Living with XY thread in Epiphanies

2

Comments

  • I'm sorry about the fear. That sucks. (And it's worse when you finally get to the doctor, as I did yesterday, to find out there actually IS something to fear! Meh.)
  • Epiphanies is supposed to be designed to allow challenges to an identity even if that is hurtful to others.
    2. This forum is for serious discussion of these topics and will be allowed to reflect all widely held views, even if they are considered offensive by some. It is not intended to be an echo chamber, nor yet a pillory. Purgatory Guidelines also apply.
    When I said I'd be slapped by the hosts, it was not in disrespect to their hosting. It is because tempers would flare and this would become too personal. I think the reactions to my opening this thread bear this out.
    When the Styx trans threads that preceded Epiphanies were happening, there was disagreement but there was discussion. I don't see much of that here. What I see mostly is wild reaction.

    See the part I bolded in the Epiphanies guideline? LGBTQ+* people have to allow for our identities to be questioned. Going through the discussion on this was part the process in which engendered Epiphanies. We, and our allies, had to make the case for why Trans people and the rest of us are required to have out identities questioned.
    That the discussion here isn't happening and the questioning is being shouted down is not a good thing.

    *And women and minorities.
  • Why are we still talking about this?

    Someone somewhere is talking about something I don't approve of.

    Yeah. And?
  • It looks to me like the Epiphanies section is somewhere that's more moderated and where participants are asked to be careful about how they phrase things.

    I can't see anywhere that says it is a safe place where specified groups of people can go and be untroubled by the title or topic of other threads that they don't want to contribute to.
  • TubbsTubbs Admin
    edited November 2019
    Having discussed the issues raised in @lilbuddha's OP, the Admins have come to the following conclusion:

    Epiphanies is a forum for subjects "where issues and identity significantly overlap".

    That includes oppressed classes, but is by no means exclusively about oppressed classes. Gender identity and the challenges that entails are appropriate for the forum.

    Tubbs
    Admin
  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    <snip>I don't want to be nasty about men's actual suffering. I've seen what men who do not conform can go through from other men.
    I don't agree, though, that merely being a man in a man's society is a thing that inherently engenders problems.<snip>
    I think that the form of patriarchal society which we have experienced is also harmful to men who do conform. I think it is harmful to their physical and mental health, and to their emotional well-being. Not all are harmed, and not all recognise it any more than the drunk recognises the danger of another drink.

    And secondly, it seems to me that we are a society in transition. The extent to which it is a man’s society is changing. Many of the unspoken and (by some men unrecognised) assumptions of the patriarchal structures are being openly and regularly challenged. To some men in particular, and perhaps to most men to an extent, they are being asked to give up what they previously took for granted, or took to be a right. The extent to which different men have the resource (social, psychological, emotional, financial or spiritual) to do that giving up, or to do it with a good grace is very variable. Some need more support and encouragement than others. Even for those who are willing and able to step back from that privilege there are all sorts of issues about how best to navigate the emerging social landscape which is increasingly different from the world they were born and raised in.

    I think I can understand a bit of where you’re coming from in terms of safe space, but I can’t see where you think that leads to in terms of how the Ship functions.
  • BroJames wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    <snip>I don't want to be nasty about men's actual suffering. I've seen what men who do not conform can go through from other men.
    I don't agree, though, that merely being a man in a man's society is a thing that inherently engenders problems.<snip>
    I think that the form of patriarchal society which we have experienced is also harmful to men who do conform. I think it is harmful to their physical and mental health, and to their emotional well-being. Not all are harmed, and not all recognise it any more than the drunk recognises the danger of another drink.
    It can't be seen, but its there is a big ask.
    BroJames wrote: »
    And secondly, it seems to me that we are a society in transition. The extent to which it is a man’s society is changing. Many of the unspoken and (by some men unrecognised) assumptions of the patriarchal structures are being openly and regularly challenged. To some men in particular, and perhaps to most men to an extent, they are being asked to give up what they previously took for granted, or took to be a right. The extent to which different men have the resource (social, psychological, emotional, financial or spiritual) to do that giving up, or to do it with a good grace is very variable. Some need more support and encouragement than others. Even for those who are willing and able to step back from that privilege there are all sorts of issues about how best to navigate the emerging social landscape which is increasingly different from the world they were born and raised in.
    Much of that is a loss of privilege. To me, the same thing would imply that white people need a "safe space" to understand their loss of priviledge.
    BroJames wrote: »
    I think I can understand a bit of where you’re coming from in terms of safe space, but I can’t see where you think that leads to in terms of how the Ship functions.
    If anything fits in Epiphanies, then Epiphanies is pointless.
  • Let me try another approach.
    Being a woman in a women's space is not an issue. Being a gay woman can be. Being a gay, black woman very often will be.*
    It is not the culture, but the variation from the perceived default that is the issue.
    Same for being a man.

