WS 2012 Sandbox: ws in the sand

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (457 of them)

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2319/2351146820_42031d875f.jpg

elks thunder, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:06 (twelve years ago) link

I wish there was a better term, believe me. :(

ᶘ ᵒᴥᵒᶅ (~curious orange~), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:06 (twelve years ago) link

if that's what i was doing i'm sorry? I don't know where i've told you or insinuated what you feel or should feel. My last sentence (just trying to reply to your own use of 'should') in the post was rushed because i'm at work, and if it's clumsy again, apologies.

bloating forecast: ruff swells (p much resigned to deems), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:07 (twelve years ago) link

OMG @ "mansplainer", I feel like my life was a little better five minutes ago when I didn't know the term existed.

shakur rump (I left my login in El Sandboxo), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:07 (twelve years ago) link

The problem is, the "man" in "mansplain" doesn't ~have~ to refer to the male gender, but the inherent assumption of automatic greater knowledge due to unspoken privilege. If you can get all that in a snappy 2-syllable phrase, we're laughing.

Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:09 (twelve years ago) link

There are still people left on ILX that are unfamiliar with the term "mansplaining"? Really? Guess it was a positive thing that Thom's irresistable belly drove me to this thread, in a small way, then.

Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:10 (twelve years ago) link

I mean I understand the concept of what it refers to, but I honestly 100% had never heard the term itself until today.

shakur rump (I left my login in El Sandboxo), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:11 (twelve years ago) link

ditto, thank god

milo z, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:12 (twelve years ago) link

I pretty much hate all words that do that type of thing though, "mansplain", "bromance", "manscaping", like worst trend ever.

shakur rump (I left my login in El Sandboxo), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:13 (twelve years ago) link

Do you hate all neologisms, or just the ones that draw attention to previously unremarked areas of male behaviour?

Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:14 (twelve years ago) link

Definitely somewhere between the two.

shakur rump (I left my login in El Sandboxo), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:15 (twelve years ago) link

definitely a sexist kind of marketing driven application of "man-" to all kinds of things, to make clear that it's ok for men to do it or have it.

but that's not really of the same species as "mansplain"

slandblox goole, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:16 (twelve years ago) link

i.e. I don't hate all neologisms, I just hate "cutesy" (for lack of a better word) ones that are most often used to describe a new cultural trend that really isn't a new cultural trend at all

shakur rump (I left my login in El Sandboxo), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:17 (twelve years ago) link

Fair enough. Because I tend to reserve my hatred for neologisms like "vagazzle" and shit like that - because on your latter count, you know, I just feel a bit "welcome to our world"

Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:18 (twelve years ago) link

Well yeah it just sorta happened that all of the examples that popped into my head were of the, "OMG men do this too" variety.

shakur rump (I left my login in El Sandboxo), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:19 (twelve years ago) link

I'm not sure the concepts of bromances and manscaping and so on were unremarked on before - bromance is just a dumb and conceivably offensive ('it's so not GAY, god no') take on male friendships, isn't it?

milo z, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:19 (twelve years ago) link

bags are for women, men have "manbags"
hair removal is for women, men have to "manscape"

etc.

slandblox goole, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:21 (twelve years ago) link

anything conceivably feminine has to be (semi-jokingly, lest you be led to think seriously about it at all) re-named to be man-suitable.

slandblox goole, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:22 (twelve years ago) link

You know what? I'll make a deal. We'll take manbag and manscape and bromance away if you can get rid of "actress" and "lady doctor" and "female musician" and every other damn ugly phrase that gets applied to women and only women? Kay? x

Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:22 (twelve years ago) link

i'm not arguing with you? i think these terms originate from the same place

slandblox goole, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:23 (twelve years ago) link

fwiw I just posted this on the girls thread as to why the term bugs me a lot

x-post - It just seems to me to imply that it's something that all and only men do which I don't think is actually the case. That's why I was saying that I'd prefer a term like FT was suggesting. One that encapsulates the phenomenon as FT stated above and doesn't seem so damning and exclusive.

ᶘ ᵒᴥᵒᶅ (~curious orange~), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:26 (twelve years ago) link

Yeah, I kind of feel like that (entirely justified) vitriol is aimed at the wrong people here?

shakur rump (I left my login in El Sandboxo), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:26 (twelve years ago) link

xxxp - I don't see how any of those are akin to neologisms that are designed to make cultural prejudices against being perceived as feminine or gay okay (manbags, etc.). Actress? I don't know how that can conceivably be offensive.

milo z, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:30 (twelve years ago) link

Goole, I don't think these terms actually do originate from "the same place." Or at least, not in the same way?

Because I think that the "lady X" and "-ess" terms come from a place of diminishing and othering women because we can't have or be the ~real~ thing.

While the "Man-" terms - perhaps they come from a marketing perspective? But I guess that is the same place, because the whole reason that men have to have a ~special~ Man-thing rather than just a thing (associated with women) is because the association with ~women~ and ~what women do~ is considered so awful and icky that a dude who wouldn't be caught dead carrying a handbag feels OK carrying a Manbag?

But then that's all that "marketing of masculinity" stuff which comes from the same place of OMG gender panic, so if that's what you mean by "coming from the same place" then yes they are.

Anyway, I really think that someone needs to post a picture of an attractive person quite soon because this is quite a derail. I'm not allowed to post any more Thoms so Pyth or CO, do you have anyone to add?

Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:30 (twelve years ago) link

I never post anyone but Steve McQueen, so you can just imagine another Bullit still here if you like.

OH GNUS (Pyth), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:32 (twelve years ago) link

"cultural prejudices against being perceived as feminine or gay" = based on the idea that being feminine sucks = sexism

Judging women on their femaleness first (as in the case of "actress") and their ~stuff they do~ second (with a side order of men = real thing, women = weird special lady thing) = also sexism

Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:35 (twelve years ago) link

No, I think that part of me is hibernating or something right now. I can't think of anyone. I guess that hot picture of Paul Newman is my go to but I can't be bothered GISing it now so

HOT PAUL NEWMAN PIC HERE

ᶘ ᵒᴥᵒᶅ (~curious orange~), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:36 (twelve years ago) link

my fucking head is killing me

ᶘ ᵒᴥᵒᶅ (~curious orange~), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:36 (twelve years ago) link

omg I feel a lot better now

ᶘ ᵒᴥᵒᶅ (~curious orange~), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:37 (twelve years ago) link

How about Lemmy and Stacia? I would happily smash either of them in those days.

http://www.angel.dk/hawkwind/store/HawkStaA_02A.jpg

Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:37 (twelve years ago) link

Hott dudes = better than yoga at making heads not hurt. Proven by science.

Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:38 (twelve years ago) link

lol

ᶘ ᵒᴥᵒᶅ (~curious orange~), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:40 (twelve years ago) link

Judging women on their femaleness first (as in the case of "actress") and their

That's no more a judgement than 'actors' being male. Language has gender, that's just kinda the way it works.

milo z, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:43 (twelve years ago) link

Milo, there's this whole book by Dale Spender, called Man Made Language about ~exactly~ this issue. Perhaps you could read it, and digest some of its points about the way language is used to constrain women (and also men but mostly, problematically, women) before you attempt to "mansplain" "gender" in "language" to me, OK? Thanks.

Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:47 (twelve years ago) link

enough of the girltalk in this thread.

elks thunder, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:48 (twelve years ago) link

There is an intrinsic judgement in mansplain, manbag, etc. (that can be sexist against women - or against men) that does not exist in "actress" or "lady doctor." Lady doctor or female musician can be diminutive, but that derives from the context of whatever else is said ('female musicians can only be bass players' or w/e) - identification by gender is not inherently judgemental.

milo z, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:51 (twelve years ago) link

Actress, more than the others, is a strange word to bring up in this argument.

milo z, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:53 (twelve years ago) link

Not true. Like I said, read Dale Spender and get back to me. I really cannot have this conversation with you until you actually know what the hell you are talking about.

Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Friday, 16 December 2011 17:54 (twelve years ago) link

Or you could make the argument you're alluding to, rather than relying on authority.

What is sexist about 'actress,' beyond being gender-identified?
How does that work in languages where basic nouns have genders?

milo z, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:56 (twelve years ago) link

Never understood why there need to be actresses when I've never been to the doctress

april wowak, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:58 (twelve years ago) link

bags are for women, men have "manbags"
hair removal is for women, men have to "manscape"

etc.

I'm conflicted on "man crush." On one hand, I like that it opens up the normal-guy discourse to intimations of homoeroticism. On the other hand, the word "man" does a lot of work in signifying that it's not a REAL crush.

jaymc, Friday, 16 December 2011 17:59 (twelve years ago) link

Dear Milo: I am not ILX's personal Womens Studies Professor. There is like 30 or 40 years of research and documentation on this stuff that you would find if you just used your eyes. And what is just a fun entertaining diversion for a Friday afternoon is the stuff of my actual life. And I would rather spend that life looking at photos of Thom Yorke's belly.

Also, you are doing this, right here:

http://derailingfordummies.com/#educate2

Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Friday, 16 December 2011 18:02 (twelve years ago) link

That's just pretty shitty - you start the discussion, then appeal to authority, then claim I'm derailing.

milo z, Friday, 16 December 2011 18:05 (twelve years ago) link

Read what it says in the link. I have told you where to find the information you're asking for, you just want me to spoon feed it to you, instead of actually reading it, and I'm tired and I want to go home but I haven't finished my actual work because I've been having this conversation for the 10,000th time.

Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Friday, 16 December 2011 18:07 (twelve years ago) link

Post pictures of mostly naked women if you must, but don't let's be completely dense? She answered you. You aren't entitled to a crash course in why you're not checking your own privilege.

OH GNUS (Pyth), Friday, 16 December 2011 18:07 (twelve years ago) link

Kate, while I pretty much agree with you on the subject, I think it's bad form to first argue something (that those words are sexist), then when someone asks you to explain it, you just say "why don't you understand it, go read these books you fool!". If you're not willing to back up you arguments, you shouldn't bring them up in the first place.

Tuomas, Friday, 16 December 2011 18:08 (twelve years ago) link

(particularly given that we don't disagree nearly as much as you think we do)

"Go read this book" is not dialogue.

milo z, Friday, 16 December 2011 18:09 (twelve years ago) link

"explain 30 years of research to me in an afternoon" is not a dialogue either, Milo.

Polemicist Who Slashed All, Freely (Fotherington Thomas), Friday, 16 December 2011 18:10 (twelve years ago) link

But, iirc, he wasn't asking for that, he was asking for you, personally, to explain your feelings/thoughts.

shakur rump (I left my login in El Sandboxo), Friday, 16 December 2011 18:11 (twelve years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.