Doctor Who reference in Pokemon B2W2? Headcanon accepted.
I'm sorry guys, but I'm not letting this point go. If anything, millercross here hits every single problem with the argument presented as thus.
millercross said:They don't really get a pass. It's just that the fact is that men hardly go through the same levels of objetification women do
Here millercross trots out the excuse that the objectification of men is totally okay because women get objectified more often elsewhere using the "two wrongs make a right" argument. Sorry, no.
They're privileged and often determine the content in said romance novels (Or in other words, they're the editors and publishers who choose to use these images because they assume that women go crazy for naked men)
Which would suggest that women are just as susceptible to prurient things and we can't have that, now can we?
Mind you, I don't think that men being objectified is good. It's just that when you consider how much female objectification there is vs how much male objectification there is, it seems hardly productive to go around and fight against male objectification,
That's the thing. I'm not fighting against it. I don't have a single problem with it. The only thing I'm doing is pointing out that one venue of entertainment for women uses sexual objectification to appeal to consumers while comics are being heavily criticized for doing the same thing for male consumers.
No matter how it is rationalized, it's a double standard, plain and simple.
Romance novels, with certain exceptions, often tend to just fall into a huge pile of genericness in the pop cultural consciousness.
Here we go with yet another rationalization. Romance novels are just a bunch of genericness, nothing to see here folks. They're irrelevant. Nevermind the fact that they're available at every supermarket, convenience store, gas station, department store, book store, and at the airport. Never mind the fact that they pull in ten times the profit that comics do. Now, if you turn your attention over to here, at this little struggling comic book store on the other side of town which is now the only place you can purchase such material, you'll see the real monster of sexual objectification, folks!
And even those that arguably objectify men often have bigger issues regarding the way they handle female characters (See: Twilight)
I don't even know how Twilight began, to be honest, but if it started as your standard tawdry romance book, then it broke past the trappings of such a fluid market, and it's hardly a representative of the whole genre.
Also, in all of this, as mentioned previously, is the fact that male objectification doesn't quite come in the same flavor as female objectification.
Even more rationalization. So, no -- sexual objectification is sexual objectification. That's the bottom line.
Doctor Who reference in Pokemon B2W2? Headcanon accepted.
a8, I'm not deflecting any arguments here. All I'm doing is keeping it on the simple level of asking why one is allowed to one thing and the other is not.
i mean i guess we could try a different line of argument.
Like, 'Should comics just be for men?', for instance.
Well, if folks wish to initiate change, the market is wide open for them to do just that. Colleen Doran did this very thing back in the 80's and 90's with her (rather successful) independent comic known as "A Distant Soil" but IIRC some drama happened later and a bunch of people got butthurt. Still, ADS was a brilliant comic
Don't say 'rationalization', tell me why they're wrong.
Again, it's because I'm keeping it on a simple level. Look at my reply at the very top of the page here. I think I do a pretty decent job explaining why these reasons aren't valid.
Well, the way i see it, i've given the actual reasons. If they're not valid because they're not 'simple' then i don't know what to say. Some things aren't simple. Culture isn't simple, people aren't simple.
If you want to know why sexual objectification of men is OK in romance novels but sexual objectification of women is bad in comic books, all else being equal, then the answer is, it isn't. Words and images are neutral, culture imparts meaning.
Re: ADS, according to Wikipedia:
Doran is notably protective of the work. She has not allowed other artists to write or draw her series, and does not use assistants in any creative capacity.
The series has been on hiatus since 2006, after its printer lost the archives of the photographic negatives of the graphic novels. An extensive restoration process is underway, with art being recovered and scanned for digital archiving. The series will return in 2013 from Image Comics, and the graphic novels will be reprinted in new editions. Jim Valentino's Shadowline imprint has taken on the restored editions and redesign tasks.
Well, the way i see it, i've given the actual reasons. If they're not valid because they're not 'simple' then i don't know what to say. Some things aren't simple. Culture isn't simple, people aren't simple.
If you want to know why sexual objectification of men is OK in romance novels but sexual objectification of women is bad in comic books, all else being equal, then the answer is, it isn't. Words and images are neutral, culture imparts meaning.
This is fine, and I'll leave it at that -- but you do know that other than good intentions, the road to hell is paved with this sort of exculpation, right?
What I mean by that is leaving it as natural effect of culture, that's all.
i'm really not trying to be obtuse here, but i honestly have no idea what you mean by this. Culture is artificial. It doesn't have natural effects. If you 'leave it' other people will shape it the way they want it to be.
