| Blogs > JWD |
JWD
United States12607 Posts
On April 17 2011 05:40 Inori wrote: Also I let my gf read your post and ask if you came off as a hypocrite and she said "yes, definately". haha! amazing serious question: what if I included 10 pictures of heavier and less attractive women in the OP? Would it be acceptable then? | ||
|
HULKAMANIA
United States1219 Posts
On April 15 2011 13:06 jon arbuckle wrote: Conflating pornography with the female models JWD's libido has deposited (or thrust or inserted) into #1 and #10 (when potpourri) of every blog entry so far, and equating those manifestations of JWD's libido with the latent chauvinism or even misogyny implied by use of the word "rape" (not to mention how explicit this misogyny is in gaming culture and on the Internet overall), is infinitely worse than deterring people from salient misogyny by harping on their language. Don't want to get into fisticuffs over whether erotic representation is inherently violent, but certainly blurring the semantics of the word and therefore concept of "rape" is at best avoided, right? Eh, maybe?  I think reforming language with the understanding that you're actually rooting out misogyny is kind of misguided. Language changes on large scales occur for reasons other than a hatred of women or a belief in their equality. If you believe that there is a "structure" to language and to society and that those structures are architecturally oppressive of women, I suppose you could spend your time scolding individuals for acting according to that structure's directives. But even then I think it's kind of a long way around. On April 17 2011 06:36 JWD wrote: haha! amazing serious question: what if I included 10 pictures of heavier and less attractive women in the OP? Would it be acceptable then? JWD, it's impressive to see you handle criticism with such equanimity! But don't you find that statement kind of weird? "Hey, JWD, I think you're treating women like objects by focusing solely on their appearances!" "Oh, good point! What if I posted some uglier ones as well, though?" I got nothing but love for you and for your blogs, but I'm just saying! | ||
|
JWD
United States12607 Posts
On April 17 2011 07:34 HULKAMANIA wrote: "Hey, JWD, I think you're treating women like objects by focusing solely on their appearances!" "Oh, good point! What if I posted some uglier ones as well, though?" I got nothing but love for you and for your blogs, but I'm just saying! You have a point there--the only reason I responded as I did is that I read his criticism to be that images of thin women make other women feel uncomfortable. I don't think he was complaining about posting pictures of women in general. But since you're taking that angle, a few words on it: I'd really hate to have to accompany each of my blogs with a disclaimer that specifies that I don't think women should be seen as objects. And I think it's sad and unfair that any one who looked at this OP might assume I see women as objects solely because it includes some pictures and video of pretty women. Isn't it possible to appreciate female beauty without being a misogynist? | ||
|
jon arbuckle
Canada443 Posts
On April 17 2011 07:34 HULKAMANIA wrote: Eh, maybe? I think reforming language with the understanding that you're actually rooting out misogyny is kind of misguided. Language changes on large scales occur for reasons other than a hatred of women or a belief in their equality. If you believe that there is a "structure" to language and to society and that those structures are architecturally oppressive of women, I suppose you could spend your time scolding individuals for acting according to that structure's directives. But even then I think it's kind of a long way around. You're right. JWD's methodology (which even he seems to have disavowed) is flawed and misguided but undertaken with the best of intentions. Gaming culture and the Internet's general misogyny, of which I take the indicated usage of the word "rape" to be symptomatic, is a larger issue and definitely not easily rooted out by what JWD did (because it's not unique to TL.net, nor the gaming community, nor the Internet, nor the world, etc. etc.). My issue is with the fire coming down on JWD's taste in women as reflected in the blog and his blithely posting them alongside the whole "rape" thingie. That those pictures are comparable to pornography (as if "pornography" only reflects one sexual attitude, no matter what its disposition); that erotic visual media is always means sexual objectification, and that sexual objectification always means sexual violence, and that sexual violence in this sense becomes "rape." I'm not in a position to say how a woman should or would feel in response to the blogs, or even that all women would have the same responses (Sasha Grey as opposed to Inori's girlfriend, for example). However, if erotic representation = rape, then we're advocating sexual restriction, and then we're back where we've started. A lot of talk in this blog is inching towards that assertion - to not post images of attractive women because that's as bad as "rape," whatever its referent - and at the risk of being outed as a chauvinist or charlatan, coming from a vaguely sex-positive position, no way. I mean, I don't like yaoi, but I know girls who do, and that's awesome. On April 17 2011 07:34 HULKAMANIA wrote: JWD, it's impressive to see you handle criticism with such equanimity! But don't you find that statement kind of weird? "Hey, JWD, I think you're treating women like objects by focusing solely on their appearances!" "Oh, good point! What if I posted some uglier ones as well, though?" Well, if erotic representation of a certain body type in JWD's blogs (corresponding to his taste in women) is what makes them reflect the same subtle misogyny as ambiguous application of the word "rape," then yeah, that would be the solution. A willfully disingenuous one that skirts the issue, but yeah. | ||
NonY
8748 Posts
There are women who think they need to be "beautiful" (I put it in quotes because it's not exactly having to do with beauty but more to do with the way mainstream society views what's sexually attractive and what isn't) in order to get what they need in life. And there are men that treat women poorly unless they are "beautiful." There's obviously something wrong with these attitudes and that's where feminism comes in. Do the innocent people in the first paragraph perpetuate the attitudes of the peoples in the second paragraph? I think we have to say yes, of course they do to some degree. We can't easily say to what degree. But it's possible to fix those attitudes without shutting down the pursuit and appreciation of human beauty. So, attempts at shutting down the pursuit and appreciation of human beauty are understandably met with reluctance. | ||
|
HULKAMANIA
United States1219 Posts
On April 17 2011 08:03 JWD wrote: You have a point there--the only reason I responded as I did is that I read his criticism to be that images of thin women make other women feel uncomfortable. I don't think he was complaining about posting pictures of women in general. But since you're taking that angle, a few words on it: I'd really hate to have to accompany each of my blogs with a disclaimer that specifies that I don't think women should be seen as objects. And I think it's sad and unfair that any one who looked at this OP might assume I see women as objects solely because it includes some pictures and video of pretty women. Isn't it possible to appreciate female beauty without being a misogynist? I certainly think so. There are, however, feminists who would vehemently disagree with you. (Off the top of my head, I would point to the essay "The Sticky Embrace of Beauty" by Anne Frances Wysocki, but that's only because I just read it recently. There's plenty of literature on how the "aestheticized other" can become the object of violent "formal judgement.") I tend to not buy their arguments, but I think they're of a kind with yours. Which leads me to: On April 17 2011 08:31 jon arbuckle wrote: You're right. JWD's methodology (which even he seems to have disavowed) is flawed and misguided but undertaken with the best of intentions. Gaming culture and the Internet's general misogyny, of which I take the indicated usage of the word "rape" to be symptomatic, is a larger issue and definitely not easily rooted out by what JWD did (because it's not unique to TL.net, nor the gaming community, nor the Internet, nor the world, etc. etc.). I agree that a stricter vocabulary regimen is a flawed cure for misogyny. However I also think that analysis of vocabulary is a flawed means of diagnosis. I emphatically don't think that use of the word "rape" is a symptom of some culture misogyny that's inherent in larger culture of gaming—any more than I think that the syntax of users of “Black Vernacular English” is a symptom of illogical thinking, any more than I think that the frequency of “like” and “you know” in today’s youth indicates laziness or fogginess in the brain, any more than I think that the use of the phrase “god damn” suggests anything definite about one’s theological convictions or the convictions of the culture in which that speaker was raised. Lexical variety and change are not simple or structured