• Announcements

    • Robin

      Welcome!   03/05/2016

      Welcome, everyone, to the new 910CMX Community Forums. I'm still working on getting them running, so things may change.  If you're a 910 Comic creator and need your forum recreated, let me know and I'll get on it right away.  I'll do my best to make this new place as fun as the last one!
animalia

Bigotry and power plays

Recommended Posts

Something I would like to point out is that despite common preconceptions it isn't that power is at the heart of the sex and race and other similar issues. It is that sex, race, etc. is at the heat of the power issue.

I will start with sex to see if I can try to be clearer.

One little understood fact is that sexual harassment isn't about sex but about power. The act may be of a sexual nature but it is a power play plain and simple. The boss believes that if they cannot control the employe sexually they will not be able to control them professionally. The main reason why you hear more cases of men harassing women is because, unfortunately, there are more men than women in these high paying jobs. As this slowly, but surely, begins to change we will surely have mare case of women sexually harassing men as well as abuse of power is not linked to a specific gender. Ideally we would have less cases of sexual harassment period, but I am not that optimistic.

Awkward Transitional Placeholder

Around the late 80s-early 90s a split in feminism occurred. Some feminists retained the idea that to succeed in a society traditionally controlled by men women need special treatment. This is called protectionism feminism. Some say this promotes the idea of women as victims who cannot succeed without special help. Others argue that men and women are equals in all ways, and should have equal opportunity. This is called equality feminism feminism. It believes that neither gender should receive special privileges or protections.

While I am only aware of such divide within feminism I can see this applying to any civil rights issue, which brings me to my next/final point(s). the problem the with protectionism feminism Is that rather than just recounting the all too real ways they have been victimized which is admittedly something that I can see being necessary they have gone one to make an IDENTITY out of that victimization. The problem with that is that it mirrors the old claim that women are children and withholds from them the right to be held accountable. Replace women with any racial or ethnic group and replace children with savage, and you could bring it back to civil rights. Do NOT misunderstand me. I understand that the scale is more tilted in favor of white hetero males and it DOES need to be equally balanced. ALL I am say saying is let's not be so eager to correct said imbalances that we create NEW imbalances.

If you want one small real world example of a way the world favor women see how divorce courts tend to favor kids going towards the mom regardless of is the better parent. I am not saying it is more favoritism towards women than men. There ISN'T I'm saying there shouldn't be favoritism on EITHER side.

Also full disclosure. I am white. Have so far voted entirely Democrat (though I would have voted for John Kasich given a chance). I am Adopted. I am Pro Life (Being Both adopted and born after Roe V. Wade possibly gives me bias on this but I believe I can argue my position with both logic and ethics). My Physical Sex is Male. The Short Answer to my Sexuality and Gender is Complicated. The Long Answer is as a guy I would only want to have sex with girls. If I could be transformed into a sexy girl (I thought about this without egs on any outside help though I did track down egs BECAUSE of the Gender-Bending. Not why I stayed though.) I would be primarily into sex with boys though I wouldn't give up on girls entirely either). Fun/Important Fact: I have Asperger's Syndrome. For those of you who don't know what that is it is a type of high functioning autism. It means I have high Intelligence( Iam told I have an 160 IQ) but low social skills. As such my default method for social events is to let people know going in that my social skills and social awareness sucks, and that if I do anything to offend them to please let me know and I  will gladly stop, but at the same time they can't really on me figuring out where it is on my own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, animalia said:

Something I would like to point out is that despite common preconceptions it isn't that power is at the heart of the sex and race and other similar issues. It is that sex, race, etc. is at the heat of the power issue.

I will start with sex to see if I can try to be clearer.

One little understood fact is that sexual harassment isn't about sex but about power. The act may be of a sexual nature but it is a power play plain and simple. The boss believes that if they cannot control the employe sexually they will not be able to control them professionally. The main reason why you hear more cases of men harassing women is because, unfortunately, there are more men than women in these high paying jobs. As this slowly, but surely, begins to change we will surely have mare case of women sexually harassing men as well as abuse of power is not linked to a specific gender. Ideally we would have less cases of sexual harassment period, but I am not that optimistic.