Viani: every time a8 and I get into such a discussion, three things are certain:
1. it will be long-winded (on both our parts) and drag out for a while
2. it will remain civil
3. someone who is not a mod or admin will disregard #2 and attempt to step in and referee
Yay you are awake
i thought I was the only one up at 6:00 in the morning
I felt lonelyish.
Have you considered recycling plastic, or donating to charity? What happens when the discussion is over, and what parameters are to be met to confirm it's conclusion?
Do both of you reply back and forth until they run out of Internet AP and have to fold? Does the thread have to become super boring? Do both of you accept each other's sides and go merry along onto different subjects or bitterly hate each other and continue this petty hatred towards each other in future discussions?
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
OK, while amusing, I think HERE is where a comparisons to romance novels would apply (keep in mind I'm JUST discussing the covers here).
Covers may be a book or comic books only chance of getting someone to pick it up and purchase it. So while, yes, you're going to see scantily clad women in strange posses gracing the covers of comic books, you're also going to see half naked men with hair blowing in the wind on the covers of romance novels.
It's an attempt to grab attention of the target audience, and it's certainly not limited to "nerd culture".
Now, once you open the item and start examining the characters within, that's when I think you have a more interesting discussion regarding how well written a character is.
How many topic changes has this thread gone through? It went from nerd culture, to romance novels, to whether or not romance novels and nerd culture are different, to whether saying they are different implies romance novels are not as bad.
At this point, I think Viani's making the most sense in this thread, and she's done nothing but joke.
How many topic changes has this thread gone through? It went from nerd culture, to romance novels, to whether or not romance novels and nerd culture are different, to whether saying they are different implies romance novels are not as bad.
At this point, I think Viani's making the most sense in this thread, and she's done nothing but joke.
The good corporal was trying to make the point that romance novels were exploitive of men and therefore the same as nerd culture
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
Let's not over simplify people's points, shall we? It comes off as sniping.
So anyhow. Friday and I stopped for dinner at our local McDonald's last night and I noticed a girl wearing a Batman hoddie.
First thought was that it was cool to see a girl interested in Batman. Then I remembered the concept of "fake nerd girl" and was angry. Not that I entertained the notion that she was a "fake nerd girl", just that...this is a thing now apparently. A concept at least even if it's one that doesn't make a ton of sense.
I guess this kinda highlights how the concept of a "fake nerd girl" never really existed for me until we started discussing it.
"It is a matter of grave importance that Fairy tales should be respected.... Whosoever alters them to suit his own opinions, whatever they are, is guilty, to our thinking, of an act of presumption, and appropriates to himself what does not belong to him." -- Charles Dickens
You could have just tried to talk to her about Batman, you know.
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
That's sort of my point. Before I would have just thought "cool, she likes Batman" and that would have been that, but now I have to strugle with the idea of "fake nerd girl":
Basically, I'm Tycho, and I'm mad at Gabe, but Gabe isn't a person he's just an idea and I'm not even sure where this idea came from originally.
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
...Is anyone actually listening to me?
I didn't think she was a fake nerd girl, I don't even really think that's a "thing" unless we look at the comic above it's a girl made out of literal straw.
I'm just irritated that this is even a concept I have to wrap my head around.
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
Well...ARE they a thing?
I mean, is it possible to fake interest in something to the point where you know literally nothing about it to the end of...what exactly? Fit in with a group that are primarily defined by their interests? The very idea seems rather counter intuitive.
I didn't think she was a fake nerd girl, I don't even really think that's a "thing" unless we look at the comic above it's a girl made out of literal straw.
I'm just irritated that this is even a concept I have to wrap my head around.
It's not really a hard concept to understand?
I mean it's a stupid one, but I'm not sure why you're confused.
I mean, is it possible to fake interest in something to the point where you know literally nothing about it to the end of...what exactly? Fit in with a group that are primarily defined by their interests? The very idea seems rather counter intuitive.
Generally the idea is that girls fake being nerds so they can sleep with nerdboys.
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
You know, weather they're girls or not is not what's bugging me so much as if it's even possible to be a "fake nerd". I mean, you can sort of make yourself out to be a bigger fan or more interested in something than you actually are, but you're still interested on some level or another.
You know, weather they're girls or not is not what's bugging me so much as if it's even possible to be a "fake nerd". I mean, you can sort of make yourself out to be a bigger fan or more interested in something than you actually are, but you're still interested on some level or another.
Well I honestly don't see what this has to do with the conversation, then?
This isn't a defence of the concept of a 'fake geek girl' </pointless disclaimer>, but, it really isn't that difficult to feign interest in something, providing you keep your statements vague and don't attempt to seriously discuss it with somebody who's actually into it.
i mean, anyone can go into a store and buy a Batman hoodie. It's not like they quiz you at the till to find out how much you know about it.
