chance. Some people are born with no lungs and die and some people are born perfect the heirs of kings. You're not gonna fix this by making everyone aware of all the multitudes of ways that life was being life at you. Just take it for granted that life works like that and move past it onto things that are about your actions and not your circumstances.

In the context of this topic; your opinion on movies is not more valuable purely because you're this or that sex. Someone who is just another man can still be way more worthwhile to listen to based on his expertise on lore and so on. It's why when experts testify at court their expert opinion is given more weight than a layman's, and there is no such category of expertise that is attained by merely being born as something. You have to actually accomplish things to get your opinion to count more than that of just another random insignificant person. Your oppression doesn't make you significant, even if you're marginally more oppressed than most everyone else. It just makes you pitiable.

Forgetting about statistics because they say little about individuals, I can't say I'm cursed by my masculinity and maleness. It's probably just me getting in the way of the good things I want and need in my life, and by that I mean I can imagine an Elsa McElroy having similar issues. Then again being an attractive woman seems to be easy mode for some things in our (Finnish in this case) society, but hey that's just my saltiness talking.

One thing I find weird is that in discussions between public figures over here, the expectations for rhetoric are the same no matter the sex of whoever's arguing, but in casual or "coffee table" conversations the stereotypically logical men are at odds with the emotional women sometimes surprisingly fast. Or maybe that's just between me and my mother.

ObsidianJones:
I still haven't seen the movie because I'm not big into comic book movies due to knowing the Lore and how much is cut out or reworked for the MCU fans. The topic was mainly how I need to see the movie regardless.

If you're a comics purist, you're going to hate what they did to the skrulls.

But that aside, I struggled how, or if, I should answer this, since, y'know, straight white male living in Australia who won't have to worry a lot about the crap you mention here. It's kind of touching on intersectionality, but I guess what your post demonstrates is that intersectionality breaks down when you apply it to individuals rather than groups. I guess all I can say about issues of race is that I think it's fair to talk about the issues until they no longer are issues. Of course, which issues are worthy of discussion is another matter, but I think it's perfectly fair to highlight that when it comes to police brutality in the US, blacks are far more negatively affected than whites as a proportion (we have the same issue here with Indigenous Australians and deaths in custody). On the other hand, I'm more blase about representation in fiction. The former is an issue that can, and should be solved, because fucking lives are on the line. On the other, I can't help but think if representation is so important to some people, shouldn't their efforts be better spent on creating it? I get that isn't necessarily possible in a system like Hollywood (or any other film industry), but the filmmakers are going to cater to the market.

But I get that as straight white male, I'm well and truly catered for in this regard. So when Black Panther became a cultural phenomenon across the African diaspora for instance, I was at first perplexed, but then, it's not my place to tell anyone that it shouldn't be (also haven't seen the film, so...)

ObsidianJones:
Should people be more open minded than what it appears from the outside? Or should we all stop talking to each other and just ask about the weather like we're British or Canadian?

British only get to discuss rain, Canadians only get to discuss snow. Need a better topic than weather. :p

Dreiko:
These kinda questions are why oppression olympics are a failed cause. Even if you satisfy this quandary, next time someone will add sexuality or disability into the equation. Someone will add immigration status.

Then let them. This isn't the last MCU or even super hero movie. If someone wants a gay hero after Captain Marvel, let them. If someone wants a muslim hero after that gay one. Let them. Trans one? Hell yeah bud.

You shouldn't be this upset because people ask for things on the internet.

undeadsuitor:

Dreiko:
These kinda questions are why oppression olympics are a failed cause. Even if you satisfy this quandary, next time someone will add sexuality or disability into the equation. Someone will add immigration status.

Then let them. This isn't the last MCU or even super hero movie. If someone wants a gay hero after Captain Marvel, let them. If someone wants a muslim hero after that gay one. Let them. Trans one? Hell yeah bud.

You shouldn't be this upset because people ask for things on the internet.

Dunno where I'm being any amount of upset here lol. I'm just pointing out the irrationality here. People's opinions ought not be granted special consideration based on these factors, this actively worsens our society by pursuing goals outside of merit. Someone being female doesn't make them by default more suitable to opine about MCU protagonists or films or what have you. Any decision reached with this as a basis will be fundamentally weaker than it otherwise would have been. At some point we have to say to someone "no, you having three moles in your nose and not two does not mean you deserve special consideration" and since nobody can really draw a line about which arbitrary characteristic is fair game to be granted sagacity over but which is patently absurd, I will simply say that none of them should have that function in society and that way everyone's gonna be treated fairly. Cause come on, being blind or deaf is way more disarming and a bigger hardship to live with by orders of magnitude as opposed to being black or gay or what have you but we barely even hear from those people. It's kinda obscene.

