
what kind of friend are you?!
7 July, 2007So there’s this huge … something going on at tekanji’s blog. I’m disinclined to call it a discussion because frankly, anytime a major player in a comment thread suggests that women just “tolerate” sexism in gaming, it ceases to be anything even remotely resembling discussion and instead becomes something a little closer to concern trolling. Especially when it’s done under the guise of “love can heal all wounds, but only if you let it,” blah blah shut the fuck up until you know what you’re talking about.
*cough*
Anyway. Since the gist of the thread is about whether a statement has to intend to be sexist in order to actually be sexist, we have the following quote:
Assuming that there were no hard feelings intended from the offender how do you make the offender aware of what he has just said? Who wins when it’s largely a difference of opinion?
“who wins?” That’s your problem right there. This isn’t about winning or losing. This is about you having said something that offends/hurts someone else, and whether you’re going to continue offending/hurting them by arguing about the offense, or whether you’re going to apologise and attempt to make amends. In short, whether you’re going to be hostile or friendly.
Frankly, I don’t think you’re a very good friend at all if you’re going to take the former route. Denise has a good analogy:
Say you’re sitting at a table with several friends. You stretch, and unintentionally hit the person next to you in the face, hard. Is the correct response to berate the person who has been hurt for leaning forward, or is it to apologize and keep greater awareness of your surroundings? Nic’s response has been telling the person who has been hit to stop being so sensistive and continuing on in ignorance. Intent is a part of what matters. Your friend would likely find the anger at being struck easier to let go of once he or she knew it was an accident. BUT that the injury was unintended does not make the injury go away. A failure to apologize and an insisitence that you are in the right when you injure people because you’re not paying attention makes you look like a jackass.
Exactly. Not meaning to do something doesn’t undo the fact that it has been done. I didn’t mean to overdraft my bank account, but that sure as hell doesn’t change the fact that I’m a couple hundred dollars in the hole. I didn’t mean to hurt my friend’s feelings, but that doesn’t change the fact that she is, in fact, hurt. And I can either argue — oh, oops, I mean “have a difference of opinion” with her as to the state of her feelings and the justification thereof. Or I can be a friend, apologise, and kiss and make up.
And that doesn’t just apply to gaming. That’s part of life. Now I know some people just have really huge issues with admitting when they’ve done something wrong — but most of them are toddlers. Adults, allegedly, are responsible individuals capable of taking ownership of their actions and the consequences of those actions, even the unintended ones.
I know it might make you look like an ass to own up to having done something wrong, but trust me, you’ll look like an even bigger ass if you’ve done something wrong and refuse to admit it, and not only refuse to admit it but go so far as to accuse the person who’s been kind enough to inform you that zie’s being intolerant or oversensitive.
Oh, and suggesting that women “tolerate” sexism because “intolerance leads to extremism”? The height of male privilege, unfriend. Or the depth, if you will. Take your pick, since gods know you don’t seem keen on listening to anything anyone else says.
nice argument you put forth. sometimes people refuse to take responsibilities for their unintentional actions simply because they refuse to see this perspective. they’re too “long-sighted” to see their fault because it is right in front of them.
If I update “Check my WHAT?” and forget to link this article, please poke me in the eye.
This encapsulates the “intent is not an excuse” argument perfectly.
The core idea behind it all is that you have a choice. Not only a choice in interpretation, but also in action and in reaction.
Argument out of “offense” arises because perception and degrees of offense are opinions. Do you suggest that I ignore my own opinion in favor of yours? Would you do the same for others?
Additionally, observe the political and historical use of intolerance as a means to justify and dominate others.
Nic, I’m somehow not surprised that you’ve missed the point entirely. You want to couch the argument in terms of abstraction, as though it’s somehow something that doesn’t involve real people with real feelings.
Let me clue you in: offending people? Involves real people. With real feelings.
When you’ve hurt someone’s feelings, you ask, whose opinion of the level of hurt is more correct — the one who’s currently hurting, or the one who’s negligently/recklessly caused the hurt?
And I’ll even make this easy: when you’ve got a stomachache, whose opinion do you trust on how bad it hurts — your own, or someone else’s?
You trust the person who’s hurting. Unless you somehow have ESP and have a better idea of how badly they’re hurting than they do, of course, in which case feel free to stomp all over their personal feelings regarding themselves and their experiences.
So no, it’s not “just a matter of opinion.”
Additionally, observe the political and historical use of intolerance as a means to justify and dominate others.
Funny, that’s primarily what I do here. It’s primarily what tekanji does too, and yet you’ve somehow managed to turn all the words around to make it sound like the person who’s hurting is somehow the intolerant one, for failing to tolerate the hurt. That’s called “blaming the victim,” Nic, and I’m not going to tolerate it here any more than tekanji did.
If you come back with any more apologisms for sexism, I’m blocking you. I don’t see why you should be allowed to completely disregard the spirit of this blog and this conversation to air your uninformed abstractions and to twist around the vocabulary commonly used here to your own sexist ends.
Nice try Nic.
My rules for discussion clearly state that this blog does not tolerate -isms and that includes defense of said -isms. Your failure to abide by these rules, in combination with having the audacity to suggest that I am being intolerant by refusing to allow you to comment despite your inability to follow those rules, has earned you the following ban, effective immediately.
[...] what kind of friend are you?! « Sara Speaking “This is about you having said something that offends/hurts someone else, and whether you’re going to continue offending/hurting them by arguing about the offense, or whether you’re going to apologise and attempt to make amends.” (tags: privilege assholes society sexism conversation) [...]
[...] another one from Sara Speaking: What kind of friend are you? Not meaning to do something doesn’t undo the fact that it has been done. I didn’t mean to [...]
[...] realised her costume might cause offense — it would not have entirely mitigated the damage (just because it was an accident doesn’t mean it didn’t hurt), but it would at least have demonstrated a sensitivity to the harm that had been caused, and would [...]
[...] http://saraspeaking.wordpress.com/2007/07/07/what-kind-of-friend-are-you/ Since the gist of the thread is about whether a statement has to intend to be sexist in order to actually be sexist, we have the following quote: Assuming that there were no hard feelings intended from the offender how do you make the offender aware of what he has just said? Who wins when it’s largely a difference of opinion? [...]