The Real World QUILTBAG Discussion

This forum is founded on discussions about T Campbell's work (alone and with artist partners).

Moderators: TCampbell, Gisele

Re: The Real World QUILTBAG Discussion

Postby oddtail » Tue Dec 11, 2012 7:22 am

FlyingFish wrote:I can't remember where I first heard this put forth (and I'll feel very silly if it turns out I heard it from one of you), but I've heard a good argument that every sexist thing that you can say about women also implies a sexist thing about men.

Women should stay at home and take care of the kids? Men should bust their butts at work to support them.

Women are weak and need protecting? Men aren't men if they aren't strong enough to protect.

Women are sexual temptresses who use their body to get what they want? Men are sexual horndogs who can't help falling for the temptation.

And so forth.

A bonus of this perspective is that it puts feminism in a form that men are more likely to sign onto, once it's about them as well (though it still needs a better name).


Your post pretty much sums up why I am a feminist, yes. Or at least one of the major reasons. There is never an inequality or injustice that is good for anyone. It may *seem* to, and it can certainly *benefit* a bunch of people in ways, but it's not good for them on a more fundamental level. Ever.

Making the world a better place for any group is, in my book, pretty much synonymous to making the world a better place for everyone - if done right.
User avatar
oddtail
 
Posts: 1080
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 9:21 am
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: The Real World QUILTBAG Discussion

Postby FlyingFish » Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:51 am

Valerie wrote:Men can't wear pink/do other girly things because women are inferior and it is bad to be like one in any way.

I think that particular perspective is inadvertently encouraged by those who act like women should never be "girly" because "it sets back the movement"; who quietly (or loudly) criticize the stay-at-home moms for not seeking something "better". Which makes feminine qualities and roles (traditional or otherwise) look weak and undesirable. If none of the women want to act like that, why in the world would men want to? Let's all be "men", just some of us without the Y chromosome!

The better perspective is that women (or men) should have the choice to take on a "masculine" role (needs a better term: "provider"?), which carries with it the choice not to. Thankfully, feminism as a whole now espouses this, though there are still the holdouts.
User avatar
FlyingFish
 
Posts: 387
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 3:14 am

Re: The Real World QUILTBAG Discussion

Postby Valerie » Tue Dec 11, 2012 4:56 pm

FlyingFish wrote:
Valerie wrote:Men can't wear pink/do other girly things because women are inferior and it is bad to be like one in any way.

I think that particular perspective is inadvertently encouraged by those who act like women should never be "girly" because "it sets back the movement"; who quietly (or loudly) criticize the stay-at-home moms for not seeking something "better". Which makes feminine qualities and roles (traditional or otherwise) look weak and undesirable. If none of the women want to act like that, why in the world would men want to? Let's all be "men", just some of us without the Y chromosome!

The better perspective is that women (or men) should have the choice to take on a "masculine" role (needs a better term: "provider"?), which carries with it the choice not to. Thankfully, feminism as a whole now espouses this, though there are still the holdouts.


Ugh, those people. *shakes head*

There's a "provider" role and a "nurturer" role that are the traditional roles of men and women, respectively. If you want to be one or the other or both (or even neither, though I wouldn't suggest it), then go for it. It is none of my business how you live your life, as long as no one else gets hurt by it.

Hell, it's all mixed up in me. I'm the provider, which is generally a "masculine" role, but, let's face it, I'm gorgeous and I don't hide it. *hair flip* (ahaheh. *ahem*) I'm "girly" in a lot of ways and "boyish" in a lot of ways, and that's just who I am. I'm still a woman. And my husband is still a man. And it's all just a bunch of stupid technicalities, anyway. If it's in my pants, you're not gonna see it anyway, so why should it determine who I am and who I'm allowed to be?

The idea that being feminine "sets the movement back" is just as sexist as insisting that women remain feminine. By telling us that being girly is bad, you are telling us that being similar to a female is inferior, and it's just not.
Lia S wrote:Valerie is right.

As usual.


TCampbell wrote:Val has a harem, but it's chiefly structured online at the moment.
User avatar
Valerie
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 11:18 pm

Re: The Real World QUILTBAG Discussion

Postby Captain LeBubbles » Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:03 pm

They are also forcing women into roles that make them unhappy, which is what they're supposedly fighting against.
A wild LeBubbles appeared!
Hexr wrote:Also, while you are all awesome people, I would like to applaud Captain Awesome LeBubbles. Sir, you're awesome, sir!