I'm not even that much into comic books and their films to begin with, it's the principle of the matter that's the issue here.

Life is hard and to say a person is a man or white had privilege is ignorant to who they are as an individual. We all have our own individual struggles and pains regardless of our sex or race. Yet, to clump someone by sex/race and say it is easier for them is not accounting for every person known as one. It devalues the individual as a whole and is the same tactic the KKK or Nazism did to dehumanize Jews. It ignores that it is baseline racism at its core, with a society which tides itself to justice. It is in essence borderline Joseph Goebbles thinking and approach. Every person is a individual, and as a individual they are not held to these stereotypes.

The same is true with the MCU characters; they should be based upon themselves as individuals. Not characters to just check mark a group. They should be individuals first well written, in essence be human without being a stereotype. Ironically, it seems Hollywood is more interested fluff than actual character development.So anything created for LGBTQ etc would just feel very hollow and placed in films just to fill seats.

Dreiko:

undeadsuitor:

Dreiko:
These kinda questions are why oppression olympics are a failed cause. Even if you satisfy this quandary, next time someone will add sexuality or disability into the equation. Someone will add immigration status.

Then let them. This isn't the last MCU or even super hero movie. If someone wants a gay hero after Captain Marvel, let them. If someone wants a muslim hero after that gay one. Let them. Trans one? Hell yeah bud.

You shouldn't be this upset because people ask for things on the internet.

Dunno where I'm being any amount of upset here lol. I'm just pointing out the irrationality here. People's opinions ought not be granted special consideration based on these factors, this actively worsens our society by pursuing goals outside of merit. Someone being female doesn't make them by default more suitable to opine about MCU protagonists or films or what have you. Any decision reached with this as a basis will be fundamentally weaker than it otherwise would have been. At some point we have to say to someone "no, you having three moles in your nose and not two does not mean you deserve special consideration" and since nobody can really draw a line about which arbitrary characteristic is fair game to be granted sagacity over but which is patently absurd, I will simply say that none of them should have that function in society and that way everyone's gonna be treated fairly. Cause come on, being blind or deaf is way more disarming and a bigger hardship to live with by orders of magnitude as opposed to being black or gay or what have you but we barely even hear from those people. It's kinda obscene.

I'm not even that much into comic books and their films to begin with, it's the principle of the matter that's the issue here.

Your choice in words and topics, coupled with your "its not like I even *like* comics b-baka" finisher reveal your true feelings here bud.

I mean hell, first we were talking about what the next Marvel hero would be, and now we're debating on whether someone's life experiences qualifies them to have more nuanced opinions on media???? I know people on the internet are pretty homogeneous. Hell, I couldn't tell one gamergater from the other. But sometimes people's experiences can give them better insight into topics.

And sometimes it's experiences that straight white men don't have.

I don't know why this is a hot take

Dreiko:
Even if you satisfy this quandary, next time someone will add sexuality or disability into the equation.

And?

Dreiko:

You're not really saying anything about you yourself, you're just using generalizations (which are by default wrong) to judge things, and since there will most likely never be a MCU movie about transgender gay mixed race with ancestry from all over the planet amputee midget with hiv and cancer who was born with no nose but seven toes on his right leg, which incidentally is his only leg btw, someone will always be able to one-up you and claim you can't POSSIBLY understand or opine cause you have 5 toes in you single midget leg and those toe privileges you enjoy make all the difference.

Just use your normal logic and opine and deal with other logical arguments about facts and stuff. If something is purely subjective and opinion based don't try to dominate other's opinions and just agree to disagree respectfully. It's really just that easy. All this is is people trying to force other people to see their opinions as fact because of the groups they belong in. It's BS.

Oh get real problems. And drop the hyperbole.

This reminds about that one episode of Scrubs, where Eliott and Turk argue who has it harder in the medical field: women or black doctors?

Then a black lady doctor passes by and they both are like "You go, you!".

That's my input for this topic when it comes to media, i guess. Since i'm both white and male, i can't think of anything to add regarding IRL situations.

Dreiko:

Saelune:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersectionality

It is not a one beats all. We all have privileges and disadvantages.

I have privilege for being an American, and white and living close to New York in a good neighborhood.

I am disadvantaged by being LGBT, particularly trans.

And yes, there are sexist women, racist black people, even homophobic gay people of all things.

Though another important point is who is bigoted, the power they have, and how they use it. The President of the US being bigoted is worse than an average citizen being bigoted.

