Support NeoGAF

[Enter The 36 Chambers]

Yeah, the glass ceiling should be broken sooner than later and sexual harassment needs to be busted. But shaming guys over "manspreading" is reaching.

Do I even want to know what this means?

 

[T.O.P]

Do I even want to know what this means?

Since i don't wanna give Buzzfeed any clicks, here's H3H3 video of it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T77frLL_bsg

Enjoy

 

[NoblesseOblige]

Do I even want to know what this means?

Given your previous post I would guess that no you aren't interested in what it means.

 

[Des0lar]

Do I even want to know what this means?

Spreading your legs on public transportation. As with all things it is not a black and white topic.

 

[eso76]

Not even the most active feminist activists can come to agreement on what it actually means and what they stand for, and pretending it's only about gender equality is disingenuous, it goes far beyond that.

I will fight against gender discrimination wherever it exists, but the world needs more nuance on this subject, for some it's really black and white.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_movements_and_ideologies

this

 

[Famassu]

Do I even want to know what this means?

Manspreading is just men sitting with their legs spread, often in a way that can kind of draw attention to their crotch. Some people crticize it because it either takes up a lot of space in trains, buses etc. (so less people can sit) vs sitting with your legs shut or crossed or whatever, some feel that at least some men use it to draw attention to the bulges in their pants, which can make public, tight spaces like metros a bit discomforting for women in those situations.

 

[Jimnymebob]

Your view of the creative process is incredibly naive. A lot of the time those decisions aren't made due to some lofty artistic vision. They're made because white men are the default, so people immediately imagine a character as such until told otherwise. Then it takes effort to change that idea despite the fact that it doesn't matter.

The problem is compounded by the fact that while no one project is an inherent problem the aggregate of all games is that there's a glut of generic white guys. So how do you meaningfully solve that problem? Well you have two avenues:

1) Criticise the problem as a whole
2) Criticise individual projects

The problem with 1) is that if you do that while your criticism is being more accurately and fairly directed each individual project contributing to that whole evades culpability. It becomes "somebody's else's responsibility" to fix. Generally you'll see both of those avenues being explored at once, raising awareness of the general problem and the fact that it's not really any individual project's fault. But still asking individual directors etc to question their choices more aggressively.

Wait, white men are usually behind large corporations and the decisions they make? Well I am shocked!

What I'm saying is, people behind the creative process who are responsible for choosing the genders of character in media should be encouraged to include women, not made to feel guilty for including men.

 

[LeleSocho]

I'm a millenial so i don't like labels

 

[SomTervo]

Yes

 

[Snowybreak]

Yes, no doubt about it.

 

[Famassu]

this

Meh, there's some debate what, say, a pursuit of "equality"means and how to achieve it but generally feminism tries to be be as inclusive as possible. And just because there are differing opinions doesn't make the labeling totally worthless. Own it. Make it your own, though do not be afraid to challenge your own notions and listen to differing opinions to at least learn what others think about it, maybe picking up a few new lessons in the process that you can incorporate into your own thoughts about the subject.

 

[televator]

Do I even want to know what this means?

The position you sit in that doesn't crush your junk.

 

[nkarafo]

If it's about equal rights, yes.

If it's about special treatment, no.

 

[Buddy Mcpuddy]

Yup.

I was raised by a single working mother and I have two sisters, so feminism always made sense to me.

 

[Moosichu]

Yes, without a doubt.

 

[flintstryker]

Nope

 

[ClosingADoor]

Yes. Over here this stuff isn't as stupidly politicized (yet) as in the US also.

 

[Laughing Banana]

Sadly, I see this as a trend.

People letting some random tumblr-blogger, person they have had a negative encounter with or psychotic person conveniently define a concept in a negative way, so they can safely stay away from it, not take the time to define what it mean for themselves, not having to think for themselves. This is like the most basic version of the strawman fallacy.

Every conceivable idea ever will have some randoms persons defining themselves as belonging to it while giving it some twisted weird content. This does not necessarily mean the idea or general movement is a bad one.

If "feminism" to you - a general you, not you DocSeuss, by laboriously reading tumblr blogs or by other means have come to mean: "cutting up men" or "sjw censorship of anime boobs", then maybe it is time to put in some work and reclaim the concept for yourself? Give the concept your own positive content, don't be intellectually lazy and let random people on the internet define it for you, just so you don't have to, or just so the concept most conveniently legitimates your own anxieties or fears.