    *Those are broad strokes to illustrate the point. Life is often more granular.
  • I think you have it backwards. Purgatory is the safe space. Epiphanies is the UNSAFE space. This is because I can say gay people are immoral in Epiphanies, but not Purgatory.
  • Tubbs wrote: »
    Having discussed the issues raised in @lilbuddha's OP, the Admins have come to the following conclusion:

    Epiphanies is a forum for subjects "where issues and identity significantly overlap".

    That includes oppressed classes, but is by no means exclusively about oppressed classes. Gender identity and the challenges that entails are appropriate for the forum.

    Tubbs
    Admin
    I am saying that merely being a man is not a challenge for a man, generally speaking.
    Men can walk down the high street without whistles or challenge. Not true for women. A man can walk into a shop without arousing suspicion merely because he is a man. Not true for black people. A man can say, "I am a man" without people doubting his identity. Not true for trans people.
    Gender identity is not an equal experience across all genders.
    The challenges faced by some men because they do not conform are real. And if those were the topics of threads in Epiphanies, we would not be here in Styx.
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    Tubbs wrote: »
    Having discussed the issues raised in @lilbuddha's OP, the Admins have come to the following conclusion:

    Epiphanies is a forum for subjects "where issues and identity significantly overlap".

    That includes oppressed classes, but is by no means exclusively about oppressed classes. Gender identity and the challenges that entails are appropriate for the forum.

    Tubbs
    Admin
    I am saying that merely being a man is not a challenge for a man, generally speaking.
    Men can walk down the high street without whistles or challenge. Not true for women. A man can walk into a shop without arousing suspicion merely because he is a man. Not true for black people. A man can say, "I am a man" without people doubting his identity. Not true for trans people.
    Gender identity is not an equal experience across all genders.
    The challenges faced by some men because they do not conform are real. And if those were the topics of threads in Epiphanies, we would not be here in Styx.

    So.. because you think there is no "challenge" in being a man therefore nobody should ever talk as if there was?
  • I'm struggling here on just how quickly lB leaps from 'man' to 'straight white man'.

    Not every man is a straight white man. The commonality is 'man' not 'white' or 'straight'. I'm certainly not going to audit other shipmates in this regard, and would be suspicious at any attempt to do so.
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    edited November 2019
    Doc Tor wrote: »
    I'm struggling here on just how quickly lB leaps from 'man' to 'straight white man'.

    Not every man is a straight white man. The commonality is 'man' not 'white' or 'straight'. I'm certainly not going to audit other shipmates in this regard, and would be suspicious at any attempt to do so.
    I used straight and white because I think most of us here agree that those are not challenging categories. If being a man was a challenging catagory, they should better understand gender or racial struggles from their own struggles despite belonging to those other categories. The point was that being a man is very similar to being straight or being white. They are power categories that don't inherently face the struggles of other categories.
  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Let me try another approach.
    Being a woman in a women's space is not an issue. Being a gay woman can be. Being a gay, black woman very often will be.*
    It is not the culture, but the variation from the perceived default that is the issue.
    Same for being a man.

    *Those are broad strokes to illustrate the point. Life is often more granular.

    [My emphasis]I genuinely think it is more complicated than that. I think conforming to the perceived default has been harmful for men as well as for women. For men, at least, some of the evidence lies in issues around men’s mental and physical health - particularly the failure to seek treatment or to accept support.