The point is you can infinitely go into these sub-facets of people's being and keep dividing and dividing forever. Maybe someone was short and has a complex with that. I had bracers growing up which I consider to be isolating and make you stand out negatively. Stuff like that. You can always find stuff like that to make yourself seem harmed by something that's not your fault. That's just life and chance. Some people are born with no lungs and die and some people are born perfect the heirs of kings. You're not gonna fix this by making everyone aware of all the multitudes of ways that life was being life at you. Just take it for granted that life works like that and move past it onto things that are about your actions and not your circumstances.

In the context of this topic; your opinion on movies is not more valuable purely because you're this or that sex. Someone who is just another man can still be way more worthwhile to listen to based on his expertise on lore and so on. It's why when experts testify at court their expert opinion is given more weight than a layman's, and there is no such category of expertise that is attained by merely being born as something. You have to actually accomplish things to get your opinion to count more than that of just another random insignificant person. Your oppression doesn't make you significant, even if you're marginally more oppressed than most everyone else. It just makes you pitiable.

Remember when people with braces weren't legally allowed to marry? Remember when movements of naturally straight teeth supremacists marched chanting to kill you? Remember when you had your liberty over your body made illegal in the state of Georgia? No? Hm. Weird.

Everyone has dealt with adversity. Not everyone's adversity was from the government making laws to oppress you. And either way, if you have ever had life be shitty cause of something, MAYBE LEARN TO EMPATHISE ABOUT IT!

I am not black, but having my own rights oppressed as an LGBT person has made me care about the rights of black people.

The real pissing contest is done by bitter straight white men who cant handle the notion of giving a fuck about people who dont look like them.

Saelune:
The real pissing contest is done by bitter straight white men who cant handle the notion of giving a fuck about people who dont look like them.

Yes and no. There's certainly a lot of that, but any rights movement you care to name has people who are (passionately, rightfully) fighting for their rights, who totally ignore (or contribute to) the problems of other groups. There are really racist white feminists, and really sexist black men fighting for black rights. Both types often demand black women stand with them (in subservient roles), and get surprised and outraged when they aren't fully onboard with that. Some of the black women (quite rightfully) condemning that sort of behaviour would hate black women who are Muslim.

Which gives straight white christian males panicking about minorities banding together and taking over another way to be annoying.

I mean, to answer the topic question, I don't know what the difference between 0 and 0 is. So I guess the answer is "No".

Medically I'd figure your sex matters more. Whereas socially it would be race.

RobertEHouse:
Life is hard and to say a person is a man or white had privilege is ignorant to who they are as an individual. We all have our own individual struggles and pains regardless of our sex or race. Yet, to clump someone by sex/race and say it is easier for them is not accounting for every person known as one. It devalues the individual as a whole and is the same tactic the KKK or Nazism did to dehumanize Jews. It ignores that it is baseline racism at its core, with a society which tides itself to justice. It is in essence borderline Joseph Goebbles thinking and approach. Every person is a individual, and as a individual they are not held to these stereotypes.

It's not that easy, though, is it?

We can say that "men are taller than women" is an insult to individual short men and tall women, but at a level it's basically true. Likewise if we sum up all the people in demographic groups X and Y, all those individuals, we can see that perhaps their lives and outcomes on average are not equivalent in ways that might be concerning. When we suddenly say everyone is an individual and refuse to budge from that level, we voluntarily decide to look only at the trees and stop seeing the wood and we start missing something important. And ironically, if we refuse to see such bigger pictures of society, we will fail many of the individuals within it.

The problem is not to note things like "male" or "white" privilege exist. The problem is with how they are applied to people and used to justify action: they can be handled sensitively and sensibly... or not. And given that humans aren't perfect, inevitably quite a lot of that time it's not going to be sensitive and/or sensible. But that's not sufficient reason to throw any babies out with the bathwater.

Dreiko:
...you're just using generalizations (which are by default wrong)

Generalisations are as true as the facts supporting them. The problem is their misapplication.

Hhm... Well Dreiko, thankfully, already made my point on your questions so instead I'll bring up something I think this might be an indication of the problem with coalitions, if one party, party 1, of that coalition gets the chance to get what they want but another party, party 2, doesn't, chances are that party 1 is going to take that instead of continuing to stand with party 2 in solidarity.

For instance, LGBT, why is the T there? The LGB indicates sexual and romantic preferences while the T indicates an identity of self that goes against what is more common. It's a bit like how Visual Novels are placed in the same stores as games despite them being more like interactive graphic novels for the most part. They aren't what you'd technically consider a game (Except for the VN's that do have gameplay) but because their audience and niche attract similar groups of people and placing them with games increases the number of people that will see and purchase them, they get placed with games.

