[Womoz] Womoz Digest, Vol 11, Issue 10

[Leigh Honeywell]

On 10-06-17 02:03 PM, Majken Connor wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Leigh Honeywell <leigh at hypatia.ca
> <mailto:leigh at hypatia.ca>> wrote:
>
>     On 10-06-17 01:46 PM, Majken Connor wrote:
>
>         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."

Ahh, I see.  I didn't go far up enough in the thread, and thought you 
were responding to a different bit.  Your email client makes the 
threading a bit tricky, might I suggest Thunderbird? :)

Assuming you were responding to this statement of mine:

"And I think it's massively important to allow people to process hurt 
and discrimination they have sufffered without worrying about whose 
fee-fees they are hurting in that processing.  I think that's what 
Melissa was trying to get at with her posts.  Let's try to engage with 
some of the hurt that cme's experienced, rather than going on forever 
about how exactly she chose to talk about it? "

It's not that I don't think men deserve consideration.  It's that 
sometimes we're allowed to process our experiences without worrying 
about their fee-fees being hurt.  That "sometimes" is the big 
differentiator there - there's a context for men to participate in these 
conversations in a constructive way as well, and in that context 
obviously a bit more attention to language and "tone" (ugh) is useful 
and productive.

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

Hopefully the above clears it up - I wasn't addressing Tiffney's comments.

-Leigh