Hard News: #NetHui: it's all about you
469 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 10 11 12 13 14 … 19 Newer→ Last
-
Sacha, in reply to
Actually I found your description helped my understanding of the other usage.
-
Don Christie, in reply to
Anything that limits our obsession with recycling stuff honestly at this point is fine by me.
Well that's a shame. We would surely have missed out on M.I.A.'s excellent "Paper Planes" under your rules.
-
Megan Wegan, in reply to
Actually, the root is exactly the same. I see no reason to be confused.
Pffft, you’re just showing your perfect-english-speaking privilege.
(Sorry. I am slightly punch-drunk)
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
And the thing is, being “called out” sucks, but you can choose to look at it two ways – “hey, I’m learning, here’s this thing I didn’t know, and I can try to be better for it”, or “Bite me! You don’t know me. I’m not ableist/sexist/homophobic”.
I regret to say I went for the latter. But then one learns. It also helps to have kind teachers I must say.
Pffft, you’re just showing your perfect-english-speaking privilege.
Actually, that’s Latin :-)
(ETA: which, just to square the circle, I got via my working class education. There.)
-
Megan Wegan, in reply to
I regret to say I went for the latter. But then one learns. It also helps to have kind teachers I must say.
As have I, on a number of occasions. And it took, as you say, kindly teachers to point out where I was going wrong. This is why I care about privilege not being used to shut down debate, cos if we all did a little learnin' we'd all be better off.
And then I could teach the world to sing, in perfect harmony. God, I am so naive.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
I suggested that Sky employing Tony O'Brien as a full-time lobbyist representing their interests in Parliament was a case of "unusual influence" in NZ politics (deflecting potential regulation of Sky's monopoly position, for example). Several pollies there (including Sue Kedgely) didn't seem to think it was a problem but it is interesting that John Drinnan has also pointed to it as an issue worthy of attention.
I don't want to sound like I'm bagging on Drinnan, but what do you think the odds are of APN going full disclosure on their lobbying and *cough* corporate hospitality of politicians? YMMV, but I'm open to the idea of requiring lobbyists to be on a public register (and I don't give a shit if they happen to be the BRT, Chen Palmer or the CTU), but it's the soft corruption of the disco round that makes me nervous.
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
We would surely have missed out on M.I.A.'s excellent "Paper Planes" under your rules.
We're getting covers, nothing but covers all the time, under the current supposedly inhibitory rules. Really the idea that our culture doesn't produce enough mashups is hard to credit.
-
There's a thing that can happen in internet forums more easily than in RL conversations, where everyone can talk about their own experience, and we can have a range of voices. It's when we start generalising or attempting to speak for others that it goes to custard, especially if we assume those others are like ourselves. This is one of the most maddening things that happens in the feminist blogosphere, where one feminist decides to speak on behalf of all feminists, or all women.
I've always liked the saying, "Everyone's a minority". As others have said, most of us are privileged in some ways but not in others. It's always worth thinking about how other people's perspectives might differ from our own, but unless we actually ask them what they think or how they feel, we can't know.
-
Isabel Hitchings, in reply to
few of the sites I write for are 101 sites, and that's clearly stated - so it gets irritating when someone crashes into a conversation with no understanding of what, say, rape culture is.
I have to say that i find the division of discussion between 101 and not 101 a bit intimidating at times. There's a feeling that somewhere along the line I need to pass an exam before I'll be allowed to play with the big kids. I totally understand not wanting to explain the in-group language over and over again and I always google unfamiliar terms before leaping in but there have been a number of times where I've felt someone is using a term in a way that is slightly different from the definition I know or that, with the best will in the world, I'm not quite seeing their point and I find it really hard to judge the point at which I can ask without being told "we don't do 101".
-
Emma Hart, in reply to
Two pages, so much good stuff. What Andre said. And also, about the quickest way to make a dick of yourself (Alright, just one of a myriad) is to get all offended on behalf of a groupd you don't belong to.
Sure, but having said that, we get pretty bored of having to explain these concepts to people who should know better. And from my perspective as a feminist blogger, few of the sites I write for are 101 sites, and that's clearly stated - so it gets irritating when someone crashes into a conversation with no understanding of what, say, rape culture is.
And this is where Megan and I will differ. I have this basic utilitarian approach to pretty much everything: what do I want, how do I get it, is what I'm doing helping me towards that goal? Works on the internet, works in bars...
So yeah, I spend a lot of time here explaining what terms mean, words I've used for so long I didn't twig to them needing explaining. And I'll keep doing that until they have to prise my keyboard from my arthritic fingers, because what I want is for people to understand. They don't have to agree, I just want them to understand.
It also means being gracious when nice people make mistakes, because everybody does. I do. You have to give people room to take Megan's second option. (Yes, yes, I just giggled smuttily.)
But while I understand the weariness with the explaining, I can't understand the point in pushing people out, in excluding them from conversations. All of these things - mansplaining, tone argument, etc - were originated to further discussion. Now we've come to a point where they're being used to shut it down. And shutting down conversation is bad, m'kay?
-
recordari, in reply to
See Cisgender.
Umm, yeah, I found that. That would have been the perfect opportunity for this, which is another form of 'schooling'*, although way funnier than most.
