Feminism - more of it

[TerraPrime]

Re: Athias

Neither black people nor women are groups informed uniquely by their blackness and womanness, respectively. I would also put forward that no individual is uniquely "disempowered" by virtue of their blacknness or womanness.

I don't understand where you're going with this framing. It is taken as a given that we are composites of various types of identities. This is the basis of kyriarchy and intersectionality, both of which are accepted by most feminists. I am both male and LBGT, so at times, my maleness confers to me advantages and at other times, my LBGT status confers disadvantages. We are the sum of these intersecting identities. Given that, I don't see how you can justify the claim that no one person is disempowered by their status as a black person or their status as a woman, since we have documented cases of wage disparity, discrimination in promotions, social pressures levied only to people of that trait, etc. While not all woman, and not all black people, experience the disadvantages or discriminations, many individuals in the group do experience that, for being black and/or for being a woman.

Except the "implicit" bias to which you're referring is just speculative until you can actually confirm it. This campaign carried on expressly to induct more women. The bias is evident.

The type of biases in favor of men in leadership roles and that discredits women in similar roles is shared nearly universally in groups that have been tested on. But if I recall our previous exchanges, you don't accept generalizing behavior characteristics based on sampling of the general population and instead want specific studies on the gorup of actors in question, correct? In other words, you're not willing to say that since people in general hold biased views against women in leadership roles, the students voting in this election probably share this bias as well, and you'd instead demand to see a study on the people who did go cast the vote before concluding that they harbor biased views. Am I right in my deduction of your view?

Not when you're in the business of "enforcing" your preferences. You're counteracting morally-inferior behavior with violative behavior--that is, forcibly subverting someone's choice to your preferences.

I disagree with your choice of descriptor of "enforcing" when you''re referring to campaigns and political movements to change social behaviors. Absent the use of punitive forces levied by authorities, there is no ground to characterize the campaign efforts in favor of female candidates as "enforcement" of any sort. You'd have a stronger case railing against Affirmative Action plans in the U.S. here.

Suggesting that there's indeed a stigma on women in leadership positions, how does it "disempower" them?

This type of stigma leads people to under-estimate the efficacy of female leaders, resulting in decreased likelihood to choose these female candidates. Unconscious biases against females in regards to their competence is wide spread across different fields. The most illustrative example, while not pertaining directly to assessment of leadership quality, is the one in female musicians auditioning for orchestra positions. Once a "blind" procedure, where the auditioning musician is hidden from view from the evaluating panel, was employed, the number of female musicians chosen for orchestra positions increased from 5% to 25% (source: http://www.nber.org/papers/w5903.pdf).%C2'>

[karaddin]

Re: Athias

I don't understand where you're going with this framing. It is taken as a given that we are composites of various types of identities. This is the basis of kyriarchy and intersectionality, both of which are accepted by most feminists. I am both male and LBGT, so at times, my maleness confers to me advantages and at other times, my LBGT status confers disadvantages. We are the sum of these intersecting identities. Given that, I don't see how you can justify the claim that no one person is disempowered by their status as a black person or their status as a woman, since we have documented cases of wage disparity, discrimination in promotions, social pressures levied only to people of that trait, etc. While not all woman, and not all black people, experience the disadvantages or discriminations, many individuals in the group do experience that, for being black and/or for being a woman.

I think bolded is the key here, given Athias has made posts in the past to the effect that she doesn't accept the group women I don't think she does take this as a given.

[deleted01]

Came across this while doing research for my SO's essay on women in games. More threats against Sarkeesian. It's utterly disgusting that people think this is acceptable, and these "open carry" places make me sick. But that's a whole other argument. I'm just sad that she felt she had to cancel her event, though anyone can understand why she did so.

http://www.theguardian.com/p/42ej7/fb

[TrackerNeil]

Came across this while doing research for my SO's essay on women in games. More threats against Sarkeesian. It's utterly disgusting that people think this is acceptable, and these "open carry" places make me sick. But that's a whole other argument. I'm just sad that she felt she had to cancel her event, though anyone can understand why she did so.

http://www.theguardian.com/p/42ej7/fb

I can't blame her for canceling, although it ticks me off that the troglodytes won.

[Castel]

I can't believe that this has become the sort of issue where you can legitimately say:"We won't let them silence us with death threats".

[TerraPrime]

Notice, too, that the threat is no longer against Sarkeesian. It is against the entire audience, meaning, not only does this person think that Sarkeesian's work merits a threat of death, but anyone who wants to listen to her presentation, whether they agree with her or not, deserves to be threatened, as well.

[Shryke]

I can't believe that this has become the sort of issue where you can legitimately say:"We won't let them silence us with death threats".

At least it's helping to expose exactly the type of people these whingers are.

[Weeping Sore]

I can't believe that this has become the sort of issue where you can legitimately say:"We won't let them silence us with death threats".

Hard to believe that people who are constantly pretending to kill masses of people with guns might pretend that they will kill masses of people with guns.

[Swordfish]

I can't blame her for canceling, although it ticks me off that the troglodytes won.

Correction. 'Troglodyte'. Singular.