This is not a difficult concept, is what i'm saying.
(Is Batman even that nerdy these days? It's been the subject of several hugely successful movies...)
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
Well, I was thinking being interest in Batman could easily just extend to seeing the last few movies, that aside, I agree the feigning interest in something for whatever reason isn't impossible or even hard to do, but neither is it limited to nerds or "geek culture" in general.
People have been doing this to fit in probably since society was a thing.
So I'm wondering if this is a case of people making the whole "fake geek girl" thing bigger than it is or people making the whole people making a thing about "fake geek girls" bigger than it is.
This also brings up an interesting point though, things that where once considered "nerdy" can be pretty mainstream now. It's unlikely that someone would buy Batman merch out of the blue, but they might do it if they've simply watched the last few movies.
And possibly that's the issue too. It's getting harder to figure out whose a flow blown "nerd" and who just "Like's comic book movies" and nerds are now having to deal with the fact that their interests are now held by a much larger audience and they have to try harder to establish that their love for Batman/comics/first person shooters is "special".
Not sure if I'm trying to make a point here, it's just interesting to witness this brave new world where nerd culture has successfully permeated mainstream culture and how it upsets people.
You know, weather they're girls or not is not what's bugging me so much as if it's even possible to be a "fake nerd". I mean, you can sort of make yourself out to be a bigger fan or more interested in something than you actually are, but you're still interested on some level or another.
Well I honestly don't see what this has to do with the conversation, then?
It can matter in that it would mean there may not really be anything inherently sexist here, just that some people have took a not uncommon phenomena and made gender part of it.
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
And I mean just in terms of the "fake game girl" or whatever thing, I mean, it's kinda obvious certain genres, activities, whatever in geek/nerd culture are targeted towards men and suffer from the usual sorts of problems that comes with doing that.
^^^ i think it's a good thing. Comic book fans have more people they can share their interests with than ever before. Similar thing seems to be happening lately with video games, cyberculture, cult TV and fantasy fiction.
Anyway... given that many geek interests are dominated by men, and that most geek stereotypes are male, it seems unlikely to me that men would be accused of feigning geekiness as often as women. A stereotype doesn't have to be outright misogynistic to be a sexist stereotype.
Though, the 'faking it in order to sleep with nerdboys' stereotype is pretty misogynistic.
"It is a matter of grave importance that Fairy tales should be respected.... Whosoever alters them to suit his own opinions, whatever they are, is guilty, to our thinking, of an act of presumption, and appropriates to himself what does not belong to him." -- Charles Dickens
And possibly that's the issue too. It's getting harder to figure out whose a flow blown "nerd" and who just "Like's comic book movies" and nerds are now having to deal with the fact that their interests are now held by a much larger audience and they have to try harder to establish that their love for Batman/comics/first person shooters is "special".
Producing the strange phenomenon of proving you're a "true fan" by preferring a badly-written soap opera with fight scenes to good films.
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
Oh, I think it's good that interests are spreading. Sort of like "nerds are winning", but many nerds consider it a mark of pride or whatever that their interests are "more obscure".
As far as feigning interest, a piece that's sort of missing for me as "why?", I mean...why fake interest in something to be part of a group that's primarily defined by what that group is interested in. Wouldn't any interest at that point HAVE to be genuine? In which case, male or female you wouldn't be a "fake nerd" so much as an "entry level nerd" if that even means anything.
And possibly that's the issue too. It's getting harder to figure out whose a flow blown "nerd" and who just "Like's comic book movies" and nerds are now having to deal with the fact that their interests are now held by a much larger audience and they have to try harder to establish that their love for Batman/comics/first person shooters is "special".
Producing the strange phenomenon of proving you're a "true fan" by preferring a badly-written soap opera with fight scenes to good films.
I'm suddenly having flash-backs to our discussion in that web-comic artist who preferred all the old Zelda games and cartoon.
Oh, I think it's good that interests are spreading. Sort of like "nerds are winning", but many nerds consider it a mark of pride or whatever that their interests are "more obscure".
As far as feigning interest, a piece that's sort of missing for me as "why?", I mean...why fake interest in something to be part of a group that's primarily defined by what that group is interested in. Wouldn't any interest at that point HAVE to be genuine? In which case, male or female you wouldn't be a "fake nerd" so much as an "entry level nerd" if that even means anything.
Most people like to fit in and to be accepted, and some other people, particularly within subcultures, have a problem with this. *shrug*
In my experience, geeks tend to style themselves as a fairly welcoming, accepting bunch, so i can understand wanting to fit in with them, if you were lonely.