    Secondly, much of feminism has been about women finding self-worth outside the expectations of patriarchy - departing from the norm. Opposition has come from those fully invested in those expectations - not just men but women too. The process of finding a different way of being fully realised as a female person other than wife and mother or other classic female ‘roles’ within a patriarchal system has needed support.

    ISTM that men too require support in moving away from the apparent axioms of patriarchal value - especially since in the first place, at least, the move involves loss of status, and the surrender of patriarchal measures of male self-worth.

    ISTM too that even ‘conforming’ men who are becoming aware of the harms of patriarchal male norms also need space and support to discover what it means to be male when those previous norms and values are to be removed.
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    If being a man was a challenging catagory, they should better understand gender or racial struggles from their own struggles despite belonging to those other categories.

    Ah, I understand now. We're not woke enough for a thread on men navigating their way out of the patriarchy. Thank you for making that clear.
  • RooKRooK Admin Emeritus
    @lilbuddha , your ongoing category error is not helpful, no matter how many times you explain your mistaken assumption about the remit of Epiphanies. All the people get to talk about all their identities, regardless of your personal sympathy for them.

    Is there a way to help you accept this, and step off?
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    <snip>I don't want to be nasty about men's actual suffering.

    You just don't want us to talk about it. I get it.
  • BroJames wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Let me try another approach.
    Being a woman in a women's space is not an issue. Being a gay woman can be. Being a gay, black woman very often will be.*
    It is not the culture, but the variation from the perceived default that is the issue.
    Same for being a man.

    *Those are broad strokes to illustrate the point. Life is often more granular.

    [My emphasis]I genuinely think it is more complicated than that. I think conforming to the perceived default has been harmful for men as well as for women. For men, at least, some of the evidence lies in issues around men’s mental and physical health - particularly the failure to seek treatment or to accept support.
    You, as a man, will not inherently have mental health issues or physical ones other than general ageing ones. But, yes, male culture makes addressing those issues more difficult. Men with the same symptoms are less likely to be diagnosed with depression, as an example. I've never denied that there are issues within maledom.
    BroJames wrote: »
    Secondly, much of feminism has been about women finding self-worth outside the expectations of patriarchy - departing from the norm. Opposition has come from those fully invested in those expectations - not just men but women too. The process of finding a different way of being fully realised as a female person other than wife and mother or other classic female ‘roles’ within a patriarchal system has needed support.

    ISTM that men too require support in moving away from the apparent axioms of patriarchal value - especially since in the first place, at least, the move involves loss of status, and the surrender of patriarchal measures of male self-worth.

    ISTM too that even ‘conforming’ men who are becoming aware of the harms of patriarchal male norms also need space and support to discover what it means to be male when those previous norms and values are to be removed.
    The patriarchy is not going away any faster than white privilege is. Not looking through my window. The perception is much greater than the reality from inside that house. There is progress, but again, it is the loss of a privilege the rest of us never had.
    I do love the quote in this cartoon. In this transition, men are walking forwards and in sensible shoes.
    I still wonder why men losing their privilege is different to white people losing theirs?
  • @BroJames
    Thank you, BTW, for actually engaging in a discussion.
  • Are we fucking done here?
  • TubbsTubbs Admin
    edited November 2019
    mousethief wrote: »
    Are we fucking done here?

    That’s really not helpful.
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    BroJames wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Let me try another approach.
    Being a woman in a women's space is not an issue. Being a gay woman can be. Being a gay, black woman very often will be.*
    It is not the culture, but the variation from the perceived default that is the issue.
    Same for being a man.

    *Those are broad strokes to illustrate the point. Life is often more granular.

