So says a commenter, over at Kos, who thinks he's explaining that I was unfair to the commenters over at Eschaton. Hello? They were attacking me. You're right that I'm not a member of the community, and I don't know their "private language," but since I could see you were talking about me, I thought I'd read some of what you were saying. I got about 100 comments into a series of 800+ comments and most of what I read looked like rank sexism. And no one stood up to say anything about it. All this in a post reacting to my complaint that Democrats don't seem to care about feminism. You folks looked awful. Your defense is, we're all insiders who share a private language?
You're talking on the web, in front of the whole world. You purport to be liberals, the people who usually tend to claim they are the ones who will protect the interests of women. But you present an ugly, degraded face to the world. Then you say, oh, this isn't my real face. This is a funny mask I wear and you just don't get it. Brilliant politics, folks.
Back in the late 80s and early 90s, feminists within liberal groups would give you hell if you talked about women like that. Saying you're joking, ironic, or speaking a private language would only earn you the next slam. That kind of feminism died in the Clinton Era.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
५३ टिप्पण्या:
The old feminism is dead; long live the new feminism!
(What is the new feminism again?)
Commenterlein: We've been through this in the comments on the other post. Sexist jokes are still a problem. Jokes can be a form of harassment and expression of hostility. Try making sexist, jokey remarks in the workplace and see how that works. You can be very ugly with humor. My post here already takes into account that they are saying it's all a joke.
commenterlein you are digging the hole deeper, typical of the KOS'esss, you get caught and you try to excuse yourself.
Ann, the answer to ugly free speech is more free speech.
Anyway, when you titled your post "We have a tight community with a private language", I naturally assumed you were referring to why, so often, law prof bloggers, yourself included, decline to answer questions posed by their layman readers in their comments section and usually speak only to the other lawyers amongst them. Well, a better person than myself suggested hallmark of posers... 3) Said expert is so far above us mortals that our requests for enlightment appear as just so much noise that she can't be bothered to acknowledge.
Some may find this to be of help?
http://anechoicroom.blogspot.com/2005/11/how-to-talk-to-liberal-if-you-must.html
Commenterlein: Read my post again. I'm talking about how it looks to an outsider. I read about 100 posts and felt an immense amount of disgust. I had just asked people to care about the sexist comments at LGF and the response from the left was to make sexist jokes. No one stood up against the hostile environment at LGF. Instead they chose to attack me, using sexist material now excused as jokes and "private language," instead of standing up for women's interests. This underscored my original point -- if you want to talk about irony! -- that Democrats don't seem to care about feminism anymore. They only care -- I suspect -- when it's a means to a partisan end. It is not an end in itself, or someone would have spoken out, the way we used to do fifteen years ago. The title of my old post is something I want to say again: Democrats have a long, long way to go to convince me that they care about feminism.
And when you write You're talking on the web, in front of the whole world. You purport to be liberals, the people who usually tend to claim they are the ones who will protect the interests of women. But you present an ugly, degraded face to the world. Then you say, oh, this isn't my real face. This is a funny mask I wear and you just don't get it. Brilliant politics, folks.
I think:
You're talking on the web, in front of the whole world. You purport to be lawyers and professors, the people who usually tend to claim they are the ones who will protect the interests of others. But you present an ugly, elitist face to the world. Then you say, oh, this isn't my real face. This is a serious mask I wear and you just don't get it. Brilliant communication skills, folks. Nice way to give back to the community.
commenterlein said:
Here is a simple example - say a tall and extremely fit black person with a PhD in math who plays center in the NBA cracks a joke about all black people being short, fat, uneducated and dumb. I think it is fair to say that nobody would go on to call the joker racist - it simply wouldn't make any sense.
That's not an accurate analogy to what went on over at Eschaton.
It's more like: a black person cracks a joke about uneducated n-----s eating watermellon, "axing" questions, and having illegimate kids. And that "joke" would be in response to an educated black man making a post with which people disagree. Yeah, it should get a deserved smackdown.
I hate political correctness, but I hate even more the double-standard that "oh, if I consider myself a feminist I can make the most over-the-top mean-spirited pseud-sexist remarks and get away with it." You wouldn't let a conservative get away with it . . . but you give a pass because you *believe* it's a joke. Who's to say it is?
I can't read someone else's heart, I can only read their words. And these commenters *seem* like angry, vicious pricks who, when confronted, fall back on "oh, it's irony and it's a special language we alone share." Yeah, whatever.
