Allison Types - May 5, 2014

[Mbast1]

I don't think we're going to agree on anything so I hope their aren't any hard feelings.

I agree, and the same. You thinking I'm wrong won't kill me, so no reason to keep going in circles. Thanks.

[People Of The Earth]

It probably used to roll off her back because she - like many/most women - grew up with that treatment, and just kind of... assume that it's normal. Annoying, but what are you going to do about it, that's just how men are and how the media is. It's easy to internalize these kinds of messages, because they're all around us constantly.

Maybe there was a defining moment that made her go, "hey, actually that's not okay and should be challenged", or maybe it was a gradual thing. Maybe she took a women's studies course, or maybe she just got wore down from dealing with this stupid crap all the time and decided she wasn't going to take it anymore.

This.
I live in a very big city, I take the subway daily to go to work, 8 of my colleagues out of 10 are males, I do a lot of sports... I mean, it's like the moment you step outside your home, you know you'll be BATHING into this environment, the en-ti-re DAY.
So you learn to live with it - and that's annoying because in a perfect world I shouldn't have to handle this c**p constantly.
Personnally, I'm on *ignore* almost all the time, I have my limits of course, and I do react *badly* when someone cross a line especially at work, basically when it's becoming offensive/agressive/annoying.
Kudos highlighting this.

She calls for people to stand up and take action but doesn't when the opportunity presented itself. Writing about it doesn't help the guy in the story.

Actually, we don't know what happened afterward, she might have enlighten him after his explanation ended.

@galaxygnome:

You forgot about option D) They get upset about it and become agressive.
And YES, stuff like that do happen, I've experienced it, friends of mine have experienced it, and let's just say those are very marking/scaring encounters even when luckily things don't go (too) South.
The rest of your post nailed it entirely, I think you summerized a lot of accurate things there.

[harashkupo]

Actually, we don't know what happened afterward, she might have enlighten him after his explanation ended.

LOL that's exactly what I posted little bit back.

I agree, and the same. You thinking I'm wrong won't kill me, so no reason to keep going in circles. Thanks.

Hey I appreciate it. Seriously classy my friend. You can't tell right now but I'm totally giving you a fist bump well unless you prefer a high five but that's so 80's. Gross right?

[Brave Sir Robin]

Something I find encouraging is that most of my favourite titles right now star women: Fatale, Lazarus, Velvet, Black Widow, Batwoman, Wonder Woman and now Elektra. That's the first time in my life that's happened to me.

While not true all my titles, the few super hero titles I like star women: Batgirl, Wonder Woman and Ms. Marvel. I believe that with super heroes, writers have more liberty at times to make characters that approach a normal human more when writing for females. Maybe they attract writers that want to approach the character that way. Male super heroes, to me, tend to be very shallow and boring.

[Mbast1]

Seriously classy my friend. You can't tell right now but I'm totally giving you a fist bump well unless you prefer a high five but that's so 80's.

Hardly, I just have done the arguing in circles bit, and it's tiring. But, if there is credit, it goes to you. You made the initial gesture. Which I hope to see more of online.
And at my age, either is appropriate!

[Brave Sir Robin]

I'm not sure how Jonah expects to have an inoffensive community when he still uses the formula of promoting columns like this.

It's almost like they're designed to bait overdone negative reactions.

It really is a race to the bottom, training people to be offending by everything, indignant, and psychologically devastated all the time.

I doubt that this is true. I honestly think that there is some belief that comics can only get better when they appeal to a wider audiance and the audiance reflects a more welcoming and accepting outlook.

The problem with the article is not the bland "lets be nicer" sentiment, but the execution. It is sort of meandering and doesn't build to a good resolution. That is why the comments are all over the place.

But the reaction everywhere you get to this stuff is a problem CBR and all comic media have. While comics are branching out and appealing to more people, a core audience likes pretty primative stuff. People fed a diet of ultra violence, poorly written women as victims, horror, and self righteous brutality, are probably not going to be the most receptive group to sentiments that ask more of people.