<redacted>
Out of context. Apart from the 'How to make a dick of yourself' advice above.
ETA: I really do wish you could fix reply to errors after posting. st ephen = Russell B.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
And then I could teach the world to sing,
in perfect harmony.I am enjoying the Choir currently on UKTV
- it really should be on Free-to-air -
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
And also, about the quickest way to make a dick of yourself (Alright, just one of a myriad) is to get all offended on behalf of a groupd you don’t belong to.
And the masterclass in that particular form of arseholism is what I like to call Borgism: “Good” members of Collective Noun X. must adopt position Y. on subject Z. or get smote with the waggling finger of bad consciousness. Just don’t do it, m’kay? (And, seriously, isn’t it something of a no-brainer not to walk onto any feminist blog and say hello with a cry of “yo, you bitches really need to chill out and focus on some real issuez”? Whether you intentionally set out to flame-troll, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that’s probably not going to be greeted with tea, cookies and an annotated abstract of the discussion so far and a reading list.)
-
Megan Wegan, in reply to
I always google unfamiliar terms before leaping in but there have been a number of times where I've felt someone is using a term in a way that is slightly different from the definition I know or that, with the best will in the world, I'm not quite seeing their point and I find it really hard to judge the point at which I can ask without being told "we don't do 101".
Yeah, but there's a way to ask, you know? (And I am not pointing this at you, at all) A lot of the time, the question seems to be "what right do you have to call me privileged, you big meanie!", rather than - "hey, help me learn here, what am I doing wrong?"
So yeah, I spend a lot of time here explaining what terms mean, words I've used for so long I didn't twig to them needing explaining.
And I am happy to do that here, too, because this isn't an explicitly feminist space, and it's also a learning space. I just think if you're gonna turn up at feminist blogs, sitting back and listening, and learning some of the terms before you go all "Here's how you are wrong!" might be a way forward.
But yeah, God knows we all make mistakes. I'm not perfect, nor is anyone I know. (I also feel really bad that I appear to have turned Russell's post into a critique of feminist discourse.)
-
Lilith __, in reply to
I also feel really bad that I appear to have turned Russell's post into a critique of feminist discourse
Guilty feet ain't got no rhythm.... :-)
[sorry, Bart!]
-
Lilith __, in reply to
Borgism: “Good” members of Collective Noun X. must adopt position Y. on subject Z. or get smote with the waggling finger of bad consciousness.
Borgism! Thank you Craig, that is wonderful. Your word will be assimilated.
-
Isabel Hitchings, in reply to
Yeah, but there's a way to ask, you know?
Doesn't that just come under the general heading of "don't be a dick"?
I suspect that one of the problems with many of the terms which get used in any form of specialised discourse (privilege being the currently relevant but far from only example) is that they are also normal vocabulary words with a slightly different meaning so people encountering that usage for the first time may not even realise there is anything to learn. And, yeah, there are ways for people on both sides of the divide to handle it without dickishness.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
Very confusing to read the terms when they mean something very different.
Actually, the root is exactly the same. I see no reason to be confused.
Absolutely. I understand that, but man when I first saw the term used I did a double take. I could work backwards to figure it out and it made sense. But it still doesn't stop it looking strange to my eyes.
-
Megan Wegan, in reply to
Doesn't that just come under the general heading of "don't be a dick"?
Yeah, but it's surprising how often people see their keyboards as an excuse to abdicate that particular responsibility.
-
James Butler, in reply to
But in my world cis and trans usually refer to regulation of gene expression.
Not meaning to boast, but I remembered enough 6th-form chemistry that the first time I saw the term "cis" in this kind of context I k̶n̶e̶w̶ correctly guessed what it meant; and I've found it a very useful tool for reflection on my own (astronomical) privilege. Names are powerful things; having a name for something forces you to think of it as a thing, which is as important for things you hadn't thought of because they're the unquestioned norm as it is for things you hadn't thought of because you haven't encountered them.
Also, privilege itself: once you've noticed it and thought about it, it has a habit of inconveniently popping up and informing your thought in places you didn't want or expect it to. Which is a good thing.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
I always google unfamiliar terms
Every post of Emma's makes me learn another 5 terms, some of which I have to try very hard to unlearn ("I can't be knowin' that!"). Of course you get really caught out when you know the exact meaning of a word like cis* and then get all confusticated.
* oh and just to note in biology cis and trans are always italicised to indicate their latin origin - 'cos I know you wanted me to pass on my knowledge and wisdom**
**WTB sarcasm tag
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
You have to give people room to take Megan's second option. (Yes, yes, I just giggled smuttily.)
Oh, puh- lease!
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
But yeah, God knows we all make mistakes. I'm not perfect, nor is anyone I know. (I also feel really bad that I appear to have turned Russell's post into a critique of feminist discourse.)
Not at all. It was my cunning plan all along ...
-
Megan Wegan, in reply to
You have to give people room to take Megan's second option. (Yes, yes, I just giggled smuttily.)
Oh, puh- lease!
Dude! I left it alone, couldn't you?
-
12 pages and no-one's godwinned yet - are you all going for the record?
Post your response…
This topic is closed.