"It is a matter of grave importance that Fairy tales should be respected.... Whosoever alters them to suit his own opinions, whatever they are, is guilty, to our thinking, of an act of presumption, and appropriates to himself what does not belong to him." -- Charles Dickens
Oh, I think it's good that interests are spreading. Sort of like "nerds are winning", but many nerds consider it a mark of pride or whatever that their interests are "more obscure".
And then nerds were the hipsters.
Now I'm going to assume that whatever hipsters like is obscure because it's bad.
Oh, I think it's good that interests are spreading. Sort of like "nerds are winning", but many nerds consider it a mark of pride or whatever that their interests are "more obscure".
And then nerds were the hipsters.
Now I'm going to assume that whatever hipsters like is obscure because it's bad.
Oh, I think it's good that interests are spreading. Sort of like "nerds are winning", but many nerds consider it a mark of pride or whatever that their interests are "more obscure".
And then nerds were the hipsters.
Now I'm going to assume that whatever hipsters like is obscure because it's bad.
Oh, I think it's good that interests are spreading. Sort of like "nerds are winning", but many nerds consider it a mark of pride or whatever that their interests are "more obscure".
And then nerds were the hipsters.
Now I'm going to assume that whatever hipsters like is obscure because it's bad.
Comments
millercross said:They don't really get a pass. It's just that the fact is that men hardly go through the same levels of objetification women do
Here millercross trots out the excuse that the objectification of men is totally okay because women get objectified more often elsewhere using the "two wrongs make a right" argument. Sorry, no.
They're privileged and often determine the content in said romance novels (Or in other words, they're the editors and publishers who choose to use these images because they assume that women go crazy for naked men)
Which would suggest that women are just as susceptible to prurient things and we can't have that, now can we? That's the thing. I'm not fighting against it. I don't have a single problem with it. The only thing I'm doing is pointing out that one venue of entertainment for women uses sexual objectification to appeal to consumers while comics are being heavily criticized for doing the same thing for male consumers.
Here we go with yet another rationalization. Romance novels are just a bunch of genericness, nothing to see here folks. They're irrelevant. Nevermind the fact that they're available at every supermarket, convenience store, gas station, department store, book store, and at the airport. Never mind the fact that they pull in ten times the profit that comics do. Now, if you turn your attention over to here, at this little struggling comic book store on the other side of town which is now the only place you can purchase such material, you'll see the real monster of sexual objectification, folks! I don't even know how Twilight began, to be honest, but if it started as your standard tawdry romance book, then it broke past the trappings of such a fluid market, and it's hardly a representative of the whole genre. Even more rationalization. So, no -- sexual objectification is sexual objectification. That's the bottom line.
Becuase if we tell you the actual reasons you dismiss them as rationalization
and the real reasons, according to you, are utterly disingenuous things like some bizarre fear that women might have sexual desires
i.e. casting the feminist position as itself sexist
so no argument can be had here
Like, 'Should comics just be for men?', for instance.
Don't say 'rationalization', tell me why they're wrong.
If you want to know why sexual objectification of men is OK in romance novels but sexual objectification of women is bad in comic books, all else being equal, then the answer is, it isn't. Words and images are neutral, culture imparts meaning.
Re: ADS, according to Wikipedia:
i'm not exculpating anything, as far as i'm aware.
It is clear to me that the good corporal doesn't want to argue but he wants a soapbox for his views.
So can we get a lock here?
i'm really not trying to be obtuse here, but i honestly have no idea what you mean by this. Culture is artificial. It doesn't have natural effects. If you 'leave it' other people will shape it the way they want it to be.
☭
B̤̺͍̰͕̺̠̕u҉̖͙̝̮͕̲ͅm̟̼̦̠̹̙p͡s̹͖ ̻T́h̗̫͈̙̩r̮e̴̩̺̖̠̭̜ͅa̛̪̟͍̣͎͖̺d͉̦͠s͕̞͚̲͍ ̲̬̹̤Y̻̤̱o̭͠u̥͉̥̜͡ ̴̥̪D̳̲̳̤o̴͙̘͓̤̟̗͇n̰̗̞̼̳͙͖͢'҉͖t̳͓̣͍̗̰ ͉W̝̳͓̼͜a̗͉̳͖̘̮n͕ͅt͚̟͚ ̸̺T̜̖̖̺͎̱ͅo̭̪̰̼̥̜ ̼͍̟̝R̝̹̮̭ͅͅe̡̗͇a͍̘̤͉͘d̼̜ 
⚢
What the hell does that accomplish?
