sophiaserpentia | (no subject)

Entry tags:

(no subject)

Hmm, somehow a few people took my reposting of Moby's blog entry about misogyny in music to mean i support censorship.

When did i ever promote censorship? I don't support it, and neither, apparently, does Moby.

How is it that people hear someone saying, "People should own up to the ramifications of their words," and translate this into calling for censorship?

A few months ago i wrote about a phenomenon i've noticed, in that people speaking outside of the established viewpoint of public discourse are automatically presumed to have an agenda. This is one of the many hidden ways in which language is used against egalitarian radicals -- you are programmed to make all kinds of assumptions when you hear certain things that sometimes have nothing to do with what is actually being said.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I have noticed that everytime someone criticizes gross misogyny in popular culture, many people have a knee-jerk reaction of accusing the criticizer of wishing censorship. The irony is that by doing so, they are themselves attempting to silence any criticism or dissent. It truly sickens me that many people find it more acceptable to sanction virulent misogyny and homophobia via silence than they are to hear any criticism of said misogyny and homophobia.

Yes, it's a memetic ruse which the kyriarchy implants in people to keep them from hearing what radicals are really saying fnord, and to make radicals waste valuable time and energy defending themselves against all kinds of accusations. This strategy is working particularly well in the backlash against feminism.

This strategy is nonetheless working quite well in the backlash against [insert progressive humanist cause here]. Any suggestions for an antidote? I'm getting rather tired of people who can't tell criticism from condemnation, or condemnation from censorship.

I'm afraid i don't. It throws me for a loop every time. I'm hoping to build up a set of tagged and bookmarked journal entries that i can link back to everytime a knee-jerk accusation comes up, but it takes years to build that up.

You ever get ljArchive to work for you? I seem to remember it was not working for you. I use it all the time to find past entries and comments I want to point out to people.

I got it to work, finally. It may have been an OS issue, since it didn't work on my old machine with Win98 but works on my XP machine.

Have you checked out

ginmar's LJ? She's got some very good writings on the subject. Ranty and pointy, which I enjoy but don't envy the flameage it generates towards her; sometimes incredibly verbose; but she always makes me think, and I value that.

Ha ha, here's a list of 'em - http://www.livejournal.com/users/ginmar/444558.html

Personally, I think radical and rude feminists have caused the backlash against feminism. I've been insulted and yelled at for doing something as simple as opening the door for a woman.

That type of behaviour discredits the movement because it's visible and personal and thus memorable and extremely negative. Some women need to learn that men are not the enemy and female empowerment can't be achieved by belittling men.

I was not suggesting that you support censorship, I was merely noting that I would rather unpopular & even destructive memes be presented in art or speech rather than see them repressed.

but here's the thing. there is a difference between allowing them to be represented and actually celebrating them and artists who create them. currently these people and their work is being encouraged because few in the industry have the backbone to stand up and say that sort of speech is wrong and actually act upon their convictions.

Nods. People do need to use their own right of expression to stand up- that's what I meant about a protest where ever the Klan has rallys

I wish I could sit on a big overstuffed pillow with coacoa and talk to you.

I am guilty of skimming through my lj (since I do this at work) - but I am always happy when I do take the time to pause for your thoughts.

You have a wonderful way of boiling down to the essence.

"people speaking outside of the established viewpoint of public discourse are automatically presumed to have an agenda. This is one of the many hidden ways in which language is used against egalitarian radicals -- you are programmed to make all kinds of assumptions when you hear certain things that sometimes have nothing to do with what is actually being said."

i have noticed that but it never solidified in my mind until I heard you say it.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only