phenomena. There is no clear correspondence between a given lexical feature and some hidden assumption that prompts that feature. But language in use often becomes simple and structured and clearly correspondent to an intellectual stance in arguments of people who have set out to prove some pre-existent notion about some target demographic. A lot of talk in this blog is inching towards that assertion - to not post images of attractive women because that's as bad as "rape," whatever its referent - and at the risk of being outed as a chauvinist or charlatan, coming from a vaguely sex-positive position, no way. That’s a really interesting reading of this thread, and I’m not saying that euphemistically.  I only wanted to mention the girl-pics as evidence of how a not-necessarily-misogynistic gesture can be easily misinterpreted as a misogynistic gesture—especially in our hyperaware day and age where misogynists, racists, and fundamentalists are the new witches whose heresies we must hound out in the name of reason and light and orthodoxy. I mean ultimately I’m willing to entertain the notion that TL might be “misogynistic.” Personally, I doubt that TL (comprised as it is primarily by a bunch of young—strike one!—men who are probably high-schoolers and/or college students—strike two!) would rank very high on any given moral rubric. What I don’t think is that this indicates is that the “culture” of TL has a structure that encourages hostility towards women. The culture of TL is definitely no more toxic, in my experience, than the culture of academia whence originate such assessments. Human beings in the aggregate almost never acquit themselves admirably, but the reasons for their manifold failures are considerably more complicated than we-need-to-educate-the-masses theories like the one espoused here ever admit to. Well, if erotic representation of a certain body type in JWD's blogs (corresponding to his taste in women) is what makes them reflect the same subtle misogyny as ambiguous application of the word "rape," then yeah, that would be the solution. A willfully disingenuous one that skirts the issue, but yeah. Amen. | ||
|
jon arbuckle
Canada443 Posts
On April 17 2011 11:08 HULKAMANIA wrote: (Off the top of my head, I would point to the essay "The Sticky Embrace of Beauty" by Anne Frances Wysocki, but that's only because I just read it recently. There's plenty of literature on how the "aestheticized other" can become the object of violent "formal judgement.") I tend to not buy their arguments, but I think they're of a kind with yours. I'm afraid of Andrea Dworkin because my philosophy of "men and women should with equal respect and happiness and rights enjoy themselves and get their rocks off provided all those involved are having a swell ol' time of it" is hard to gussy up with proof in academic-speak, where it seems problematizing (or, worse yet, problematicizing) is preferable to chillin'. On April 17 2011 11:08 HULKAMANIA wrote: I agree that a stricter vocabulary regimen is a flawed cure for misogyny. However I also think that analysis of vocabulary is a flawed means of diagnosis. [. . .] Lexical variety and change are not simple or structured phenomena. There is no clear correspondence between a given lexical feature and some hidden assumption that prompts that feature. But language in use often becomes simple and structured and clearly correspondent to an intellectual stance in arguments of people who have set out to prove some pre-existent notion about some target demographic. Well, it's bigger than the word "rape." That's why the method fails, and why I'm not particularly interested in posing a convincing argument as to why the word "rape" is totally indebted to some underlying misogynistic root cause, or posing any sort of argument attempting to bracket some latent inequality whose basis is entirely composed in the English language; that type of reasoning is God is dog spelled backwards. The primary motive for using "rape" is that it conveys a sense of violence, violation, and power, and does so briefly; the gender concerns are tertiary. Eradicating misuse of the word "rape" is like smashing and grabbing on the corner while Stringer Bell gets away. Blah blah blah Althusser ideology silent agency etc. blah blah blah, but coupled with how in-game or athletic prowess is posed in male/female binaries (or the fucker and the fuckee, which may be something paraphrased from Dworkin, so go fig), "rape" appears to be another facet of competitive dominance conceptualized in terms of gender roles. Take that with the whole gb2 kitchen lol brand of 4chan humour, or even some of the more disastrous