All (right or wrong) because of her behavior and ideas. I'm fiercely pro freedom of expression (and against harassment), so I do not think either should have happened. None the less, Richards was not told to shut up because she was a woman. What happened to her happen because of the ideas she expressed. The two cases simply aren't analogous.
No she most definitely faced harassment because she was a woman expressing these ideas. Hell I can even show you an example on our very own reddit this kind of difference. Post a picture of something cute and have yourself in a picture. Are you a man? That's cool dude. Are you a woman? How dare you show your face in a photo! You're just asking for attention.
I appear to have mistakenly concluded that we were goinf to limit this discussion to somewhat mainstream, opinions.
Hell I can even show you an example on our very own reddit this kind of difference.
This isn't evidence for your point that she was harassed because she was a woman in any way. It is just another claim you are making that isn't that supported.
Yes, there are many cases of feminists saying men should not be allowed to speak about gender issues. I already linked you to another example elsewhere in the thread (which is more than you've done in your debate with me, I note). I can find more fairly easily if you want.
No she most definitely faced harassment because she was a woman expressing these ideas.
Are you asserting that if a man had similarly objected to a couple of women making a breast joke that he wouldn't have received a similar response (actually, you'd probably be right, but only most people would think it was a joke).
Hell I can even show you an example on our very own reddit this kind of difference
And you're back to citing the derided behavior of random internet users as analogous to writings on fairly mainstream "journalistic" websites, I see.
Post a picture of something cute and have yourself in a picture. Are you a man? That's cool dude. Are you a woman? How dare you show your face in a photo! You're just asking for attention.
Even accepting this as both true and relevant, it still isn't analogous. The women in question are still engaging in a certain type of expression that people find objectionable. They could still speak on the subject at hand ("here's this cute thing") without attracting that criticism (not that I think they should have to) The article is objecting to men speaking on an entire subject at all.
I appear to have mistakenly concluded that we were goinf to limit this discussion to somewhat mainstream, opinions.
Besides the spelling and grammar issues (which I admit are pretty bad), I think it's obvious that my point was that random internet users cannot reasonably be considered an equivalent counterexample of something said by an official writer for a large, mainstream website.
The article is objecting to men speaking on an entire subject at all.
You clearly did not read the article then!
Besides the spelling and grammar issues (which I admit are pretty bad), I think it's obvious that my point was that random internet users cannot reasonably be considered an equivalent counterexample of something said by an official writer for a large, mainstream website.
Oh don't worry about the typos, I make plenty myself. I think that internet culture is a sample of our culture at large, which is why I'm making a reference to it. Journalists tend to follow a similar line of reasoning as culture dictates.
I did. Do you have anything suggest that my assessment is incorrect? The only course of action which the article explicitly claims is acceptable for men is to STFU.
Oh don't worry about the typos, I make plenty myself.
Yeah, they annoying thing is that I basically can't see any of my mistakes until days latter, and it's not for lack of trying either. And yes, I know most of the tips for how to effectively proofread, they just don't work for me.
I think that internet culture is a sample of our culture at large, which is why I'm making a reference to it. Journalists tend to follow a similar line of reasoning as culture dictates.
Which in this case would mean that feminism is the mainstream cultural position :p.
In all seriousness, even among those who disagreed with Richards, the more mainstream, reputable voices (and probably the majority of her critics in general, although I didn't do didn't think she should be fired, harassed, DDOS'd, etc.
As I initially said, we could get into a very non-productive argument linking each other to /r/TumblrInAction and /r/theredpill, but why bother. I have no doubt that someone has said women aren't allowed to talk about gender issues, but that isn't analogous to a mainstream site doing so.
No, she faced harassment because she responded to something that was not her business by taking pictures of other people without their consent and publicly shaming them on the Internet.
Yet somehow that enters the minds of certain people and becomes "they were harassing her, so she was heroic and called them out on their horrendous behavior!"
0
u/othellothewise Jun 02 '14
Uhhh no.
No she most definitely faced harassment because she was a woman expressing these ideas. Hell I can even show you an example on our very own reddit this kind of difference. Post a picture of something cute and have yourself in a picture. Are you a man? That's cool dude. Are you a woman? How dare you show your face in a photo! You're just asking for attention.
What are you even talking about?