☭
B̤̺͍̰͕̺̠̕u҉̖͙̝̮͕̲ͅm̟̼̦̠̹̙p͡s̹͖ ̻T́h̗̫͈̙̩r̮e̴̩̺̖̠̭̜ͅa̛̪̟͍̣͎͖̺d͉̦͠s͕̞͚̲͍ ̲̬̹̤Y̻̤̱o̭͠u̥͉̥̜͡ ̴̥̪D̳̲̳̤o̴͙̘͓̤̟̗͇n̰̗̞̼̳͙͖͢'҉͖t̳͓̣͍̗̰ ͉W̝̳͓̼͜a̗͉̳͖̘̮n͕ͅt͚̟͚ ̸̺T̜̖̖̺͎̱ͅo̭̪̰̼̥̜ ̼͍̟̝R̝̹̮̭ͅͅe̡̗͇a͍̘̤͉͘d̼̜ 
⚢
i thought I was the only one up at 6:00 in the morning
I felt lonelyish.
Have you considered recycling plastic, or donating to charity? What happens when the discussion is over, and what parameters are to be met to confirm it's conclusion?
Do both of you reply back and forth until they run out of Internet AP and have to fold? Does the thread have to become super boring? Do both of you accept each other's sides and go merry along onto different subjects or bitterly hate each other and continue this petty hatred towards each other in future discussions?
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
but even if she isn't actually into Batman, would that make you think less of her as a person?
I mean I have a Ghost Rider shirt and I've never read a single issue of Ghost Rider in my entire life.
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
It's not really a hard concept to understand?
I mean it's a stupid one, but I'm not sure why you're confused.
no.
Generally the idea is that girls fake being nerds so they can sleep with nerdboys.
Allegedly.
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
i mean, anyone can go into a store and buy a Batman hoodie. It's not like they quiz you at the till to find out how much you know about it.
This is not a difficult concept, is what i'm saying.
(Is Batman even that nerdy these days? It's been the subject of several hugely successful movies...)
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
Anyway... given that many geek interests are dominated by men, and that most geek stereotypes are male, it seems unlikely to me that men would be accused of feigning geekiness as often as women. A stereotype doesn't have to be outright misogynistic to be a sexist stereotype.
Though, the 'faking it in order to sleep with nerdboys' stereotype is pretty misogynistic.
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
And then nerds were the hipsters.
Most people like to fit in and to be accepted, and some other people, particularly within subcultures, have a problem with this. *shrug*
In my experience, geeks tend to style themselves as a fairly welcoming, accepting bunch, so i can understand wanting to fit in with them, if you were lonely.
Now I'm going to assume that whatever hipsters like is obscure because it's bad.
☭
B̤̺͍̰͕̺̠̕u҉̖͙̝̮͕̲ͅm̟̼̦̠̹̙p͡s̹͖ ̻T́h̗̫͈̙̩r̮e̴̩̺̖̠̭̜ͅa̛̪̟͍̣͎͖̺d͉̦͠s͕̞͚̲͍ ̲̬̹̤Y̻̤̱o̭͠u̥͉̥̜͡ ̴̥̪D̳̲̳̤o̴͙̘͓̤̟̗͇n̰̗̞̼̳͙͖͢'҉͖t̳͓̣͍̗̰ ͉W̝̳͓̼͜a̗͉̳͖̘̮n͕ͅt͚̟͚ ̸̺T̜̖̖̺͎̱ͅo̭̪̰̼̥̜ ̼͍̟̝R̝̹̮̭ͅͅe̡̗͇a͍̘̤͉͘d̼̜ 
⚢
大學的年同性戀毛皮
aaaaa
☭
B̤̺͍̰͕̺̠̕u҉̖͙̝̮͕̲ͅm̟̼̦̠̹̙p͡s̹͖ ̻T́h̗̫͈̙̩r̮e̴̩̺̖̠̭̜ͅa̛̪̟͍̣͎͖̺d͉̦͠s͕̞͚̲͍ ̲̬̹̤Y̻̤̱o̭͠u̥͉̥̜͡ ̴̥̪D̳̲̳̤o̴͙̘͓̤̟̗͇n̰̗̞̼̳͙͖͢'҉͖t̳͓̣͍̗̰ ͉W̝̳͓̼͜a̗͉̳͖̘̮n͕ͅt͚̟͚ ̸̺T̜̖̖̺͎̱ͅo̭̪̰̼̥̜ ̼͍̟̝R̝̹̮̭ͅͅe̡̗͇a͍̘̤͉͘d̼̜ 
⚢