Awkward Transitional Placeholder

Around the late 80s-early 90s a split in feminism occurred. Some feminists retained the idea that to succeed in a society traditionally controlled by men women need special treatment. This is called protectionism feminism. Some say this promotes the idea of women as victims who cannot succeed without special help. Others argue that men and women are equals in all ways, and should have equal opportunity. This is called equality feminism feminism. It believes that neither gender should receive special privileges or protections.

While I am only aware of such divide within feminism I can see this applying to any civil rights issue, which brings me to my next/final point(s). the problem the with protectionism feminism Is that rather than just recounting the all too real ways they have been victimized which is admittedly something that I can see being necessary they have gone one to make an IDENTITY out of that victimization. The problem with that is that it mirrors the old claim that women are children and withholds from them the right to be held accountable. Replace women with any racial or ethnic group and replace children with savage, and you could bring it back to civil rights. Do NOT misunderstand me. I understand that the scale is more tilted in favor of white hetero males and it DOES need to be equally balanced. ALL I am say saying is let's not be so eager to correct said imbalances that we create NEW imbalances.

If you want one small real world example of a way the world favor women see how divorce courts tend to favor kids going towards the mom regardless of is the better parent. I am not saying it is more favoritism towards women than men. There ISN'T I'm saying there shouldn't be favoritism on EITHER side.

What you say about sexual harassment, as I understand it, holds true for all forms of abuse be they sexual, physical, mental or social. It is all about demonstrating power and asserting dominance outside the usual contests among equals or nearly equals. A game of football is also about asserting dominance when all is said and done. So is a boxing match. So is a debate.

The difference is: in the realm of abuse, one side is a predator. It is engaging in what it confidently expects to be an unfair match in order to assert dominance over its victim. Also, this is always done either outside the public eye or disguised in a manner so the public is fooled into not seeing what is really going on. In most if not all such cases the abuser also harms the victim, often forcing them into a state where they can only passively accept the abuse.

Having clarified that, I agree unreservedly with your premise: That sex, 'race', gender, religion, age, disability, poverty and so forth are at the heart of the power issue, not the other way around.

Now to your earlier question: why is racial dysphoria not discussed as much?

First, let me freely admit: I completely misunderstood your question and as a result my first answer arrived in a form somewhere between the irrelevant and the absurd. I have in the meantime taken the time to look up racial dysphoria and read a bit about it, which I hope will help a little. Having said so, I confess I am at a loss to give a satisfactory answer. The obvious answer is that racial dysphoria as a concept has yet to be broadly accepted. It is in a similar limbo state as transsexuality itself was a quarter century ago and many refuse to accept it or believe there are different explanations. For example, blaming internalised racism against one's own race by stating it creates a desire to be a more privileged race, which might hold some water if it affected a large majority or even a significant minority in that way. Of course, the problem with this sort of 'explanation' is that any explanation which employs a premise like 'Obviously it is caused by' or 'Everybody knows that' is not much of an explanation at all. Which includes my initial 'obvious' answer. Possibly a better reply would be "If we take the discussion up, perhaps it will stop being a problem." That is, after all, what various oppressed groups do when they make themselves visible -- they make it impossible for society to simply ignore and silence them to death.

Oh, and being myself the child of a divorce where the mother was unfit to hold custody but received it anyway, I know precisely what you mean. *sigh*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:

What you say about sexual harassment, as I understand it, holds true for all forms of abuse be they sexual, physical, mental or social. It is all about demonstrating power and asserting dominance outside the usual contests among equals or nearly equals. A game of football is also about asserting dominance when all is said and done. So is a boxing match. So is a debate.

