Comments for Confluence http://confluence.za.net/blog Powered by space monkeys! Tue, 03 Aug 2010 17:13:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 Comment on Oh, look. A terrible news article about a subculture. by Nantalith http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=204&cpage=1#comment-494 Nantalith Tue, 03 Aug 2010 17:13:17 +0000 http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=204#comment-494 I read that article and despaired for the harm it did. I read that article and despaired for the harm it did.

]]> Comment on A thought experiment by confluence http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196&cpage=1#comment-467 confluence Tue, 20 Oct 2009 10:43:02 +0000 http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196#comment-467 Most of us say and think stupid things sometimes. I am not immune to unconscious sexism just because I am a woman, and I'm certainly not immune to unconscious racism or other -isms. And if I say something that sounds kinda *-ist, I would like to know about it. I may not agree that the criticism is reasonable, but I'd rather know that at least one person interpreted it that way than not know, so that I can make an informed decision about my future behaviour. The trouble is that many people seem to believe that sexism, racism and other -isms were easily recognisable, overt behaviours which are All Over Now and In The Past, and that we are all living in a wonderful egalitarian utopia where no trace of unfair discrimination remains. They believe that they are not capable of behaving in a *-ist way, ever, and that anyone who interprets their behaviour in that way must be deluded / oversensitive / being reverse-*-ist / being PC in order to impress someone / deliberately playing the [something] card in order to gain an unfair advantage. I would love to live in that utopia, but I fear that we have a long way to go. And we can only get there if we are able to talk about what we're doing wrong. Most of us say and think stupid things sometimes. I am not immune to unconscious sexism just because I am a woman, and I’m certainly not immune to unconscious racism or other -isms. And if I say something that sounds kinda *-ist, I would like to know about it. I may not agree that the criticism is reasonable, but I’d rather know that at least one person interpreted it that way than not know, so that I can make an informed decision about my future behaviour.

The trouble is that many people seem to believe that sexism, racism and other -isms were easily recognisable, overt behaviours which are All Over Now and In The Past, and that we are all living in a wonderful egalitarian utopia where no trace of unfair discrimination remains. They believe that they are not capable of behaving in a *-ist way, ever, and that anyone who interprets their behaviour in that way must be deluded / oversensitive / being reverse-*-ist / being PC in order to impress someone / deliberately playing the [something] card in order to gain an unfair advantage.

I would love to live in that utopia, but I fear that we have a long way to go. And we can only get there if we are able to talk about what we’re doing wrong.

]]> Comment on A thought experiment by Dan http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196&cpage=1#comment-466 Dan Tue, 20 Oct 2009 10:23:32 +0000 http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196#comment-466 Ah, I know this soup and it does taste bitter indeed. ;) And you’re absolutely right to use this analogy. Either the soup is vegetarian or it is not. I’ll be honest and say that I seldom advocate black and white arguments (for want of better term) but there is no shade of grey here. Either you’re offended or you are not. And not speaking against it only gives it silent sanction. Long ago I had to learn the hard lesson that if I wanted to advocate being a “good man” I had to accept it when I was told that I wasn’t. It’s hard not to take it as a personal attack. Us blokes are ingrained with the idea that, in this confused society of ours, acceptance amongst our peers is just one inappropriate comment away. Bigoted behavior is almost cultivated in us from an early age. Why? God knows. Fear perhaps. It’s not as bad as it used to be, granted, but now-a-days there’s this notion that being offensive is alright as long as you don’t offend anyone. Well, to me that’s as bizarre as masturbating with a condom on but the idea here being is that you can be inappropriate as long as you can undermine the response. “It’s just a joke.” “You’re being over sensitive.” “I don’t mind you saying that about me.” And my pet hate: “It’s the New South Africa/New Millennium/New Age of the Space Monkey, you can say that now. They’ll understand.” Now, I don’t claim to be perfect. (I say this through clenched teeth because experience has taught me that this line always prefaces idiocy) I even went to such a far extreme in trying to right myself that I had to be told that I had become condescending. Shock/horror! And I still catch myself saying the most stupid shit. However, I do feel that I am somewhat more enlightened than most. The point I’m trying to make, in my strange meandering way, is that I never would have come to the understanding I have now if I didn’t have a good woman telling me exactly when I was being an absolute ass. And more importantly, why. So, more power to your elbow. If that soup isn’t entirely vegetarian, you don’t need to swallow any of it. Ah, I know this soup and it does taste bitter indeed. ;)
And you’re absolutely right to use this analogy. Either the soup is vegetarian or it is not. I’ll be honest and say that I seldom advocate black and white arguments (for want of better term) but there is no shade of grey here. Either you’re offended or you are not. And not speaking against it only gives it silent sanction.
Long ago I had to learn the hard lesson that if I wanted to advocate being a “good man” I had to accept it when I was told that I wasn’t. It’s hard not to take it as a personal attack. Us blokes are ingrained with the idea that, in this confused society of ours, acceptance amongst our peers is just one inappropriate comment away. Bigoted behavior is almost cultivated in us from an early age. Why? God knows. Fear perhaps.
It’s not as bad as it used to be, granted, but now-a-days there’s this notion that being offensive is alright as long as you don’t offend anyone. Well, to me that’s as bizarre as masturbating with a condom on but the idea here being is that you can be inappropriate as long as you can undermine the response.
“It’s just a joke.”
“You’re being over sensitive.”
“I don’t mind you saying that about me.”
And my pet hate:
“It’s the New South Africa/New Millennium/New Age of the Space Monkey, you can say that now. They’ll understand.”
Now, I don’t claim to be perfect. (I say this through clenched teeth because experience has taught me that this line always prefaces idiocy) I even went to such a far extreme in trying to right myself that I had to be told that I had become condescending. Shock/horror! And I still catch myself saying the most stupid shit. However, I do feel that I am somewhat more enlightened than most.
The point I’m trying to make, in my strange meandering way, is that I never would have come to the understanding I have now if I didn’t have a good woman telling me exactly when I was being an absolute ass. And more importantly, why.
So, more power to your elbow. If that soup isn’t entirely vegetarian, you don’t need to swallow any of it.

