Yellow Peril: Are you gonna liberate us girls from male, white, corporate oppression?
226 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 … 10 Newer→ Last
-
It might be helpful to realize that these calculations have know scientific foundation.
No need to feed that line to the Genie - 100% bloke.
-
Fear of a female interwebs
This will be my 276th comment posted on PA System. I don't know for sure, but I suspect most of the comments I've made have been more on social rather than political topics (though sometimes there are overlaps).
Politics and sports are two things that I have very little interest in, but I can, if I try, find an in to these topics via some sort of social connection.
When I first got on the interwebs back in '95, I don't remember it being male-dominated. There always seemed to be 50-50 mix of the sexes (either that or women were smaller in numbers but louder).
There was also the old school journal girls (shout out to 2 Joanna!). It seemed that in the pre-blog days, most people who kept interesting personal websites were female (or gay guys). There were guys out there who kept websites, but very few were writing frequently-updated interesting ones.
Now there seem to be more guys out there writing stuff, and stuff that's interesting and worth reading.
But there are also plenty of arseholes out there who have an opinion and would like you to be aware of it, whether it's about how awful George Bush is or how awful American Idol is.
If the 'net - our kool thing - becomes spoiled by male, white corporate oppressors, it's not the end of the world. It just means that 'us girls' need to work a little harder. And we can take Chuck D's advice from that awesome song and tell it like it is.
Fear, baby
-
i comment on NRT, span and this. mostly this, and rarely about politics. i'd like to talk about say, unions with span, but simply cannot. (work)
oh, and i can vouch for deborah! loved that buzz bar by the way. "theatre" needs to be yelled in more work meetings...
i think more guys comment here because that's russell's community of interest. and the net is alllll about community.
i don't read or comment on chickenhawk sites or rwdb because i don't associate with those people in real life.
so... what we have here is a site with usual, liberal, left-leaning guys chatting. and i'd like to think that women are more than welcome to chime in, exactly the same as they would be if we were out socially.
-
so... what we have here is a site with usual, liberal, left-leaning guys chatting. and i'd like to think that women are more than welcome to chime in, exactly the same as they would be if we were out socially.
Heh, System reminds me of hanging out in the Lower Common Room at varsity: very bright, mostly left-leaning people, interspersing high-level discourse with total and utter bollocks. That too was a group where the ratio was about 2:1 male to female. Rest assured the only scaring-off of females was done by females: the straight guys were desperate for more chickies.
I read what's worth reading regardless of who wrote it, and I have a network of sites I check daily. Pol blogs I only comment here, Span, and NRT: that's because the level of discourse is civil and intelligent, and especially here, witty. I feel perfectly welcome to chime in. Of course, I also feel complimented rather than oppressed when people whistle at me.
-
Helen Clark (hooray), in her Friday interview with Jim Mora (boo) on Radio NZ National (hooray, boo), said that she reads Public Address. So there's at least one female lurker you can reach by posting here.
And I suspect there are a lot of men like me that read Tze Ming's stuff and nod a lot, without ever bothering to type our agreement, admiration even. It doesn't exactly make up for the creeps out there, but, anyway, here's a nod for you.
My avatar is my byline photo, an exact likeness.
-
3410,
Slightly off-topic I realise, but said magazine really has turned to custard since Pamela Stirling took over, hasn't it?
[...]
Why don't they just change their name to Self-Help Weekly and be done with it?.
-
I'm happy to be labelled a white boy - one's a fact, the other gives me back a couple of decades I thought I'd lost.
But seriously, I see no reason to be offended by Tze Ming's piece. And any throwaway jibes are absolutely nothing - nothing at all - compared with the misogyny and bigotry spewed out in various NZ forums on the net every bloody day. You'd have to be a saint not to feel the occasional urge to snip off a few pink balls in response. If I spent any more time on Kiwiblog (a habit I've now happily dropped) I'd be out there with the scissors myself.
-
I particularly remember one peice written about wannabe gangsters in freemans bay, rippingly funny retort that was. If I might venture an answer to the question posed in the title of this one, no I'm not going to free you, because freedom in whatever form it takes or is realised is formed in your own mind so you're just going to have to keep on freeing yourself, doing bloody well so far, but who am I to judge?
-
I also remember an egg flying out of the lower common rooms at a great rate of knots towards the bespoke suited Mr Banks.
Legend arm that. -
If I might venture an answer to the question posed in the title of this one, no I'm not going to free you
Good lord, not another one too young to remember Goo. Creak. Creak. Somebody bring me my cane.