You are saying that people should find their own definition of something, and yet it seems like what you are saying is if the definition that someone happens to find is a negative one, then it should not be acceptable...?

I mean, the bolded above, this is exactly what some in this thread is trying to do, yes? Defining the term in a way that is acceptable to them and refusing to accept that others may view it differently?

 

[Enter The 36 Chambers]

Since i don't wanna give Buzzfeed any clicks, here's H3H3 video of it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T77frLL_bsg

Enjoy

Spreading your legs on public transportation. As with all things it is not a black and white topic.

Manspreading is just men sitting with their legs spread, often in a way that can kind of draw attention to their crotch. Some people crticize it because it either takes up a lot of space in trains, buses etc. (so less people can sit) vs sitting with your legs shut or crossed or whatever, some feel that at least some men use it to draw attention to the bulges in their pants, which can make public, tight spaces like metros a bit discomforting for women in those situations.

The position you sit in that doesn't crush your junk.

Thanks. Yeah I guess I do that. I dont like sitting legs together as it makes my balls feel uncomfortable.

Given your previous post I would guess that no you aren't interested in what it means.

I treat women with equal respect as men. I was raised that way. Just because Im not interested in talking about feminism with my friends or when not online, doesn't mean I don't support equal rights either.

People getting annoyed by men sitting with their nuts not being smushed is silly though.

 

[Kadayi]

I believe in equality, I don't, however, believe in exceptionalism.

 

[PancakeBurglar]

Yes

 

[CortexVortex]

If it's about equal rights, yes.

If it's about special treatment, no.

This.

 

[Famassu]

Thanks. Yeah I guess I do that. I dont like sitting legs together as it makes my balls feel uncomfortable.


I treat women with equal respect as men. I was raised that way. Just because Im not interested in talking about feminism with my friends or when not online, doesn't mean I don't support equal rights either.

People getting annoyed by men sitting with their nuts not being smushed is silly though.

Were not talking about normal sitting here, but the kind that takes the space of 1.5-2 people and which some men do use to demonstrate their magnificent bulges to people in public spaces. Even if it's not deliberate, people don't necessarily want to see trouser snakes in their commute and in tight spaces like metros, so the complaint isn't all without some merit.

Your balls aren't so big that you absolutely need to spread your legs THAT wide open (if they are, I'd get them checked).

I believe in equality, I don't, however, believe in exceptionalism.

Feminism isn't about exceptionalism in any manner or form.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

I treat women with equal respect as men. I was raised that way. Just because Im not interested in talking about feminism with my friends or when not online, doesn't mean I don't support equal rights either.

People getting annoyed by men sitting with their nuts not being smushed is silly though.

I made no such implications that your disinterest means you don't support equal rights. Just you proclaimed such conversation as 'shit' and expressed the inability to hang out with people who do delve into such topics. This still leaves me questioning why you would then be interested enough to query what manspreading is?

 

[Vincent Grayson]

I'm not big on labels, but if pressed, I would probably accept "feminist" as one. I just don't care for the baggage that comes with saying "I'm this" instead of proffering your actual beliefs and feelings about a thing.

Inevitably, "Yes, I'm a feminist" is likely to be followed by "So you believe X, Y, and Z?", and if it's some prick trying to challenge the concept, I'm honestly not interested in engaging in that shit anymore.

 

[BocoDragon]

Yes, easily I identify as a feminist.

And I am a cranky person who often tires of social justice dogmatism and think the left is frequently overreaching. I am not an unabashed "SJW" (I'm joking with that term but you know what I mean) and I still quickly apply the label of feminist to myself.

It comes down to this: do you recognize that unusual historical trends in the short history of civilization have privileged the male role? Yes, I would. And would you work to correct that because it is a biased state of affairs? Yes, I would. Therefore, I'm a feminist.

The state of males automatically being placed into a dominant role over society is a kind of lie. I hate lies. Therefore I'm a feminist, which means to smash that lie.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

In terms of policy, yes.

But I also indulge in porn, which you probably shouldn't as a feminist

 

[NoblesseOblige]

In terms of policy, yes.

But I also indulge in porn, which you probably shouldn't as a feminist

I hope you're joking, but sex positive feminism exists which generally has a favorable opinion of porn as long as it's performed by consenting actors who are not abused. There are even feminist-friendly porn producers who help assure that all parties are treated fairly on set.

