I wonder how many men would be fine with having their salaries reduced to match their female contemporaries if it meant that it was no longer socially acceptable for someone to punch them in the face in the course of a heated argument.
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:39 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Amateurist (amateurist), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:40 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:41 (twenty-one years ago) link
hstencil, what you've posted is exactly what I was trying to avoid. Of course we all know the world is not a perfect place, and we don't need to argue about it because we all agree that women = men in rights, even if it doesn't pan out that way in the "real world".
Aaaaaaanyway, does anyone else have some tales of academic idiocy?
― Andrew (enneff), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:42 (twenty-one years ago) link
Hmm, well I dunno, I haven't been punched in an argument since I was at least a teenager. Also, if you think it's not "socially acceptable" in some sense to hit a women, I'd like to reintroduce you to the term "domestic violence."
― hstencil, Monday, 24 February 2003 20:42 (twenty-one years ago) link
Hstencil: The fact that men hit women (and children) does not mean it's socially acceptable. Is murder socially acceptable? How about car theft? Crime happens, ergo it is socially acceptable.
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:44 (twenty-one years ago) link
(and I'm not being sarcastic, either! (yes, I shock even myself))
― Andrew (enneff), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:45 (twenty-one years ago) link
Andrew I don't think it's necessarily a given that everyone here thinks the same way, even on something that you and I might agree as a pretty basic given.
― hstencil, Monday, 24 February 2003 20:46 (twenty-one years ago) link
just a tidbit of info
― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:46 (twenty-one years ago) link
― jess (dubplatestyle), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:46 (twenty-one years ago) link
― oops (Oops), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:46 (twenty-one years ago) link
― hstencil, Monday, 24 February 2003 20:47 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:47 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Andrew (enneff), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:49 (twenty-one years ago) link
I'm tired of Freud being appropriated as a punching bag by undereducated knee-jerk feminists (not necessarily by you Amateurist).
Actually, "gender studies" classes are often this lame. At Berkeley the real deal gender studies were in the rhetoric department.
― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:51 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:52 (twenty-one years ago) link
― jess (dubplatestyle), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:54 (twenty-one years ago) link
>Spencer, I agree, that's why I added the word "naive" (not that Freud didn't write his share of loopy, totally-bogus nonsense). <
― Amateurist (amateurist), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:54 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:55 (twenty-one years ago) link
These are the type of people who would say Dr. Strangelove is a porno.
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:56 (twenty-one years ago) link
― oops (Oops), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:57 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Maria (Maria), Monday, 24 February 2003 20:59 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Jody Beth Rosen (Jody Beth Rosen), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
Not only "relatively easy to get away with," but also "incredibly common and not second-guessed by the perpetrator." I would assume that one of the reasons I've see anti-domestic violence ads in public transit are because some men might not know it's a crime. I.e. it's "acceptible" to them.
Were the Enron-style shenaningans socially acceptable?
I'm sure there are plenty of people who don't return Ken Lay's phone calls, but I haven't seen a society-wide change because of any of this. Aside from the market being down, but that happened before Enron anyway.
If so, why are they being prosecuted?
Uh, well has anyone even brought charges yet against Ken Lay or Bernie Ebbers? Definitely those are two people involved in corporate scandals who are prolly not "socially acceptible" in the business world these days, but as of yet neither has been charged with anything.
― hstencil, Monday, 24 February 2003 21:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:02 (twenty-one years ago) link
― jess (dubplatestyle), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:03 (twenty-one years ago) link
< /sarcasm >
― hstencil, Monday, 24 February 2003 21:05 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:05 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark p (Mark P), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:05 (twenty-one years ago) link
I ask because I am a walker. I'm male, but of fairly slight proportions, but when I'm walking at night and happen to find myself behind a woman, or even two women, they usually turn back every so often or pick up their pace or turn off (the worst is when my path is coincidentally the same as theirs), but I get the very clear impression that my presence, as unintimidating as I may be to folks who know, makes them nervous.
― Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:08 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Cozen (Cozen), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:09 (twenty-one years ago) link
― oops (Oops), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:10 (twenty-one years ago) link
― jess (dubplatestyle), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:10 (twenty-one years ago) link
What I find amusing in Andrew’s examples, is that the phallic nature of the symbols are valid only for the primary observer.
