Red Mile discussion #saferedmile

[Tomas]

Threads like this is one of the reasons this board is the greatest! Hockey is the main focus but other things in life is important to.

To Polak and everyone else who thinks this is not an issue, get out of the micro perspective and go into macro mode. Of course this is not a big thing for most women but it is a structural problem for the whole society. It´s like saying I know two girls at work that make more money than me so saying that men in general make more money than women on the same position is not true! Calling Katy Perry can seem like nothing but it´s an outcome of bigger structural issues in society that women are looked at as weaker individuals and we should just stop doing things that verify that way of looking at boys and girls.

I have a little daughter and I don´t want her to grow up with this kind of BS. So even if you don´t think this is a big issue, can you please stop doing it for her!

[ScorchyScorch]

Originally Posted by Makarov

I find your views on gender politics and male hegemony to be sophisticated and nuanced.

just telling it like it is.. a minority handful of people stirring up issues where there don't need to be any.

no "male hegemony" going on from my end. I don't need to be sophisticated or subtle about it because it's not a sophisticated issue. it's just plain idiotic.

[Dagger]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

There are people who matter that aren't part of the majority.

You can't always worry about the little guy. If a vast amount of people were up in arms I could see it, but identifying for the sake of identifying just screams witch hunt.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Dagger

Honest question: what's the point of identifying sexist language if the majority are not offended by it?

Just to add to PsYcNeT's comment, even if no one is "offended" by it (in a hurt feelings sense), it can still have negative consequences for our community (that may even be subconscious to some extent.)

[Dagger]

Originally Posted by ScorchyScorch

just telling it like it is.. a minority handful of people stirring up issues where there don't need to be any.

no "male hegemony" going on from my end. I don't need to be sophisticated or subtle about it because it's not a sophisticated issue. it's just plain idiotic.

There goes the tarring again. It's an absolute witch hunt.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by ScorchyScorch

just telling it like it is.. a minority handful of people stirring up issues where there don't need to be any.

no "male hegemony" going on from my end. I don't need to be sophisticated or subtle about it because it's not a sophisticated issue. it's just plain idiotic.

Capitalization, like the simple and non-complicated issue of gender politics, is overrated.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Dagger

There goes the tarring again. It's an absolute witch hunt.

Not much hunting involved. Those who oppose social progress are often the ones most likely to step out and beat their chest over it publicly.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by ScorchyScorch

just telling it like it is.. a minority handful of people stirring up issues where there don't need to be any.

no "male hegemony" going on from my end. I don't need to be sophisticated or subtle about it because it's not a sophisticated issue. it's just plain idiotic.

Spoiler!

[Dagger]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Not much hunting involved. Those who oppose social progress are often the ones most likely to step out and beat their chest over it publicly.

Some don't see identifying a Katy Perry chant as sexist social progress. Encouraging equality in the work place, equal opportunity and the like, most definitely. This? No. It is an absolute witch hunt. There's labeling going on from one side of the spectrum in an attempt to fear monger.

[Flames89]

MOD EDIT: Not a good contribution.

[Dagger]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Just to add to PsYcNeT's comment, even if no one is "offended" by it (in a hurt feelings sense), it can still have negative consequences for our community (that may even be subconscious to some extent.)

It can or it does? And to how many?

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Dagger

Some don't see identifying a Katy Perry chant as sexist social progress. Encouraging equality in the work place, equal opportunity and the like, most definitely. This? No. It is an absolute witch hunt. There's labeling going on from one side of the spectrum in an attempt to fear monger.

So what you're saying is they are hunting down which fans were chanting and publicly ostracising them?

I must be really naive if they are doing that, because it seemed more like they were trying to start a conversation on casual sexism.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Makarov

It has nothing to do with anyone being "offended". We're not talking about individual reactions. We're talking about the cultural or societal consequences of this type of behaviour.

Chants meant to demean by feminizing (or homosexualizing) players and celebrating victory by chanting for female fans to show their breasts are clear examples, I think, of behaviour that reinforces the traditional, hyper-masculine discourse which has dominated western society for thousands of years.

Yes I understand the concept. I'll have you know I got an A in my intro to sociology course

What I'm getting at is attacking the other side (not anyone here specifically, but say that reporter who grilled Bettman) for a pretty benign issue (the Katy Perry chant) is a terrible way to get them on your side. Especially when "the other side" contains many of the people you're trying to defend.

This chant issue is rallying more annoyance with your cause than respect for it.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by ScorchyScorch

just telling it like it is.. a minority handful of people stirring up issues where there don't need to be any.

no "male hegemony" going on from my end. I don't need to be sophisticated or subtle about it because it's not a sophisticated issue. it's just plain idiotic.

"I don't think it's a problem, therefore it isn't."

Great logical conclusion there. Top notch.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by polak

This chant issue is rallying more annoyance with your cause than respect for it.

Why can't we discuss smaller issues alongside the bigger issues?

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Dagger

It can or it does? And to how many?

I'm no expert, but I would argue that it does. And the consequences are felt by everyone. Hegemonic masculinity (and those things that tend to reinforce it) affects the way we teach and learn, the way we divide and value work, they way we relate to each other (the way we relate to other countries even), who is more likely to commit crimes (newsflash: its overwhelmingly men), who is more likely to maintain their health (newsflash: it isn't men!).

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by polak

Yes I understand the concept. I'll have you know I got an A in my intro to sociology course

What I'm getting at is attacking the other side (not anyone here specifically, but say that reporter who grilled Bettman) for a pretty benign issue (the Katy Perry chant) is a terrible way to get them on your side. Especially when "the other side" contains many of the people you're trying to defend.

This chant issue is rallying more annoyance with your cause than respect for it.

I'm not trying to defend anyone really. Many aspects of our traditional ideas about masculinity and femininity are more harmful to men than to women. I'm just interested in how our society works and how we can potentially improve it (no easy answers on that front either.)

And I'm not sure why people are annoyed by the discussion, even if the discussion is sparked by relatively minor or unimportant incidents. Indeed, isn't just sparking the discussion a benefit in and of itself?

[Dagger]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

So what you're saying is they are hunting down which fans were chanting and publicly ostracising them?

I must be really naive if they are doing that, because it seemed more like they were trying to start a conversation on casual sexism.

The witch hunt refers to one movement labeling everyone who doesn't agree with them as "misogynist" "sexist" or someone who doesn't believe in social progress. Just because they disagree with you doesn't automatically make them any of those things.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by polak

Yes I understand the concept. I'll have you know I got an A in my intro to sociology course

Not really sure why you beat your chest over this so much. I got an A or higher on every 100 level course I ever took. They're entry level courses for a reason.

[Dagger]

Originally Posted by Makarov

I'm no expert, but I would argue that it does. And the consequences are felt by everyone. Hegemonic masculinity (and those things that tend to reinforce it) affects the way we teach and learn, the way we divide and value work, they way we relate to each other (the way we relate to other countries even), who is more likely to commit crimes (newsflash: its overwhelmingly men), who is more likely to maintain their health (newsflash: it isn't men!).

I respect your opinion, but that's a pretty large reach.