    [My emphasis]I genuinely think it is more complicated than that. I think conforming to the perceived default has been harmful for men as well as for women. For men, at least, some of the evidence lies in issues around men’s mental and physical health - particularly the failure to seek treatment or to accept support.
    You, as a man, will not inherently have mental health issues or physical ones other than general ageing ones. But, yes, male culture makes addressing those issues more difficult. Men with the same symptoms are less likely to be diagnosed with depression, as an example. I've never denied that there are issues within maledom.
    BroJames wrote: »
    Secondly, much of feminism has been about women finding self-worth outside the expectations of patriarchy - departing from the norm. Opposition has come from those fully invested in those expectations - not just men but women too. The process of finding a different way of being fully realised as a female person other than wife and mother or other classic female ‘roles’ within a patriarchal system has needed support.

    ISTM that men too require support in moving away from the apparent axioms of patriarchal value - especially since in the first place, at least, the move involves loss of status, and the surrender of patriarchal measures of male self-worth.

    ISTM too that even ‘conforming’ men who are becoming aware of the harms of patriarchal male norms also need space and support to discover what it means to be male when those previous norms and values are to be removed.
    The patriarchy is not going away any faster than white privilege is. Not looking through my window. The perception is much greater than the reality from inside that house. There is progress, but again, it is the loss of a privilege the rest of us never had.
    I do love the quote in this cartoon. In this transition, men are walking forwards and in sensible shoes.
    I still wonder why men losing their privilege is different to white people losing theirs?

    But you want to deny one section of the Ship’s community an opportunity to talk about their issues in a dedicated space even though you admit they have them. That doesn’t seem like a great starting point for a new board regardless of where we eventually end up.
  • Tubbs wrote: »
    mousethief wrote: »
    Are we fucking done here?

    That’s really not helpful.

    At this point what is to be helped? A question was asked, it was answered. Any other conversation seems superfluous, or out of place. This is Styx, not Purg, not Epiphanies.
  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    <snip>I still wonder why men losing their privilege is different to white people losing theirs?

    I don’t think I can answer that because I don’t experience any sense of loss of privilege or identity in the move towards racial equality.

    My parents would have been shocked to the core if they thought they had imparted any sense that a person’s skin colour or ethnicity made them in any respect lesser.

    I am aware, however, that my patterns of thought and experience are white middle-class normative, and, for me, that makes me cautious - even anxious - in my interactions with those whose background and experience is very different.

    I was also brought up in a household where my mother achieved far higher qualifications than my father and where there was no sense that I could discern that my sister and other female relatives should have any lower expectations than me and my brother.

    OTOH I was aware of wider cultural expectations to be what we might now call a macho man; of an unspoken assumption that it was up to the male to make the first move in initiating a male-female ‘relationship’; and of a general expectation that it was a man’s responsibility to be protector and provider. These expectations included holding doors open for ‘ladies’ (although that term encompassed all women), giving up my seat for a lady, ladies first etc.

    In relation to those minor social courtesies (apart from giving up a seat) my own practice would normally be to extend them to anyone male or female. It’s complicated, however, because some women receive them as a patriarchal blow.

    Happily I’m not in the dating market, but I’m not sure what advice is give to my sons (if they sought it) about how best to express an interest without appearing to be a threat.
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    Tubbs wrote: »
    Having discussed the issues raised in @lilbuddha's OP, the Admins have come to the following conclusion:

    Epiphanies is a forum for subjects "where issues and identity significantly overlap".

    That includes oppressed classes, but is by no means exclusively about oppressed classes. Gender identity and the challenges that entails are appropriate for the forum.

    Tubbs
    Admin
    I am saying that merely being a man is not a challenge for a man, generally speaking.
    Men can walk down the high street without whistles or challenge. Not true for women. A man can walk into a shop without arousing suspicion merely because he is a man. Not true for black people. A man can say, "I am a man" without people doubting his identity. Not true for trans people.
    Gender identity is not an equal experience across all genders.
    The challenges faced by some men because they do not conform are real. And if those were the topics of threads in Epiphanies, we would not be here in Styx.

    See, I actually agree inasmuch as I don't think men's issues and women's issues are mirror images, and I know that 'male' is what as a linguist I was taught to call the unmarked category in most situations.