]]> Comment on A thought experiment by psi http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196&cpage=1#comment-465 psi Tue, 20 Oct 2009 09:53:15 +0000 http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196#comment-465 C) Tell them nobody is forcing them to eat the food that you made effort with to prepare, and that they are more than welcome to have some of the salad. C) Tell them nobody is forcing them to eat the food that you made effort with to prepare, and that they are more than welcome to have some of the salad.

]]> Comment on A thought experiment by confluence http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196&cpage=1#comment-464 confluence Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:59:01 +0000 http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196#comment-464 Yes, well spotted, Dan; I am in fact showing blatant bias towards one of the options, and the question is intended to be rhetorical. ;) Why the analogy? I find that comparing sexism to racism is not useful, because people who react poorly to being criticised for saying something kinda sexist tend to react equally poorly to being criticised saying something kinda racist, for the same reasons. They define both racism and sexism to be only deliberate, conscious acts of prejudice, and thus parse the criticism as an extremely harsh personal attack. I compared sexism to insensitivity towards vegetarians, because I hope most people realise that when a vegetarian is offered an almost-but-not-quite vegetarian meal this is usually because of ignorance or carelessness, not because of deliberate anti-vegetarian malice. And when a vegetarian says "gelatin is made of ground-up hooves, so I can't eat it", they are not saying "you must hate vegetarians and you are a terrible person"; they are saying "this might not seem like a big deal to you, but it is to me -- for moral reasons, I can't eat gelatin any more than I can eat beef." (Which is not to say vegetarians don't get pissed off about getting offered not-quite-vegetarian food all the time from people who profess to know what vegetarianism is. And if more people reacted with option B to actual vegetarianism-related situations, I'm certain that there would be a lot more unpleasantness and bad feeling surrounding the issue. And maybe in other parts of the world accommodating vegetarians is already a nasty hot-button issue -- but it's relatively civilised down here in Cape Town.) It is by no means a perfect analogy -- in real life you seldom have to serve the same soup to a hundred people, for a start. <em>Edited to add: Sorry; just to clarify further, this was specifically in response to an ongoing discussion about sexism in the free / open source software community (or at least parts of it; the discussion is frustratingly vague most of the time). In this context, I am comparing the overall experience of participating in a particular mailing list to "soup", and the occasional thread in which some dude makes an off-hand sexist remark to the addition of chicken stock / fish sauce / bacon sprinkles. Unfortunately these threads frequently devolve into lengthy flamewars about sexism and who is being more mean (the person making the original joke or the person who criticised them).</em> Yes, well spotted, Dan; I am in fact showing blatant bias towards one of the options, and the question is intended to be rhetorical. ;)

Why the analogy? I find that comparing sexism to racism is not useful, because people who react poorly to being criticised for saying something kinda sexist tend to react equally poorly to being criticised saying something kinda racist, for the same reasons. They define both racism and sexism to be only deliberate, conscious acts of prejudice, and thus parse the criticism as an extremely harsh personal attack.