The professor in the first example is in the practice of looking for phallic symbols and their symbolic oppression (to her) of her Sex— both personal and gender. Taken in the context of a course in studying self-oppression, one would be likely to see offences where none exist— or in this case seeing penises merely by opening one’s eyes.
For “Retard Girl,” the thought of being penetrated would have to be forefront in her conscious for her to take offense, which would be a knee-jerk response to cover the guilt of having naughty thoughts.
I find it likely that any course studying self-oppression would cause the student (and teacher) to invent slights where none exist.
― Sigmund Freud (SiggyBaby), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:11 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Cozen (Cozen), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:12 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Maria (Maria), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:12 (twenty-one years ago) link
The argument that says "It is socially acceptable to beat women because the men doing the beating don't realize it isn't socially acceptable" is really, really, really stupid. Given the media saturation of the past two decades of the problems of domestic abuse and heightened availability/awareness of options for getting out of abusive relationships, you would have to believe that every man who beats a woman is living under a rock if he realizes he's doing something wrong, let alone the whole manipulative "It's your fault, why do you make me do this to you?" tactic of keeping the victim from seeking help basically screaming that the abuser knows he's doing wrong.
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:13 (twenty-one years ago) link
how many women in here feel safe walking down a city street alone at night? I ask because I am a walker. I'm male, but of fairly slight proportions, but when I'm walking at night and happen to find myself behind a woman, or even two women, they usually turn back every so often or pick up their pace or turn off (the worst is when my path is coincidentally the same as theirs), but I get the very clear impression that my presence, as unintimidating as I may be to folks who know, makes them nervous.
I've noticed this too and I realized that I usually end up slowing my pace or crossing the street so I won't be perceived as a threat.
― Jonathan Williams (ex machina), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:15 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Mr. Diamond (diamond), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:15 (twenty-one years ago) link
― jess (dubplatestyle), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:15 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Cozen (Cozen), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:16 (twenty-one years ago) link
― hstencil, Monday, 24 February 2003 21:16 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Cozen (Cozen), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:17 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Jonathan Williams (ex machina), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:22 (twenty-one years ago) link
Perhaps there should be a separate thread for this issue, though.
― N. Cognito, Monday, 24 February 2003 21:27 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:30 (twenty-one years ago) link
I did not and have never said that domestic abuse wasn't a widespread problem. I said that domestic abuse is not socially acceptable. You say it is, largely because it exists. For evidence of this, you are offering the words of people who have committed domestic abuse as proof that people find it to be socially acceptable. I'm sorry, that's fucking stupid. Are you expecting these guys to break down and admit that they are wrong so that they can open themselves up to full prosecution? Surely I'm not the only one who thinks that is a dangerously naive view of how people who contravene socially accepted norms behave?
Painting aggressors as victims: Classic or Idiotic?
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:31 (twenty-one years ago) link
― g.cannon (gcannon), Monday, 24 February 2003 21:39 (twenty-one years ago) link
― N. Cognito, Monday, 24 February 2003 21:39 (twenty-one years ago) link
The point is that Lakoff doesn't deal with that stuff -- he recognizes that linguistics can only play a subordinate role to other disciplines in that sort of study and thus he avoids going there. He doesn't oppose it per se, but he also makes clear that his research need not have such implications -- of course I've yet to read his new one on philosophy so maybe I've just got a one sided view from having studied under him briefly.
I mean of course marketeers are going to play that stuff up too, because readers outside the discipline don't just want to know "Here are some interesting things" but "how can I use this?" except in many ways, they can't.
Is it taken as a given that no one in the linguistics world misinterprets him in the way you're saying simplified summaries tend to?
The problem I think is that there are distinct schools of linguistics -- chomskyian and less-so (and the less-so school is more dispersed but Lakoff is a recognized figure there). The less-so school is making inroads on questioning some long held comskyian assumptions, but it faces significant obstacles and I think that's more where these misreadings come in -- not from careful academic appraisals of these sorts of things, but off-the-cuff dismissals by exponants of a different school.
& I think Lakoff lends himself to these misreadings himself -- for example with his book "Moral Politics" on the structure of conservative thought. He's obviously thinking in a way conditioned by his academic work, but there's no actual connection to be drawn between his scientific work and a book like this. The implication of doing such a work in such a way can tend to undermine acceptance of his research sometimes, I think.