    But it is not possible to discuss why this is the case without reference to women's issues (or other issues of identity). So even on your terms, a discussion of men's issues is implicitly a discussion of women's issues, just as a thread entitled 'Heterosexuality' is implicitly a discussion of homosexuality which would, under the old rules, have ended up in Dead Horses pretty quickly. So absolutely it is a topic for Epiphanies.
  • mousethief wrote: »
    Tubbs wrote: »
    mousethief wrote: »
    Are we fucking done here?

    That’s really not helpful.

    At this point what is to be helped? A question was asked, it was answered. Any other conversation seems superfluous, or out of place. This is Styx, not Purg, not Epiphanies.

    Given the subject, the optics of a male poster asking if we’re fucking done yet aren’t great. It’s not a typical Styx post.
  • That's the closest anybody has ever come on the SOF to accusing me of mansplaining. This thread really is bad for the Ship.
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    Men can walk down the high street without whistles or challenge.

    On the other hand, men are massively more likely to be the victims of random violent crime.

    But that’s irrelevant anyway. The issues faced by a given identity group don’t have to be the same as those faced by others for them to be real. They don’t have to be as serious or pressing as those faced by others for them to be worth discussing. This isn’t some zero sum game where caring about one group means other groups matter less.

    This thread reminds me of those people who rant on about the inviolable principle of freedom of religion right up until the point where a woman walks past in a burka or a mosque is proposed at the end of their road, at which point suddenly all they want to do is ban it and prevent it. They want freedom of religion, as long as it’s not Islam. You want a place to discuss gender, as long as it’s not male. A place to discuss race, as long as it’s not white. A place to discuss sexuality, as long as it’s not straight.

    No dice.
  • Tubbs wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    BroJames wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Let me try another approach.
    Being a woman in a women's space is not an issue. Being a gay woman can be. Being a gay, black woman very often will be.*
    It is not the culture, but the variation from the perceived default that is the issue.
    Same for being a man.

    *Those are broad strokes to illustrate the point. Life is often more granular.

    [My emphasis]I genuinely think it is more complicated than that. I think conforming to the perceived default has been harmful for men as well as for women. For men, at least, some of the evidence lies in issues around men’s mental and physical health - particularly the failure to seek treatment or to accept support.
    You, as a man, will not inherently have mental health issues or physical ones other than general ageing ones. But, yes, male culture makes addressing those issues more difficult. Men with the same symptoms are less likely to be diagnosed with depression, as an example. I've never denied that there are issues within maledom.
    BroJames wrote: »
    Secondly, much of feminism has been about women finding self-worth outside the expectations of patriarchy - departing from the norm. Opposition has come from those fully invested in those expectations - not just men but women too. The process of finding a different way of being fully realised as a female person other than wife and mother or other classic female ‘roles’ within a patriarchal system has needed support.

    ISTM that men too require support in moving away from the apparent axioms of patriarchal value - especially since in the first place, at least, the move involves loss of status, and the surrender of patriarchal measures of male self-worth.

    ISTM too that even ‘conforming’ men who are becoming aware of the harms of patriarchal male norms also need space and support to discover what it means to be male when those previous norms and values are to be removed.
    The patriarchy is not going away any faster than white privilege is. Not looking through my window. The perception is much greater than the reality from inside that house. There is progress, but again, it is the loss of a privilege the rest of us never had.
    I do love the quote in this cartoon. In this transition, men are walking forwards and in sensible shoes.
    I still wonder why men losing their privilege is different to white people losing theirs?

    But you want to deny one section of the Ship’s community an opportunity to talk about their issues in a dedicated space even though you admit they have them. That doesn’t seem like a great starting point for a new board regardless of where we eventually end up.
    The point, as should be clear as I have repeated it many times, is that the general category of bing male is not a sensitive, threatened or challenged identity.
    The OP that began this was one of general maleness. I do not want to deny men talking about actual problems, but general maleness is very much like general whiteness.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Men can walk down the high street without whistles or challenge.

    On the other hand, men are massively more likely to be the victims of random violent crime.