If you demean someone with racist "humor" it is still demeaning. Same with anti-semitic or misogynistic "humor"--if you deploy it to demean someone--you actually end up reaffirming the power of the stereotype to do damage.
Thanks, C. Well put!
You're just noticing the Kos Kids look awful? As the judge would say, "asked and answered, counsellor... move on."
(Mostly because I can't figger out how you'd phrase an objection based on "assumes a fact blatantly in evidence...")
Anyway, when you titled your post "We have a tight community with a private language", I naturally assumed you were referring to why, so often, law prof bloggers, yourself included, decline to answer questions posed by their layman readers in their comments section and usually speak only to the other lawyers amongst them.
Huh? See, this must be ironic, because I'm an English teacher and I've gotten tons of questions answered and comments responded to by Ann/other lawyer bloggers. Certainly no blogger has an obligation to answer EVERY query, right?
Seriously, until you withdraw your support of the Alito nomination, you have no business talking about feminism.
Ah, conformism. So, who gets to hand out the membership cards and decide what the criteria for membership is? I nice to see the spirit of diversity and debate in action.
Quxxo: re "more speech" -- well, obviously, I putting out this "more speech."
re lawprofs answering questions: I answer an awful lot of them! Can't possibly get to them all or write new text for every legal question. Do some web research!
Also speaking for tight communities with a private language, what do you believe Sam Alito was trying to convey in 1985 when he was applying to become deputy assistant attorney general in the Reagan Administration, by touting his membership in an organization called Concerned Alumni of Princeton, an organization with an innocuous name whose purpose was to keep women and minorities out of Princeton?
How is this ranked on the list of Alito problems?
"Try making sexist, jokey remarks in the workplace and see how that works."
You lose your job and get sued. However I do not see that as a problem for the commentators at Eschaton. Obviously, they are scared to death of women and would never say a word to females.
And these men are the type that women shun in the workplace. So their contact is limited to women who take pity on stray cats or males of the left.
You really are being utterly obnoxious, Prof Althouse. And wilfully dense.
First of all, of the comments you took such exception to that you posted them on your blog, only ONE of them references you at all. And THAT one is from an obvious right-wing troll! NOT a member of the Eschaton community.
NOBODY WAS ATTACKING YOU. YOU REFERRED TO TWICE. AND THAT'S IT. Attaturk called you an idiot, but that isn't sexist language. And that's it. The rest of the posts were about feminism in general, and you insist on foolishly misreading them. More bizarrely, you insist on equating NOT BEING SPOKEN ABOUT with comments at LGF linking directly to your picture and calling you a bitch. Are you mad?
Indeed, in your original post on this, you MANIPULATED one of the comments -- "she looks like a man" -- to make it seem like it refers to you, when it does not, and you pasted the line from a post ny Monica_NYC, who was calling the language into question on sexist grounds! Thus refuting your contention that nobody questioned the language.
And the rest of the posts were simply not sexist. They were not directed at any individual and they were banter between friends. You want to run your blog comments section like everyone who posts there has to imagine that they're being scrutinized for "correct" political attitudes, fine, run yours like that. Otherwise, you come to our house, you respect our community. And don't pretend that it's all about you because it goddamned well WAS NOT.
You got angry when you thought Atrios was saying you weren't a feminist because that was taking you out of context. And yet you utterly refuse to even try to see the Eschaton commenters in context. That's pretty ripe hypocrisy.
I will keep on bloody well saying this: you owe Watertiger, Shaw Kenawe, Kent, NTodd, and GWPDA a public apology and retraction for publicly and baselessly calling them sexists.
Though I've seen enough of your and your commenters' utter and disgusting dishonesty and self-absorbtion to expect one.
Ann,
I see you're still fighting the good fight, even as you baste your gobbler.
Well, alas, my blogging today is minimal, as I'm sure even the Kos Kids' will be too.
So on that note, allow a brief, but very loving wish to all Althouse denizens (even the trolls) for a Happy Thanksgiving!
Cheers,
Victoria
However I do not see that as a problem for the commentators at Eschaton. Obviously, they are scared to death of women and would never say a word to females.
Of the nine commenters Althouse slandered, five ARE women. The commenter who made the reference to uppity blacks is black. Grow up.
Thersites: I just quoted their comments. If they are offended at how they words looked outside of the Eschaton environment, maybe they should rethink how they speak in public. There were plenty more comments that I could have selected. It went on and on and on. It was an ugly, hostile environment. Let them apologize to me. I am telling you my opinion of the way things looked over there when you folks were talking about me. You are completely uninterested in self-examination here. I'm not going to continue to answer your repetitious comments. You know what I think.
