The Internet's 'Misogyny Problem' - real or imagined?

[BenitoChavez]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction, or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin that has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life

To me, walking down the street and getting beat up because I'm white is "impairing the recognition of human rights in the field of public life"

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I don't even have to click the links to see what's wrong with this picture.

This is why I don't bother to "prove" things to you willfully-blind people, it's not worth the one-liner dismissal of evidence that inevitably accompanies it.

Go to your library. Read a book. Do some research yourself. Until you can find excuses to dismiss or avoid that proof too.

Moderator Action: Please do not say those you are arguing against are wilfully blind. In an RD thread, please also ensure you're making your case, rather than simply making a statement and telling people to go 'read a book' when they're trying to engage with it.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Evie]

Would be easier to have this conversation if people didn't insist on confusing individual racism (which anyone can be a victim of, but which is highly localized and relatively easily remedied) and structural racism (which flows from the culturally predominant group in a given society toward the non-predominant ones always, is omnipresent, and cannot be solved short of deep societal changes)

The two problems cannot be compared, and should not be put in parallel...but they both remain racism, and victims of those problems remain victims of racism.

TL;DR: Cheezy is wrong about "You can't be a racism victim if white". Everyone else is wrong to assume that the racism they're victims of in any way, form or shape compare to the racism non-white, non-males face in western society.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

I think you misunderstood me; I'm not talking about total number of abusive post.

EXAMPLE: (snipped for brevity)

So are you saying that male politicians are inherently more likely to receive abusive tweets than female politicians? I could accept that as being true, but I don't see how it is necessarily true simply because there are greater numbers of them. If I look at a sample of coins that contains 90 £1 coins and 10 £2 coins then I wouldn't expect to see any statistically significant difference in how often heads or tails turns up in each group (although obviously with larger errors on the latter sample).

However, I suspect that the "closeness to marble factory" and "wealth of parents" factors in your example are supposed to map onto some factors in the politician example and be significant too. That's the problem with analogies

(and no I'm not trying to be difficult. I suspect you probably have a valid point, I'm just not seeing exactly what it is and would like to.)

 

[Manfred Belheim]

This is why I don't bother to "prove" things to you willfully-blind people, it's not worth the one-liner dismissal of evidence that inevitably accompanies it.

Go to your library. Read a book. Do some research yourself. Until you can find excuses to dismiss or avoid that proof too.

Well instead of getting sidelined into an entirely irrelevant semantic discussion, why don't you just state what term you would find acceptable for describing acts of discrimination between individuals (or small groups of individuals) that don't necessarily inherently stem from the larger socio-political makeup of the society in which they live. Then we can just use that term and we can all be happy. Because you surely can't be denying that such things occur and that they can be equally as damaging and traumatising to an individual or family as anything more institutional?

 

[cardgame]

Institutional racism is called 'institutional' for a reason.

because it's not what racism is.

it's a subset, a specific type.

 

[Evie]

If we assume male politicians receive as much abuse as female ones, they skew the average even worse (in our example, if the "far" rich kids have 30 marbles each, same as the "near'" ones), then we get to 880 marbles for the far kids, for an average of 4.07 marble per kid.

In which case we'd conclude that the "far" kids have MORE marbles than the 'near' one, despit the fact that the average middle class kid living near the store has 50% more marbles than the one living far from it.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

TL;DR: Cheezy is wrong about "You can't be a racism victim if white". Everyone else is wrong to assume that the racism they're victims of in any way, form or shape compare to the racism non-white, non-males face in western society.

I don't fully agree with the latter. If I get stabbed to death because of the colour of my skin, I don't think in that terrifying moment I would really care whether my ancestors were landowners or not, or see what relevance it had to what was happening to me right there and then. That individual act would compare entirely equally to any equal act (by definition surely).

 

[Farm Boy]

No, it doesn't count, because it's still not racism.

What part of this aren't you getting? It's not about individual attitudes or your white people feel-feels. You cannot be the victim of racism because your race dominates society. Even if the president is Black, even if he came from poor origins, even if the president is female, even if the cop beating down the Black man on the street is still himself Black, they are upholding and defending a White, Male-run society which reinforces the rule of their respective social classes.

You have privilege. Get that through your head. Let's say he had killed you. You know what would happen? An actual police investigation. News time on your death, on the capture of the criminal once he was apprehended. You know why? Because you're White. They don't report on the murders of poor black girls so often, and they are never as quick to start up a search for the murderer or robber of a Black person. It's often dismissed as "well they kill/rob each other anyway." People just don't care that much, certainly not the police. No one says that about White people, either, even though we certainly do that to each other too.

You mix in enough true statements with godawful tripe that I really don't know what to make of this. But thank you, I'll remember your respect why I share a life experience about my feel feels. You something something infractible I'm sure.