    And young men are massively more likely to commit suicide than is any other group.
  • "How can we live well as men?" is the start of the thread that gave rise to this whinge. Just not seeing how this is threatening, or problematic, or dismissive of oppressed minorities. This thread is just manufacturing a problem where none existed, seemingly out of spite. The "scroll past" advice seems to apply very well. Don't want to read about men trying to be better men? Then don't read about it. But wanting to stop them from talking about how to be better men because other groups are oppressed and men aren't? MYOFB.
  • BroJames wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    <snip>I still wonder why men losing their privilege is different to white people losing theirs?

    I don’t think I can answer that because I don’t experience any sense of loss of privilege or identity in the move towards racial equality.

    My parents would have been shocked to the core if they thought they had imparted any sense that a person’s skin colour or ethnicity made them in any respect lesser.

    I am aware, however, that my patterns of thought and experience are white middle-class normative, and, for me, that makes me cautious - even anxious - in my interactions with those whose background and experience is very different.
    Whiteness is baked into our culture. It is difficult to see from the inside and one needn't actively do anything to gain from it. The white person who gets the job that the black person was never considered for, the white colleague doing the same job as the black one but gets paid more, the white criminal who gets a shorter sentence than the black one, etc. It is the insidiousness of invisible privilege that even those who might think it wrong cannot easily see where it exists.
    BroJames wrote: »
    I was also brought up in a household where my mother achieved far higher qualifications than my father
    My mum as well, but my dad earned more...
    BroJames wrote: »
    OTOH I was aware of wider cultural expectations to be what we might now call a macho man; of an unspoken assumption that it was up to the male to make the first move in initiating a male-female ‘relationship’; and of a general expectation that it was a man’s responsibility to be protector and provider. These expectations included holding doors open for ‘ladies’ (although that term encompassed all women), giving up my seat for a lady, ladies first etc.

    In relation to those minor social courtesies (apart from giving up a seat) my own practice would normally be to extend them to anyone male or female. It’s complicated, however, because some women receive them as a patriarchal blow.

    Happily I’m not in the dating market, but I’m not sure what advice is give to my sons (if they sought it) about how best to express an interest without appearing to be a threat.


    Sixty years.


    This is a conversation that has been going on for more than 60 years.

    How long a transition is needed? Serious question, not snark. This is not new. The pace is only fast if one didn't notice that the bus has been in motion for more than half a century. Well longer if talking about the actual beginnings of movements for equality.
  • Am I the only person who doesn't mind which board a discussion takes place on? Most of the time I'm not aware which board I'm on. If a topic interests me, I follow it, if not, not. This is mainly from the Active Threads page, or whatever it is called.
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    The point, as should be clear as I have repeated it many times, is that the general category of bing male is not a sensitive, threatened or challenged identity.
    The OP that began this was one of general maleness. . . .
    Even if it is the case that the OP that began the "Living with XY Chromosomes" thread was one of "general maleness" (which I am not sure is an accurate description, but for the sake of discussion), how is the discussion arising from that OP not one, to quote from the Epiphanies forum heading, "where people are personally invested, where academic detachment just isn't possible, and where issues and identity significantly overlap"?

  • I don't mind--I too use the Active Threads page. But I do mind if a discussion never gets to take place at all, because certain people are blocking it.
  • BroJames (:notworthy:)

    You are speaking great sense. :)

  • I don't mind--I too use the Active Threads page. But I do mind if a discussion never gets to take place at all, because certain people are blocking it.

    Indeed. Having the discussion is the important thing.
  • I don't mind--I too use the Active Threads page. But I do mind if a discussion never gets to take place at all, because certain people are blocking it.

    Indeed. Having the discussion is the important thing.

    As blocking discussion is important to others.
  • Nick Tamen wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    The point, as should be clear as I have repeated it many times, is that the general category of bing male is not a sensitive, threatened or challenged identity.
    The OP that began this was one of general maleness. . . .
    Even if it is the case that the OP that began the "Living with XY Chromosomes" thread was one of "general maleness" (which I am not sure is an accurate description, but for the sake of discussion), how is the discussion arising from that OP not one, to quote from the Epiphanies forum heading, "where people are personally invested, where academic detachment just isn't possible, and where issues and identity significantly overlap"?

