![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
...lightbulb...
Apr. 19th, 2006 06:55 pm(wrote this offline, last week, and then forgot about it.)
This is one of those "duh" moments.
There are people -- friends of mine, who are in general what I'd consider "good people" -- with whom I keep vowing to not have discussions about feminism with. The conversations get too frustrating and I haven't been able to explain why I get so frustrated and nobody ends up learning anything or enjoying the conversation.
It's the one where I describe a cultural bias, and they respond with a biological one. Like, our culture generally puts the responsibility for the emotional upkeep of relationships on women -- and they'll respond with a scientific study that says that somebody has done brain scans that "indicate" women are better at emotional processing than men. Two things wrong with that: one, when you find that there are more neurological connections in women's emotional-processing centers than in men's, might that be because women's are being exercised due to culture pressure and men's are exercised less so?
But the second thing, the one that I had to re-learn today, is that it's blaming the victim. They're saying that women carry an undue share of the burden of emotional upkeep because we're better suited for it. In addition to probably being circular (because society is shorting men on emotional training, as compared to what women get), it's also putting the justification of bad behavior in the victim's court.
Like I said, "duh" moment. It's not like blaming the victim is a new concept for me.
If you wanna piss off the sevoo, declare yourself an ally of the feminist movement, and then:
This is one of those "duh" moments.
There are people -- friends of mine, who are in general what I'd consider "good people" -- with whom I keep vowing to not have discussions about feminism with. The conversations get too frustrating and I haven't been able to explain why I get so frustrated and nobody ends up learning anything or enjoying the conversation.
It's the one where I describe a cultural bias, and they respond with a biological one. Like, our culture generally puts the responsibility for the emotional upkeep of relationships on women -- and they'll respond with a scientific study that says that somebody has done brain scans that "indicate" women are better at emotional processing than men. Two things wrong with that: one, when you find that there are more neurological connections in women's emotional-processing centers than in men's, might that be because women's are being exercised due to culture pressure and men's are exercised less so?
But the second thing, the one that I had to re-learn today, is that it's blaming the victim. They're saying that women carry an undue share of the burden of emotional upkeep because we're better suited for it. In addition to probably being circular (because society is shorting men on emotional training, as compared to what women get), it's also putting the justification of bad behavior in the victim's court.
Like I said, "duh" moment. It's not like blaming the victim is a new concept for me.
If you wanna piss off the sevoo, declare yourself an ally of the feminist movement, and then:
- require strokes for not being a bad person (for instance: "but not *all* men are like that!")
- confuse correlation with causation ("but fatherless homes promote drug abuse!")
- blame the victim ("They have to deal with that shit because they're *better* at dealing with it!")
- obscure the political with the personal ("But maybe they just didn't *like* any of the female candidates! It's not a pattern, it's individual choice!")
- demand equal airtime for the views of the patriarchy ("but ... we have to talk extensively about the welfare queens!")
