Inspired by Dr. Scribblemoose, a post to stay in touch :D

[puddingcat]

Firstly: nannyo, meet lipstickcat. Possibly the only 2 people I know who will be able to sympathise about giving a ferret a pill.


Secondly: Did anyone *not* have a godawful day yesterday? Time seemed to stop at 11.30, nothing got done, nothing went noticeably wrong, and yet I came home wanting to destroy something.

So instead I did some sewing and went round to see dr_wez, ate chips & pizza (but drank fruit juice, so that's ok) and watched American Psycho. Er - yes. Now I've IMDBed it to find out what actually happened, I think I want to see it again and appreciate the humour without wondering "WTF?" every few minutes.

Oooh, and (thanks to daegaer, I've been watching RH Plus! That is how vampires should be. Well, apart from the never-explained eating real food and going out in daylight bits, obv. But they're all pretty and angsty, and pretty and they fight crime!, and are pretty. And there's biting. Mmm, biting.

I have two episodes left, and then it's back to Bleach and the godawful filler section. The things I do for Renji. Mmm, Renji. (I'm still looking for good, *long* fics...)

I'm off to Stockport tonight (boo hiss) to mow the lawn and sort through my mortgage docs and find out whether we're *actually* allowed to rent the houses in the Mews out. Several people *are* doing so, but one of the viewers that's been round wanted to have it in writing. Realistically, I think the house will be bought as a buy-to-let; all the feedback I've had has been "Too small".


More evidence that my cats actually belong in a cartoon: apparently Cleo was so eager to get back into the house this morning that she ran head first into the fridge. One day, I'll catch little tweeting bluebirds flying around her head.


I've also been finding several followup reactions to the train wreck of the OSBP, and finding that I'm actually starting to get interested in feminism. Not as a bra-burning, man-hating, giving-them-a-bad-name sort, but interested and righteously angry. Which is a definite change from previously being upset by all the fuss and Just Getting On With Things.

I still get worried that one of these Real Feminists will read something I've said and get cross with me, but then I worry about that in regard to everyone and everything. Still, surely wanting to learn is a good start, right? Even if it is rather late?

Comments

Feminism is the radica notion that women are people

[strangefrontier.livejournal.com]

I'm actually startign to get interested in feminism. Not as a bra-burning, man-hating, giving-them-a-bad-name sort, but interested and righteously angry.

Welcome to my experience of the last couple of years! :) And don't worry about Real Feminists getting cross about things you say. Real feminists tend to engage in debate; it's the anti-feminists and radical feminists who seem to abstain from reasoned discussion and back up their statements not with logic or proof but with stubbornness and decibels.

Re: Feminism is the radica notion that women are people

[puddingcat.livejournal.com]

Ah, but I'm worried about posting or comenting with an initial reaction that's completely unfeminist. Frex, my initial reaction to the OSBP was "So what?". I think, if I'd commented to that effect in a number of places, I'd have been torn a new one; and indeed, I can thoroughly see the point, now.

Re: Feminism is the radical notion that women are people

[strangefrontier.livejournal.com]

Well the OSBP did end up as a big ol' LJ-wide wankfest. You can't say anything in those circumstances that isn't going to piss off someone. I thought a lot of the discussion seemed to take it a little bit out of context, centring on the wrongness of the OSBP at any random con with any random people, instead of one specific micro-environment with absolute consent from all parties. In that instance, yeah, actually, I don't see any hefty problems with it. OTOH, there's a naivete in thinking that the OSBP would be acceptable in any wider context, with all the social pressure and dodginess and potential for hijacking and abuse of the trust and comfort it's supposed to be based on. In the end, I think it's for theoretical utopias only, in which all humans are sexually enlightened. Or something like that! I don't know! Human social interaction is too complicated for me to understand.

Mind you, perhaps I wasn't initially horrified by the OSBP because I've participated in something vaguely similar. Pile of friends, some of whom are very tactile, hanging out in the pub every Wednesday evening. Those on the sofas snuggled, stroked and caressed almost absent-mindedly during the conversation, and those not wishing to take part took other seats round the tables. No pressure, no disapproval, no discomfort, no judgement, and it was friendly rather than sexual. Again, though, a very specific micro-environment that had touching not as a focus but as a background. Just squeezing boobs seems so detatched and unappealingly mechanical. And possibly too much like testing the ripeness of fruit.