    There seems to be an assumption that unmarked categories don't constitute an "identity". I'd say that recognizing unmarked categories is fairly important.
  • Nick Tamen wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    The point, as should be clear as I have repeated it many times, is that the general category of bing male is not a sensitive, threatened or challenged identity.
    The OP that began this was one of general maleness. . . .
    Even if it is the case that the OP that began the "Living with XY Chromosomes" thread was one of "general maleness" (which I am not sure is an accurate description, but for the sake of discussion), how is the discussion arising from that OP not one, to quote from the Epiphanies forum heading, "where people are personally invested, where academic detachment just isn't possible, and where issues and identity significantly overlap"?
    People can be invested in anything. There are people personally invested in being white. And there are plenty of issues that identity overlaps in.

  • mousethief wrote: »
    I don't mind--I too use the Active Threads page. But I do mind if a discussion never gets to take place at all, because certain people are blocking it.

    Indeed. Having the discussion is the important thing.

    As blocking discussion is important to others.
    I'm going to need a tetanus shot just from reading that.
  • Crœsos wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    The point, as should be clear as I have repeated it many times, is that the general category of bing male is not a sensitive, threatened or challenged identity.
    The OP that began this was one of general maleness. . . .
    Even if it is the case that the OP that began the "Living with XY Chromosomes" thread was one of "general maleness" (which I am not sure is an accurate description, but for the sake of discussion), how is the discussion arising from that OP not one, to quote from the Epiphanies forum heading, "where people are personally invested, where academic detachment just isn't possible, and where issues and identity significantly overlap"?

    There seems to be an assumption that unmarked categories don't constitute an "identity". I'd say that recognizing unmarked categories is fairly important.
    Of course unmarked categories constitute an identity.
  • RooKRooK Admin Emeritus
    mousethief wrote: »
    I don't mind--I too use the Active Threads page. But I do mind if a discussion never gets to take place at all, because certain people are blocking it.

    Indeed. Having the discussion is the important thing.

    As blocking discussion is important to others.

    [ HOSTING ]

    The C3-class sniping stops now, @mousethief . Kindly keep such contributions to Hell.

    [ /HOSTING ]

    RooK
    Styx Host
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    Men can walk down the high street without whistles or challenge.

    On the other hand, men are massively more likely to be the victims of random violent crime.

    But that’s irrelevant anyway. The issues faced by a given identity group don’t have to be the same as those faced by others for them to be real. They don’t have to be as serious or pressing as those faced by others for them to be worth discussing. This isn’t some zero sum game where caring about one group means other groups matter less.

    This thread reminds me of those people who rant on about the inviolable principle of freedom of religion right up until the point where a woman walks past in a burka or a mosque is proposed at the end of their road, at which point suddenly all they want to do is ban it and prevent it. They want freedom of religion, as long as it’s not Islam. You want a place to discuss gender, as long as it’s not male. A place to discuss race, as long as it’s not white. A place to discuss sexuality, as long as it’s not straight.

    No dice.
    I'm trying to ignore the ridiculous posts, but seeing as you are an admin, I probably shouldn't.
    If I am thinking this zero-sum, then why did I put so much effort into the Trans threads that engendered Epiphanies?
    A number of people want to frame this as me being unwilling to listen to men and this is what you are doing.
    A few are actually engaging in the discussion. And though I am not very encouraged that this is going very far, at least they are making an effort.
    You do not appear to be even trying.
  • RussRuss Shipmate
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    I've never denied that there are issues within maledom.

    So what's wrong with a thread to discuss male issues and male identity ?

    You seem to think that having such a discussion amounts to categorizing men as a victim-group...





  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    There are people personally invested in being white.

    Which is a bad thing because...?
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Men can walk down the high street without whistles or challenge.

    On the other hand, men are massively more likely to be the victims of random violent crime.

    But that’s irrelevant anyway. The issues faced by a given identity group don’t have to be the same as those faced by others for them to be real. They don’t have to be as serious or pressing as those faced by others for them to be worth discussing. This isn’t some zero sum game where caring about one group means other groups matter less.