[Mbast1]

a core audience likes pretty primative stuff. People fed a diet of ultra violence, poorly written women as victims, horror, and self righteous brutality, are probably not going to be the most receptive group to sentiments that ask more of people.

It's not just comics, gaming seems as problem-filled, but this seems dead on. Some people like being able to abuse others, and that's that.

[galaxygnome]

It is pretty gross and disappointing that this thread is not about the subject matter of the article but rather a personal attack on how people think Types should or shouldn't behave as an activist. Her means to activism are hers to decide, not yours.

E.G. I participated in inter-group dialogue workshops for years around race/sexuality/class/gender/etc, and I do grow and learn fairly well in that environment, but I have quickly found that my skill set is just not matched for the protest environment. I will support the hell out of others pursuing that brand of activism, but it is not the best format for me to use my skills. Types is a writer. I imagine some of her most favored skills are her writing skills. She is being an activist by writing. Not everyone can or should be every single kind of activist - that isn't a real life!

You forgot about option D) They get upset about it and become agressive.
And YES, stuff like that do happen, I've experienced it, friends of mine have experienced it, and let's just say those are very marking/scaring encounters even when luckily things don't go (too) South.
The rest of your post nailed it entirely, I think you summerized a lot of accurate things there.

Absolutely. I don't know why I didn't include that, but absolutely.

I feel like something a lot of people forget in these "debates" is that women live in a culture of fear. In a casual conversation in a group of college freshman years ago, I remember discussing safety tips for living in the city. I mentioned that in addition to never having headphones, only walking on well lit streets, etc, I have gained the habit of watching the sidewalk as I walk, so that I could see the shadow of anyone who approached me. I've been followed for significant lengths of time before. I've been heckled at while fully covered. I've had men sit next to me on the train and block my exit with their feet, then persistently ask for my phone number and demand why I am not adequately paying attention to them. Casual threats of violence are an every day part of a woman's life. We all have these stories, and worse.

Yet apparently it's that easy to challenge a man on their sexism. A man we just met and have no prior knowledge of, next to other people we also don't know. When I don't challenge someone on their sexism, I'm not just doing so because it is inconvenient for me, I'm doing so because I don't know HOW they'll react. Another poster suggested that option D would be the man take the criticism constructively, learns and moves on. I can think of maybe 2 met in my life who do just that. The other men aren't bad guys - indeed, my partner would never have just accepted the call out without raising an eyebrow. Like another poster mentioned, it is literally human nature to react defensively. And you have no idea how that defensiveness will play out, who will decide you just need to be put in your place, etc. While not all men get violent, all women have received threats of violence from men. You don't know.

He literally just told her who the Trailblazers were to provide context. That's it. If she found it offensive, that's sort of her problem, no? If this situation were to replay itself, and she had told him that he had just been sexist, he's supposed to simply accept it without question? He didn't tell her to go make him a sandwich, he just offered a pre-emptive explanation. People are not obligated to just accept other people's explanation of things and put aside their own ability to analyze a situation. Just because somebody is easily offended does not mean there was actually something offensive said.

I think you would benefit from following the link on "microaggressions" in my original comment and exploring the website to see what the term really means.

I want to start by saying thank you. I appreciate the fact that you went out of your way to word your response to not sound aggressive or accusational. I feel comfortable talking about this without the fear that I already offended you.

I'm glad you feel that way, so long ad you are also open to listening to others who express their feelings differently than I.

About the second part I don't think that's what happened but in a piece about taking a stand in the face of prejudice it didn't really happen within the context of the story.

