[Gurdur]

This is part of my other thread on the subject, but I am making a kind of split here to discuss some other concrete issues.

I mentioned in that other thread this interesting op-ed piece in the Guardian.

Summarising the main points made by Natasha Walter in interview:

• there is increasing sexism (not patriarchy) in British society today
  .
• it puts a hell of a lot of pressure on young girls/women
  .
• and there is real problems for the feminist movement in deciding what to agitate about
  .
• and a marked fall in feminist action
  .
• and there is a debate about what is nuture and what is nature, what is culture versus what is biological
  .
• and the interview mentions the rise of psychological and biological determinist faddish theories over the last 15 years.

I'ld like to add to the above some other points gathered elsewhere:

• there is a marked rise in STD's among Brit youth. It has become a very real problem.
  .
• there is a marked rise in a kind of incoherent aggro in overall Brit culture that also results in an ugly form of sexism, but an ugly sexism promoted by both genders, after all see the phenomenon of ladettes
  .
• girls do better in science and maths classes if taught seperately from boys, but that difference does not apply to most other school subjects

Your thoughts? Ideas? Counter-arguments? Flames?

[Makbawehuh]

I would say a lot of that also applies here. It makes me sad, and it's not like I have the means to do a hell of a lot about it.

[alicat]

I don't know the answers either. In primate societies in general, those that are more violent are male dominant, peaceful tend to be more egalatarian or even matriarchal. In a lot of ways we are a martial society, that whole warrior/ protector vibe still often defines roles for men, then we see women villainize those roles- yet use them to redefine themselves (ladettes, radical feminism). My hope would be if we develop more into a communcation/economic basis things might start to become more balanced, will we can we? Then the traditional male devaluation of the role (predominately female) of raising children got thrown further under the bus in the last 50 years or so in the feminist movement, the irony is in the next generation the results of this are obviously quite crucial.

[Gurdur]

Originally Posted by alicat

I don't know the answers either. In primate societies in general, those that are more violent are male dominant, peaceful tend to be more egalatarian or even matriarchal. In a lot of ways we are a martial society, that whole warrior/ protector vibe still often defines roles for men, then we see women villainize those roles- yet use them to redefine themselves (ladettes, radical feminism). My hope would be if we develop more into a communcation/economic basis things might start to become more balanced, will we can we? Then the traditional male devaluation of the role (predominately female) of raising children got thrown further under the bus in the last 50 years or so in the feminist movement, the irony is in the next generation the results of this are obviously quite crucial.

I'm going to suggest later that these days the main devalution of the role of bringing up children is actually an economically-driven one, not driven by sexist males. IOW, blame Wall Street, not males. And that affects how we should agitate to change that.

And then I'll slam an atheist male arsehole who elsewhere went on a huge vicious rant against the very recently deceased Mary Daly; he basically danced on her grave. Her crime? Saying nasty things about men. And? So what? I'ld never even really heard of Mary Daly before I read his little ball-less poison-pen rantings, and most others have never heard of her, and Mary Daly, no matter how many nasty things she said about men in general, was not meaningful in terms of altering society; IOW, there is no point at all in getting upset that Mary Daly wrote a few nasty things about men in general; there are always people who will write nasty things about other people.

That particular male atheist is a nasty little bitchy screamer anyway, and there are quite a few male atheists who get all very uptight and bitchy about feminists on the various atheist boards.

And then, just to keep you all on your toes, and make everyone but everyone suspicious of me when not actively hostile to me, I'll be writing defending male role models of the warrior and defender. Yup, seriously. I am old-fashioned, after all.

But right now, before all that, I have to finish writing a blog post on "Feminism, Sexism And Crucifixions", which will be about the TV series "Rome", and then a blog post seperately on Lucrezia Borgia (nowhere near as black as she's painted).

As for hopes on how society will develop, well, we are all working for that, and that is what the Hub is all about.

[alicat]

The warrior approach works fine for those fight or flight situations when physical aggression is involved, but here in the forums you're talking about are people in aggressive keyboard warrior mode. Who wins these flame wars? So we have aggressive escalation of bad feelings often sparking a bit of flight or fight reaction between people sitting at their keyboards hundreds of miles away. Kind of ridiculous how hard wired for aggression and conflict we all are. We should "agitate to change things." Yeah lets all go *fight* to get rid of violence and promote harmony.

[Gurdur]

Originally Posted by alicat

The warrior approach works fine for those fight or flight situations when physical aggression is involved, but here in the forums you're talking about are people in aggressive keyboard warrior mode.

well, actually, I am trying to keep both things seperate. It's a lot of different subjects, but I do keep them seperate; I only mention things together because of my rather weird sense of humour.

Who wins these flame wars? So we have aggressive escalation of bad feelings often sparking a bit of flight or fight reaction between people sitting at their keyboards hundreds of miles away. Kind of ridiculous how hard wired for aggression and conflict we all are. We should "agitate to change things." Yeah lets all go *fight* to get rid of violence and promote harmony.