 

[Enter The 36 Chambers]

Were not talking about normal sitting here, but the kind that takes the space of 1.5-2 people and which some men do use to demonstrate their magnificent bulges to people in public spaces. Even if it's not deliberate, people don't necessarily want to see trouser snakes in their commute and in tight spaces like metros, so the complaint isn't all without some merit.

Your balls aren't so big that you absolutely need to spread your legs THAT wide open (if they are, I'd get them checked).


Feminism isn't about exceptionalism in any manner or form.

I think my balls are average sized. I am over 6ft though. I sit with my kegs spread a bit so my nuts can breathe.

I do think the argument is without merit. While I'm sure there is the odd douche who thinks his bulge looks great when sitting like that, I've never even considered it a thing.

I see it no different then girls wearing leggings and stuff to show off their asses. It's as logical to me as guys spreading their legs to show off their package. I just assume it's not some intentional display of their bodies for both genders. It's ridiculous in either case.

I made no such implications that your disinterest means you don't support equal rights. Just you proclaimed such conversation as 'shit' and expressed the inability to hang out with people who do delve into such topics. This still leaves me questioning why you would then be interested enough to query what manspreading is?

My apologies then. The tone of your post made me think that's what you were getting at. I misinterpreted it so.

I'm simply saying I don't regularly talk about social issues with friends or when not online. And that seems pretty common for me and my circle. Maybe were all dicks or something Idk.

It's a valid topic and like I said I do try to treat my girl and my female friends and Co workers with respect as equal as men.

I just wouldn't be arsed sitting with my boys and talking about sexism and inequality etc.

 

[Winters]

No. You don't have to be a feminist to believe in equality.

Spoiler

imo

 

[Famassu]

In terms of policy, yes.

But I also indulge in porn, which you probably shouldn't as a feminist

Nothing in feminism explicitly denies all porn. It takes issue in some forms of porn (i.e. depictions of fictional rape where the woman first struggles against it and then enthusiasticly enjoys it & rougher abusive stuff where the woman is treated like shiiiiiit), but sexual desires & enjoying looking at naked women aren't some kind of tabu (so long as those attitudes don't control you behaviour outside of you sessions) and masturbation with the help of porn isn't some grand sin in (all) feminism. Just maybe think of what kind of porn you support if you support it. Less rape & abuse, more "both parties enjoy it without too much abuse & extremely demeaning behavior towards the women"

 

[Zelias]

Absolutely, yes.

 

[Mohonky]

Manspreading is just men sitting with their legs spread, often in a way that can kind of draw attention to their crotch. Some people crticize it because it either takes up a lot of space in trains, buses etc. (so less people can sit) vs sitting with your legs shut or crossed or whatever, some feel that at least some men use it to draw attention to the bulges in their pants, which can make public, tight spaces like metros a bit discomforting for women in those situations.

Seriously......

 

[Kadayi]

Feminism isn't about exceptionalism in any manner or form.

The only person you can talk for is yourself, so mayhap it's wiser to be less grandiose in your proclamations as to what is or isn't.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

It's just, I have been known to get off to some pretty fucked up stuff. Which makes me ashamed to call myself a feminist

 

[Elandyll]

If it's about equal rights, yes.

If it's about special treatment, no.

But to achieve equality, there might be the need for selective special treatment (like quotas in positions of power)... That reminds me of how Affirmative Action for Black Americans is maligned as "giving them preference" when it's about correcting an imbalance and counter balancing unjust circumstances.

Pretty much also goes back to how some Men have tried to redefine feminism (which is essentially Women having equal rights and treatment) to a definition where Women are supposedly seeking superiority and preferential treatment.

Also, yes I do think of myself as a feminist.

 

[fantomena]

Yes.

 

[shintoki]

Yes, outside the one acquaintance who reads Tumblr and said that's its impossible for a woman to rape a man. To her, I'm a sexist! I forget what shit she is spewing about now.

 

[Famassu]

The only person you can talk for is yourself, so mayhap it's wiser to be less grandiose in your proclamations as to what is or isn't.

Feminism doesn't try to portray women as exceptional. Apart from some misandric extreme minority, feminist on average do not drive any kind of agenda that women are somehow exceptional or better in comparison to men. That's exactly what they are fighting against.