I feel like I kind of addressed this earlier, a little bit. But I also feel like, in addition to that point, I may be thinking about this in the context of many other discussions happening about feminism right now. One of them is the role of a man in feminism. While a woman puts herself on the line when she expresses a feminist view point, this isn't really the case for men. In fact, men who express themselves as feminists are often applauded. Particularly in geek spaces which continue to value the male perspective so much higher than any other, men often get to define acceptable rules of behavior for those around them. Thus, when you saw Greg Rucka speak up about the t-shirt he saw, you saw many people applaud him, and posts on comicsalliance and various feminist blogs about why men doing things like that is so crucial. You can't force the target to fight all of the battles on their own. When I read the post, I was thinking about the people who WEREN'T the target that were also present - could they not also speak up and thus diffuse some of the tension?

In addition, Types was describing a symptom of the bigger problem. It would be silly - and easy to be typecast as the so-called angry feminist - to call out every instance of assumed ignorance based on race or gender. I'm not going to go to the doctor because I have an odd cough now and then, take a cough drop after every cough... But if those coughs are symptomatic of a larger issue (which in this metaphor, they are), I'm going to start taking cough medicine every day. I'll take a cough drop when it feels extra gross. But it is excessive to try to medicate myself after every single instance. Does that make sense? Not sure if it is a well-working metaphor...

[ExcelsiorPrime]

Or the behavior is so deeply a part of the culture there doesn't appear to be anything TO do. As has been pointed out, the guy could just as well have been offended at being called on it.
I was having a discussion online with someone about crime, and during the talking they pointed to an article "analyzing" the issue published on a white supremacist website. I told them I didn't accept that as a source, and the guy went ballistic, and another participant went on a rant about being tired of hearing about racism, and being called a racist because she wasn't liberal, and on and on. People's most common response to being called on their behavior isn't to learn, IME, it's to double down (and on that point there is actual social psychology research on why it happens, because it does) and stop listening.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...e-got-ideology

"Rather, when faced with evidence discomfiting deeply held beliefs, we often ignore the new information, “doubling down” on the original belief. In psychology, we call this belief perseverance. "

I don't think it would have helped then and there. I could be wrong, but not likely.

ahhh. yes double down..that is true. One of the more interesting aspect of Michael Crichton's Sci-FI novel SPHERE in which a team of scientists encounter an unidentified underwater object was the Psychologists concept of how persons deal with uncomfortable situations.

Doubling down mentally was one of the main developments. That when people confront their own dogma instead of revelation, it often leads to returning to previous ideology even more.

Plato's Cave is another excellent example. I believe the person who returned to the cave to tell the others there was a world outside beyond looking at shadows on the wall..was killed.

But I think its still necessary to battle preconceived notions if not for us, for the next generation so that they at least have a chance to follow their own train of thought and not to blindly adhere to their forefather's beliefs.

And Personally--I have to practice what i preach.

It is pretty gross and disappointing that this thread is not about the subject matter of the article but rather a personal attack on how people think Types should or shouldn't behave as an activist. Her means to activism are hers to decide, not yours.

Its the go to, in ignoring the gist of anything. To bog down in the minutia of the delivery or to pick some thread on a tapestry of complex thought and pull on it hoping the entire thing will unravel. Her article was quite clear.

yeah she could have confronted that man, but that wasn't the entirety of what the article was about.

[Tonamelt]

I think you would benefit from following the link on "microaggressions" in my original comment and exploring the website to see what the term really means.

"Microaggression" is just a theory.

This is my opinion: Life is hard, people sometimes are mean, I doesn't matter if you are a man or a woman, people sometimes are disrespectful, and sometimes you face danger, it's not sexism or racism if someone gives you a bad look... It's (sadly) the real world.

And no, I'm not being an Alex Summers, I'm not gonna say something like "The M word represents everything I hate" or something like that... My point is: Everyone faces that kind of thing when going outside, regardless of their gender. We must focus on being strong, instead of overthinking it and feel vulnerable. That's my opinion, sorry if I offend anyone.

[Marc Lombardi]

It is pretty gross and disappointing that this thread is not about the subject matter of the article but rather a personal attack on how people think Types should or shouldn't behave as an activist. Her means to activism are hers to decide, not yours.