Well, you already know that I think like that. The Hub is largely flamewar-free because I think malice and malicious flame-wars are no good at all, and that is put into practice in adminning and modding, both in policy and in practice.

If you think the Hub is not flame-free, or if you mistake my very odd sense of humour for actually wanting flames, there are several around here who can tell you just how different the Hub is from the usual atheist board. Never, Fizzle, I will wager Unbeliever too, they can tell you that the Hub is notable for its absence of malice compared to other atheist boards, let alone Christian ones (often filled to the brim with malice). And that's not an accident.

If you are referring to the flamewars at work in the atheist blogosphere, these are important to us atheists, because it's all about how atheism is presented to the wider public. For me, it's all about winning atheism back from the extremists. It's an important struggle.

And where there are humans, there will always be struggles. For one thing, sociopaths will always be born, though in very small numbers, and sociopaths simply don't give a real fuck about anyone but themselves, and the rest of us will always need to defend ourselves against that. But more on that later.

I do not praise conflict for its own sake. I do not praise fighting for its own sake. I would find that an incredibly stupid and silly thing to do.

I merely say conflict exists, and will do so. It has to be managed and controlled.

[alicat]

Sorry Gurdur I wasn't criticizing your board and I do think it well run compared to many, mostly talking about the examples you gave from the other boards. IBut in reading almost any boards it the aggression becomes apparent, forums for expression and communication with minimal risk of any actual harm form the other side, but people do become angry and hostile, it's an observation not a judgement. Of course it's not all bad, you see some real concern and connection for other people we've never even actually met. The observation is 1) conflict exists 2) Most automatically either go into "warrior mode" (fight) or fade out of the discussion (flight). and then we have you and your ban hammer in protector mode (maybe I shouldn't even mention that one). But what other ways are there to deal with conflict?

[Never]

Interesting conversation. I'll just say that I don't think anything works all the time (or even nearly). Sometimes various people run the same routines and you can kind of predict the results of your actions, but mostly I personally go by my own rule:

I just don't understand people (in general)

I post the same way I would interact if people were chatting with me in my living room.

[Gurdur]

Originally Posted by alicat

... IBut in reading almost any boards it the aggression becomes apparent, forums for expression and communication with minimal risk of any actual harm form the other side, but people do become angry and hostile, it's an observation not a judgement.

Well, I agree with you fully.

But what other ways are there to deal with conflict?

This is also a very important question, and coincidentally one I have long wanted to do a giant OP on, and I will. How to de-escalate, how to negotiate, when to de-escalate, when to fight. How to find those willing to cooperate. How to judge. So on and so on. Sorry if I am getting too wordy; I would love to see posts, OP's and blog posts from others on all subjects.

But right now I have gotten a blog post up on, "Feminism, Sexism And Crucifixions", and soon I will have another blog post up on Lucrezia Borgia (nowhere near as black as she's painted, i.e. not a schemer or murderer).

[Gurdur]

Originally Posted by Never

... I just don't understand people (in general)

I post the same way I would interact if people were chatting with me in my living room.

Well, I agree fully with you too. I have pretty much always posted exactly like I would talk face to face, except sometimes I have been more restrained in posting than I would be in real life.

But I have never really understood people well either. Frankly, in my opinion, people are all stark raving mad and blinking well baffling.

[Makbawehuh]

Originally Posted by Gurdur

But I have never really understood people well either. Frankly, in my opinion, people are all stark raving mad and blinking well baffling.

Most people have very basic worries and motivations... What looks like madness on the surface is often just a weird expression of one of those basic things. *shrugs* I love to watch people, talk to people, explore what makes them tick. Everyone's a little different, and there's a kind of physics to how they think... The human mind is an amazing place.

Off subject, I know, but that's about the only thing that's been posted on that I have the awakeness to comment on right now, and mostly because it was already on my mind. Maybe I'll blog about it later... Sorry for the tangent.

[Gurdur]

Tangents are always good.

[alicat]

At least as atheists we have a little edge that we can acknowledge something that I think seems pretty obvious in observing human behavior- we're primates. A lot of our behavior and society is ordered along those instinctive primal drives, 4 Fs- fight flight, food and fuck. I'm interested in the conflicr resolution stuff too, but now I have to go hunt for roots and berries- I mean go to work. Wish a great day to all you uptight bitches and crap slinging gorillas, I love you all.

[Gurdur]

I'm too afraid to ask which one I am supposed to be.

[PSeeley]

I've actually converted to djewleuism.

[Makbawehuh]

I'm a shameless uptight bitch and shitslinging gorilla.

lol, Pseeley. I'm Iti Ojian.

Edit: Wait- Pseeley, does that mean you have to kill all the lions?

[alicat]

yes, we must all seek to balance these polarities and synthesize our inner uptight bitch and crap slinging gorilla to dwell in the enlightened atheist harmony of Djewleu.