My LJ My DevART My Tumblr
User avatar
Captain LeBubbles
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 10:35 pm
Location: Georgia

Re: The Real World QUILTBAG Discussion

Postby Trefle » Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:41 pm

Valerie wrote::P So picky. <3

Disability would also count. I was just trying to get a sample going, really. People can probably figure out the able/disabled part on their own. (Or, well, I hope they can.)

I have heard people use personal history, but that's almost a separate issue. You can be a *deep breath* rich, able-bodied, straight, white, cisgender, thin, Christian man-- give me a minute *catches breath*-- and still have personal problems. But there is a very, very slim chance that those problems are related to any of those words I said before. If your long-lost twin brother shows up and murders your wife, that has nothing to do with your economic status, race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religious beliefs, weight, or ability. It's just Life throwing you a curve-ball, as she tends to do.

Yep, that's why I said it may be a good thing to make that distinction.

Also, soap opera plots! Dun dun dun~

I also agreed with FlyingFish. A lot of the rules patriarchy had set are also damaging for a significant amount of men.
And yes for Val's next post as well. I think the point of feminism (or equality) isn't and shouldn't be for women (or blacks, or gays, or anyone) to overthrow men and sit in their position...
Trefle
 
Posts: 961
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 2:16 am

Re: The Real World QUILTBAG Discussion

Postby Valerie » Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:47 pm

Trefle wrote:I also agreed with FlyingFish. A lot of the rules patriarchy had set are also damaging for a significant amount of men.
And yes for Val's next post as well. I think the point of feminism (or equality) isn't and shouldn't be for women (or blacks, or gays, or anyone) to overthrow men and sit in their position...


*nods* It's awfully hard to get along with people when you're busy pushing them down.
Lia S wrote:Valerie is right.

As usual.


TCampbell wrote:Val has a harem, but it's chiefly structured online at the moment.
User avatar
Valerie
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 11:18 pm

Re: The Real World QUILTBAG Discussion

Postby Valerie » Sat Dec 15, 2012 4:14 pm

This has been bugging me for a while, and I just now realized that I can probably ask you guys.

What's the proper way to address someone who is agender? There are non-gendered pronouns, though they aren't very common, if the person doesn't like "he" or "she." But what would be the agender equivalent to "Mr.," "Miss," "Mrs.," or "Ms.?" How about agender versions of "sir," "ma'am" or "miss?"
Lia S wrote:Valerie is right.

As usual.


TCampbell wrote:Val has a harem, but it's chiefly structured online at the moment.
User avatar
Valerie
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 11:18 pm

Re: The Real World QUILTBAG Discussion

Postby Captain LeBubbles » Sat Dec 15, 2012 4:40 pm

Valerie wrote:This has been bugging me for a while, and I just now realized that I can probably ask you guys.

What's the proper way to address someone who is agender? There are non-gendered pronouns, though they aren't very common, if the person doesn't like "he" or "she." But what would be the agender equivalent to "Mr.," "Miss," "Mrs.," or "Ms.?" How about agender versions of "sir," "ma'am" or "miss?"


As far as I know, I'm the only agender person on the board, and I've said before that I personally don't care what addresses people use to refer to me. That said, I've encountered Mx. elsewhere, which I suppose works as well as anything else. (As a side note, when referring to myself in third person, I use s/he as the pronoun, since none of the others appeal to me.)
A wild LeBubbles appeared!
Hexr wrote:Also, while you are all awesome people, I would like to applaud Captain Awesome LeBubbles. Sir, you're awesome, sir!

My LJ My DevART My Tumblr
User avatar
Captain LeBubbles
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 10:35 pm
Location: Georgia

Postby Bo Lindbergh » Sat Dec 15, 2012 5:15 pm

Mx. Yzptlk, the infamous trickster? :P
User avatar
Bo Lindbergh
 
Posts: 782
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 2:08 pm
Location: 59°20'N 18°03'E

Re: The Real World QUILTBAG Discussion

Postby Valerie » Tue Dec 25, 2012 10:42 am

Okay, I have another trans question. What would be the trans equivalent of "lady" or "gentleman?" "Person" is gender-neutral, but it doesn't carry the connotation that "lady" or "gentleman" carries. Like... "person" isn't formal.