Moderator Action: Please be more civil in RD threads, despite what might be trolling by others.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Manfred Belheim]

If we assume male politicians receive as much abuse as female ones, they skew the average even worse (in our example, if the "far" rich kids have 30 marbles each, same as the "near'" ones), then we get to 880 marbles for the far kids, for an average of 4.07 marble per kid.

In which case we'd conclude that the "far" kids have MORE marbles than the 'near' one, despit the fact that the average middle class kid living near the store has 50% more marbles than the one living far from it.

Not wanting to be rude... but could you just drop the marble analogy entirely because I just feel it's confusing things (it's certainly confusing me). How or why are male politicians more likely to receive abuse than female politicians? And if they receive exactly as much abuse, then how are they skewing the results? Again, I just don't see what role "distance" and "parental wealth" are having in this analogy.

 

[NovaKart]

Men definitely experience sexism. Selective Service in the USA is probably the most blatant example. A patriarchy traditionally gives males more control but also gives women certain privileges that men don't have. It's pretty different from racism where at least traditionally one could have little or not benefit in being from the more oppressed race. Now in western countries people don't really live in a full fledged patriarchy but in a transition period.

I also think that these concepts which probably come from gender studies classes are not always so relevant to the real world.

 

[NovaKart]

Not wanting to be rude... but could you just drop the marble analogy entirely because I just feel it's confusing things (it's certainly confusing me). How or why are male politicians more likely to receive abuse than female politicians? And if they receive exactly as much abuse, then how are they skewing the results? Again, I just don't see what role "distance" and "parental wealth" are having in this analogy.

Yeah I really hate word problems so that just turned me off completely.

 

[Old Hippy]

I don't fully agree with the latter. If I get stabbed to death because of the colour of my skin, I don't think in that terrifying moment I would really care whether my ancestors were landowners or not, or see what relevance it had to what was happening to me right there and then. That individual act would compare entirely equally to any equal act (by definition surely).

to you sure, but that denies that the (other) has been brought up through a system that was influenced by previous generations attitudes.. so it is the (others) reaction to institutional and structual racism that preceeds the event

I not saying it's rational or right, but you would still be a victim of structual and instituionalised racism that in the western world was put in place by mostly white males and which is still going on merly by the rejection of it having happened in the first place or that it has lasting effects

 

[Manfred Belheim]

to you sure, but that denies that the (other) has been brought up through a system that was influenced by previous generations attitudes.. so it is the (others) reaction to institutional and structual racism that preceeds the event

I not saying it's rational or right, but you would still be a victim of structual and instituionalised racism that in the western world was put in place by mostly white males and which is still going on merly by the rejection of it having happened in the first place or that it has lasting effects

Well the only point I'm (currently) interested in is whether or not white men can be victims of racism. You can analyse the entire backstory of humanity to look for what context that racism may sit in if you like, but I don't think it's relevant to the question. And I don't think it would be massively relevant to any grieving family of a victim of any individual racist act either, regardless of what race they were. I just think it's silly, or wilfully ignorant, to just make a blanket decree that it can't even happen at all, or that that only form of racism is institutional racism (which the qualifier "institutional" goes a long way to disproving by its mere existence).

 

[Farm Boy]

It doesn't seem that silly, it's a stretch to assume ignorance, it's more like a calculated lie. Good intentions or not.

 

[NovaKart]

Racism of one minority group against another isn't institutionalized racism either.

 

[Old Hippy]

Well the only point I'm (currently) interested in is whether or not white men can be victims of racism. You can analyse the entire backstory of humanity to look for what context that racism may sit in if you like, but I don't think it's relevant to the question. And I don't think it would be massively relevant to any grieving family of a victim of any individual racist act either, regardless of what race they were. I just think it's silly, or wilfully ignorant, to just make a blanket decree that it can't even happen at all, or that that only form of racism is institutional racism (which the qualifier "institutional" goes a long way to disproving by its mere existence).

it is not a blanket decree that it can't happen, but in asking how it came about one can not say the past has nothing to do with it, thats willfully ignorant as you say.
what relevence would it have to a greving family knowing the difference between a racist or non racist act, would they feel better knowing their white son was killed by a white person instead of the (other). What difference would this be, hatred furthering institional racism, revenge, acceptance because bad stuff just sometimes happens between white people... would it be massively relevent to a grieving family

people just do not wake up one morning and decide they hate short people, nor do they wake up and want to stab white people without a reason

 

[NovaKart]

people just do not wake up one morning and decide they hate short people, nor do they wake up and want to stab white people without a reason

Maybe after listening to Randy Newman.

 

[Old Hippy]

Maybe after listening to Randy Newman.

I nornally want to stab myself after listening to Randy

 

[NovaKart]

You know short people right?