Steven: you are obviously rather upset, and so perhaps have not noticed that this thread and the post was obviously dedicated to the women of PA being able to talk about their experiences of the internet. I think it's sad that your repeated appearances were so focused on some perceived slight to yourself, and had no substantial contribution to the wider issue. Ultimately, dude, this post wasn't about you; it was about us. I hope you can get over it.
To address your concerns, since you have dedicated so much time and energy to getting one, and I have accepted by now that you are not really a troll:
I don't see what's so offensive, or incorrect, about observing that comments threads on any political blog from the West (apart from dedicated feminist sites or dedicated ethnic minority sites) are generally dominated by white males.
If you are white, it is odd that you are offended by the term 'white', although I wouldn't discount the possibility. There's no way I can stop calling white people white though - perhaps you prefer 'Caucasian' or 'of European descent', but I think that's clumsy.
If you are offended by the term 'boy', it is odd that you don't feel offended on the behalf of women by my (and the other female commentators, and Kim Gordon's) use of the word 'girls' to describe ourselves.
If you are offended that the hallowed ground of the PA System was compared to a playground, this is pretty damn precious, laughably so. We talk of parliament as a kindergarten all the time, do we not? Is a blogsite as revered as our legislative chamber? Are PA System participants never childish, or, alternately, are they really that up-themselves and self-congratulatory that they would be wounded at the very suggestion that they might be? I don't think so.
-
Sue,
maybe more guys comment on PA because there are more guys writing for PA. Plus the women who blog on PA write infrequently.
Does in PAs case two plus two equall a gender imbalance? -
A regular poster told me on another PA thread that they'd always wondered if my breasts were real. I was quite taken aback by that ... not what I expected here on PA. It was more the way it was casually slipped into a broader comment about something else. But I guess because of my choice of Avatar I was asking for it, right?
BTW: According to Gender Genie I am a male, if that helps, but so is Tze Ming Mok (I entered her blog) so I guess it doesn't. (Gee, I didn't realise that 'what' and 'are' were masculine words...)
Maybe Robyn, Joanna, Emma, Deborah, Jackie and Anjum could register again under fake names, and create the illusion of having doubled the number of regular female commentors. You go girls!
Hmmm, I wonder why RB hasn't resonded to that suggestion?
-
mmm, I wonder why RB hasn't responded to that suggestion?
(damn, and I did use the preview button) (it must be late)
-
Although I am much more of a lurker here than a poster (thus far) I've found Public Address to be far and away the most civilised and intelligent political community here in Enzed. You're "my kind of people" and I spend quite a lot of time here in the shadows.
The only reason I don't post more is that, as a linear thread rather than a nested one, I often find the conversation has shifted direction by the time I read a post I'd like to respond to - and by then it's too late to respond.
I spend a lot of time at Daily Kos - and unlike Tze Ming Mok, I've decided that it's not dead to me. I still find it a great source of news, debate and information about American politics (about which I have a slightly unhealthy obsession). There are so many great frontpagers and diarists on DKos, that I feel I can ignore Kos's occasional idiotic statements, and just appreciate the others. I don't post much there either, but boy, do I lurk!
The reason why you won't find me anywhere near Kiwiblog and the like is that, on the rare occasion I've visited, it seems to be populated entirely by bigoted right-wing jerks, and as I wouldn't pass the time of day with any of them in RL, I'm certainly not going to waste my online time on them.
Although it's not obvious from my screenname, I am a girl, and I am also a blogger. I wrote a big piece on Kathy Sierra, misogyny on the web, and the Blogger's Code of Conduct when Kos first made his stoopid comments, and I've just written a post for Take Back the Blog!, if anyone's interested in reading them.
I was surprised at how hard I found the Take Back the Blog! post to write, actually. I am fortunate in never having been subject to online harrassment in any of my online communities over the years, and never on my blog either. But I couldn't help worrying that by simply putting that fact out there on my blog I would be tempting fate, or worse.
And, like other women here, I'm not sure what I can do about that, aside from not blogging any more. And I don't want to do that. No way!
-
What are the women doing instead of commenting on blogsites?
I like the idea that perhaps girls are doing something better; but I get hung up on my own experience of some girls still lacking the confidence to formulate an opinion on an issue or missing the confidence to express it in public. My current intern at work is gradually learning that I do want to hear what she thinks and what she has learned. But it has taken 6 weeks to get this far. SWMBO on the other hand ends up doing far more work than she needs to as an academic, because she seems to lack the confidence to go with what is obvious at times. Society does something cruel and unfair to girls in this respect and I’m quite sure it makes them hesitate at the return key sometimes.
Thanks Span…….
