[Womoz] Womoz Digest, Vol 11, Issue 10

[Majken Connor]

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Leigh Honeywell <leigh at hypatia.ca> wrote:

> On 10-06-17 01:46 PM, Majken Connor wrote:
>
>>        Again, it's mega snarky, but I'm including it to point out that
>>        this is a part of this conversation, and conversations about
>>        race, class, sexuality, disability, and other axes of
>>        difference, that comes up over and over and over again.  There's
>>        no "nice enough" way to talk about this stuff.  We're always
>>        being "too hostile" or "too mean" when we call out
>>        discrimination.  It's one of the most effective ways for
>>        kyrarchies to maintain their power, as they get to define what
>>        "too mean" or "too hostile" is.
>>
>>
>> Hey, I'm all for being mean to the assholes. I think when someone really
>> has made a conscious choice, they deserve to reap the consequences.
>> However we know enough about biology and psychology now to know that
>> gender is not a hard binary line. We've already established that both
>> men and women can marginalize women based on gender. So yes, I believe
>> that any tactic that says screw them all, they don't deserve anything
>> from us is really morally wrong. It's not to win the argument.
>>
>
> No, you're missing my point - the problem with what's referred to as the
> "tone argument" is that there's never a "nice enough".
>

> For reference:
>
> http://theangryblackwoman.com/2008/02/12/the-privilege-of-politeness/
> ^^ about race/racism, but the same arguments apply more or less.
> http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Tone_argument
> http://derailingfordummies.com/#hostile
>
> Hope that makes it clearer.  I'm totally with you on both men and women
> being capable of marginalizing women - internalized sexism for the lose.
>  But it's not about "tactics that say screw them all", in my books. It's
> about what kind of dialog is "allowed" to take place and what's considered
> "too hostile".
>
> Hope that makes some sense,


Ok. I was replying in the context, that you were replying to my use of the
argument you linked to. I was responding to specific comments made earlier
that were very much along the lines of "men don't deserve consideration."

As for the bits about the "tone argument" I think you were replying to
Tiffney, so I'll just take it in.


>
>
> -Leigh
> _______________________________________________
> Womoz mailing list
> Womoz at lists.womoz.org
> http://lists.womoz.org/mailman/listinfo/womoz
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.womoz.org/pipermail/womoz/attachments/20100617/3662f259/attachment.htm>