    This thread reminds me of those people who rant on about the inviolable principle of freedom of religion right up until the point where a woman walks past in a burka or a mosque is proposed at the end of their road, at which point suddenly all they want to do is ban it and prevent it. They want freedom of religion, as long as it’s not Islam. You want a place to discuss gender, as long as it’s not male. A place to discuss race, as long as it’s not white. A place to discuss sexuality, as long as it’s not straight.

    No dice.
    I'm trying to ignore the ridiculous posts, but seeing as you are an admin, I probably shouldn't.

    As long as I’m not using the tags, feel free.
    If I am thinking this zero-sum, then why did I put so much effort into the Trans threads that engendered Epiphanies?
    A number of people want to frame this as me being unwilling to listen to men and this is what you are doing.

    No, I’m framing it as you claiming that freedom from being attacked, belittled, etc. when engaged in discussion of issues relating to gender doesn’t apply if that gender is male.
    A few are actually engaging in the discussion. And though I am not very encouraged that this is going very far, at least they are making an effort.
    You do not appear to be even trying.

    You’re mistaking disagreement for disengagement.
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    There are people personally invested in being white.

    Which is a bad thing because...?
    Tell me why it is a good thing? Black pride is not about black people being better than anyone else. White pride is.
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    Men can walk down the high street without whistles or challenge.

    On the other hand, men are massively more likely to be the victims of random violent crime.

    But that’s irrelevant anyway. The issues faced by a given identity group don’t have to be the same as those faced by others for them to be real. They don’t have to be as serious or pressing as those faced by others for them to be worth discussing. This isn’t some zero sum game where caring about one group means other groups matter less.

    This thread reminds me of those people who rant on about the inviolable principle of freedom of religion right up until the point where a woman walks past in a burka or a mosque is proposed at the end of their road, at which point suddenly all they want to do is ban it and prevent it. They want freedom of religion, as long as it’s not Islam. You want a place to discuss gender, as long as it’s not male. A place to discuss race, as long as it’s not white. A place to discuss sexuality, as long as it’s not straight.

    No dice.
    I'm trying to ignore the ridiculous posts, but seeing as you are an admin, I probably shouldn't.

    As long as I’m not using the tags, feel free.
    That wasn't meant 'cause you might get cross, it is because you are part of the team who made the decision and what you think affects this.
    If I am thinking this zero-sum, then why did I put so much effort into the Trans threads that engendered Epiphanies?
    A number of people want to frame this as me being unwilling to listen to men and this is what you are doing.

    No, I’m framing it as you claiming that freedom from being attacked, belittled, etc. when engaged in discussion of issues relating to gender doesn’t apply if that gender is male.
    There is no freedom from attack for anyone in Epiphanies. Whilst the discussions might be more closely monitored, that is not part of the remit of the board.
    A few are actually engaging in the discussion. And though I am not very encouraged that this is going very far, at least they are making an effort.
    You do not appear to be even trying.

    You’re mistaking disagreement for disengagement.
    How about lack of comprehension then? At best, you are responding to what you think I am thinking and not what I have been saying.

  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    The point, as should be clear as I have repeated it many times, is that the general category of bing male is not a sensitive, threatened or challenged identity.
    The OP that began this was one of general maleness. . . .
    Even if it is the case that the OP that began the "Living with XY Chromosomes" thread was one of "general maleness" (which I am not sure is an accurate description, but for the sake of discussion), how is the discussion arising from that OP not one, to quote from the Epiphanies forum heading, "where people are personally invested, where academic detachment just isn't possible, and where issues and identity significantly overlap"?
    People can be invested in anything. There are people personally invested in being white. And there are plenty of issues that identity overlaps in.
    Sure, but that doesn’t answer the question I asked. I asked how the discussion in the specific thread you are challenging as inappropriate for Epiphanies does not meet the three criteria in the description of the purpose for Epiphanies—criteria that are joined by the conjunction “and,” and that don’t include a specification that the identity in question be that of an “oppressed class” (quoting your OP in this thread).

    Or to put it another way, is your concern that the thread in question doesn’t meet the current remit of Epiphanies, or is that you think that remit should be amended so as to exclude the thread in question? Or is it is something else?

This discussion has been closed.