In my typical bloke way I had to test the gender genie to the extreme; it passed with flying colours. As far as my academic writing is concerned I’m very Masculine. My blogging on the other hand is somewhat less so. Kind of good news, but perhaps the best news of all is that it made me stop and think about the way in which I write my teaching materials and whether they are more difficult to access by virtue of being written in a more bloke style. The difficulty is getting a bloke who can barely write in comprehensible language to figure out rules that would neutralise the educational materials he produces.
{disclaimer – I am not seeking to defend this guy and haven’t read all the posts on this.}The Moulitskas thing interests me because it reflects blokes’ ability to miss the frame of reference and consequently fail the empathy test. Blokes grow up with threats of violence and largely learn to ignore them from an early age. For reasons that I could guess at invloving the need to protect unborn offspring females/girls/other don’t….ever learn to ignore threats in the same way. I would agree that this still doesn’t explain why apparently more abuse is directed towards female bloggers. But then again I don’t get why blokes want to do this in the first place.
BTW: by all means call me white boy if you must, but I prefer bloke.
-
I don't see what's so offensive, or incorrect, about observing that comments threads on any political blog from the West (apart from dedicated feminist sites or dedicated ethnic minority sites) are generally dominated by white males.
If you are white, it is odd that you are offended by the term 'white', although I wouldn't discount the possibility. There's no way I can stop calling white people white though - perhaps you prefer 'Caucasian' or 'of European descent', but I think that's clumsy.
If you are offended by the term 'boy', it is odd that you don't feel offended on the behalf of women by my (and the other female commentators, and Kim Gordon's) use of the word 'girls' to describe ourselves.
Steven's right to register his distaste - if a right wing opinionist made generalisations about 'yellow gals' (or whatever) you'd be at the head of the mob with a pitchfork and noose, and I doubt you'd be sympathetic to any protests that the semiotics of the racebaiting were technically correct.
-
I think it's sad that your repeated appearances were so focused on some perceived slight to yourself, and had no substantial contribution to the wider issue. Ultimately, dude, this post wasn't about you; it was about us. I hope you can get over it.
then... why take a swing at the guys under the pretense of getting the girls online.
why not just say, "grrl-only commenters"? sure the guys here would respect that.
-
Are you sure they wouldn't still just opine about why they think women do things a certain way, and point out how unjust it is that they're excluded? Because that's what I've seen happen in most conversations in a mixed audience about women's issues. Even here - it's just that the opining is more benign and the complaints of injustice nicely worded.
-
I don't think anyone's offended as such by simple terms to denote your gender and (perceived) skin colour.
But as Steven and Danyl point out, race and gender-baiting is distasteful. You know, that little thing called context. Sure, you can be childish and pretend otherwise, and probably get away with it too, provided you're not a white boy.
Think about what that means though.
-
Tze Ming:
... I knew, whatever the demographics of my own readership and private correspondence, a comments section is always a white boy's playground. But hey, white boys gotta play somewhere, and at least it's clean!
Flip way of saying it, sure, but isn't turning a discussion about women's exclusion from online discussion through threats of violence into an argument about how unfair it is to denigrate "white boys" exactly an illustration of what Tze Ming is saying?
Think about what that means. That we can't talk about how women can have an online voice, because the guys take over complaining about how they've expressed that voice?
-
No, not really, unless you're saying that women's online voice is one of race and gender-baiting and nobody should be allowed to opine against that.
Actually, that is what you're saying.
-
Sue,
the complaints of injustice nicely worded.
to me that somewhat implies that you see no injustice online.
i see it every day, and not just towards women, but we do seem to make neat and tidy targets.
-
Fair point, B Jones. And you'll be missed here, Yellow Peril- spinner of threads that will not die.
I 'spect this will be another- we've hardly engaged the question yet, let alone diverted it totally to get your opinions about Chinese mathematics! -
unless you're saying that women's online voice is one of race and gender-baiting and nobody should be allowed to opine against that.
Actually, that is what you're saying.
No - Tze Ming made a bunch of important points about women's ability to participate online in the face of threats of violence, and one one flip comment about men (in particular white ones) making up the majority of blog commentators, which is kinda true and not particularly offensive, speaking as a member of one of the groups supposed denigrated.
Ignoring the important points about threats of violence and women's participation to focus on perceived mean comments about men's participation shows a real lack of perspective. In most contexts, it's not cool to make comments perceived as mean about any group. In the context of a discussion about how one group is systematically marginalised, threatened and discriminated against, it's not cool to go on about how something relatively trivial marginalises you.
-
Dammit, now I have The Killers' Where the White Boys Dance stuck in my head.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.