Another post on the articles I found on science-fiction and feminism. If you haven't read them yet, refer to the last three articles first, please. The most recent comments there have clarified the issue quite a bit for me. Many thanks go to Arbitrary for his or her comments; and kudos on the ability to not rage about innacuracies in thinking.
From The War on Science Fiction and Marvin Minsky (fourth to last and the two last posts as of today)
Vicky Thorne November 26, 2009 at 8:21 pm
This is almost as bad as ’superheroes/comics are for boys! Since boys are the ones that want power! They are the ones that are agressive!’
Seriously, Pro-male/Anti-feminist Tech; get over yourself. Please. Remind me again how women have killed science-fiction? Science-fiction has a very loyal fanbase, as I’m sure you know, and I fail to see how because you are female you simply cannot like technology or science. Or that you must like romance. Romance is sappy. Science fiction is where all the good stuff comes out. Dystopias, social issues, how societies function, the possiblities of intellect…Tell me how it is impossible for me to like science-fiction, or be an intelligent human being with likes and dislikes and things I will not stand to hear.Perhaps there are more boys and men who read science-fiction and/or comics, but did you ever think it was because we actually enjoy it but people like you just love to kick us around and then say that we won’t stand for abuse that you aren’t taking because we have very slight genetic differences?
Arbitrary November 26, 2009 at 9:26 pm
Vicky, I am afraid you have completely missed the point; you seem to think that the thesis of this article is entirely reversed from its actual intent. The author (and I) have no inherent problem with women reading or writing science fiction. The problem is that science fiction, as a genre, has been warped to target women as an audience; no one here is claiming that all girls are purely interested in romance, or that girls are biologically incapable of expressing interest in male-targeted entertainment. The point of the article is that, in an effort to “be more inclusive of girls” (that is, to target them, being a more valuable audience), male-targeted science fiction has been crowded out of the marketplace.
It is because of these differences in targeting that the symptoms of these problems arise; shows focused on relationship drama and on advancing a social agenda (surreptitiously, not to be confused with confronting social issues) rather than the themes of man conquering nature (both his own and that which surrounds him) and allegories of philosophical and social problems.
I will not defend the claim that these targeting assessments accurately reflect viewer interests; I don’t have to. Regardless of whether they do, or do not (and I would assume that they do, given the amount of money riding on the issue), they are the assessments made by the industry. We are here expressing an interest that their desire to grab a female market (misguided or not) not crowd out the entertainment we are looking for.
Vicky Thorne December 3, 2009 at 1:55 pm
Thank you for clarifying the point, Arbitrary, the problem here is that the way the argument is presented seems to be saying that you and the author do not want women in science fiction in any way. I think your post should be added on the end as a edit to the article. It could very well stop the flaming that seems to be going on all through this comment thread.Anyhow, I completely agree with all your points, but it might perhaps be better to address these concerns to the industry instead of (perhaps seemingly)to feminists and women to prevent further misunderstandings.
From We Are All Misogynists Now
Vicky Thorne November 26, 2009 at 9:11 pm
Completely agreeing with you here that rampant feminism in which all people do is insult eachother is completly besides the point and unhelpful. However, what I’m seeing in this article is circular reasoning. The women/feminists have a knee-jerk reaction of shaming language to apparent misogyny and you are comparing them to ‘bleating sheep’ and Klansmen and Nazis. That is also shaming language. So shaming language is invalid… yet both sides are using it. Therefore that brings about the conclusion that neither side’s arguments are valid; so everyone needs to shut up and go home and not come out until they can think of something comstructive to say which does not involve insulting people.
Arbitrary November 26, 2009 at 9:38 pm
Vicky, you’ve again not accurately read the article presented.
The article is not comparing feminists to Klansmen or Nazis. It’s saying that feminists use the label “misogynists” on men to try to make them seem equivalent to Klansmen and Nazis.
The article did, however, call the people bleating knee-jerk reactions sheeple. If you feel that this is an unwarranted insult, I suggest that you consider carefully the way in which this claim was introduced.
Vicky Thorne December 3, 2009 at 1:44 pm
I went back and looked, you’re right, Arbitrary, it does say in the article that “feminists use the label “misogynists” on men to try to make them seem equivalent to Klansmen and Nazis” as you put it. Thank you for pointing this out.Sheeple? Sheep-people or she-people? I’ve never heard that term before.Also, which claim? My claim about circular reasoning or the article’s claim about misogyny?
“Instead, we look to you and say, if we are Misogynists…SO WHAT?!”“SO WHAT?!” It offends a lot of women, that’s what. That is why so many people are complaining here.
“If we are what you call “Misogynist,” it is only so because we are reacting to a society and culture that has embraced Misandry as an acceptable cultural value.” If it is”an acceptable cultural value”, why are so many people objecting? It is because they do not feel it is acceptable, so it is a change in society. Therefore it is becoming not acceptable and you should realize that. If you want to decry the notion and file objections, go ahead; but keep in mind that many people will reply to this sort of thing as they have.
Arbitrary December 3, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Sheeple is a portmanteau combining sheep and people, and I was referring to the original article’s claim.
And I’m afraid that I honestly don’t care if telling the truth offends people; better to tell the truth and offend someone than to lie and hurt people in order to make a select few feel better about themselves, or to stand silently by as others do the same.
If telling the truth makes me a misogynist, I’m prepared to accept that label.
Vicky Thorne December 3, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Perfectly admirable viewpoint, and really that’s what this whole thing is about, right? Telling the truth as you see it? Cultural movements like femisim get started because the collective truth of a majority is changed.