I'm percolating in my head the idea that one might be able to tell if a minority group truly has strength to stand on its own if it is willing to distance itself from another minority group or "eat" it for its own benefit. I've noticed more and more of my fellow aspies acting... snobbish in regards to talking about NT's on forums which I feel is another sign of us having more power in the public sphere that they feel they can act that way.

Saelune:

The real pissing contest is done by bitter straight white men who cant handle the notion of giving a fuck about people who dont look like them.

It always stuns me when you say these things with a completely straight face and no sense of the irony of how you yourself act like the people you describe.

it seems like your friend was just excited and happy to be represented in the modern high-budget universe they enjoy and wanted to share that, whereas yourself being so intimately familiar with the source material and current film adaptation knowledge led to a different perception and lack of excitement overall, where they both collide in conversation an impasse occurred and things were said that weren't thought out too good, perhaps fueled by emotional investments born of different life experiences? just from first impression however. I'm not sure the question is a useful one though, as there are numerous interconnecting factors and variables that mean attempting to prioritise one over another for the sake of debate doesn't really do any of them justice. people tend to only see the problems of this world through the prism of their own negative experiences, it takes effort to push through that. effort, patience, empathy and a surrender of ego which some find more challenging than others of course, for better or worse. but the expected default is the prism. people tend to think pretty ladies get everything easier than them, but that is not at all true. they just see what they project into these typically attractive females which coincidentally misses everything except their own personal desires

Specter Von Baren:

I've noticed more and more of my fellow aspies acting... snobbish in regards to talking about NT's on forums which I feel is another sign of us having more power in the public sphere that they feel they can act that way.

That and the usual self-important narcissism so many forms of activism tend to develop.

Specter Von Baren:
Hhm... Well Dreiko, thankfully, already made my point on your questions so instead I'll bring up something I think this might be an indication of the problem with coalitions, if one party, party 1, of that coalition gets the chance to get what they want but another party, party 2, doesn't, chances are that party 1 is going to take that instead of continuing to stand with party 2 in solidarity.

For instance, LGBT, why is the T there? The LGB indicates sexual and romantic preferences while the T indicates an identity of self that goes against what is more common. It's a bit like how Visual Novels are placed in the same stores as games despite them being more like interactive graphic novels for the most part. They aren't what you'd technically consider a game (Except for the VN's that do have gameplay) but because their audience and niche attract similar groups of people and placing them with games increases the number of people that will see and purchase them, they get placed with games.

I'm percolating in my head the idea that one might be able to tell if a minority group truly has strength to stand on its own if it is willing to distance itself from another minority group or "eat" it for its own benefit. I've noticed more and more of my fellow aspies acting... snobbish in regards to talking about NT's on forums which I feel is another sign of us having more power in the public sphere that they feel they can act that way.

Saelune:

The real pissing contest is done by bitter straight white men who cant handle the notion of giving a fuck about people who dont look like them.

It always stuns me when you say these things with a completely straight face and no sense of the irony of how you yourself act like the people you describe.

It stuns me that people who support Trump complain I am uncivil. Oh wait, its because they don't actually care about civility, they just care about keeping people like me oppressed.

You agree with Dreiko. Thats the problem. Because you should not agree with Dreiko on this topic.

Thaluikhain:

Saelune:
The real pissing contest is done by bitter straight white men who cant handle the notion of giving a fuck about people who dont look like them.

Yes and no. There's certainly a lot of that, but any rights movement you care to name has people who are (passionately, rightfully) fighting for their rights, who totally ignore (or contribute to) the problems of other groups. There are really racist white feminists, and really sexist black men fighting for black rights. Both types often demand black women stand with them (in subservient roles), and get surprised and outraged when they aren't fully onboard with that. Some of the black women (quite rightfully) condemning that sort of behaviour would hate black women who are Muslim.

Which gives straight white christian males panicking about minorities banding together and taking over another way to be annoying.

Terrible people are universal and will use anything they can to help them be terrible. The difference is which of those terrible people are running the government. And that is terrible straight white (mostly old) men who want to oppress women, LGBT people and people of color. But hey, Cardi B did some bad shit, so I guess that justifies all the women who get raped, right? (No, no it does not)

Specter Von Baren:
For instance, LGBT, why is the T there? The LGB indicates sexual and romantic preferences while the T indicates an identity of self that goes against what is more common.

I suspect that that's because the most vocal and violent enemies of LGBT people don't distinguish between the letters, they got lumped together by society, rather than by their own choice. Though that's a generalisation, and an easy answer.