Just to clarify my point on this topic. I am not criticizing her for not confronting him about his microaggression/insult. I am criticizing that she is calling for people to stand up for themselves when she herself doesn't appear to have done so (or at least she didn't present herself as doing so in her own article). I think it's a little hypocritical and disingenuous to expect people to "speak up!" when they are talked down to when she herself doesn't appear to have done so in this instance.

I think your cough drop/cough medicine metaphor is a good one though and I certainly understand that concept. In that regard, maybe telling this story using another example from what is certainly a long list of them based on her account...one that would have required a cough drop perhaps?...would have been a little more well received.

[Petotto Parkavius]

I think you would benefit from following the link on "microaggressions" in my original comment and exploring the website to see what the term really means.

I am familiar with the concept of 'microaggressions,' thank you. I simply don't agree that what transpired as described in the article was one. He over explained something, perhaps, but that's hardly an aggressive or insulting act. Again, just because a person feels insulted does not mean an insult was given.

[galaxygnome]

"Microaggression" is just a theory.

This is my opinion: Life is hard, people sometimes are mean, I doesn't matter if you are a man or a woman, people sometimes are disrespectful, and sometimes you face danger, it's not sexism or racism if someone gives you a bad look... It's (sadly) the real world.

And no, I'm not being an Alex Summers, I'm not gonna say something like "The M word represents everything I hate" or something like that... My point is: Everyone faces that kind of thing when going outside, regardless of their gender. We must focus on being strong, instead of overthinking it and feel vulnerable. That's my opinion, sorry if I offend anyone.

Microaggressions aren't a theory. it's a term for a certain set of experiences. I can't really tell from your reply if you did follow the original link, but it doesn't really sound like you did. :/

You're not offending me, but I don't really think you're hearing me - or maybe I'm not explaining in the right way? This is a pretty big piece, and it is about intersectional feminism, not just feminism as a whole, but maybe it will help us see on the same page a bit about why pretending all of us experience the same things and just need to get on with it... gives us more problems than good: http://www.muhlenberg.edu/media/cont...ng%20lorde.pdf

[harashkupo]

It is pretty gross and disappointing that this thread is not about the subject matter of the article but rather a personal attack on how people think Types should or shouldn't behave as an activist. Her means to activism are hers to decide, not yours.

E.G. I participated in inter-group dialogue workshops for years around race/sexuality/class/gender/etc, and I do grow and learn fairly well in that environment, but I have quickly found that my skill set is just not matched for the protest environment. I will support the hell out of others pursuing that brand of activism, but it is not the best format for me to use my skills. Types is a writer. I imagine some of her most favored skills are her writing skills. She is being an activist by writing. Not everyone can or should be every single kind of activist - that isn't a real life!




Absolutely. I don't know why I didn't include that, but absolutely.

I feel like something a lot of people forget in these "debates" is that women live in a culture of fear. In a casual conversation in a group of college freshman years ago, I remember discussing safety tips for living in the city. I mentioned that in addition to never having headphones, only walking on well lit streets, etc, I have gained the habit of watching the sidewalk as I walk, so that I could see the shadow of anyone who approached me. I've been followed for significant lengths of time before. I've been heckled at while fully covered. I've had men sit next to me on the train and block my exit with their feet, then persistently ask for my phone number and demand why I am not adequately paying attention to them. Casual threats of violence are an every day part of a woman's life. We all have these stories, and worse.

Yet apparently it's that easy to challenge a man on their sexism. A man we just met and have no prior knowledge of, next to other people we also don't know. When I don't challenge someone on their sexism, I'm not just doing so because it is inconvenient for me, I'm doing so because I don't know HOW they'll react. Another poster suggested that option D would be the man take the criticism constructively, learns and moves on. I can think of maybe 2 met in my life who do just that. The other men aren't bad guys - indeed, my partner would never have just accepted the call out without raising an eyebrow. Like another poster mentioned, it is literally human nature to react defensively. And you have no idea how that defensiveness will play out, who will decide you just need to be put in your place, etc. While not all men get violent, all women have received threats of violence from men. You don't know.