I compared sexism to insensitivity towards vegetarians, because I hope most people realise that when a vegetarian is offered an almost-but-not-quite vegetarian meal this is usually because of ignorance or carelessness, not because of deliberate anti-vegetarian malice. And when a vegetarian says “gelatin is made of ground-up hooves, so I can’t eat it”, they are not saying “you must hate vegetarians and you are a terrible person”; they are saying “this might not seem like a big deal to you, but it is to me — for moral reasons, I can’t eat gelatin any more than I can eat beef.”

(Which is not to say vegetarians don’t get pissed off about getting offered not-quite-vegetarian food all the time from people who profess to know what vegetarianism is. And if more people reacted with option B to actual vegetarianism-related situations, I’m certain that there would be a lot more unpleasantness and bad feeling surrounding the issue. And maybe in other parts of the world accommodating vegetarians is already a nasty hot-button issue — but it’s relatively civilised down here in Cape Town.)

It is by no means a perfect analogy — in real life you seldom have to serve the same soup to a hundred people, for a start.

Edited to add: Sorry; just to clarify further, this was specifically in response to an ongoing discussion about sexism in the free / open source software community (or at least parts of it; the discussion is frustratingly vague most of the time). In this context, I am comparing the overall experience of participating in a particular mailing list to “soup”, and the occasional thread in which some dude makes an off-hand sexist remark to the addition of chicken stock / fish sauce / bacon sprinkles. Unfortunately these threads frequently devolve into lengthy flamewars about sexism and who is being more mean (the person making the original joke or the person who criticised them).

]]> Comment on A thought experiment by Dan http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196&cpage=1#comment-463 Dan Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:32:57 +0000 http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196#comment-463 Clearly this is simply a diatribe lamenting the need to conform to social mores over the desire to indulge in emotional reactions. No? Perhaps then outlining mature behavior over a childish response based entirely in embarrassment and a fear of being ostracized solely because one lacked the foresight to consider those that are different. Closer? Sadly, the analogy is flawed, as previously stated, due to the business given to both options. The one is clearly being favoured as irrational. But then I suspect objectivity was never your intention to begin with and this is nothing more than a shameless grasp for solidarity towards your own way of thinking. But hey, who says there’s anything wrong with that? I like you. And since our opinions are not what are being solicited here, rather our validation, I choose the option you would. Clearly this is simply a diatribe lamenting the need to conform to social mores over the desire to indulge in emotional reactions.
No?
Perhaps then outlining mature behavior over a childish response based entirely in embarrassment and a fear of being ostracized solely because one lacked the foresight to consider those that are different.
Closer?
Sadly, the analogy is flawed, as previously stated, due to the business given to both options. The one is clearly being favoured as irrational. But then I suspect objectivity was never your intention to begin with and this is nothing more than a shameless grasp for solidarity towards your own way of thinking.
But hey, who says there’s anything wrong with that? I like you. And since our opinions are not what are being solicited here, rather our validation, I choose the option you would.

]]> Comment on Better late than never by Nantalith http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=185&cpage=1#comment-462 Nantalith Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:12:19 +0000 http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=185#comment-462 Ah - the kimono book sounds awesome! Ah – the kimono book sounds awesome!

]]> Comment on A thought experiment by firstfallen http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196&cpage=1#comment-455 firstfallen Fri, 16 Oct 2009 08:15:32 +0000 http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196#comment-455 Oooh, an analogy for what? You want to have some party games that involve Great Old One-summoning but worry about the tiny fraction of your guests who might be offended? Oooh, an analogy for what? You want to have some party games that involve Great Old One-summoning but worry about the tiny fraction of your guests who might be offended?

]]> Comment on A thought experiment by confluence http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196&cpage=1#comment-453 confluence Thu, 15 Oct 2009 08:08:00 +0000 http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196#comment-453 This isn't actually about vegetarianism. It's an analogy, which like all analogies (as Hodgestar has been quick to point out) is flawed and should be treated with suspicion. ;) But Ina Paarman's stock is very nice; I stopped buying actual meat stock cubes ages ago because they're gross. My unvegetarian vice is fish sauce. Mmm, bottled meat. This isn’t actually about vegetarianism. It’s an analogy, which like all analogies (as Hodgestar has been quick to point out) is flawed and should be treated with suspicion. ;)

But Ina Paarman’s stock is very nice; I stopped buying actual meat stock cubes ages ago because they’re gross. My unvegetarian vice is fish sauce. Mmm, bottled meat.

]]> Comment on A thought experiment by firstfallen http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196&cpage=1#comment-452 firstfallen Thu, 15 Oct 2009 07:51:33 +0000 http://confluence.za.net/blog/?p=196#comment-452 Argh, I apologise for poorly-spelled comment above. Note to self: read through before hitting "submit" :(. Argh, I apologise for poorly-spelled comment above. Note to self: read through before hitting “submit” :( .

]]>