Thaluikhain:

Specter Von Baren:
For instance, LGBT, why is the T there? The LGB indicates sexual and romantic preferences while the T indicates an identity of self that goes against what is more common.

I suspect that that's because the most vocal and violent enemies of LGBT people don't distinguish between the letters, they got lumped together by society, rather than by their own choice. Though that's a generalisation, and an easy answer.

The LGBT community exists because we were kicked out of 'normal' society. If we were never treated as aberrations, we would not even need to make our own niche community.

You're less likely to look for a surrogate family when your biological one loves you and doesn't kick you out of the house despite still being just a kid.

ObsidianJones:

So what are your thoughts? Does what I say suck, but still being a man for the most part makes up for whatever I have to endure? Should people be more open minded than what it appears from the outside? Or should we all stop talking to each other and just ask about the weather like we're British or Canadian?

I'll have you know that the weather is an eternally important topic in Sweden too.

Though I think Saelune already sort of covered what I wanted to say. I'll be a little less academic about it though. I think that we should all be humble to the fact that everyone can suffer from circumstances beyond their control, whether that is sex, ethnicity, gender, class or nationality (or something else). Being a black man means facing issues and dangers that a white woman won't, but she'll be facing issues and dangers a man won't. A wealthy, well-educated black woman will probably have it better than a poor, uneducated white man. For some it is, on average, institutionally easier to get help or a larger chance of not facing the really bad struggles. But it is poor comfort to an uneducated, drug addicted white man who gets HIV from injecting heroine that native american women on average has it worse then white men. Just as it is poor comfort for a native american woman or a black man that people have it worse in places like Burma or Congo-Kinshasa.

It is about respecting the fact that everyone faces their own struggles and problems in life. When you express your fear of getting killed by the Police because of racial profiling, that's a real danger you face and a real emotional burden to you. Whether that's worse than me being raped and hearing that it is bad for my kids that they've got two mothers and whether a white man not finding a woman to share his life with is suffering as much as either of us is kind of beside the point.

To me, that also means respecting that when we're talking Black Lives Matter, GLBTQ proponents should not hijack the discussion to talk about Gay Lives Matter or Incels turning it into a discussion about White Sexuality Matters. Occasionally we all need a reality check (maybe someone's fear of not being able to afford two luxury yatches if the stock market dips is not as bad as another person's fear of being evicted because they can't get a job due to their mental illness), but it should never be an excuse to hijack or overrule someone else's concerns or problems.

As we say in Sweden: Talking is silver, listening is gold.

Dreiko:
Cause come on, being blind or deaf is way more disarming and a bigger hardship to live with by orders of magnitude as opposed to being black or gay or what have you but we barely even hear from those people. It's kinda obscene.

This literally goes into the topic of Intersectionality and sub-facets you were speaking about before. Everyday things will be harder for people with physical ailments. But they are 'treated better' by society at large. However, this better treatment offend makes those challenged individuals feel like more of a subject of Pity than an actual person.

Meanwhile, being apart of a stigmatized minority can and has lead majority populations to go out of their way to mistreat those minorities because they know they simply can't fight back and no one will care. Look at the treatment of the Native American and how the majority basically used them as human punching bags Forever. But then people in the majority who do not see this treatment or do not care about anything that doesn't happen outside of their sphere of influence will decide that this is made up BS that isn't worth their time, or made up lies to get sympathy.

A meeting between that Blind and/or deaf person and that Native American person can go one of two ways. They can look at the other's strife and empathize. See some of their struggle and connect through that. Or they can lose themselves in their own issues and instead of find an ally, they found a competitor for attention.

The former is what I tried to do with.. I'm just going to call her S because I'm tired of just referring to her as my friend. This is what I tried to do with S. I tried to present my plight as well to say I get it. I know what it's like not to be counted. I could dismiss her plight by saying "You're a White Woman, S. You are the most coveted person on this planet. What do you know about struggle?". That's easy. That's shifting the focus on me and whoo, boy, won't that be fun?

But instead, wouldn't it be better in the long run if S and I could stand together? Instead of just these base differences and counting that only, can't we sit and find out how we're alike and build from there? Because thinking about how we're different and building Walls has not helped us in one single moment of humanity's history.

Also, I don't know what you've been listening to but you hear about people with Disabilities having to champion for their own agency or share of resources all the time. All the time. Do you have a family member in Education? If so, then you hear about how funding has been Dwindling under Federal Government Spending. We hear how Mental Health and disabilities account for at least 25 percent of Police Killings. But these are swept under the rug. Tragic Accidents due to Police Following Procedure.

