General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]RainDog
(28,784 posts)I think some people have different opinions about gender issues - but, the reason for the latest dust up has a genealogy that explains it, imo. But I could be wrong.
If you want to follow along, it went like this - someone posted a video from some Christian ministry about the evils of porn. Right wing fundie boilerplate. People, both male and female were joking about it. (I'm female, if that matters to someone about someone's opinion, to me, it doesn't.) It was hard to tell if it was a parody or the real thing, for me. But it's apparently a real vid.
Some, who you will see in the thread, thought this was a personal attack on them. Why anyone would think a right wing religious fundie porn video would be an attack on them... well, I don't know.
In that thread, someone called Riff a dog and, in HoF, women, plenty of them, have referred to her as a dog who just wants a pat on the head. This sort of insult goes on here frequently... to the point that, when I defended Jennifer Granholm's opinion about a person rather than an anonymous blogger - someone here said I was a pedophile enabler, and, thus, by extension, that person was calling Granholm a pedophile enabler. That's not considered over-the-top for some people here, iow, because they're so "radical."
So, Riff is a big sports fan, she posted the thread with a clearly identified title so no one had to click on the thread if they didn't want to, though, of course, she knew the outrage brigade would show up. And from there some people were going off on how disgusting the magazine was (way overaction, imo), but the same person apparently, has lived an isolated rural life where everyone expected everyone else to conform in order to get along because... you know... that's so necessary? really? I would hate to be a transexual in that place. And that person posted a shame-based thread about other women, making judgmental assumptions about them that are not in evidence, but, again, that small-town mentality tends to be xenophobic. So, this is interesting to see because objectification theory itself is based upon shame-based views of the human body. To accept objectification as the definition of your interaction in the world requires you to internalize that shame. No thanks.
I think sexism exists and I think women have a historical basis for claims for gender-based govt. actions to help level the playing field of centuries of sexism that arose from religion... and the shaming of females that is the central message of the story of humankind within western and, especially Anglo society with, say, Milton, still one of the most lauded writers in the English language. Any theory that requires me to internalize and then judge others, a philosophy that is, at its core, a view of the human body as disgusting... well, that's not my kind of feminism. To rid one's self of this shame, judgment puts the issue elsewhere.
This doesn't just hold for this one issue, fwiw, in terms of cultural cues. It is a feature, too, of homophobia when found in men who may have homosexual feelings... who are also overwhelmingly found in certain religious cultures.
Interestingly, in a recent meta study of porn, the right wing-funded porn studies that are the basis for "porn addiction" belief found that homosexual men within religious cultures felt the most damaged from using porn. They are internalizing the religious shame attached to their natural sexual orientation and latch on to explanations like, "porn is addictive." That's where the claim comes from - among homosexual men who are in environments that reject their sexuality.
fwiw.
I don't think Riff should've posted that in GD. I think it's fine to keep such things out of GD. The Upton post that followed was trolling because not everyone shares the same pov about how "horrendous" something might be.
So, all this really comes down to, again, is fights between personalities here and people who "side" with them. The men's group said they had opened their group except for one or two people - one I think sent someone some really hateful email or something. not sure. cursing at him, etc. Anyway, I don't see why the post can't be there. I looked at that forum (I've never posted there, rarely read there) and they have such a thread and both hetero men, women, and gay men have all posted photos of people and joked about this or that. I didn't even know the thing was here for a long time - but if you go looking for something to be offended by, I guess you can find it.
But from this latest flare up, I've come to discover that the cultural gap between people here is very wide sometimes, as far as what is offensive. I think DU has to try to find a happy medium and the men's group thing seems like a decent compromise to me.