blogs on TL.net (not this one obv!!!!!!!!!), and that's where "rape" appears as part of a larger tapestry of (sorta, kinda) misogyny - which, again, as an overall tendency, is larger than TL.net and even gamers. On April 17 2011 11:08 HULKAMANIA wrote: ...any more than I think that the frequency of “like” and “you know” in today’s youth indicates laziness or fogginess in the brain... This only pisses me off when it becomes an ellipses linking together non-sequiturs in what is supposed to be a thought-out position on an abstract concept and/or moral question. This happens a lot at parties. I am a fun guy. On April 17 2011 11:08 HULKAMANIA wrote: I mean ultimately I’m willing to entertain the notion that TL might be “misogynistic.” Personally, I doubt that TL (comprised as it is primarily by a bunch of young—strike one!—men who are probably high-schoolers and/or college students—strike two!) would rank very high on any given moral rubric. What I don’t think is that this indicates is that the “culture” of TL has a structure that encourages hostility towards women. The culture of TL is definitely no more toxic, in my experience, than the culture of academia whence originate such assessments. Being that TL.net bans the most egregious behaviour, it might be better than a lot of other DISCOURSE COMMUNITIES, if not perfect. We're mostly in agreement; I typed my previous post in something of a jittery, twelfth-cup-of-coffee-in-one-hour spasm wherein I searched frantically for and failed to find a synonym for "misogyny," a word I realize(d) is way to severe for what I'm trying to get at. | ||
|
HULKAMANIA
United States1219 Posts
On April 17 2011 12:05 jon arbuckle wrote: I'm afraid of Andrea Dworkin because my philosophy of "men and women should with equal respect and happiness and rights enjoy themselves and get their rocks off provided all those involved are having a swell ol' time of it" is hard to gussy up with proof in academic-speak, where it seems problematizing (or, worse yet, problematicizing) is preferable to chillin'. Well, it's bigger than the word "rape." That's why the method fails, and why I'm not particularly interested in posing a convincing argument as to why the word "rape" is totally indebted to some underlying misogynistic root cause, or posing any sort of argument attempting to bracket some latent inequality whose basis is entirely composed in the English language; that type of reasoning is God is dog spelled backwards. The primary motive for using "rape" is that it conveys a sense of violence, violation, and power, and does so briefly; the gender concerns are tertiary. Eradicating misuse of the word "rape" is like smashing and grabbing on the corner while Stringer Bell gets away. Blah blah blah Althusser ideology silent agency etc. blah blah blah, but coupled with how in-game or athletic prowess is posed in male/female binaries (or the fucker and the fuckee, which may be something paraphrased from Dworkin, so go fig), "rape" appears to be another facet of competitive dominance conceptualized in terms of gender roles. Take that with the whole gb2 kitchen lol brand of 4chan humour, or even some of the more disastrous blogs on TL.net (not this one obv!!!!!!!!!), and that's where "rape" appears as part of a larger tapestry of (sorta, kinda) misogyny - which, again, as an overall tendency, is larger than TL.net and even gamers. This only pisses me off when it becomes an ellipses linking together non-sequiturs in what is supposed to be a thought-out position on an abstract concept and/or moral question. This happens a lot at parties. I am a fun guy. Being that TL.net bans the most egregious behaviour, it might be better than a lot of other DISCOURSE COMMUNITIES, if not perfect. We're mostly in agreement; I typed my previous post in something of a jittery, twelfth-cup-of-coffee-in-one-hour spasm wherein I searched frantically for and failed to find a synonym for "misogyny," a word I realize(d) is way to severe for what I'm trying to get at. I want you to know that I enjoyed reading your post even though I had to wikipedia who the hell Stringer Bell is (who, as it turns, is played by a guy that I recognize from the American version of The Office). (And maybe I just play too much Gears of War 2, where the number of dudes t-bagging dudes has distorted my view of gender—as well as species, for that matter—roles in competitive dominance, but I dunno. I just can't shake the feeling that most of the rhetoric I've heard on this topic is bass ackwards, which leads me to conclude that a certain allowance for conceptual indeterminancy here is healthy.) At any rate, we are mostly in agreement. I just tend to think that your aforementioned tapestry was woven by humankind's eternal propensity to be in general shitty and self-interested and short-sighted, which is one impulse in which we're strictly equal opportunity, respecting neither race nor class nor gender nor age nor orientation nor right-or-left-handedness nor favorite color nor opinion on the ultimate origins and purpose of the universe. | ||