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 20:25 (twenty-one years ago) link
(I think another factor in interpreting Lakoff's less academic books is that they're, well, seriously far-reaching, with Moral Politics as the absolute pinnacle of that: a large proportion of this book's reviews say something like "well, this is certainly an interesting way of thinking about things, but I'm just not so sure it works that way..." Same for Metaphor We Live By, actually, in non-specialist review. But I'm not sure it's possible to comment on the basic concepts people use to view the world without people, umm, vigorously denying that their worldviews are definable enough to be discussed.)
― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 20:36 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 20:38 (twenty-one years ago) link
Are professors in other disciplines inclined to dabble as far and wide?
Is there some imperative on *their* part to demonstrate why otherwise quite abtruse work is of vital meaning in the world -- a science variation of my take on artistic ethos?
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 20:41 (twenty-one years ago) link
(The good safety valve they have at present is computational linguistics, I think, or if not that the bridge between traditional and computational linguistics: the part where people start caring about German applicatives is when they want German texts translated into Finnic and then subjected to "semantically rich" databasing and searching.)
― nabisco (nabisco), Tuesday, 25 February 2003 20:47 (twenty-one years ago) link
Why?
Because she was a woman and men were into threatening women with guns and bullets and therefore the word bullet should not be used because it intimidates women.
So just how in the hell are we to describe a "bulleted" list? A dotted list, perhaps? A listing with symbols before each separate item? It was horrid.
― I'm Passing Open Windows (Ms Laura), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 02:59 (twenty-one years ago) link
― gaz (gaz), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 03:07 (twenty-one years ago) link
But the class was very interesting (once I got past the whole "men keep women down, therefore all men are evil" stuff that the prof. dished-out - she really disliked males). I was (and am) most taken with the ideas about how male and female writing differs, especially at younger ages (teenage girls talking in exclamations, teenage boys being aggressive in their writing, etc.) While I see much of this as being stereotypical, there is still some basic truth that males and females are taught to espress themseles differently. Anyway, it's made me more conscious of how I use language and what it says about me and other writers. (And I'm now investigating the gender-marked language of the post-operative transsexual community - really interesting, in my mind.)
― I'm Passing Open Windows (Ms Laura), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 04:36 (twenty-one years ago) link
haha -- s. trife to thread!!!!!!
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 05:46 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Andrew (enneff), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 11:03 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Pete (Pete), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 11:09 (twenty-one years ago) link
― suzy (suzy), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 11:30 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 11:50 (twenty-one years ago) link
Suzy, I kiss you (in a nonsexual, non-threatening manner).
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 13:58 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 14:01 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 14:03 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 14:08 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 14:10 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 26 February 2003 14:11 (twenty-one years ago) link
nothing has ever happened less than the "gender studies class" described in OP
― What's (Left), Wednesday, 13 May 2020 00:47 (four years ago) link
Ah, the stupendous, death-defying heights of early ILX.
― pomenitul, Wednesday, 13 May 2020 00:50 (four years ago) link
great revive
― sleeve, Wednesday, 13 May 2020 00:58 (four years ago) link
ffs
― genital giant (Neanderthal), Wednesday, 13 May 2020 00:59 (four years ago) link
I think you mean fp
― sleeve, Wednesday, 13 May 2020 00:59 (four years ago) link
this thread is depressing.
― mark p (Mark P), Monday, February 24, 2003 4:05 PM (seventeen years ago)
― pomenitul, Wednesday, 13 May 2020 01:00 (four years ago) link
Anyway, OP's faux-anecdote brings to mind the atheist professor copypasta.
― pomenitul, Wednesday, 13 May 2020 01:01 (four years ago) link
in the movie of this thread, the teacher is going to be played by Kevin Sorbo
― genital giant (Neanderthal), Wednesday, 13 May 2020 01:02 (four years ago) link
I keep mistaking him for Brendan Fraser.
― pomenitul, Wednesday, 13 May 2020 01:04 (four years ago) link
not sure why this was worth reviving
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Wednesday, 13 May 2020 05:24 (four years ago) link
-what the EMT will probably say after I go into cardiac arrest
― genital giant (Neanderthal), Wednesday, 13 May 2020 05:28 (four years ago) link