[UA] Re: [UA][OT] UA unintenionally sexist? (LONG!)

[Steve Dustin]

> > I'm not ranting at you--but this is exactly what I was complaining about 
>in
> > my other post.  There's a real casualty to all of this back-n-forth
> > bullshit, and that's to do deprive people of their dissenting opinion; 
>to
> > silence them; and to take their voice.
>
>You mean, like the way people on this list instantly disagreed with Jo's 
>opinion
>and dismissed her objections because she "just doesn't get it"?
>

Well, yes, exactly.

I apologize if I appear hot-headed, sometimes I hit the send button before I 
definitely should.  Once I got home, after a nice long drive, I definitely 
realized nothing would be gained from me jumping into the middle of a 
discussion I wasn't very familiar with, especially if I was going to be 
perceived to be belligerent.

This discussion has just hit upon one of my major sore-spots, and its 
something that's currently not very tangible, but is slowly starting to 
emerge in society.  Susan Faludi just put out a book about how a 
disproportionate amount of American males are beginning to feel powerless, 
and yet, can't quit figure out what's making them feel this way.  She got 
raked over the coals about it; men in this country don't even want to admit 
its happening.

Yet, men are four times more likely to succeed at suicide.  Fathers are less 
likely to win custody of their children, unless the mother is obviously 
deranged or psychopathic.  Fathers are treated like pedophiles if they are 
openly touchy-feelie with small children.  Men are taught to substitute love 
for sex--walk into any strip club and tell me what you see; men paying to 
talk to naked women.  True, porn and prostitution is an overly complicated 
issue, but I think this is part of it.  Men are expected to go to war and 
die--that's how much we value them.  We kill them.

My beef is not actually with *Jo* at all.  My beef is with the 
*unintentional sexism* thing.  I mean why does Greg (or any of us) have to 
apologize for something he wrote which expresses his point-of-view under the 
spectre of *unintentional sexism*?  It's his point-of-view.  You can tried 
to change his point of view, but its still a valid point of view, even if 
you disagree with it.  Unfortunately, there's this climate of fear that has 
grown from labeling things *sexist* or *racist* in America.  The end result? 
  Thinking, intelligent men, like Greg or John (I don't want to speak for 
them, this is just conjecture), constantly have to place *qualifiers* about 
what they write, what they think, and who they are--over issues they in no 
way *consciously* contribute too.  I mean, who knows better who Greg is then 
Greg?  Apparently, anyone who can label him sexist or racist.  Just by 
virtue of being a white male, there are certain aspects of Greg's 
personality that he's not privey too.  It comes to a point where its better 
to say nothing then to say anything.  How is that being honest to yourself 
and your society?  If you can't or refuse to voice your own point of view, 
how can society learn from that?

Meanwhile, the *real* culprits, the ignorant, spiteful hate groups, and the 
entrenched *Old Boys Networks* continue to manipulate with impunity those 
they feel are inferior/superior, because they flat out don't care.  I'm 
involved in neither of those things, yet as a stereotype, being white and 
male, I'm perceived as the major contributor to the problem; just by virtue 
of existing.  Being.  And I have to apologize for that constantly (well, I 
might have meant it *unintentionally*...).  I'm through with that shit.  
Through.

I mean, in the big scheme of things, UA, Greg and John are a small pindrop.  
Why go after them?  A lot of sexist and racist issues are actually class 
issues--something you don't talk about in America.  If you want to find 
where the real power is at in a society, just look and see what's *not* 
being discussed.  Those in power would prefer it that way.


>This is discussion, not a fight; I don't think anyone is interested in 
>denying
>the other side their voice.

You're right, its not a fight.  I shouldn't be so belligerent, and with that 
I apologize again.  I'm sure Joanna's an intelligent woman, and I'm sure the 
conversation at Pyramid is a worthwhile one.  Since I'm not there, I don't 
think I should just go there.  I always tend to lurk on my lists for a while 
anyway, so I'm sure you won't see me anytime soon.

>
> > My opinion: we're all unintentionally rascist, we're all unintentionally
> > sexist, because we're
> > trying to protect *our* group, its instinct, we're born to fear those 
>who
> > are different, because in the past, those who were different usually 
>wanted
> > to take our food, or overpower us.
>
>And this isn't something that's worth trying to overcome?  It's not a 
>_good_
>thing to question our assumptions, our biases out positive and negative
>prejudices?
>

Once again you're right again.  I should have placed one more statement in 
that list--if we are going to improve, we have to know our failings.  My 
point was that until we all acknowledge that we have biases, we won't be 
able to fix the problem.  There has to be a social *jump* in society to 
acknowledge the problems of the past.  We have to move forward.  But I 
always find these conversations going in a round-robin of "You're sexist!" 
"No, I'm not!" "You're sexist!" "No, I'm not!".  It solves nothing.  There 
has to be a better way, otherwise ten thousand years from now, we'll still 
be having the same argument.

>Humans beings are intrinsically flawed (fuck knows I am); that's not a good
>excuse for leaving one's life unexamined.
>
> >  I think if we could admit that, we'd get
> > over this stupid hump of name-calling.
>
>What name calling?  I don't think there's been any name calling thus far.

There's so much baggage associated with *sexist* and *racist* that I don't 
think they're worthwhile terms.  All they do is get everyone's hackles up, 
which is never a good way to start a meaningful conversation.  Still though, 
I probably shouldn't have said that.

> > I guess I'm getting that subscription to Pyramid.
>
>Don't get a subscription just so you can have an argument with Joanna.
>Subscribe because it's a damnfine site, and because the forums are an 
>excellent
>place for reasonable discussion and debate.  And it has Ken Hite.

Don't worry, I'm much mellower now.  I promise I won't show up just to push 
people around.  I also realize, now that I've gotten this far, that this 
thread now has gotten wildly off-topic and will no longer post about this on 
this forum.  Anyone who wants to continue this one off-list, my e-mail is 
below.

Take care,
Steve Dustin
yetiseti at hotmail.com

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at 
http://profiles.msn.com.


_______________________________________________
UA mailing list
UA at lists.uchicago.edu
http://lists.uchicago.edu/mailman/listinfo/ua