We live in a society where one side can have "Tragic Accidents" and the other side has "No Excuses". This is a daunting prospect. Especially if you're not in the Majority, and put that to the Nth Magnitude when you're on the Ostracized Fringe in the Majority's perception. There can be no fair play, therefore no peace for those who deal with it and yet still has to hear sentiments of "It's not a fair world, so stop whining".

Which leads me to ask people who always spout this mindset one question that always comes to mind... So what are you doing?

We all struggle with the frailty of life, the limited scope of power or influence of our individual positions, and the utter meaningless of it all compared to the unfazed Universe that won't even notice when the Earth itself gets stuffed out. But somehow we feel the need to tell people that they shouldn't voice their opinions to make their lives better. What always struck me as odd is... isn't the very act of trying to tell people to suffer in silence the act of trying to change the conditions of another individual's life? That they are tired of having to think about something and they rather not, so they will speak out to tell others to stop speaking out so they don't have to deal with it any more?

How is that any different than people speaking out to have agency over their own bodies, to say their skin color doesn't matter, to say sexuality and gender can be fluid even if you don't think it to be? How are they always complaining when they bring up those ideals and it's so very annoying, but those who tell them to shut up are only speaking their mind and must be heeded as for some reason their opinion is faultless compared to people speaking to try to have a better life?

To sum up, there's often this weird dichotomy that baffles me. There's always a segment of people who tell others to stop talking, stop bringing up things, and stop trying to change the world. And very often, these are the same people who will at some point say they never heard of a problem before so there must not really be one. I often am fascinated on how that works.

Gethsemani:

ObsidianJones:

So what are your thoughts? Does what I say suck, but still being a man for the most part makes up for whatever I have to endure? Should people be more open minded than what it appears from the outside? Or should we all stop talking to each other and just ask about the weather like we're British or Canadian?

I'll have you know that the weather is an eternally important topic in Sweden too.

Though I think Saelune already sort of covered what I wanted to say. I'll be a little less academic about it though. I think that we should all be humble to the fact that everyone can suffer from circumstances beyond their control, whether that is sex, ethnicity, gender, class or nationality (or something else). Being a black man means facing issues and dangers that a white woman won't, but she'll be facing issues and dangers a man won't. A wealthy, well-educated black woman will probably have it better than a poor, uneducated white man. For some it is, on average, institutionally easier to get help or a larger chance of not facing the really bad struggles. But it is poor comfort to an uneducated, drug addicted white man who gets HIV from injecting heroine that native american women on average has it worse then white men. Just as it is poor comfort for a native american woman or a black man that people have it worse in places like Burma or Congo-Kinshasa.

It is about respecting the fact that everyone faces their own struggles and problems in life. When you express your fear of getting killed by the Police because of racial profiling, that's a real danger you face and a real emotional burden to you. Whether that's worse than me being raped and hearing that it is bad for my kids that they've got two mothers and whether a white man not finding a woman to share his life with is suffering as much as either of us is kind of beside the point.

To me, that also means respecting that when we're talking Black Lives Matter, GLBTQ proponents should not hijack the discussion to talk about Gay Lives Matter or Incels turning it into a discussion about White Sexuality Matters. Occasionally we all need a reality check (maybe someone's fear of not being able to afford two luxury yatches if the stock market dips is not as bad as another person's fear of being evicted because they can't get a job due to their mental illness), but it should never be an excuse to hijack or overrule someone else's concerns or problems.

As we say in Sweden: Talking is silver, listening is gold.

Wow, that was really well said. I guess people want to be acknowledged in their struggles but generalizations make people feel personally offended as they feel it diminishes the acknowledgement of their own struggles.

Agema:

RobertEHouse:
Life is hard and to say a person is a man or white had privilege is ignorant to who they are as an individual. We all have our own individual struggles and pains regardless of our sex or race. Yet, to clump someone by sex/race and say it is easier for them is not accounting for every person known as one. It devalues the individual as a whole and is the same tactic the KKK or Nazism did to dehumanize Jews. It ignores that it is baseline racism at its core, with a society which tides itself to justice. It is in essence borderline Joseph Goebbles thinking and approach. Every person is a individual, and as a individual they are not held to these stereotypes.

It's not that easy, though, is it?

We can say that "men are taller than women" is an insult to individual short men and tall women, but at a level it's basically true. Likewise if we sum up all the people in demographic groups X and Y, all those individuals, we can see that perhaps their lives and outcomes on average are not equivalent in ways that might be concerning. When we suddenly say everyone is an individual and refuse to budge from that level, we voluntarily decide to look only at the trees and stop seeing the wood and we start missing something important. And ironically, if we refuse to see such bigger pictures of society, we will fail many of the individuals within it.

