[Noisebridge-discuss] happy feminist film night: Hayao Miyazaki?

Mon Jul 29 16:52:32 UTC 2013

Hi romy, hep, snail, and others! Thanks for having this conversation *in
public* since the only way out is through..

Hi garrett, this?
"I don't think that someone receiving these benefits means that they should
automatically be treated as part of the machine that takes them from women
and distributes them to men. At least I don't see how that could have any
positive effect."

Is *your opinion* on how feminism should approach and solve the problem of
women's oppression.  I think that part of the original poster's intent is
to protect a space where what mr. garrett thinks about strategy is less
relevant than what, say, she and her friends think.

Because, um, it's their movement for them, and if you want to drive the bus
you gotta get your own damn bus.

I heard groups of male feminist allies like to get together and talk about
how to not constantly present their opinion as fact. Ask the men in your
life who don't seem to be dicks; maybe they know of this mythical gathering.

R.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "macegr" <garrettmace at gmail.com>
Date: Jul 28, 2013 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] happy feminist film night: Hayao
Miyazaki?
To: "hep" <dis at gruntle.org>
Cc: "noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net" <
noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>

Thanks for taking the time to write all of this. I think it does help me
understand your point of view better, but ("of course," you think, rolling
your eyes) I still have a couple problems with some of the details. Some
notes included inline below:

On Jul 28, 2013, at 10:18 AM, hep <dis at gruntle.org> wrote:

> This guy has derailed a conversation, thrown down an oppressed-class
members words about their own movement, argued that one definition of
feminism has more merit than others, used the tone argument to disregard an
oppressed-class members feelings and reactions about defending their own
movement, and is denying the core foundations of that oppressed class
movement because he is personally offended that he may be lumped into it.
guess what buddy, you are. all men are. because you benefit from the system
as is, even if you personally do not like it or agree with it. actual male
feminist allies understand this. if you don't and if you want to argue
about it, you aren't doing feminism allyship correctly fyi.

I still don't see how I was the one to derail the conversation, since the
reprimand you re-quoted below was in response to a friendly, inclusive
invitation.

> there is no "badge of honor" where a man isn't part of the patriarchy.
much like one can't use having black friends or peers to nullify one's
benefits of white supremacy in the united states if one has white passing
privilege. understanding this and accepting this is the first step towards
helping to dismantle this system. the patriarchy isn't some kind of
sentient thing that only rewards those dick men who want to support it. it
benefits all men in silent ways because it is a word to describe the kind
of society we live in, and the preferred class that it rewards above
others. it's in a man never having to hear and internalize "why don't you
get raped!" if he loses a video game. it's in never being worried about
being alone on a street at night that as a man you might be the target of
rape. it's in not having to be uncomfortably aware and trying to silently
read the intentions of every man you are ever alone with for any reason.
it's in not being told to watch what you are wearing or where you are going
to socialize at night. it's in not wondering if you were passed over for a
promotion because you are female. it's in knowing that you are probably
being paid commensurate with your peers, not earning cents to the dollar
for the employees of the opposite sex in your company. it's in not
wondering whether you should change your name to a more masculine sounding
name because you aren't getting callbacks in a male dominated field. etc,
etc, etc.

Also, in an earlier message I myself brought up the fact that men can be
part of the patriarchy without knowing it. And maybe this is the source of
the disconnect...I don't think that someone receiving these benefits means
that they should automatically be treated as part of the machine that takes
them from women and distributes them to men. At least I don't see how that
could have any positive effect.

> and this is why a LOT of feminists believe that the word "feminist" only
applies to females. at most, men can be feminist allies. which, you know,
lupita said in her very first email on this subject. but you know, the
words of a girl about their own movement are SO HARD to read, which I am
sure is the reason that guy missed it. And since he brought up gay allies,
that is EXACTLY it isn't it? You don't call yourself LGBTQ if you are just
an ally right? You call yourself a gay ally, or gay-rights ally, or LGBTQ
ally. Why does he have such a strong reaction to labeling himself an ally
for another movement he can truly never be a part of? Why does he react
with such typical shaming and argument nullifying tactics to someone who is
pointing out that he does not belong in that space? The real questions here
are why does he feel compelled to speak over someone speaking about their
movement, and infer that they are both doing it wrong and that he has more
of a right to claim that space and speak on that topic?

I think your analysis of my LGBTQ analogy is flawed. Of course a straight
gay rights supporter wouldn't call themselves gay...if that was the logic I
was using, then I would be demanding that men be allowed to call themselves
female if they agree with feminism. Additionally, there are many gay people
who actively work against gay rights, and there are many women who actively
work against feminists. And there are many in both groups who simply aren't
worried about the status quo and do nothing. Being gay or female is
something that you are; supporting gay rights or feminism is something that
you believe and do.

That's why I don't think it's 100% impossible for a man to be a feminist.
It would probably take a huge amount of work and sacrifice to gain the
necessary level of understanding, but ultimately we're all software running
on mostly-identical meat robots. A man isn't going to wake up one morning,
yawn, and think it might be nice to be a feminist, then suddenly become
one. But absolutes applied to ideas make me uncomfortable; they've gotten
us humans into trouble more than once.

> -hep
>
> the below post is re-quoted because apparently he has issues with reading
comprehension:
>
>
>
> Lupita Berries garyberries at gmail.com via gruntle.org
> 5:49 PM (16 hours ago)
> to Romy, noisebridge-di.
>
> > I would really prefer if you don't use the term feminist to describe
men. Feminism is a movement for the liberation of women,
> > for women, and by women. Men cannot be feminists, and it shouldn't be
encourage that the oppressor class hijack the
> > movement of an oppressed class.
>
>
> > Men at most can be feminist allies, but not feminists.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 10:48 PM, Curtis Gagliardi <
gagliardi.curtis at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Do people actually think that everyone they disagree with is trolling
them?  Do you think macegr is pretending to have a different definition of
feminism than Lupita or pretending to be sensitive about being a member of
the oppressing class just to annoy you guys?
>>
>
> --
> hep
> hepic photography || www.hepic.net
>     dis at gruntle.org || 415 867 9472
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss

_______________________________________________
Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20130729/3a3bc5db/attachment-0003.html>