So, for example, if I'm going to say, "Ladies often have to deal with sexual harassment," or "Gentlemen often have to deal with abuse," how would I say "(polite form of trans people) often have to deal with discrimination?"

A lot of trans people are ladies and gentlemen, so I guess this is more specifically for agender people. Like, I've probably called Bubbles a "lady" on more than one occasion, but I think she's probably okay with that because she's fine with feminine pronouns? But I could be wrong. And some agender people might not like "lady" or "gentleman," so...
Lia S wrote:Valerie is right.

As usual.


TCampbell wrote:Val has a harem, but it's chiefly structured online at the moment.
User avatar
Valerie
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 11:18 pm

Re: The Real World QUILTBAG Discussion

Postby Artemisia » Tue Dec 25, 2012 10:56 am

I haven't run into anything regarding a trans specific 'ladies' or 'gentleman'.
There was a girl who had a little curl right in the middle of her forehead, and when she was good, she was very, very good, and when she was bad she was homicidal.
I am a lizard woman from the dawn of time, and this is my wife.
User avatar
Artemisia
 
Posts: 1626
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 12:03 am

Re: The Real World QUILTBAG Discussion

Postby svenman » Tue Dec 25, 2012 12:33 pm

Well, how would you say "(polite form of cis people) often don't have to deal with discrimination?" I don't think there is a special polite form of referring to persons of unspecified gender anyway.
User avatar
svenman
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 5:57 pm
Location: Germany

Re: The Real World QUILTBAG Discussion

Postby FlyingFish » Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:19 am

Speaking from my admittedly cisgendered perspective:

I would think that a trans specific version of "ladies" and "gentlemen" is unnecessary. My understanding is that proper respect for the trans community can be summed up as "treat them as the gender they ask to be treated as." Therefore, Artemesia is a lady; a more complicated term is not required for her.

For groups containing both men and women, "ladies and gentlemen" would generally apply, so to cover the trans community as a whole, "trans/transgendered ladies and gentlemen"? And for cis people, "cisgendered ladies and gentlemen"? Or, I would think that "the trans community" and "the cis community" is also sufficiently polite.

As for a truly gender-neutral formal term, for the agendered, bigendered, and prefer-not-to-identify, I admit to being stumped.
User avatar
FlyingFish
 
Posts: 387
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 3:14 am

Re: The Real World QUILTBAG Discussion

Postby Valerie » Mon Dec 31, 2012 11:06 am

FlyingFish wrote:Speaking from my admittedly cisgendered perspective:

I would think that a trans specific version of "ladies" and "gentlemen" is unnecessary. My understanding is that proper respect for the trans community can be summed up as "treat them as the gender they ask to be treated as." Therefore, Artemesia is a lady; a more complicated term is not required for her.

For groups containing both men and women, "ladies and gentlemen" would generally apply, so to cover the trans community as a whole, "trans/transgendered ladies and gentlemen"? And for cis people, "cisgendered ladies and gentlemen"? Or, I would think that "the trans community" and "the cis community" is also sufficiently polite.

As for a truly gender-neutral formal term, for the agendered, bigendered, and prefer-not-to-identify, I admit to being stumped.


Oh, well of course Art is a lady, I was asking for agender/bigender/etc. Sorry if I wasn't clear enough about that before. o_o;; Now I feel rude.
Lia S wrote:Valerie is right.

As usual.


TCampbell wrote:Val has a harem, but it's chiefly structured online at the moment.
User avatar
Valerie
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 11:18 pm

Re: The Real World QUILTBAG Discussion

Postby mikbuster » Mon Dec 31, 2012 4:19 pm

I'm 99.999% sure Arty and others didn't take any offense :wink:
You don't need a reason to help people. ~Zidane Tribal
Geez. Why are adults so pigheaded? ~Palom
How do you prove that we exist? Maybe we don't exist... ~Vivi Orunitia
The only dependable thing about the future is uncertainty. ~Amarant Coral
User avatar
mikbuster
 
Posts: 600
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:09 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

cron