The problem is not to note things like "male" or "white" privilege exist. The problem is with how they are applied to people and used to justify action: they can be handled sensitively and sensibly... or not. And given that humans aren't perfect, inevitably quite a lot of that time it's not going to be sensitive and/or sensible. But that's not sufficient reason to throw any babies out with the bathwater.

So is it the assumption that group X is just sooo pathetic that they need others to prop them up?. Would that also not be a discredit for all the Women, LGBTQ's Disabled etc who actually have businesses?.Those that work for the Federal government, or members of the US Senate and Congress?. Racism is also the notion of believing others are incapable of helping themselves because of themselves.

The posters friend used a stereotype because she started off in a confrontational mode. That should never be used to make a point from the start. At the point those words left her mouth she didn't see her friend. She didn't care about the "sensitivity" of her friend in fact he was a thing by that point. All while at the same time telling Mary T Barra(CEO GM),Michele Buck(CEO Hershey) Marilyn Hewson (CEO Lockeed M)They are held down by the man that is a complete utter insult to them. As well as the hundreds of thousands around the world, in governments or in the private sector.Does anyone realize how patronizing it can come across doing what she did?.

https://www.catalyst.org/research/women-ceos-of-the-sp-500/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-leadership/wp/2017/06/07/the-number-of-women-ceos-in-the-fortune-500-is-at-an-all-time-high-of-32/

RobertEHouse:
So is it the assumption that group X is just sooo pathetic that they need others to prop them up?.

No. Obviously.

RobertEHouse:
All while at the same time telling Mary T Barra(CEO GM),Michele Buck(CEO Hershey)etc. They are held down by the man that is a complete utter insult to them. As well as the hundreds of thousands around the world, in governments or in the private sector.

https://www.catalyst.org/research/women-ceos-of-the-sp-500/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-leadership/wp/2017/06/07/the-number-of-women-ceos-in-the-fortune-500-is-at-an-all-time-high-of-32/

A record 5-6% of those companies having female CEOs proving gender inequality doesn't exist in the same way Obama being PotUS proved racism is over in the US?

RobertEHouse:
So is it the assumption that group X is just sooo pathetic that they need others to prop them up?. Would that also not be a discredit for all the Women, LGBTQ's Disabled etc who actually have businesses?.

No, it's an assumption that systematic societal disadvantages exist such as low socioeconomic status, class, and conscious or unconscious discrimination.

Racism is also the notion of believing others are incapable of helping themselves because of themselves.

Racism is things like repeated studies that show things like black people of identical qualifications being less likely to be invited to inerview or offered a job. I'm sure they'd be much more able to help themselves if they weren't three times more likely to have their CV binned because their name doesn't look suitably majority typical.

Take this doozy from a report: "Most German workers (52%) say that their manager's gender doesn't make a difference to them, but of those who have a preference, many more would prefer a male (34%) to a female (14%) boss." Yeah. You're not telling me that attitude isn't slipping into people's hiring preferences at least sometimes.

Maybe you don't have the "right" accent or different cultural reference points, that make it harder to fit in at your workplace. Or you didn't go to the right school and lack the same networking to pull strings and grease the wheels for you. Maybe you're unfortunate enough to be of child-bearing age and your prospective boss doesn't want to pay maternity leave. Maybe it's just you're in a demographic group than earns on average 30% less than others, which makes you disproportionately likely to be worse educated, less healthy and brought up in a less supportive social milieu. Or just that the police like to pull people like you over and slap punishments on you more, so you're more likely to be inconvenienced, fined, even criminalised.

We all know this stuff exists. Why pretend otherwise?

Thaluikhain:

A record 5-6% of those companies having female CEOs proving gender inequality doesn't exist in the same way Obama being PotUS proved racism is over in the US?

I don't think that can be entirely attributed to inequality. Many(if not most) women also favor a work/life balance more, and aren't willing to sacrifice everything for their job like so many male CEO's do. More women also graduate from universities than men and often have more part-time and comfortable jobs that earn more than men who work full-time at the bottom. The comparison also don't involve the fact most dirty, physically demanding and dangerous work is done by men. The problem with your kind of reasoning is that you only focus on the top of the pyramid, where differences are the biggest. A comparison that only involves maybe 0,001% of males isn't really a representative comparison.

stroopwafel:
I don't think that can be entirely attributed to inequality. Many(if not most) women also favor a work/life balance more, and aren't willing to sacrifice everything for their job like so many male CEO's do.