|
Zim23
United States1681 Posts
On April 17 2011 13:45 HULKAMANIA wrote: I want you to know that I enjoyed reading your post even though I had to wikipedia who the hell Stringer Bell is (who, as it turns, is played by a guy that I recognize from the American version of The Office). (And maybe I just play too much Gears of War 2, where the number of dudes t-bagging dudes has distorted my view of gender—as well as species, for that matter—roles in competitive dominance, but I dunno. I just can't shake the feeling that most of the rhetoric I've heard on this topic is bass ackwards, which leads me to conclude that a certain allowance for conceptual indeterminancy here is healthy.) At any rate, we are mostly in agreement. I just tend to think that your aforementioned tapestry was woven by humankind's eternal propensity to be in general shitty and self-interested and short-sighted, which is one impulse in which we're strictly equal opportunity, respecting neither race nor class nor gender nor age nor orientation nor right-or-left-handedness nor favorite color nor opinion on the ultimate origins and purpose of the universe. Please go download and watch 'The Wire' immediately. | ||
|
jon arbuckle
Canada443 Posts
On April 17 2011 13:45 HULKAMANIA wrote: At any rate, we are mostly in agreement. I just tend to think that your aforementioned tapestry was woven by humankind's eternal propensity to be in general shitty and self-interested and short-sighted, which is one impulse in which we're strictly equal opportunity, respecting neither race nor class nor gender nor age nor orientation nor right-or-left-handedness nor favorite color nor opinion on the ultimate origins and purpose of the universe. People are pretty awesome overall. I just wish I wasn't such a curmudgeon. But you know ![[image loading]](http://i54.tinypic.com/v3gajr.png) And, yes, you need to watch The Wire. | ||
|
Deleted User 61629
1664 Posts
| ||
|
JWD
United States12607 Posts
On April 18 2011 02:48 Inori wrote: ... Or you could just return to posting your blog series, while staying neutral yourself. this is my blog series. I have no obligation to stay neutral about anything. (It'd be really boring if I did!) P.S. Oh yeah, in your crusade against word "rape" have you actually considered asking females how they feel about it? For example, my gf says that it doesn't concern her at all and you have too much spare time if you managed to make such a big deal about it. Why are you posting in such a nasty tone? I don't really think it's fair to brand my ~50 PMs sent in 1 day last year a "crusade". I've asked a couple girls I know about it, after reading some comments in this thread. They both agreed it's distasteful. In 10th grade a smart teacher of mine corrected me for misusing the word and I've been on her side of the issue since. All this is just extremely limited anecdotal evidence, of course. I undertook this crusade in no small part because I myself don't like to read the word misused. It's a good thing I am not dating your gf, huh! | ||
|
Chef
10810 Posts
| ||
|
JWD
United States12607 Posts
On April 18 2011 04:07 Chef wrote: 5 PMs is a battle, 15 is a skirmish, 30 is a war, and 50 is a crusade. In that case I must be fighting World War III vs. the users I've banned | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
| ||
|
emperorchampion
Canada9496 Posts
gonna post this here, some local McGillians- thought it would appeal to your hipsterish tastes  | ||
|
Deleted User 61629
1664 Posts
| ||
|
Render
United States249 Posts
I'm not sure if the point of questioning the use of the word rape is about rooting out the misogyny of TL, although it would be great if that worked! Misogyny is insidious, and I don't think anyone is arguing that removing the word rape is to remove misogyny on any internet DISCOURSE COMMUNITY (lol), or the world. It seems, to me, to be more like neosporin. It's not supposed to stop you from falling down and hurting yourself, but when you do it can stop the wound from hurting and becoming infected. It's a bandaid. It's a stop gap. It's so that people who have experienced rape don't have to hear it being used as a joke, it's so casters don't sound juvenile to potential investors, it's so that the