Op Ed

Kotaku - Nerds and Male Privilege.
The idea that perhaps the way women are portrayed in fandom is aleetle sexist is regularly met with denials, justifications and outright dismissal of the issue. So regularly, in fact, that there's a Bingo card covering the most common responses. Part of the notion of male privilege in fandom is that nothing is wrong with fandom and that suggestions that it might benefit from some diversity is treated as a threat.

But what is that threat, exactly?

View : : :
53.
 
Re: Op Ed
Dec 19, 2011, 04:09
53.
Re: Op Ed Dec 19, 2011, 04:09
Dec 19, 2011, 04:09
 
Morga wrote on Dec 19, 2011, 02:10:
This is a sad attempt by a Male feminist from Jezebel (they are under the same blog community banner with Kotaku. Notice how they link to each other) to put their hate filled propaganda into the gaming community.

Indeed, not only is the theory of “male privilege” dead wrong, if we were to use their arguments and definitions, we could say with statistical data that the opposite, or “female privilege,” would be a much more accurate conclusion. Truth is, feminist arguments hardly ever back up their claims of “male privilege” with anything more than superficial hyperbole or emotional tantrums. Sadly, all they can fall back on is the role of the oppressed victim in need of special treatment.

Yes, Priveledge can play out in several ways. You can be privileged in one area and not have privilege in another. These cherry-picked statistics aren't really indicative of privilege, and doesn't provide all the information, so it paints a skewed picture. for example, he could have included in his listing of stats that One in Four college women(25%) report surviving rape or attempted rape since their fourteenth birthday, compared to males at 3%, (on a side note did you know that women can be punished for being raped in some countries,) but then he wouldn't get a pretty post where everything listed is there solely to support his argument, providing an illusion of validity to his argument. The numbers don't tell the whole story, and all the numbers aren't even there.

Another example, they list unemployment rates in these stats, which shows women are more likely to be employed than men. What they left out of these statisics is that women are paid less for doing the same work men do. More women than men being employed is a result of the failing economy and stems from companies knowing they can get away with this, they are inclined to hire women instead of men or lay off male workers instead of women. If we looked at employment stats before the economy started taking a dump you would actually see that more men than women were employed then. They also leave out that men are more likely to be hired for higher-paying jobs. You'd be a fool to think that women don't have privilege as well, but you'd also be a fool to think that men also don't have privilege, and that in a patriarchal society, due to history, male privilege tends to be more readily apparent, and prevalent. Especially if you aren't part of the people who get to have that priviledge.
I think the wage gap is a great example of how male priveledge plays out. http://www.amptoons.com/blog/2003/10/07/the-wage-gap-series-so-far/

Of course, the article you quoted had a classic dismissal of feminism as calling them all emotional, Because we all know how women are, right?!

Also, I don't see what was hate filled propaganda about the article, No one is saying men are evil or anything like that, to deny that people have privilege (for example, males) and then talk about how their privilege influences something, I don't see as hateful at all. I mean, I guess you could see it as being hateful that he wants the gaming community to be more inclusive than we are as being threatening, but I certainly don't see it that way.
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
2.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
18.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
37.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
   Re: Op Ed
38.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
    Re: Op Ed
3.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
4.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
5.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
64.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
   Re: Op Ed
7.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
8.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
   Re: Op Ed
9.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
    Re: Op Ed
11.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
    Re: Op Ed
6.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
10.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
12.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
13.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
14.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
15.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
16.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
20.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
17.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
19.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
31.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
33.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
34.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
35.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
21.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
22.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
26.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
32.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
36.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
   Re: Op Ed
41.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
    Re: Op Ed
42.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
    Re: Op Ed
43.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
     Re: Op Ed
49.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
      Re: Op Ed
51.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
       Re: Op Ed
44.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
     Re: Op Ed
45.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
      Re: Op Ed
46.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
       Re: Op Ed
47.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
        Re: Op Ed
66.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
        Re: Op Ed
67.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
         Re: Op Ed
69.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
          Re: Op Ed
70.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
           Re: Op Ed
71.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
            Re: Op Ed
72.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
             Re: Op Ed
73.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
              Re: Op Ed
74.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
             Re: Op Ed
79.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
             Re: Op Ed
80.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
              Re: Op Ed
81.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
               Re: Op Ed
82.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
                Re: Op Ed
83.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
                 Re: Op Ed
76.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
          Re: Op Ed
77.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
           Re: Op Ed
23.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
24.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
25.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
27.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
28.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
29.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
48.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
50.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
   Re: Op Ed
52.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
    Re: Op Ed
 53.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
    Re: Op Ed
54.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
     Re: Op Ed
55.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
      Re: Op Ed
56.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
       Re: Op Ed
57.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
      Re: Op Ed
58.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
       Re: Op Ed
59.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
     Re: Op Ed
62.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
      Re: Op Ed
78.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
      Re: Op Ed
60.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
    Re: Op Ed
63.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
     Re: Op Ed
65.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
      Re: Op Ed
30.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
39.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
40.
Dec 18, 2011Dec 18 2011
61.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
68.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011
75.
Dec 19, 2011Dec 19 2011