Sephiroth wrote:If i don't speak up about something, that is engaging in it?
I wouldn't say engaging it, I would say allowing it. And by allowing it, we give it tacit approval. We may not actually approve of it, but our silence is enabling. It means that when someone makes expresses a view in a group setting, the individual looks to how people react. If they receive no warnings, they believe that their views are allowed, and even desired or affirmed, even if it is absolutely not true.
Really, so by that logic if i don't speak about Pedophilia or speak out against it i'm a Pedophiles despite the topic never coming up. Your logic is astoundingly absurd.
What? No. This isn't what I said at all. It's a false comparison.
Because the majority of editors are men = AMVs must be sexist.
I specifically say that a male majority has nothing to do with the space being a male dominated one. It is possible, in fact it is common, for a space to be dominated by a minority. It's about the frequency of attitudes and behaviors, and indeed, the blind spots we have about that frequency, which leads to such a situation.
AMVs are not sexist. AMV communities can have individuals who make misogynistic comments and structures with misogynistic tendencies.
The majority of Psychologists are female, by your logic Psychology hates men. Correlation does not equal causation.
Please reread the essay. This is a major mischaracterisation of what I have written.
That is not a problem, a real problem would be if there was deliberate cordinated effort to keep women out, which there isn't.
I never said women are not allowed to enter into these spaces. Overt exclusion is not the issue. Conditional inclusion is.
No one knows that much about the person who made them, you could even pretend to be another gender if you wanted. Does the audience know the gender of anyone who made said random videos at a con? They may know some of the people if they had a panel but do you think that anyone would look at a video say its good and then when they hear a women made it suddenly hate it.
You are articulating a very simplistic view of what misogyny is, how it can be both expressed and perceived, and how it is built into our social structures. This really isn't helpful.
So yes more men then women make amvs.
Please reread the essay. Majority is not the issue here.
There is nothing no one i have ever seen in 15+ years of editing untold cons and meeting other editors that ever had anyone say or express a feeling of women shouldn't be making AMVs and by inferring that you are insulting and demonizing everyone ive ever met in this hoby.
You and are from the same generation, Sephiroth. Again, this is an articulation which is considerably oversimplified. I am not inferring what you have claimed I am inferring. I am absolutely certain there are a few isolated incidents of male AMV editors saying that women shouldn't be making AMVs, but that is not what this is about. At all. And if you think it is, I suggest you please reread the essay.
You are a horrible human being and if you continue to infer that the AMV community hates women i don't want anything to do with you.
Woah. Timeout. This is way across the line. I have not said AMV communities (there is no longer one, monolithic AMV community, not by far) "hate women." I find them to have subtle misogynistic tendencies which are systemic and sometimes flare up into specific incidents which reflect an underlying issue. I also feel these spaces can be anti-woman without any intentional or overarching desire to be anti-woman.
Calling me a horrible person for daring to speak up about an issue I have had brought to my attention repeatedly and that I have personally experienced is not appropriate. It's a silencing tactic. And it simply lends credence to my views.
Not because your a feminist or a women, but because you have just insulted everyone else in a unfair and patronizing manor by infering that they have furthered sexist behaviors and attitudes, or actively engaged in them.
Patronising? Perhaps. I admit that maybe I erred by writing in a style better suited for an academic journal or for the feminist spaces in which I usually write. Maybe this was too theoretical and too academic. That's a fair criticism and something I have already acknowledged. It was certainly not my intent. It was my intent to write a well-crafted essay/article on an issue in AMV communities and posted to the appropriate section of the forums for such an essay/article.
I'm not inferring anything. I am explicitly stating that misogyny allowed is misogyny approved within this theoretical framework, but even if the framework is theoretical, the consequences are not. The consequences are very real. So I am asking us to be a bit better about enforcing a set of what I believe to be shared values of the hobby which you (incorrectly) believe I am attacking.
I appreciate your engagement in the discourse, but please try to remain civil.