So... is this about "the left" not caring about feminism, or is it about the left not appearing sufficiently pro-feminist to an uninformed and incurious outside viewer?
It's probably also worth mentioning that comments about feminism are going to be a little more snarky than usual when they're provoked by a right-wing pseudo-moderate looking to feminists for succor when they get hit by friendly fire from LGF...
brylin said...
I've been a lawyer for many years and I don't seem to recall a humor or irony defense to a hostile environment sexual harassment case.
Brylin, you maybe correct about that.
I do urge you to sue Duncan Black, blogger, haloscan, ntodd, watertiger, et. al., for having sexist jokes in the comments section and thus creating a hostile environment for other commenters.
I am telling you my opinion of the way things looked over there when you folks were talking about me.
Nobody WAS talking about you. So stop with that crap right now.
You think a comment like "Feminism is OK in its place" is about YOU? What, you're "feminism"? Please.
The comments that were ironic were IRONIC ABOUT "FEMINISM" in general and NOT AIMED TOWARDS YOU or any other individual. That is pretty goddamned obvious.
So the self-righteous commenters here who arer assuming otherwise need to stuff it.
There is not a single example of a personal insult towards you disguised as irony in any of the cited examples or anywhere else on that thread. YOU WERE NOT ATTACKED IN SEXIST TERMS ON THE THREAD and you CANNOT PROVE YOU WERE.
When it's a post about Roger Simon, you get all snippy that we don't stay "on assignment." But a post about you, suddenly, you forget your snark about how we don't stay on topic and it becomes All Ann Althouse Hate? Get over yourself. You aren't any more inherently fascinating than he is.
And when are you going to stop embarrassing yourself and admit you cited an obvious right-wing troll?
Eschaton's commenters' sexist jokes were distasteful and certainly un-PC...
Heehee! I am totally anti-PC. Really, I've always hated that shit, and I do as much as I possibly can to upset the proverbial apple cart. It's all part of my charm and the immense value I bring the blogosphere.
You're both in error. When two people talk about a contentious subject, how can it be otherwise? One may be more egregious than another, but proving that to the other is simply impossible.
Sounds like Gandhi's satyagraha: nobody has a monopoly on The Truth.
Silly (and perhaps overly liberal) as it may sound, how can anyone not walk the middle road here, advocating that both "forgive, forget," and move on?
Oh, I'd be totally for that, 'cept I'm a major whore and could use the traffic and ad revenue.
One other quick comment: Looking back over the supposedly offensive comments, all but three of them are anything but clearly ironic to anyone with even a vestigial sense of humor.
And the really offensive troll comment is very obviously a troll.
I don't know if Ann is being stupid or dishonest here, but whichever one it is, she's being it a whole lot.
Eschaton's commenters' sexist jokes were distasteful
Which ones?
Mike: I stripped out all the names, so I wasn't drawing attention to individuals. The only name in there occurs where someone is answering someone who is named, but her comment is not presented as sexist. I'm characterizing the overall environment and using sample quotes, not focusing on individuals.
And as for being un-PC: what fun to be a liberal feminst. Attacked for being PC, make an un-PC self-aware crack about feminism, and BAM! Attacked.
Phooey on that noise.
I stripped out all the names, so I wasn't drawing attention to individuals.
And obscuring the context. Haloscan has permalinks for comments. You at least could have put that in.
And you just admitted that you distorted Monica_NYC's comment on purpose. Not because it wasn't sexist, but because it was questioning Dartanyon's comment, and you wanted very badly to say that nobody did such a thing.
The "overall tone of the thread" is your subjective opinion. Which you already had before you read the damn thing, clearly.
Your examples do not support your characterization.
all but three of them are anything but clearly ironic to anyone with even a vestigial sense of humor.
Sorry, appalling grammar there. What I was trying to say was that the irony was extremely clear to anyone with a functioning brain and a vestigial sense of humor.
Oh sorry, that was Shaw Kenawe's comment. Which now you say is not "presented as" sexist. How on earth anyone reading your post could have been expected to know that is an utter mystery, though, given that you're presenting that comment lumped in with all the others you tag as deeply sexist.
How is presenting a sample quote that not's sexist evidence of overall sexism?
How would you feel if you were Shaw and you see a comment you knew was not sexist lumped in with a bunch of other quotes labelled as sexist?
How can you cntinue to claim now that the context of the quotes does not matter?
I was amused by Thersites and the comment that only a few made reference to you by name.
Althouse was the one who said the comments were about her.