culture at large can look at gamers as something more than testosterone pumping pubescents. Regardless of mainstream culture's beliefs about gendered violence or inequality, you would never hear a sports caster on ESPN say rape. Using the word dates us. It screams immaturity. And it offends in an internet community that is becoming less and less anonymous (I'm sure there are plenty of posts and videos that certain TL celebrities would rather forget). Someone can create an eloquent justification of the word's usage and it would still look bad to most non-gaming adults. From what I understood of your posts I think I am in agreement with both of you, insofar as the discussion being about etymological debate. I just wanted to share that I see the question of saying "rape" in a slightly different way. I do also want to thank both of you (and JWD) for the good-intentioned healthy discussion. It is very refreshing. | ||
|
Arkansassy
358 Posts
When I was introduced to the TL community I immediately sensed a chauvinistic attitude, but hardly misogynistic. I’ve read posts that, as a woman, offended me tremendously. I encountered phrases such as “Show some tits." The tone, of which, women have vehemently fought to squelch for generations. Others: “Make me a sammich, woman!” or “Why is she out of the kitchen?” was so 50s-ish that I had to laugh. To post pictures and videos of beautiful women is neither chauvinistic, nor misogynistic; and whilst cliché, “Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.” Today’s standard for beauty, however, differs from other eras, regions, and cultures and will continue to change as society dictates. The woman’s body, with its curves and roundness and fleshiness is a glorious sight and, since the beginning of time, has been touted as a work of art. I highly doubt anyone can argue with that. The difference is in the way it’s presented. It’s either erotic or porn. The words, however, used in game by players, the vast majority of which are male, (some more mature than others) made me feel uncomfortable at first; however, as with “beauty” each generation/era creates their own connotation to words of yore. Shakespeare, for one, made up words when he was at a loss to describe what he meant. Many of those words are used today. I’ve made up words (one in this post) to better describe what I mean, or to prevent others from knowing what I mean. *insert evil grin* Rape is a plant of the mustard family cultivated as fodder. The word "rape" is used in wineries to define the refuse of grape that’s left after extraction. We, however, relate it to a heinous crime perpetrated upon both men and women, and thus, take offense. How many people find the word “cunt” offensive? I’d venture to say the vast majority of women would slap your face. But its origin is that of “queen.” So, before you think of calling me one, bow to the queen! Lol (which is now in the dictionary) Other words, which have been tagged as dirty or distasteful, “whore,” in Persia, is simply a beautiful woman who awaits men in heaven; “prostitute,” the lawgiver of the temple. So it’s not so much the word, but how it’s delivered that I might find abhorrent. Frankly, whilst I do think we’ve become an overly sensitive people, if I were not familiar with gaming vernacular, I would definitely gasp at reading “Hey, man, you raped that dude good.” By the way, I am a B.I.T.C.H who thoroughly enjoyed the discussion evoked by the OP. | ||
|
Aberu
United States968 Posts
On April 15 2011 08:14 ghrur wrote: I think you're making a tu-quoque argument here. Sure, he's a part of the community and part of the culture, but that doesn't make his complaint any less valid. The fact of the matter is, people should still refrain from using the word rape, regardless of whether or not JWD posts pictures of women in his blog series. Umm you misread that. The comment that JWD made was about not just the use of the word rape. Drawing a parallel between the kinds of videos he posts (which if you read my post, he posted one that had cartoon rape all over it) and the thing he is saying, you can see it is just plain hypocritical. It was intellectually dishonest, he got called out for it. Not like the awesomeness of his posts is any less awesome now however, just it was an interesting thing for him to rant on considering his history of posts. | ||
| ||
|
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV European League
PiGosaur Monday
OSC
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
The PondCast
Online Event
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
Online Event
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