Entirely due to inequality? Perhaps not, but it'd be a big factor.

As to work/life balance, I'd say that's in large part due to social expectations. Women are supposed to but their careers on hold to raise a family, men are supposed to not do this. Which is itself an inequality. If the husband wants to stay home and look after the kids, and the wife to run the company, both will face derision.

stroopwafel:
The comparison also don't involve the fact most dirty, physically demanding and dangerous work is done by men. The problem with your kind of reasoning is that you only focus on the top of the pyramid, where differences are the biggest. A comparison that only involves maybe 0,001% of males isn't really a representative comparison.

Eh, I didn't bring that up, that was RobertEHouse.

Though I largely agree. But, by comparison, while Obama being PotUS doesn't mean racism is over, it would have been unthinkable 50 years ago. Likewise, the same proportions of women as CEOs in those specific companies isn't going to be the same as in society of general, but it still does point to a broader issue.

I think the appeal of looking at the PotUS or 500 CEOs is due to a nice small and obvious sample size, more than anything else. Doesn't take much research to find out who the current PotUS is, and their race, sexuality and gender, for example.

Saelune:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersectionality

Which is roughly analogous to Communism. Nice in theory, but when it comes to practicum it fails catastrophically under the weight of its own (lack of) logic. And, unless adherents recognize its own failings and attempt to overcome them, will go nowhere and yield no effective direct action nor policy.

Kyriarchy is a much smarter, agile, and practical, theory, because it actually provides means for prioritizing direct action and policy-craft, while shifting priorities after direct action yields policy outcome. And, this bears out in that regardless how heavily "intersectionalists" decry kyriarchy, nine times out of ten they default to it without an iota of self-awareness. "Privilege checking" isn't a logical outcome of intersectionality, because the tactic is designed to silence, by enforcing some people are more privileged than others in accordance to a largely subjective calculus, all while marginalizing the struggles of those whose privilege is "checked" and denying them the space to speak on the basis of those struggles, even if the subject of discussion is a shared struggle. "Privilege checking" is, however, a logical outcome of kyriarchy which has built into its foundation means of ordering structures of oppression.

In other words, intersectionality is supposed to be the answer to oppression olympics. But scratch the surface, and nine times out of ten the default, and generally only, recourse of an intersectionalist is oppression olympics.

Case in point, the progressive stack. Only one party can nominally speak at a time; time, attention, and platforms are finite resources; ergo, speaking order is attributed value, with higher priority having higher value. Someone has to be first, second, third, all the way to last, in order of whose voices are valued highest. Just as a single example, who speaks first -- a black man, or a white woman? Selecting speaking order alone represents a value judgment, even as a necessary evil, which means even in this simple and dichotomous example the agenda-setter is valuing either blackness or womanhood higher than the other.

Even if the black man and white woman wish to speak to a shared struggle, like for example institutional poverty.

Intersectionality has no applicable answers to this issue, and should be discarded in favor of a theory that does. That progressive activists (of which, again, I am part) cleave to intersectionality and continue paying it lip service, while having long abandoned it in principle and practice, speaks only to the ignorance, hubris, and incompetence of contemporary social activism.

This ain't news. Intersectionality came into this world philosophically dead-on-arrival; this shit started in Seneca Falls, which has been thoroughly whitewashed, thanks to the revisionist nuclear takes of the same women who walked into the conference (at which poor and black women were excluded) race baiting and shilling white supremacy.

Eacaraxe:

In other words, intersectionality is supposed to be the answer to oppression olympics. But scratch the surface, and nine times out of ten the default, and generally only, recourse of an intersectionalist is oppression olympics.

Only if you use the pop version of intersectionality popular on Tumblr or Instagram. Actual, honest to God, intersectionality is an academic theory created to describe and explain the scientific findings that power, privilege and influence doesn't just have a single vector or a single outcome. Intersectionality is the theory that many concurrent, competing factors influence the social hierarchy at all times and in all situations and that these factors can have different values depending upon the context of the social situation. As such an intersectional reading might point out that on average being male is a positive factor in terms of social hierarchy, but that being male in the context of being a radical feminist might actually be negative for the influence of the individual.

Intersectionalism is not the answer to the question how to improve society. Intersectionalism is a tool to understand that there's more that goes into social stratification then just gender. This might seem obvious today, but when it hit in the early-90's it was a concept that revolutionized feminism and it is one of the key theories that paved the way for third wave feminism. Using it as anything other then a tool to understanding that there might be multiple system of oppression going on is futile, because intersectionality theory doesn't provide the means to rank or stratify different vectors of oppression or power.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here