The other comments about feminism would only be offensive to feminists totally devoid of a sense of irony, humor, or common sense, or who have some axe to grind.
the comments were offensive to any feminist who was not clued in to the in-group
No, they were offensive to anyone who doesn't understand irony.
As for "being clued in", how clued in does one have to not to know that the image of the left as uniformly sexist and racist is utter tripe; and therefore that Occam's razor applies: Hmm, that's odd, a blog frequented by feminists is filled with sexist comments. What's the simplest explanation?
A hint: The simplest explanation is not that the left in general has suddenly become wildly pro-patriarchy.
Or, alternatively, what Thersites said.
Ann I canot believe you are spending you Thanksgiving being insulted this way. I had the same thing yesterday, and all I got for my trouble for trying to have civil discourse was that I was called a troll and my comments were deleted replacing them with this written by the author of the blog:
"Run get daddy’s exorcism tongs.
I’ve got her twit-filtered; you should see the stuff I bounced. Deranged."
So basically my lucid polite comments in defense of a barrage of abuse were deleted and the author lied, leaving just one comment as bait. Everyone just descended like vultures and started a barrage of profanities in a self gratifying echo chamber insulting me, whilst the author kept my IP address unable to enter and defend myself.
It really upset me so much, and I swear although a liberal conservative, I woke up this morning distinctly channeling to the right of Genghis Khan.
Popping over here I hear the same rhetoric and wonder why you should upset yourself and have people insult you on your own blog, especially on a day like today.
Breathe deeply, give yourself a pat on the back, and come and visit me, I've written a nice post where you feature, that will cheer you up. Loyalty To The Truth on Thanksgiving
Leave them in their echo chamber to shout profanities at each other....
Happy Thanksgiving!
Ah yes, poor, poor Annie. Makes a ridiculous-on-its-face attack against liberals as anti-feminist(!), takes childish potshots at Atrios's supposedly inflated traffic numbers, and somehow *she's* the victim when she gets ridiculed for being ridiculous.
Righto, back to the echo chamber for some tasty profanity stuffing.
We've seen the "irony defense" from the left many times before, in the vicious attacks against Michelle Malkin, Michael Steele, and Jeff Gannon, just to name a representative few.
In each case, the purpose of the sexist, racist, and homophobic "ironic" attacks is to focus attention on the target's sex, race, or sexual orientation and to coerce them into certain behaviours. But this is also the purpose of what I'll call "authentic" attacks on those same groups.
This raises the question: when these tactics are used, does it really matter if the attacker is being "ironic" or not? The purpose is equally vile. Using racism, etc. to make a point or to achieve an end is equally wrong whether or not one actually buys into the racism.
Also, the level of glee that is easily detectable in some of these marathon baiting sessions argues against a purely ironic use of them. Can the ironic leftists engaging in these attacks say that they don't, at some level, buy into these stereotypes? I get the distinct impression, having seen these things several times now, that there's a certain amount of emotional release involved. It's as if they've had to hold back all of these vicious thoughts in their day-to-day commenting, and can finally let it all out when a conservative target belonging to a certain racial or sexual group becomes available. Then it's truths said in jest.
Thanks, Alexandra. But do I have to make a big thing out of Thanksgiving? I prefer normal days. Still, I am incredibly tired of this particular fight! I'll go cook my squirrel.
Best. Thanksgiving. Ever.
I am incredibly tired of this particular fight!
Which is, of course, why you keep bringing it up over and over. Odd, that. Somehow reminds me of this old Onion article...
Best. Thanksgiving. Ever.
Man. You have to be some kind of poor excuse for a human being, to call this sorry excuse for netkiddie dust-up, the "best thanksgiving ever".
Find yourself a nice turkey, and gobble. You'll feel better about yourself. Promise.
Hold the acid tongue, and the dyspeptic misanthropy for just one day -- which Miss Ann, if you didn't know, that's the reason most people celebrate Thanksgiving. To remember the peace and thanksfulness which overcomes individuals, for just one day of the year.
Squirrels are just as tasty any day of the week.
Although it's hard going to stuff those little cavities.
Cheers,
Victoria
In each case, the purpose of the sexist, racist, and homophobic "ironic" attacks is to focus attention on the target's sex, race, or sexual orientation and to coerce them into certain behaviours.
But nobody at Eschaton attacked Althouse in those terms.
Althouse seems to be claiming that when feminists make ironic jokes about how sexism and when black people make ironic jokes about racism, that's sexism and racism.
That's absurd.
wildaboutharrie, thanks.
