more thoughts on OSBP (perhaps my final ones)

[novapsyche]

I remain greatly distanced from the majority of my FL regarding OSBP. I accept that, and I am glad that I can read and be involved in such a wide assortment of opinions.

I have to say that there seems to be a definite sense of "circling the wagons" to where people who would normally be willing to engage in a feminist discussion of something like this (especially had it been hypothetical) are hardened to it. Which, again, I understand--it's hard to defend a friend and take the position of a critic.

I don't know theferrett personally, but there are many people on my FL who do. I'm sure he's a great person IRL, and I've enjoyed several of his articles on magicthegathering.com. I'm sorry he got the raw end of the stick regarding some of the comments to his original post. I'm glad he's backed away from his defensive stance and justifications. I'm really sad to hear that he's exiling himself from two of Michigan's most well-known cons; I think that is as much overkill as some of the vitriol to which he was exposed.

I'm also sad that so many people that I regard as friends have chosen this opportunity to bash feminists. I'm trying very hard to see their remarks as neutral, but it's difficult.

Comments

[eposia.livejournal.com]

I really enjoyed my discussion with Skennedy on the topic in my LJ, which started out with him sounding pretty upset at me and shifted pretty quickly into an actual non-vitriolic discussion. I appreciated reading your viewpoint as well, since it did differ from most of the participants; and I agree I would have loved to see more discussion about the issues raised flowing, rather than assumptions and attacks.

[vrax.livejournal.com]

Yes there's no need, regardless of how someone views this, to belittle or degrade anyone else.

[atdt1991.livejournal.com]

See rbradakis's journal (perhaps in an hour or two, as I believe it is temporarly f-locked) for a pretty sound expression of what it was intended to be, and then compare that with what was on Theferrett's journal and the reactions that came from it.

I was helping a friend who was reduced to tears from the personal abuse she was taking, not just on his journal but from people who hunted down her blog and attacked her there in a post where she basically said she didn't want to talk about it anymore because there are more important issues in the world.

I consider myself, in general, a very difficult to rile person. I think the questions about the implications are quite valid and definitely worth discussing, but I -do- take it personally when someone I love has been unfairly attacked, and unfortunately, in text I was unable to perceive your normal tongue-in-cheek style - I read your post as if I was reading the posts of a dozen other people who were basing their criticisms on faulty information.

And you were more than worthy of an apology for that, which I only indirectly gave.

If it helps any, some of us got together for a kind of "support session" the other day. This thing has appeared on Digg and Jezebel and (for pete's sake) kotaku - the bright spotlight of inadvertent fame is difficult to deal with.

I wish we could be sitting at a coffee joint, discussing this in person. I don't like being defensive, particularly unnecessarily.

Ultimately, though, the attacks keep coming. I had to teach my friend how to screen non-friend comments because she's getting swearing and abuse in her journal even this afternoon. The two kinds of dialogue are extremely hard to separate. I'm hoping that when the vitriol has abated, the healthy dialogue can begin properly.

[atdt1991.livejournal.com]

I've let theferrett know that he is not allowed to take the burden on entirely for the rest of us who participated, especially those of us who understood and embraced the implications fully. We made a decision about our bodies, and it is, in my opinion, our right and responsibility to defend those decisions ourselves.

By taking -complete- responsibility for this mess, he denies our right to say that we control our own bodies and minds, that we did these things entirely of our own will, and that is just as problematic as the problems of lack of self-empowerment we were fighting.

[cabell.livejournal.com]

Previous comments seem centered around what seeksadventure identified as problematic abuse of participants--particularly female ones--with which I vehemently disagree. I think kphoebe captured the issue quite well in her recent girl-wonder post: http://girl-wonder.org/girlsreadcomics/?p=149

I don't, however, make any attempt to see many comments on the subject as neutral. People may be angry about personal attacks on themselves and their friends, and that's understandable, but people who dismiss the whole issue as "kerfluffle" or suggest that cons are somehow places where history and privilege do not travel (whumpdotcom has an excellent post on this) make me very angry.

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

I think whumpdotcom has that post locked.

[rbradakis.livejournal.com]

I've been convinced that I shouldn't talk about it, since, well, what you said about what she was getting, would also follow me home and land on my wife and friends. If it were just me, I'd unlock it. Maybe if I could pass it along to someone else more or less anonymously, I would.

I've been called some pretty terrible things for just attempting to explain what really happened, and it seems like the people doing the attacking don't want anything but to destroy our lives.

So I'm just not sure what to do, now.

[http://users.livejournal.com/jer_/]

I have absolutely no problem with feminists. I do have a problem with a pretty sizable group of people who were calling themselves feminists while doing some pretty non-feminist stuff.

I don't agree with everything that was done, nor do I agree with the way that this thing was described initially (especially the part where it was described as a movement for wider distribution). I do, however, think there was merit to the original idea with its original intent intact.

I'm sorry if any of that was taken as anti-feminist (which I'm decidedly not) or judging your feelings on it.

[rialian.livejournal.com]

===I think part of the problem is that there are a lot of folks that call themselves "feminists" for whom it is more a nationalism...in other words, it is not about rights, it is about power and sovereignty over something...and they objectify women just as much as the folks they attack. (especially when they attack women that do not support their views of how women are supposed to be). I tend to look at the tactics and behaviors, to see if I can respect them...not the label they use. (It is a similar issue to the folks that call themselves "Skeptics", when they are really all about the disbelief. (I posted on this a while back.)

===I do not consider myself a "feminist"....I am far more for fair and equal rights for all.

[dr-pipe.livejournal.com]

Humanist?

[just-one-view.livejournal.com]

Hello.

I am gathering the annoymous views of the people who were there and actually experienced it. Unfortunately, none of the female participators (that I know of) feel comfortable enough or safe enough to even write about it, much less post.

I was there, had a button and wanted to get my view out. So if you know of anyone else who needs a place to post their view, please let me know.

Thank you for your bravery and I am really sorry that it actually does take bravery to talk about this as a participant.

I long for the discussion and open dialog as well.

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

I think I have a post percolating about your framing the opposition as "slut-shaming". Maybe early next week.

I don't agree with everything that was done, nor do I agree with the way that this thing was described initially (especially the part where it was described as a movement for wider distribution). I do, however, think there was merit to the original idea with its original intent intact.

I think we can agree there, although (as I said to atdt1991), focus on a non-sexualized part of the body might have gone over much better.

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

netmouse has written about it.

I don't think this was necessarily brave, although it's odd, being the turned shield in the phalanx.

[http://users.livejournal.com/jer_/]

Well, allow me to correct one small bit of inaccuracy. I wasn't framing the opposition as "slut-shaming". I was framing the small percentage of opposition that was slut shaming as such. At no point did I say that everyone that disagreed was doing so. In fact, I think I was fairly clear in pointing out that being in opposition to this is a perfectly rational position.

Calling participants sluts and sold to the patriarchy, however, is not.

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

I didn't see that part. I will go back through the comments and see what was said.

Any feminist worth her salt shouldn't use "slut" as an epithet.

At the same time, just because someone is female does not mean that she cannot participate in maintaining the current power structure. dionysus1999 just posted about this.

Again, I must have missed some comments. I will definitely go back and reread them. (If you could point out some threads, that would be helpful, too.)

[http://users.livejournal.com/jer_/]

I'd have to cull through to find them (and realize that this is across more than just theferrett's comments), but please don't think I was being literal. I don't think anyone used the word "slut" specifically... but there was dozens of references to "doing it for attention", "the sort of women that would participate", as well as "promiscuity like this" hurting the feminist movement, etc.

It was a bit sick-making.