[PSeeley]

Originally Posted by Makbawehuh

I'm a shameless uptight bitch and shitslinging gorilla.

lol, Pseeley. I'm Iti Ojian.

Edit: Wait- Pseeley, does that mean you have to kill all the lions?

No, I'll let the gorillas take care of them, while I sip reverently from my Holy Morphing Martini, djewleu be praised.

[Gurdur]

Originally Posted by PSeeley

I've actually converted to djewleuism.

Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep. Won't you please think of the endangered species?

[Gurdur]

Originally Posted by alicat

yes, we must all seek to balance these polarities and synthesize our inner uptight bitch and crap slinging gorilla .....

One thing I will say. Internet pagans on average seem somewhat more mentally well-balanced than internet atheists* on average; you would not believe it, but my simple little blog post on Feminism, Sexism and Crucifixions has already set off a flamewar storm elsewhere on other sites in the greater atheist blogosphere, and I know that that flamewar elsewhere (I won't link to it yet, since I am going to handle that one in full later) will get much worse; I swear, sometimes I despair of my alleged-fellow atheists.


Oh well.


I got another new blog post up on Lucrezia Borgia, Richard III of England, Leonard Cohen and Blondie. I blog like I cook, novel combinations are the order of the day.

_______

* That does not include the atheists of the Hub and of the Hangout; they are unusually well-balanced and good folks for atheists and indeed for overall.

_____________

Originally Posted by alicat

... the enlightened atheist harmony of Djewleu.

If I have to save endangered species from you Djewleu-cultists, I am going to. Now all I have to do is work out how to distract you as a group. I guess I will use nice shiney objects and so on. Hmmm.

[Makbawehuh]

Originally Posted by Gurdur

If I have to save endangered species from you Djewleu-cultists, I am going to. Now all I have to do is work out how to distract you as a group. I guess I will use nice shiney objects and so on. Hmmm.

And bacon.

[PSeeley]

We must NOT forget the bacon.

[Gurdur]

This op-ed piece here is interesting, but lacks a lot.

[PSeeley]

I'm not actually sure of what she is trying to say, as she appears to trying to pack as many topics in as space will allow. Several thoughts came to mind as I was reading it:

Is it even possible to measure "hapiness"? People who take surveys endlessly may have their feelings documented, but what about those who suffer in relative silence? Or those who live in places where survival is too urgent a consideration to have time to be passing out surveys? *cough-Haiti-cough*

Why this constant whinging about 'working mothers' as if it were a modern idea? Do they honestly think Great-Grandmother on the farm had much time to spend with the children, with all the work she had to do (especially if she kept having children every couple of years).

Life has always been pleasanter for the more attractive, just as it has been for the richer and more powerful. Is that really a feminist issue, or more a brutal fact of life?

Young people often hate what they see in the mirror. I thought I was absolutely hideous at fifteen, I hated my red hair, and thought my freckles looked like leprosy, but looking at photos from that time, I was actually quite pretty. Does this mean that feminism has failed, and that my childhood was toxic? Or was it just the normal misery of adolescence?

Surely boys also feel awkward and unattractive. Doesn't anyone care about the poor things?

Also, Naomi Wolf and burquas: Two irritating objects that sensible folk avoid.

[Makbawehuh]

Originally Posted by PSeeley

Why this constant whinging about 'workiing mothers?' Or is it constant whinging about women who have 'white collar' jobs? Do they honestly think Great-Grandmother on the farm had much time to spend with the children, with all the work she had to do?

Or how much work the kids had to do. The cheapest, easiest way to get farm labor was to breed it.

Young people often hate what they see in the mirror. I thought I was absolutely hideous at fifteen, I hated my red hair, and thought my freckles looked like leprosy, but looking at photos from that time, I was actually quite pretty. Does this mean that feminism has failed, and that my childhood was toxic? Or was it just the normal misery of adolescence?

Surely boys also feel awkward and unattractive. Doesn't anyone care about the poor things?

I still think my brown hair is too frizzy, and I've developed some dislikes about my body that *need* surgury to fix... But it's not that I dislike it to dislike it. The issues cause physical pain, so I think I'm somewhat justified there.

Mostly, though, I would say it's a normal part of growing up at a certain stage. Certainly I went through it, and certainly I mostly got over it. The discovery that I could, if I took the time, do damned near anything I wanted to with my hair helped, admittedly... just, how much time do I want to spend taming the frizz in the morning? bahahaha, no.

Also, Naomi Wolf and burquas: Two irritating objects that sensible folk avoid.

I actually wore hijab for a year, mostly to hide my hair. It was freeing in a way because I was doing it by -choice-, and when I left it behind it was in the same manner... But it's not for everyone, and I'd never suggest it for the long term or as a cure for social anxiety. It's less trouble to look in the mirror and find something you like about yourself to compliment every morning, and you have to deal with people randomly stopping you on the street and saying "Are you a muslim?" and then trying to explain that no, you just woke up one morning and decided to try wearing hijab for a while...