 

[sephi22]

No. That term has become too toxic. But I support feminism/egalitarianism.

It's kinda sad how people outright won't say it because they're scared of being lumped in with those mean ol' bra-burning feminazis.

Why is it sad? It's rational to not label yourself with a term that's often used by extremists. We've seen this happen on the gaming side, a lot of posters don't like the term gamer because of the negative connotations that come with it because of gamergate. If someone is pro-feminism or equal rights, we shouldn't need to browbeat them for not liking the term feminism.

 

[Fliesen]

Seriously......

please don't take those Tumblr blogs you're linked to on Reddit and whatever H3H3 finds on Buzzfeed as your indications of what "modern feminism" is.

Entertainers cherrypicking the crazies for comedy / satire should not be confused as having a somewhat representative sample.

Just as a side note.

 

[Cyanity]

Yep. I don't care if some people who don't understand the term have a problem with it; I'm a feminist and will fight for women's rights until the day I die.

 

[Nabbis]

Depends who is asking. Most of the time the answer would probably be no. In my experience the public understanding of the word here is filled with negative connotations.

 

[Famassu]

No. That term has become too toxic. But I support feminism/egalitarianism.

The term is only toxic among the MRA types and people who lean on their side even if they aren't full blown members of the crazy train, maybe some people who have let those groups successfully affect their opinions/views on the term but otherwise it shouldn't be considered toxic. If anything that should be reason to steal it back from their attempts to smear a perfectly respectable political/human rights movement for equality in our communities.

 

[jon bones]

of course, i'm not an asshole

 

[Boss Mog]

But to achieve equality, there might be the need for selective special treatment (like quotas in positions of power)... That reminds me of how Affirmative Action for Black Americans is maligned as "giving them preference" when it's about correcting an imbalance and counter balancing unjust circumstances.

To me equality doesn't mean having the same amount of each gender or race, it means that the best people, those who are the most deserving, through their efforts and achievements, are the one ones who get picked regardless of their gender or race. Picking somebody less deserving is by definition "special treatment".

 

[Kadayi]

But to achieve equality, there might be the need for selective special treatment (like quotas in positions of power)... That reminds me of how Affirmative Action for Black Americans is maligned as "giving them preference" when it's about correcting an imbalance and counter balancing unjust circumstances.

I think larger investment in education and social support structures that encourage people to excel is a far far better approach versus quotas in the long run. The inherent problem with quotas, is it leaves parties inside and out wondering if they got where they did on personal merit or simply because a box needed to be ticked somewhere, and doubt is a terrible thing.

Feminism doesn't try to portray women as exceptional. Apart from some misandric extreme minority], feminist on average do not drive any kind of agenda that women are somehow exceptional or better in comparison to men. That's exactly what they are fighting against.

How are you establishing your metric here? By what measure beyond your own convictions? I like Camille Paglia as she's a straight talker, but I wouldn't say her views are the consensus these days.

 

[Famassu]

To me equality doesn't mean having the same amount of each gender or race, it means that the best people, those who are the most deserving, through their efforts and achievements, are the one ones who get picked regardless of their gender or race. Picking somebody less deserving is by definition "special treatment".

Yeeeeah,how about no? Boys clubs, sexism, racism & other forms of discrimination can often mean that perfectly valid, equally if not sometimes even more talented canditates are looked over just because they are women or not white. Having an aim to hire more women doesn't mean that they just hire any worthless shit from the street with no education. It's about acknowledging the VERY REAL negative biases in many parts of societies and giving a bit of an extra push to those affected to stand on more equal ground with white men.

 

[Addi]

To me equality doesn't mean having the same amount of each gender or race, it means that the best people, those who are the most deserving, through their efforts and achievements, are the one ones who get picked regardless of their gender or race. Picking somebody less deserving is by definition "special treatment".

That's reasonable in itself if you have an even playing field, but not that's the world we are living in. You need the "special treatments" right now to give everybody the same chance and eventually get to the point where only achievements matter.

 

[Dark_castle]

I hope you're joking, but sex positive feminism exists which generally has a favorable opinion of porn as long as it's performed by consenting actors who are not abused. There are even feminist-friendly porn producers who help assure that all parties are treated fairly on set.

What about consenting adult who acted in a scene that shows the female counterpart being abused? This seems to be running rampart in the Japanese AV industry. I think that starts to step into the questionable territory for sure.