Came across this while doing research for my SO's essay on women in games. More threats against Sarkeesian. It's utterly disgusting that people think this is acceptable, and these "open carry" places make me sick. But that's a whole other argument. I'm just sad that she felt she had to cancel her event, though anyone can understand why she did so.

http://www.theguardian.com/p/42ej7/fb

Who in the world thinks that is ok?

And I know she said 'open carry', but that is not the issue at all. The issue here is concealed carry. She conflated the two.

“Forced to cancel my talk at USU after receiving death threats because police wouldn’t take steps to prevent concealed firearms at the event,” shetweeted. “Requested pat downs or metal detectors after mass shooting threat but because of Utah’s open carry laws police wouldn’t do firearm searches.”

The school confirmed Sarkeesian’s explanation in a statement. “During the discussion, Sarkeesian asked if weapons will be permitted at the speaking venue. Sarkeesian was informed that, in accordance with the State of Utah law regarding the carrying of firearms, if a person has a valid concealed firearm permit and is carrying a weapon, they are permitted to have it at the venue.”

Yes. How dare the police not violate state laws. Totally unacceptable.

That said, i hope they catch and prosecute whoever is responsible for the threat.

[deleted01]

Correction. 'Troglodyte'. Singular.

Who in the world thinks that is ok?

And I know she said 'open carry', but that is not the issue at all. The issue here is concealed carry. She conflated the two.

Yes. How dare the police not violate state laws. Totally unacceptable.

That said, i hope they catch and prosecute whoever is responsible for the threat.

Clearly, the people who issued the threats think it is OK.

Either way, why people need to carry a weapon, concealed or no, on a university campus is beyond my British comprehension. And at the risk of derailing and/or starting a war: The police bloody well should "violate state laws", if people's safety is at risk. Isn't that the job of the police, to protect people? Bollocks to the decision they made, and bollocks to anyone who thinks the right to carry a gun is more important than someone's life.

[Castel]

Clearly, the people who issued the threats think it is OK.

Either way, why people need to carry a weapon, concealed or no, on a university campus is beyond my British comprehension. And at the risk of derailing and/or starting a war: The police bloody well should "violate state laws", if people's safety is at risk. Isn't that the job of the police, to protect people? Bollocks to the decision they made, and bollocks to anyone who thinks the right to carry a gun is more important than someone's life.

It's hilarious that I come across this post just minutes after closing a video where Johnathan Haidt claimed that liberals value liberty and fairness less than care. :)

I think that's a problematic position , personally. The issue should be fixed at a much higher level, before we get here.

[Swordfish]

Clearly, the people who issued the threats think it is OK.

Either way, why people need to carry a weapon, concealed or no, on a university campus is beyond my British comprehension. And at the risk of derailing and/or starting a war: The police bloody well should "violate state laws", if people's safety is at risk. Isn't that the job of the police, to protect people? Bollocks to the decision they made, and bollocks to anyone who thinks the right to carry a gun is more important than someone's life.

No. The police should not violate state law. Period. End of discussion. That should be self evident.

The job of the police is not, actually, to protect people, At least not primarily. The job of the police is to enforce the law.

[Galactus]

What the fuck, people can't keep guns out of a closed event?

What the fuck AMerica?

[TerraPrime]

What the fuck, people can't keep guns out of a closed event?

What the fuck AMerica?

:lol:

You just realized this is the end result of concealed carry laws? ;)

[Galactus]

:lol:

You just realized this is the end result of concealed carry laws? ;)

I figured they were for public spaces, (stupid enough) not closed events!

[David Selig]

No big deal, people, a MRA bright mind already proved that the Sarkeesian threat in Utah was a hoax - http://i.imgur.com/J61ml88.jpg . Real insightful analysis, FBI psychologists have nothing on this guy.

[Castel]

Just to be clear: the University can surely block these things themselves right? The cops are the ones that can't interfere? Surely there isn't a law on the books saying;"all you private places must open yourselves to all manner of danger lest the eagle cry."

[Swordfish]

I figured they were for public spaces, (stupid enough) not closed events!

Whether or not they are allowed depends on the venue.

From the utah state website FAQ:

As a permit holder, exactly, where can I carry or not carry a handgun?

The concealed firearm permit allows an individual to carry a firearm fully loaded and concealed. The permit also allows an individual to carry a firearm into public schools. Permit holders can not carry a firearm into federal or state restricted areas i.e. any airport secured area, federal facilities, courts, correctional & mental health facilities, law enforcement secured areas, a house of worship or private residence where notice given and/or posted, any secured area in which firearms are prohibited and notice posted, or otherwise prohibited by state of federal law.

Top

[NestorMakhnosLovechild]

No big deal, people, an MRA bright mind already proved that the Sarkeesian threat in Utah was a hoax - http://i.imgur.com/J61ml88.jpg . Real insightful analysis, FBI psychologists have nothing on this guy.

... wow.

Any relation to these people who conclusively proved that Anita previously faked death threats against herself because the offending tweets used proper punctuation and grammar?

[Shryke]

What the fuck, people can't keep guns out of a closed event?

What the fuck America?

Forget it Galactus, it's America.