You're entitled to have a reaction, an opinion, and you're entitled to change it without that change seeming like meekness or a capitulation or appeasement of the majority.

Re: Feminism is the radical notion that women are people

[puddingcat.livejournal.com]

You're entitled to have a reaction, an opinion, and you're entitled to change it without that change seeming like meekness or a capitulation or appeasement of the majority.

Oh, definitely. I'm all about new information changing my mind :)


I think the rest is two things. First, I really, really wish I'd get wolf whistled at. And yet I'm very glad I don't get the "show us yer tits" comments I used to. I have *no idea* how to explain that without sounding illogical and inconsistent. Secondly, what if my longing for physically-based compliments is contributing to the ongoing objectification of women's bodies? Argh, argh, argh!

Plus I'm getting mysefl knotted up about the sort of language to use. Ok; men will understand objective rationality better than subjective "this happened to me" arguments. Makign men understand is a Good Thing. But why should *we* change our language to suit *them*? Why can't *they* change their understanding to suit *us*? Gah!

Re: Feminism is the radical notion that women are people

[nannyo.livejournal.com]

Ok; men will understand objective rationality better than subjective "this happened to me" arguments. Makign men understand is a Good Thing. But why should *we* change our language to suit *them*? Why can't *they* change their understanding to suit *us*? Gah!

This is something that has been getting to me about the situation too. In fact Mup and I had a SCREAMING debate about it, and we harldy ever ever shout at each other. I had never thought about the language of gender, and I'm quite obsessed by it now.

[crocodilewings.livejournal.com]

If I want to convince someone of something, it is my responsibility to pitch my language and argument to them. If I'm going to attempt to interfere with someone's existing beliefs, I can't expect them to do the legwork.

[puddingcat.livejournal.com]

Ordinarily, I'd agree with you 100%.

When the point under discussion is how women have to change themselves to fit in with men's preferences in a large variety of ways, it becomes a lot harder to stick to.

Also, if the men in question are asking to be helped to understand how women see things, then the language and emotions are part of that; stripping them out and turnign it into ManSpeak makes it an impossible task.

[crocodilewings.livejournal.com]

I think that's more of a parallel than a symptom of the same issue. If France and Poland were experiencing diplomatic strife, Poland would send its communications in its very best French to avoid miscommunication, not to show capitulation to France.

When France responds, you can expect the best Polish they can muster, but if they don't speak very good Polish, there's not a lot you can do. That's the way wars are started.

Do you find male discourse particularly inaccessible?

[puddingcat.livejournal.com]

Do you find male discourse particularly inaccessible?

Not usually, no.

Go and read libellum's post here. Note how many of the male respondents suggest alternative intentions behind some of the actions being described. The easiest way to answer their points is to say "It's not just what he said; it's the way he said it". Which is factual, and accurate - but wholly unquantifiable, and therefore frequently discounted as a valid point.

Much of "female discourse" is based on how things are said. Much of women's issues with how men treat them comes down to how men say and do things. These things are impossible to describe in terms that "male discourse" recognises. Most of the times I've tried to explain why I have a problem with something, I get accused of being oversensitive because I can't pin down in totally objective and factual terms what the problem is. Many of those times, the problem *can't* be put in objective and factual terms.

Re your France & Poland comment, the situation is more that France has been telling Poland how to behave for centuries. Poland is starting to stand up for itself and demand autonomy, in their very best French. France is starting to realise that what it's doing might be considered wrong, and is making an effort to change. And yet France is making no attempt to understand Polish better, even when Poland points out the flaws in thir grammar. At the same time, France is pointing out every little error in Poland's French, and totally ignoring the substance of their argument.

[crocodilewings.livejournal.com]

I've read it.

Although I do believe that certain circumstances call for special measures, I feel that "abandon one of the cornerstones of civil dialogue" is a measure which requires a pretty exceptional circumstance.