Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Urban v's the Commentariat

I think that, as usual, Ms. Penny gives good quote, but adds no meat to the bones of her contention.
IMO we can say "all men are in a position to derive benefit from multiple generations of sexism, both institutional and broadly social", but we can't say "all men benefit from sexism" without elucidating beyond the general statement, because as a general statement it's glib and uninformative, as well as pandering to the very thing it purports to be in conflict with. Ya can't defeat sexism by making sexist assumptions, Laura!

well there was this follow up too:

Laurie Penny @PennyRed
For those asking 'HOW do men benefit from sexism?' as per my article, newstatesman.com/2013/08/laurie… - start with this list! amptoons.com/blog/the-male-…

And there is a lot to agree with there (but also some things to disagree with - for example I think men's manhood is called into question if they don't have kids).

But yes that was a bit of a glaring omission from the piece.

There is also an awkward question to ask about this, which is "do some women benefit from a sexist culture?"

I'm not sure what the answer to that is. I guess there might be, but they would benefit in some ways and not benefit in some ways (which is the same for men, I think). :confused:
 
well its like the whole "i've had enough of your shit , tumblr goyim" and saying that by saying stuff like that your striking a blow against oppression whereas you're actually a bigoted twat
Yup, and most of those who commit such stupidities seem entirely unaware that they're doing so. A lack of self-awareness that isn't excuseable.
 
Laurie Penny@PennyRed 5m
Not all men hate women, but all men benefit from sexism. Column asking men to stop moaning and stand up for feminism: http://www.newstatesman.com/2013/08/laurie-penny/men-sexism …

No they don't


How does the unemployment rate being much higher for young men than young women factor into this exactly? Or are young men supposed to take solace in the fact that while they might be unemployed while their girlfriends are employed at least there are other men out there who think that their employed girlfriends are inferior on the basis of their gender?

This article is beyond fucking stupid and insulting, frankly people like Laurie Penny are far more, to use her turn of phrase, implicated in a system that oppresses women than I and most men are. The idea that the existence of individual men props up, for example, inadequate child care provision is just terrible logic and not a million miles away from the sort of thinking that blames the individual existence of Jews for the actions of the Israeli state. Fuck off lauriepenny, you are a compulsive liar, a poor writer and YOUR VERY EXISTENCE as a 'writer' *is* actively detrimental towards anything resembling a progressive and decent future in this country.
 
How does the unemployment rate being much higher for young men than young women factor into this exactly? Or are young men supposed to take solace in the fact that while they might be unemployed while their girlfriends are employed at least there are other men out there who think that their employed girlfriends are inferior on the basis of their gender?

This article is beyond fucking stupid and insulting, frankly people like Laurie Penny are far more, to use her turn of phrase, implicated in a system that oppresses women than I and most men are. The idea that the existence of individual men props up, for example, inadequate child care provision is just terrible logic and not a million miles away from the sort of thinking that blames the individual existence of Jews for the actions of the Israeli state. Fuck off lauriepenny, you are a compulsive liar, a poor writer and YOUR VERY EXISTENCE as a 'writer' *is* actively detrimental towards anything resembling a progressive and decent future in this country.

well i don't even think men do benefit from sexism necessarily - is somebody say turning up home from work stressed out from the effects of sexist harrassment in the workplace going to benefit their partner?
 
This is where the total absence of a class analysis (or perhaps better just to say a total absence of politics) leads you to. All men are oppressors, all women are oppressed. Four legs good, two legs bad.





"You can be the gentlest, sweetest man in the world yet still benefit from sexism. That’s how oppression works. Thousands of otherwise decent people are persuaded to go along with an unfair system because it’s less hassle that way. The appropriate response when somebody demands a change in that unfair system is to listen, rather than turning away or yelling, as a child might, that it’s not your fault. And it isn’t your fault. I’m sure you’re lovely. That doesn’t mean you don’t have a responsibility to do something about it."

Erm, she didn't exactly follow her own script here when she made her brief interventions on the old thread, did she?
 
Is there no understanding of what exploitation is in any of these people? Has the idea of oppression just drowned that start point out? if so,then these people are nothing but liberals. if no, i find it very hard to see any evidence of it in anything they ever right. Which effectively puts them back in the liberal camp anyway.
 
There is also an awkward question to ask about this, which is "do some women benefit from a sexist culture?"