I think you would benefit from following the link on "microaggressions" in my original comment and exploring the website to see what the term really means.



I'm glad you feel that way, so long ad you are also open to listening to others who express their feelings differently than I.



I feel like I kind of addressed this earlier, a little bit. But I also feel like, in addition to that point, I may be thinking about this in the context of many other discussions happening about feminism right now. One of them is the role of a man in feminism. While a woman puts herself on the line when she expresses a feminist view point, this isn't really the case for men. In fact, men who express themselves as feminists are often applauded. Particularly in geek spaces which continue to value the male perspective so much higher than any other, men often get to define acceptable rules of behavior for those around them. Thus, when you saw Greg Rucka speak up about the t-shirt he saw, you saw many people applaud him, and posts on comicsalliance and various feminist blogs about why men doing things like that is so crucial. You can't force the target to fight all of the battles on their own. When I read the post, I was thinking about the people who WEREN'T the target that were also present - could they not also speak up and thus diffuse some of the tension?

In addition, Types was describing a symptom of the bigger problem. It would be silly - and easy to be typecast as the so-called angry feminist - to call out every instance of assumed ignorance based on race or gender. I'm not going to go to the doctor because I have an odd cough now and then, take a cough drop after every cough... But if those coughs are symptomatic of a larger issue (which in this metaphor, they are), I'm going to start taking cough medicine every day. I'll take a cough drop when it feels extra gross. But it is excessive to try to medicate myself after every single instance. Does that make sense? Not sure if it is a well-working metaphor...

I hope I didn't give the impression that I think she's an angry feminist. You mention the other people, the friend and the wife were present and anyone could have mentioned it but didn't. We don't know if they picked up on but she did. We also don't know what she did or didn't do because it's not in the article. All we are left with is non action right before she calls for people to act. That doesn't sit right with me.

I understand everything you said as to why she wouldn't, why she shouldn't have to, and I'm in agreement that everyone has their own way of dealing with this and there is no right way. From personal experience I've been able to grow because people have taken me to the side and told me when I screwed up. And honestly I just keep imagining what I would be like if they just let it happen and not say a thing. It's not reasonable for someone to constantly correct people if that's all they're doing especially when they're the ones who should be apologized to in the first place. But at the end of the day it feels like a chance to change one man's mind and it didn't happen. Maybe after some sleep cuz it's late as hell I'll see things differently.

[galaxygnome]

I don't mean to ignore other replies to me, I'm just strapped on time and if I don't feel there is anything substantive to add to the conversation at that point I'm just skipping past for now. I've certainly read everything, though. agree to disagree, planting seeds, all that.

Just to clarify my point on this topic. I am not criticizing her for not confronting him about his microaggression/insult. I am criticizing that she is calling for people to stand up for themselves when she herself doesn't appear to have done so (or at least she didn't present herself as doing so in her own article). I think it's a little hypocritical and disingenuous to expect people to "speak up!" when they are talked down to when she herself doesn't appear to have done so in this instance.

I think your cough drop/cough medicine metaphor is a good one though and I certainly understand that concept. In that regard, maybe telling this story using another example from what is certainly a long list of them based on her account...one that would have required a cough drop perhaps?...would have been a little more well received.

I can definitely understand that perspective. As a whole, however, I think it is less productive to critique the rhetoric of others when we essentially agree with their point, as opposed to suggesting new and further ways to promote that message ourselves. IE if I think that article could have been written more effectively, I'm not going to drag her down for what she wrote, I'm going to go out and write about it myself and see if I can bring it to that further step I'm looking for, you know?

Maybe some of my perspective here also comes from, what would be for me, a nasty and tired tradition of women bringing other women down because they are "not feminist enough" or are "too feminist." I think her post had a target audience and it likely reached that audience, but I'm not her editor and it's not my job to evaluate that. If I think the message should be expressed differently or more extensively - that's not her job anymore, that's mine. yanno? I'm sure she has her job for a reason, kinda thing.