DiscussionI don't know

submitted by [deleted] from self.LGBDropTheT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]endless_assfluff 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

While I've talked about emotionally intelligent discussion strategies in the past and agree that we could spend more time strategizing, changing our behavior in a casual setting like this to center the needs of people outside the group comes with its own problems. There's something to be said for a space where people are allowed to vent.

Put more clearly, if you say "UUUGH, men are trash," and a friend responds "aCKShelLy you shouldn't say that because not all men," that doesn't mean the friend is more logical, knowledgeable, or level-headed, just that they lack empathy/emotional awareness to some degree. That is, in context, the purpose of the statement was to communicate that something distressing happened to you and you wanted to talk about it, not to literally write off half the population as buffoons. Regardless of whether the friend in this case is 'correct,' it's clear that anyone starting a conversation like that wants the other party to listen and validate their emotions. And instead they get lectured. The natural response to that is to feel hurt or defensive, since the aggrieved party is being told they don't deserve emotional support unless they communicate their problem in the 'right' way, something that takes loads of maturity and practice to do. That's why people will respond poorly to someone coming into a space where they're venting and telling them they can't do that anymore.

The best solution would be having a separate, less trauma-driven space reserved for talking strategy and rhetoric. Unfortunately, all the specialized academics I know working on this problem are radical feminists, so they wouldn't be welcome. (I'm also not interested in the reasons why you want to distance from GC/radical feminism. Please don't waste time explaining it to me.)

[–][deleted]  (3 children)

[deleted]

    [–]endless_assfluff 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

    I'm also not interested in the reasons why you want to distance from GC/radical feminism. Please don't waste time explaining it to me.

    ^

    That being said, I don't think you're not worth my time! On the contrary, I posted what I did because I can see you're trying to improve and might appreciate a push toward studying emotional intelligence, which is exactly what one would do to develop the skills you say you value in the original post. If you reread my statement, it clearly says "I am not interested in discussing this one particular thing," not "I don't think you're worth my time."

    I don't know whether there are other non-radfem LGB academics. All I know is what's going on in my one cohort, and that if I have a super-dry essay from a philosophy professor or something from PubMed to post, it goes on the GC sub and not here. I don't like pushing my credentials online because it's usually not relevant, but to put things in perspective, I'm a mathematician, and am far from the only radical feminist I know who holds a PhD in a relevant area and likes doing the type of measured analysis you're talking about. And it's tiring for me to try and engage with people who don't understand what I'm saying---but think they do, and surprise, surprise, it's always something devoid of nuance & easier to argue with than what I actually said---or who have the impression that radical feminists are angry extremists, so much so that I often have to go months without commenting.

    Anyway. What I'm saying is, there's a huge correlation between people who work to develop the skills you value and people who realize that radical means 'root' and not 'fueled by blind hate.' That's why so many high-level discussions are happening elsewhere and in conjunction with radfems. I hope you can join us someday.

    [–]Elvira95Viva la figa 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

    Personally I do agree that radical feminists can sometimes be too irrational and extremists against males and making generational against one entire category isn't logical. That being said, I agree with most of their stances and think they're the purest form of feminists.

    [–]endless_assfluff 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    About making generalizations against one category: right?! I've been pretty lucky in avoiding the bad eggs of radfem circles. It does seem to me sometimes that people can get defensive about the ideas radfems propose, and rather than recognizing that reaction as getting defensive, they point to the meanest and angriest of us so that they can use it as an excuse to dismiss the whole group offhand. Or interpret what we say in the least charitable way because the movement is already stigmatized. But whatever. Eh.

    Thanks for giving me the opportunity to clarify.