The difference is: in the realm of abuse, one side is a predator. It is engaging in what it confidently expects to be an unfair match in order to assert dominance over its victim. Also, this is always done either outside the public eye or disguised in a manner so the public is fooled into not seeing what is really going on. In most if not all such cases the abuser also harms the victim, often forcing them into a state where they can only passively accept the abuse.

Having clarified that, I agree unreservedly with your premise: That sex, 'race', gender, religion, age, disability, poverty and so forth are at the heart of the power issue, not the other way around.

Now to your earlier question: why is racial dysphoria not discussed as much?

First, let me freely admit: I completely misunderstood your question and as a result my first answer arrived in a form somewhere between the irrelevant and the absurd. I have in the meantime taken the time to look up racial dysphoria and read a bit about it, which I hope will help a little. Having said so, I confess I am at a loss to give a satisfactory answer. The obvious answer is that racial dysphoria as a concept has yet to be broadly accepted. It is in a similar limbo state as transsexuality itself was a quarter century ago and many refuse to accept it or believe there are different explanations. For example, blaming internalised racism against one's own race by stating it creates a desire to be a more privileged race, which might hold some water if it affected a large majority or even a significant minority in that way. Of course, the problem with this sort of 'explanation' is that any explanation which employs a premise like 'Obviously it is caused by' or 'Everybody knows that' is not much of an explanation at all. Which includes my initial 'obvious' answer. Possibly a better reply would be "If we take the discussion up, perhaps it will stop being a problem." That is, after all, what various oppressed groups do when they make themselves visible -- they make it impossible for society to simply ignore and silence them to death.

Oh, and being myself the child of a divorce where the mother was unfit to hold custody but received it anyway, I know precisely what you mean. *sigh*

To be fair I did not know if it existed, it simply seemed like it was something that was possible to exist. I do not have it. If I did however I would NOT come out with it.I obviously cannot know what it is like to be a women and have to do deal with systemic sexism, just like I cannot know what it is to be another race and have to deal with systemic racism. The difference we know that transgenderism is a real thing so we don't attack people and accuse them and say you can't turn it off.  It makes me wonder maybe we should do a little more research into these things before we are so quick to attack people. Because if noone has done any research into this thing maybe it is real. I am aware it is sensitive and again I apologize if I go to far, I just want to point out that we can go too far in EVERY direction. I hope I was clear. if not I will try again.

 

In a related note, although maybe this should be a separate topic, what is the fine line between cultural appreciation and cultural appropriation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, animalia said:

In a related note, although maybe this should be a separate topic, what is the fine line between cultural appreciation and cultural appropriation

Due respect.

What that means could be debated at length.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, HarJIT said:

Due respect.

What that means could be debated at length.

As an Italian-American all I can say is that may heritage would be a lot poorer without the Tomato. Which for those of you who do not know came from the America's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Conflicts usually boil down to

ME vs EVERYONE

or

US vs THEM

Who is "Us" and who is "Them" can change.  Sometimes rapidly.

For some people in an "Us" that has power and authority, there is pleasure in making one of "Them" suffer and know that "They" can't do anything about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Pharaoh RutinTutin said:

Conflicts usually boil down to

ME vs EVERYONE

or

US vs THEM

Who is "Us" and who is "Them" can change.  Sometimes rapidly.

For some people in an "Us" that has power and authority, there is pleasure in making one of "Them" suffer and know that "They" can't do anything about it.

The irony is that once someone who used to be one of THEM is welcomed into US they are protected by the same power structure of US

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/13/2017 at 5:12 AM, animalia said:

The irony is that once someone who used to be one of THEM is welcomed into US they are protected by the same power structure of US

Nah, the real irony is that the newly-welcomed members of US so often choose to engage in the same abuse of THEM that they themselves had previously suffered--e.g. you get hazed when you are a new initiate in a school, fraternity/sorority, or other organization, and then you engage in hazing of the NEXT group of newcomers in a perpetual cycle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now