I'm not sure what the answer to that is. I guess there might be, but they would benefit in some ways and not benefit in some ways (which is the same for men, I think). :confused:

Of course women employers benefit from sexist societal attitudes to women in similar ways to male employers, why wouldn't they?
 
Is there no understanding of what exploitation is in any of these people? Has the idea of oppression just drowned that start point out? if so,then these people are nothing but liberals. if no, i find it very hard to see any evidence of it in anything they ever right. Which effectively puts them back in the liberal camp anyway.


I don't think that there is any interest in how people are materially affected by stuff like sexism or racism in terms of employment, or childcare or whatever because it simply isn't something that really factors into LP's daily life. Actually, that isn't true, she does like to talk about how endemically sexist the British media is (unlike the US media apparently) when people have the temerity not to employ her.
 
With half the competitors boycotting the games.

ranting.gif
 
The latest from Ellie Mae O'Hagan:

"Anyway, people think UK Uncut is the bee's knees now. Telegraph columnists write glowing articles about its achievements, its activists get courted by big companies desperate to avoid some bad headlines, people like me get invited on to Newsnight to argue about tax avoidance. But I remember a time when being in UK Uncut meant you got sprayed with CS gas, smeared by Boris Johnson on Question Time, branded an "embryonic terrorist group" by Michael Gove's thinktank and denounced as violent by the very politicians who are now clambering to label tax avoidance "morally wrong". Now opposing tax avoidance is de rigeur; most people have forgotten that the people who made it fashionable were originally dismissed as idealists."

Jesus-Crucified-On-The-Cross-Picture.jpg
 
Hmmm she seems completely unaware of what it says about UK Uncut that it has been so easily and speedily co-opted by the establishment.

Also some of the early UKuncut actions (top shop) got good coverage in the daily mail iirc.

(At one of the first demos - Vodafone on Oxford Street, the only literature being given out was a photocopy of a Private Eye article.)

Few things are MORE establishment than demanding people pay their tax, surely?
 
This is where the total absence of a class analysis (or perhaps better just to say a total absence of politics) leads you to. All men are oppressors, all women are oppressed. Four legs good, two legs bad.

Yep. When the point about class has been made directly to Ms. Penny and several of her ilk, they always skirt it. They don't dismiss it as irrelevant, but bury it through referencing other forms of oppression, missing the point that class sits behind every one of those alternative oppressions.



"You can be the gentlest, sweetest man in the world yet still benefit from sexism. That’s how oppression works. Thousands of otherwise decent people are persuaded to go along with an unfair system because it’s less hassle that way. The appropriate response when somebody demands a change in that unfair system is to listen, rather than turning away or yelling, as a child might, that it’s not your fault. And it isn’t your fault. I’m sure you’re lovely. That doesn’t mean you don’t have a responsibility to do something about it."

Erm, she didn't exactly follow her own script here when she made her brief interventions on the old thread, did she?

No, she never does. She either ignores her own hypocrisies (multitudinous), or she genuinely doesn't see them.
 
Is there no understanding of what exploitation is in any of these people? Has the idea of oppression just drowned that start point out? if so,then these people are nothing but liberals. if no, i find it very hard to see any evidence of it in anything they ever right. Which effectively puts them back in the liberal camp anyway.

Exploitation, you'd think, would fit in perfectly with the intersectionalist's belief in hierarchies of oppression, but that would require admitting a hierarchy whereby, at least in "the west", a majority of white working-class men and women are exploited, which doesn't fit with the intersectionalist agenda whereby all oppression proceeds from the honkie.
 
of course, is she saying that an alcoholic working class black man has greater social power than Lady Oink by dint of his testicles? that's obv nonsense.

But that's how intersectional theory, as applied by these goits, slices things. There's no acknowledgement of social nuance, just a sledgehammer of (as The Pale King put it) "four legs good, two legs bad". Those with one leg, three legs, or more than four legs are forgotten about/ignored.
 
you can't crucify someone through the palms, that picture is wrong. And jesus is too white.

fucking shoddy religious art

while the crucifixion seems rather idiosyncratick they have tied the arm to the cross and then nailed him up - belt and braces as it were

but i was under the impression that in acts jesus is showing off his stagmata to anyone he could inveigle into looking at his hands and ankles: so something was done to his hands.
 
Back
Top Bottom