I can see your point about (3), though Atrios was mostly just piggybacking off Echidne's post.
You are starting to make even Roger Simon look good.
You are wrong, way wrong, on two counts.
First you equated the hateful comments from the Little German Fascist thread to the lighthearted ribbing you got from the Atrios crowd. Even granted that the irony flew way over your head, if we take those comments at face value, no reasonable person would equate them. The question remains, what psychological process would lead someone to actually believe these two types of behavior are the same? Or is this your way perhaps to try to win back some wingnut street cred?
Secondly, after being informed of the ironic nature (it is totally understandable that this wasn't apparent to you at first glance), after being informed that many of these comments come from hardcore feminists or blacks who were engaging in a bit or ironic banter (since commenting in a normal voice gets slightly tedious after a while) you continue to hold to your opinion that these comments were racist and sexist.
Roger tried the same thing, issuing disingenuous corrections and trying to backpedal until he realized the game was up and he kind of admitted he was wrong.
Be strong Ann.
Man. You have to be some kind of poor excuse for a human being, to call this sorry excuse for netkiddie dust-up, the "best thanksgiving ever".
Man, you have to be some kind of poor excuse for a sentient being, to post that fucking braindead, yet holier-than-thou, comment.
Secondly, after being informed of the ironic nature (it is totally understandable that this wasn't apparent to you at first glance)
Um. No, it's not. Very spot-on otherwise, though.
Wonder how Anne's ad revenue is doing this week...
I don't see why she equates those commenters with Democrats.
Damn straight. I'm no fucking Democrat!
brylin - nah, I'm an Indy and hate political parties. That said, I do vote Democrat, Republican, Pinko Commie Bastard, Progressive, Libertarian, Green and Natural Law (if I'm stoned).
Not sure I'm gonna vote for Bernie in his Senate run next year. Fucker stole my seat in DCA earlier this year.
Oh, hey, since I'm a skanky ho, I'd like to note that I just posted my Freddie Mercury Memorial Podcast, if anybody gives a rat's ass. But don't listen if you believe in copyright law. Anne, I'm looking at you.
PPS and then I get blog-slapped!
MYSIGIN, er...MISYGON, ah...SEXIST! That's clearly a play on the term 'bitch slapped', which is VILE and DEROGATORY, and OFFENSIVE. I hope that Ann condemns her insenstive, insulting commenters ASAP.
I'm sure that you are much more sophisticated than someone from Wisconsin.
As far as I know, GWPDA hails from Arizona, and I think before that, Canada. I really don't think she was being condescending about Anne hailing from Wisconsin. I think she was being condescending about Althouse's "charming combination of paternalism and pretension."'
I guess that sophistication entitles you to make sexist comments.
Do you see a sexist comment made by GWPDA? no? That's because she hasn't made one.
Or if she was thinking there would be a post or two about how sick the LGF guys were and found none
I don't know about anywhere else, but LGF's response to Althouse was completely unsurprising to the Atrios community. Anything that the loons there or at Nicedoggie.net do is barely worth comment. The only thing that is surprising about LGF and Nicedoggie.net are that anyone puts them on their blogroll (or that someone trying to start a business would openly associate themselves with Charles Johnson) because both blogs stop this short of stormfront.
I'm sure we didn't say anything about Pop a Pali for Pizza because these sorts of things are expected.
Or Saint Pancake
And how could we keep up with the times these people want to Nuke Mecca or Kill them all.
So you know, the sociopaths that comment at LGF say mean things in explicitly misogynistic tones it's really not even worth comment.
wildabout harrie: I did indeed try, but no dice. I don't think it would have mattered, anyway, except maybe to throw gas on flames.
Just got back from a Thanksgiving dinner at church, which I was asked to organize and implement to try and bring together people who didn't have family etc. to go to.
We were a quite the collection (mostly didn't know each other well) of people with widely varying backgrounds, educations, politics (!), theologies (!), ages, interests, diets (several vegetarians--for philosophical reasons) and so forth. A number were natives of other countries.
And you know what? Everyone worked together just fine. Nary an unkind word. No arguments.
It sure restored my faith in the ability of humans who disagree profoundly on some of the Large Issues In Life to engage in civil discourse, and to listen and speak with respect.
Happy Thanksgiving, everyone! May you find an uplifting space today!
(And no, I'm not being sarcastic or ironic or whatever here.)
Allicent: You're right. I need to control the level of ugliness around here. I'm going to be more active about it. The quality of the comments really has been seriously affected, and I need to restore some of the old atmosphere.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा