Support NeoGAF

[not_so_special]

Completly agree, this hurt the cause way more than "raise awareness"
Guess what is happening now after this dude was bullied into an apology, everyone want's to buy that shirt, and most hate the people who started the bullying.

it shows me in what kind of bubble some people on this thread live..its amazing

 

[Aurongel]

I've been reading more into the original complaints against his shirt before all of this turned into the silly keyboard warrior campaign it is currently. I feel like these feminists are just using the publicity of the comet landing and his vaguely questionable shirt to push a wider message about feminine representation in science fields. I'm a CS major currently and I absolutely agree that feminine representation in my field is a major issue but publicly shaming this man and exploiting the publicity of this scientific achievement to advance that political agenda does a disservice to scientists of any gender.

 

[Foggy]

I just disagree on a core level that the shirt equals "You wouldn't be welcome here." The argument that the individual needs to not actually like things or display that in their place of work, that they instead project some theoretically neutral image 24/7 is so preposterous its hard to actually acknowledge that frame of thinking.

Not often I agree with Boris Johnson, but he's bang on with "There must be room in our world for eccentricity, even if it offends the prudes, and room for the vague other-worldliness that often goes with genius." The standard that countless internet warriors try to hold others to is one they themselves would undoubtedly fail because it comes from a total place of unreality.

What these same reactionary sects fail to realise is every time they mire their movement or message with an attack force/negative association, they chip away at its position. The correct way forward is positive reinforcement of women in STEM and so on, giving that tons more press, not raking a guy in a garish shirt over the coals for a month because "its symbolic". Shaming people will just create a well of anger and push-back each and every single time. "GAMERS ARE OVER" was a poignant recent example of that boiled down to its core.

Stop tone policing, bro. There's no room for consideration and introspection anymore.

 

[berzeli]

I just disagree on a core level that the shirt equals "You wouldn't be welcome here." The argument that the individual needs to not actually like things or display that in their place of work, that they instead project some theoretically neutral image 24/7 is so preposterous its hard to actually acknowledge that frame of thinking.

Which is why HR departments are totally unnecessary and no one has ever done anything objectionable in a workplace environment. And it is possible to express oneself without offending someone.

Not often I agree with Boris Johnson, but he's bang on with "There must be room in our world for eccentricity, even if it offends the prudes, and room for the vague other-worldliness that often goes with genius." The standard that countless internet warriors try to hold others to is one they themselves would undoubtedly fail because it comes from a total place of unreality.

What standard is that? Basic professional decency?

Also that Boris Johnson nonsense ignores agency and its relevancy, claims that this was a orchestrated and says that people finding the shirt objectionable are on the same level as fundamentalist islamists. Fuck that noise.

What these same reactionary sects fail to realise is every time they mire their movement or message with an attack force/negative association, they chip away at its position. The correct way forward is positive reinforcement of women in STEM and so on, giving that tons more press, not raking a guy in a garish shirt over the coals for a month because "its symbolic". Shaming people will just create a well of anger and push-back each and every single time. "GAMERS ARE OVER" was a poignant recent example of that boiled down to its core.

I don't know how much clearer I can make this, this wasn't created by some sect like uber feminilluminati. There were people with an interest in Rosetta reacting negatively to something they saw.

But hey, if we'd all just do as you say I'm sure that this would be fixed in no time.

 

[wsippel]

And less than 25% of women hold STEM jobs. That should be a terrifying statistic, that means that there is something about STEM that despite women seeking it out and studying it they then choose to look elsewhere for employment.

It's really not terrifying at all. In fact, I find it quite encouraging. You're comparing a few years to decades here, of course the results will be skewed - people don't just work for a year and then quit, so there are still a ton of males working in the field who started when female graduates were actually rare. The percentage of female graduates in STEM rose to roughly 34% in the US in 2012, and yet they already hold 25% of the jobs.

 

[berzeli]

It's really not terrifying at all. In fact, I find it quite encouraging. You're comparing a few years to decades here, of course the results will be skewed - people don't just work for a year and then quit, so there are still a ton of males working in the field who started when female graduates were actually rare. The percentage of female graduates in STEM rose to roughly 34% in the US in 2012, and yet they already hold 25% of the jobs.

Dude... that is not what the research says. Even that flawed piece of bad research that got an op-ed in the New York Times points out that after graduating a lower percentage of the women seek out employment in STEM.

 

[not_so_special]

I don't know how much clearer I can make this, this wasn't created by some sect like uber feminilluminati. There were people with an interest in Rosetta reacting negatively to something they saw.

yeah? remember the title of the verge article?

I don't care if you landed a spacecraft on a comet

sure the people who made the headline cared about the rossetta mission

and i calling some one ASSHOLE on twitter its "reacting negatively to something" excuse me if i think is rude and of a poor taste

 

[Pie and Beans]

But hey, if we'd all just do as you say I'm sure that this would be fixed in no time.

Funny how that works. But then, those last four words are the core issue aren't they. "fixed in no time". Its that impatience, that desire to see the entire world reforged to a new standard that completely undercuts any movements basis in reality. The long road, the "lets just positively reinforce stuff to inch forward generation by generation" isn't sexy and immediate and passion filled. Like below:

It's really not terrifying at all. In fact, I find it quite encouraging. You're comparing a few years to decades here, of course the results will be skewed - people don't just work for a year and then quit, so there are still a ton of males working in the field who started when female graduates were actually rare. The percentage of female graduates in STEM rose to roughly 34% in the US in 2012, and yet they already hold 25% of the jobs.

But thats not enough. Actual gradual change isn't acceptable to someone that wants to see everything change within their lifetime and will stoop to negative association to do so. Thats the problem with Shirt Gate. Its benefits no-one (well, other than the girl selling those shirts!), its actually about "taking something away from one side" and all it does is stir a pot. Its not meaningful change, its hoping that whacking a dog on the nose with a newspaper for shitting in the house will do the job rather than treating/praising it whenever it doesn't.

 

[berzeli]

yeah? remember the title of the verge article?

I don't care if you landed a spacecraft on a comet

sure the people who made the headline cared about the rossetta mission

and i calling some one ASSHOLE on twitter its "reacting negatively to something" excuse me if i think is rude and of a poor taste

This is not evidence that the criticism was invented by some sect and making claims like that is ridiculous.

Look the only reason I know about the Verge article is because people keep bringing it up and whatever tonal issues you find with it is not evidence that it was written by someone who did not have an interest in the Rosetta mission. Look I don't agree with it, I hadn't even read it before this thread because I don't read The Verge since I don't like their output.

And I have stated multiple times that I found some of the initial criticism acerbic, but that doesn't change the fact that it is criticism and shouldn't diminish its legitimacy. This was live commenting on an unfolding event and if you compare it to something like a sporting event the language is tame. And those tweets were definitely made by someone who was interested in the mission.

 

[Zaptruder]

No it isn't. Mumei covered this very well earlier in the thread.

Why are you pretending that this is about feminists? The initial criticism was sparked during the live feed of the Rosetta mission. The criticism was from people with a vested interest in tech/STEM.

If we accept the argument from the except posted by Mumei... we should be also critical of any factor alienating women from STEM; including but not limited to bowling shirts with Star Trek prints on them... and indeed dumb bowling shirts themselves.

However, if he were wearing something more mundane like a star trek bowling shirt, I can't imagine that people criticizing the guy on this basis would gain any sort of traction, even if on a logical level it does make sense; that even wearing a non-overtly sexist shirt that nonetheless symbols the 'boys club' feeling of STEM is damaging to the prospects of women going into the STEM field.

Given how much media impressions and discussions that shirt storm has generated... and how it's played out; with a lot more people sympathizing with the guy rather than the point that the feminists was trying to make... that hasty move to criticize his shirt may in a very real sense been more damaging to the issue of women in STEM than the actual shirt itself was.

That is; the shirt gets more coverage, and the issue of it been an overtly sexualized and inconsiderate and inappropriate shirt is raised along with it, which in turn strengthens the impression that this stuff is a boys club.

Coupled with many people rejecting the notion of the shirt doing harm (or at least rejecting the manner of the criticism), and it just serves to polarize people, rather than converting minds to been more 'sensitive' and 'empathic' about these things (because that's not at all what's been demonstrated, even if that's precisely what's needed).

The issue of a lack of representation with women in STEM is a conversation that America (and all countries that are culturally influenced by her) desperately needs to have. But it's not one that should be attached to a case that involves some errant overt sexualization - because it serves to set people on guard about the whole issue, and as a result weakens the willingness of people to participate in reasoned and constructive arguments about a broader and far more important issue.


But if we are going to have this STEM gender asymmetry discussion; then it's reasonable for us to understand that it's a multi-factorial issue with iterative feedback loops that is affecting the overall motivation for females to engage in STEM.

There's a lack of positive reinforcement for starters; in the sense that there are very few positive role models in the media (fictional or otherwise)... a couple recent examples come to mind; Felicity from The Arrow and Brand from Interstellar - although those characters still play second fiddle unfortunately.

There's also cultural misinformation - the general impression that males are somehow more suited to the actual tasks involved in STEM roles.

These are as significant if not more so than the idea of the 'boys club' alienating women from STEM.

But even if we do engage in the idea of the boys club - stuff like the geekiness; a lot of that is fairly gender neutral (star trek) - only the overarching cultural associations make it more male slanted than female slanted. And in those cases - I'm not sure it's a problem that people in STEM areas can solve (other than suppressing their natural interests and proclivities).

Sure, the guys (and gals) in STEM can and should tone down misogyny and make themselves more empathic and sensitive to the needs of both genders. But in this discussion (the one about how to redress the gender imbalance in STEM), it's a minor point. A more important point (related to been empathic and sensitive to the needs) would be how companies in these fields can set their policies to better accommodate for women (paid maternity leave, subsidized day care, etc).

 

[berzeli]

Funny how that works. But then, those last four words are the core issue aren't they. "fixed in no time". Its that impatience, that desire to see the entire world reforged to a new standard that completely undercuts any movements basis in reality. The long road, the "lets just positively reinforce stuff to inch forward generation by generation" isn't sexy and immediate and passion filled. Like below:

No one is suggesting that removing the shirt is going to fix the underlying issue. But it is possible to both be critical of this situation and reinforce positives such as mentorships and promoting role models. And it is disingenuous to say that you can't.

But thats not enough. Actual gradual change isn't acceptable to someone that wants to see everything change within their lifetime and will stoop to negative association to do so. Thats the problem with Shirt Gate. Its benefits no-one (well, other than the girl selling those shirts!), its actually about "taking something away from one side" and all it does is stir a pot. Its not meaningful change, its hoping that whacking a dog on the nose with a newspaper for shitting in the house will do the job rather than treating/praising it whenever it doesn't.

He misread that research and he misread it badly. There is still an exodus of women from STEM even when they've worked hard for their graduation.

And I'm really intrigued that you are able to with such certainty proclaim the effects of both this situation and the long term effects of this discussion.

 

[Kano on the Phone]

Victimhood, really? And my aw, schucks statement was me trying to be polite. Firstly, that so called victim hood is being played very well by this new wave of feminist. I'm not saying that issues do not exist, they do. It just seems like every other week outrage explodes about......... The most inconsequential things. For fuck sake, it's a shirt! A tacky one at that.

In regards to the article, it was an opinion peace. I stumbled up on it and read it. I didn't think that it was in anyway brushing off the what feminist are fighting for. I feel it was more of, "hey, look at this great feat that humankind has achieved. Ten years of work to get here" but instead of that we have to hear about the choice of shirt some dude made. It reminds me of that "hey look at me! Im doing shit too" attitude.

This current movement is starting to feel manufactured in my opinion. And I'm not downplaying the real issues. I'm saying that if a shirt (and the implied notion that it is keeping women from the sciences and if you can show statistics proving this and not a tweet) can cause so much outrage, then whats next? It sounds like reaching for anything and hoping that shit sticks to the wall.

It's been shown this is a real issue and was addressed by women directly affected by it. You completely avoided my question and responded with what is basically "grr...feminism." You either have to either assume these actual women affected by it, especially the ones in STEM, are either exaggerating or lying and I would like you to explain why you can't say what they're saying this means to them at face value.

The ESA guy wasn't sent home, and if you read my post I said that people should have more freedom to wear what they want to work. The entire premise was that I desire to see an expansion of casual dress in the workplace. People are more productive when they are more comfortable. Finally, when you're banned from doing something, the freedom that you had to do the aforementioned something is surrendered. You have less rights than you had in the previous condition.

You can get the exact same shirt without tits on it if comfort is your deal. You're arguing about a shirt that a person would get sent home from basically any job for wearing. Just because he wasn't here doesn't mean he shouldn't have been. 99 percent of the population doesn't have the freedom to wear anything they want to work and they never have, so I'm not sure what freedom you imagine is being taken away here.

 

[berzeli]

If we accept the argument from the except posted by Mumei... we should be also critical of any factor alienating women from STEM; including but not limited to bowling shirts with Star Trek prints on them... and indeed dumb bowling shirts themselves.

However, if he were wearing something more mundane like a star trek bowling shirt, I can't imagine that people criticizing the guy on this basis would gain any sort of traction, even if on a logical level it does make sense; that even wearing a non-overtly sexist shirt that nonetheless symbols the 'boys club' feeling of STEM is damaging to the prospects of women going into the STEM field.

Given how much media impressions and discussions that shirt storm has generated... and how it's played out; with a lot more people sympathizing with the guy rather than the point that the feminists was trying to make... that hasty move to criticize his shirt may in a very real sense been more damaging to the issue of women in STEM than the actual shirt itself was.

You are also missing the forest for the trees.

The example in Muemi's isn't a perfect analogue for this situation it is about how and why the shirt is perceived as exclusionary. This still isn't a feminist conspiracy and there isn't some cohesive group of feminists that are arguing.

Both your claims about are about sympathy and the effects of the criticism lack any sources and making such claims without any basis is not contributing to the discussion in a constructive manner.

That is; the shirt gets more coverage, and the issue of it been an overtly sexualized and inconsiderate and inappropriate shirt is raised along with it, which in turn strengthens the impression that this stuff is a boys club.

Coupled with many people rejecting the notion of the shirt doing harm (or at least rejecting the manner of the criticism), and it just serves to polarize people, rather than converting minds to been more 'sensitive' and 'empathic' about these things (because that's not at all what's been demonstrated, even if that's precisely what's needed).

Yet again, not providing basis for your arguments is not constructive and I won't engage. Claiming that this is self evident is not something that would be considered a reasonable basis. You are portraying your opinions as facts.

The issue of a lack of representation with women in STEM is a conversation that America (and all countries that are culturally influenced by her) desperately needs to have. But it's not one that should be attached to a case that involves some errant overt sexualization - because it serves to set people on guard about the whole issue, and as a result weakens the willingness of people to participate in reasoned and constructive arguments about a broader and far more important issue.

Dismissing a marginalised group's right to voice their opinion due to it not being an appropriate time or not being in the appropriate tone is not valid grounds for dismissal.

But if we are going to have this STEM gender asymmetry discussion; then it's reasonable for us to understand that it's a multi-factorial issue with iterative feedback loops that is affecting the overall motivation for females to engage in STEM.

And I have linked to research that states the the behaviour of the departments play a role in how female students perceive the STEM field and in their continued studies. It is not unreasonable to suggest that the behavioural effect persists outside of the academic setting.

There's a lack of positive reinforcement for starters; in the sense that there are very few positive role models in the media (fictional or otherwise)... a couple recent examples come to mind; Felicity from The Arrow and Brand from Interstellar - although those characters still play second fiddle unfortunately.

There's also cultural misinformation - the general impression that males are somehow more suited to the actual tasks involved in STEM roles.

These are as significant if not more so than the idea of the 'boys club' alienating women from STEM.

Still does not mean that we should ignore lesser evils just because there exist greater. And you can work to improve the situation for women in STEM in more ways than one. This isn't some zero sum game in which if you criticise attire you can't promote good role models.

But even if we do engage in the idea of the boys club - stuff like the geekiness; a lot of that is fairly gender neutral (star trek) - only the overarching cultural associations make it more male slanted than female slanted. And in those cases - I'm not sure it's a problem that people in STEM areas can solve (other than suppressing their natural interests and proclivities).

Sure, the guys (and gals) in STEM can and should tone down misogyny and make themselves more empathic and sensitive to the needs of both genders. But in this discussion (the one about how to redress the gender imbalance in STEM), it's a minor point. A more important point (related to been empathic and sensitive to the needs) would be how companies in these fields can set their policies to better accommodate for women (paid maternity leave, subsidized day care, etc).

What constitutes natural interests and proclivities?

And as I did state above, fighting lesser evils do not prohibit the fighting of greater. Dismissing the criticism that is brought forth by a lot women in STEM as less important would in my opinion reinforce the perception of STEM as a boys club since you are determining what gets discussed and how it gets discussed.

 

[Dice//]

This controversy is totally less offensive (by like a hundred-fold) than some of the reactions in here. This is why the debate has stretched on as long as it has. But seems largely content on men telling women/feminists that there is nothing wrong with a shirt that poorly depicts women being put on national television.... nothing at all. "Forget perspective, you feminists are wrong for simply exploding the issue" - Men

Spoiler

(#notallmen)

.

No,more on the line of how anyone can defend the verge article or the lynch-mob mentality againts the poor guy

and yes...in europe things are different

in the words of the always on the spot stephen fry

No.. Don't post that. You could post that at so many topics here about a controversy and it does nothing but show your apathy or avoid the hot button issue with a very general quote. I love Fry, but that specific image is so counter-productive.

I love how everyone is now on the "Poor Matt Taylor"-train, even going like "That shirt is awesome, lil' buddy, keep wearing it proudly!!!" like we're coddling some kid. Gaffers, for the most part, don't CARE about Matt Taylor on this, we love the guy and think he did something great for science; shit we barely care about the shirt here (even those in anti-shirt camps) and really don't think it's a five-alarm issue. The problem is people's thoughts on this and extreme dismissal as some evidence forthe very 'discreet sexism' going on by, at worst, telling Feminists once again they're being silly and their perspective is irrelevant.

Even if things are Europe in different, how does that excuse him from criticism of a national event? A smart enough business caters to its viewers than the other way around.

 

[jmdajr]

nice 37 pages. Good god.

 

[jorma]

No it isn't. Mumei covered this very well earlier in the thread.

So why did you even post this if you don't stand by it? Is wearing a star trek shirt on the STEM-field job "problematic" because it makes women feel not interested?

Because that's what i pick up from Mumei's post. Men should refrain from being so fucking geeky if they work the STEM-fields, because it makes women disinterested. They should go for more refined decor such as shirts with artsy Salvador Dali images (not the ones with scantily clad women, mind you!).

And if that post "covered this" very well, then.. i'll just say that if these are the trees that makes me not see the forest, it's a rather shitty forest to walk about in. One where geeks can't be who they are, because who they are is someone a woman don't like to associate with.

Honestly i find Mumeis post and what it suggests rather problematic. Because to me it's obvious that the geek paraphernalia wasn't sending a "i'm not welcome here" message to women, but rather the other way around - women sending a "i don't want to associate with these geeky losers and if this is what STEM is about i don't want any part of it"-message.
Should that kind of shallow really be catered to?

And for what's its worth i don't think this has anything to do with this "shirtgate", i'm just baffled that Mumei choose to post it in this thread (or anywhere at all).

 

[Dash27]

The shirt is awesome and I want one. I just read he was given the shirt as a gift by a lady friend, even better. She's posted about it here in case anyone missed it.

As for the generated outrage, it just adds to the self imposed ridicule of people claiming to be standard bearers for feminism. It's why many people shy away from the word even though most agree in equality of sexes.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/feminism-poll_n_3094917.html

 

[Dice//]

The shirt is awesome and I want one. I just read he was given the shirt as a gift by a lady friend, even better. She's posted about it here in case anyone missed it.

As for the generated outrage, it just adds to the self imposed ridicule of people claiming to be standard bearers for feminism. It's why many people shy away from the word even though most agree in equality of sexes.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/feminism-poll_n_3094917.html

I hope you don't think you're the first with these ideas. AGAIN, THE ISSUE ISN'T WITH MATT TAYLOR.

 

[Vagabundo]

What the hell do women have against Star Trek?

My wife loves it. Although she is now in the S of the STEM and starting her PHD in parasites. She thinks the shirtstorm is stupid too.

 

[Kano on the Phone]

nice 37 pages. Good god.

It would be 10 if it weren't for all of the throwaway comments like this one.

The shirt is awesome and I want one. I just read he was given the shirt as a gift by a lady friend, even better. She's posted about it here in case anyone missed it.

As for the generated outrage, it just adds to the self imposed ridicule of people claiming to be standard bearers for feminism. It's why many people shy away from the word even though most agree in equality of sexes.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/feminism-poll_n_3094917.html

Literally no one missed that. And you missed the probably hundred posts explaining why it's irrelevant.

 

[berzeli]

So why did you even post this if you don't stand by it? Is wearing a star trek shirt on the STEM-field job "problematic" because it makes women feel not interested?

Because that's what i pick up from Mumei's post. Men should refrain from being so fucking geeky if they work the STEM-fields, because it makes women disinterested. They should go for more refined decor such as shirts with artsy Salvador Dali images (not the ones with scantily clad women, mind you!).

And if that post "covered this" very well, then.. i'll just say that if these are the trees that makes me not see the forest, it's a rather shitty forest to walk about in. One where geeks can't be who they are, because who they are is someone a woman don't like to associate with.

Honestly i find Mumeis post and what it suggests rather problematic. Because to me it's obvious that the geek paraphernalia wasn't sending a "i'm not welcome here" message to women, but rather the other way around - women sending a "i don't want to associate with these geeky losers and if this is what STEM is about i don't want any part of it"-message.
Should that kind of shallow really be catered to?

And for what's its worth i don't think this has anything to do with this "shirtgate", i'm just baffled that Mumei choose to post it in this thread (or anywhere at all).

I'm assuming you quoted the wrong post by me.

I do stand by that post as a mean of illustrating the ways of how and why a shirt can be perceived as being exclusionary and what exclusionary entails. I have no idea how you can have gotten any other impression.

My comments about covering it well was about that it covering how it wasn't jumping to conclusions to say that attire can be perceived as exclusionary. You are ignoring the context to what I said.

I am honestly not following your argument about geekiness and Dalí and I think that you are not understanding what Mumei is saying.

You are assuming that a lot of things are true with the basis that it is self evident, which it isn't. You cant claim that not wanting to associate with something perceived as geeky means that you are being shallow and you can't claim that women as a group are at fault, and places the value judgement of loserhood on geekiness without backing it up. You are projecting you views on a situation as fact.

To reiterate what I've said before, Mumei posted that to illustrate the how and why of someone could find the shirt exclusionary and how it wasn't just about the perception of the imagery as offensive.

 

[Dash27]

I hope you don't think you're the first with these ideas. AGAIN, THE ISSUE ISN'T WITH MATT TAYLOR.

Of course I'm not because this is the obvious answer. Just like you'd get a lot of people saying 4 if the question is "What's 2+2?"

The issue is indeed with Matt Taylor, as he was the one wearing the shirt which is causing such a big stink. The implication is his shirt is a microcosm of exclusion. If you think a shirt is part of some overarching culture of making women feel unwelcome, frankly, with all due respect: who cares? It's a ridiculous position to take. Feel free to argue women are made to feel unwelcome as a general principle, but to base it on this example is again, the reason people cringe at the term feminist.

Honestly it's insulting. If my daughter grows up to feel intimidated by a shirt because it represents some culture she doesn't align with... worn by guy like him, who seems to be not only extremely talented but a very sweet person, I'd tell her to re-evaluate her priorities.

The world does not bend to the whims of everyone. Nobody owes you frilly halmark card welcomes because that's what YOU identify with. Nobody cares if you feel like you wouldnt be welcomed here. Get up and find like minded people and form your own culture then, don't berate people doing what they like.

 

[Faddy]

This is the most "Problematic" thing I have read in a while.

Problematic of course means that you have decided society has an issue that you can fix by bitching about it.

 

[KHarvey16]

Of course I'm not because this is the obvious answer. Just like you'd get a lot of people saying 4 if the question is "What's 2+2?"

The issue is indeed with Matt Taylor, as he was the one wearing the shirt which is causing such a big stink. The implication is his shirt is a microcosm of exclusion. If you think a shirt is part of some overarching culture of making women feel unwelcome, frankly, with all due respect: who cares? It's a ridiculous position to take. Feel free to argue women are made to feel unwelcome as a general principle, but to base it on this example is again, the reason people cringe at the term feminist.

Honestly it's insulting. If my daughter grows up to feel intimidated by a shirt because it represents some culture she doesn't align with... worn by guy like him, who seems to be not only extremely talented but a very sweet person, I'd tell her to re-evaluate her priorities.

The world does not bend to the whims of everyone. Nobody owes you frilly halmark card welcomes because that's what YOU identify with. Nobody cares if you feel like you wouldnt be welcomed here. Get up and find like minded people and form your own culture then, don't berate people doing what they like.

I hope your daughter grows up knowing that she should learn about an argument before dismissing it, despite the conduct of her parent.

 

[Kano on the Phone]

Of course I'm not because this is the obvious answer. Just like you'd get a lot of people saying 4 if the question is "What's 2+2?"

The issue is indeed with Matt Taylor, as he was the one wearing the shirt which is causing such a big stink. The implication is his shirt is a microcosm of exclusion. If you think a shirt is part of some overarching culture of making women feel unwelcome, frankly, with all due respect: who cares? It's a ridiculous position to take. Feel free to argue women are made to feel unwelcome as a general principle, but to base it on this example is again, the reason people cringe at the term feminist.

Honestly it's insulting. If my daughter grows up to feel intimidated by a shirt because it represents some culture she doesn't align with... worn by guy like him, who seems to be not only extremely talented but a very sweet person, I'd tell her to re-evaluate her priorities.

The world does not bend to the whims of everyone. Nobody owes you frilly halmark card welcomes because that's what YOU identify with. Nobody cares if you feel like you wouldnt be welcomed here. Get up and find like minded people and form your own culture then, don't berate people doing what they like.

It's a culture that's by and large unwelcoming to her because she has a vagina. I hope that if you actually have a daughter, you're a bit more thoughtful when you're telling her to "walk it off" when it comes to institutionalized sexism. If that's all you have, maybe let her mom handle it.

 

[not_so_special]

I hope your daughter grows up knowing that she should learn about an argument before dismissing it, despite the conduct of her parent.

and you hit a new low in this thread...congrats dude

 

[KHarvey16]

and you hit a new low in this thread...congrats dude

This discussion has proven that your ability to identify low points is demonstrably terrible.

 

[Irminsul]

It's a culture that's by and large unwelcoming to her because she has a vagina.

Why? Because geekiness has some intrinsic misogyny or because women are told by societal rules not to like geekiness? If the former, where does it come from? If the latter, aren't the societal rules at fault then?

 

[Kano on the Phone]

Why? Because geekiness has some intrinsic misogyny or because women are told by societal rules not to like geekiness? If the former, where does it come from? If the latter, aren't the societal rules at fault then?

What does geekiness have to do anything? We're talking about women in STEM, a field most women haven't been encouraged to get into, if not intentionally steered away from. for as long as it's been around.

 

[Angelus Errare]

I've avoided this thread because I kept reading it as "Shitstorm" whenever I scrolled down OT. I need new contacts apparently.

 

[Dash27]

This is the most "Problematic" thing I have read in a while.

Problematic of course means that you have decided society has an issue that you can fix by bitching about it.

It's not even necessarily problematic that women aren't involved in STEM. It might be an issue if they are being actively discouraged, and thats a legitimate debate but that's not been proven just asserted. There have been.... other assertions, but they must not be discussed as any intellectual should know. We do not talk about the uncomfortable, even if we are able to rule it out.

All that is aside from this though, which is in fact, much ado about a shirt.

I hope your daughter grows up knowing that she should learn about an argument before dismissing it, despite the conduct of her parent.

I recall your nonsense from other posts. This would be a good try if you were relatively anonymous and the whole vague dismissal coupled with ad hominem attempt was a new tactic.

 

[stufte]

What does geekiness have to do anything? We're talking about women in STEM, a field most women haven't been encouraged to get into, if not intentionally steered away from. for as long as it's been around.

The oft referenced Mumei post?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=138940918#post138940918

 

[Kano on the Phone]

The oft referenced Mumei post?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=138940918#post138940918

Yes, thanks for sharing the link.

 

[Dice//]

Of course I'm not because this is the obvious answer. Just like you'd get a lot of people saying 4 if the question is "What's 2+2?"

The issue is indeed with Matt Taylor, as he was the one wearing the shirt which is causing such a big stink. The implication is his shirt is a microcosm of exclusion. If you think a shirt is part of some overarching culture of making women feel unwelcome, frankly, with all due respect: who cares? It's a ridiculous position to take. Feel free to argue women are made to feel unwelcome as a general principle, but to base it on this example is again, the reason people cringe at the term feminist.

Honestly it's insulting. If my daughter grows up to feel intimidated by a shirt because it represents some culture she doesn't align with... worn by guy like him, who seems to be not only extremely talented but a very sweet person, I'd tell her to re-evaluate her priorities.

The world does not bend to the whims of everyone. Nobody owes you frilly halmark card welcomes because that's what YOU identify with. Nobody cares if you feel like you wouldnt be welcomed here. Get up and find like minded people and form your own culture then, don't berate people doing what they like.

For the umpteenth time; the problem isn't Matt Taylor. It's people's reaction to this that have been far more problematic to digest.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=139226869&postcount=1827

And don't lecture me on the last part when you're just as guilty, if not more winded, of the same. I feel bad for your hypothetical daughter having no one to take comfort in when people dismiss her claims of a culture that's 'perfectly fine' with such attire being worn publicly, being applauded even by some as 'work and television appropriate'. Most people should have some sense of consideration to see it isn't so black and white.

I've avoided this thread because I kept reading it as "Shitstorm" whenever I scrolled down OT. I need new contacts apparently.

I avoided the first 7 pages worth of posts for the same. "Shitstorm" huh?

 

[Dash27]

It's a culture that's by and large unwelcoming to her because she has a vagina. I hope that if you actually have a daughter, you're a bit more thoughtful when you're telling her to "walk it off" when it comes to institutionalized sexism. If that's all you have, maybe let her mom handle it.

I'd rather she be more like her parents, successful and not intimidated by clothing. You can feel free to teach any kids you may have to cry "institutionalized sexism" because of a tacky button down. It is safer that way as you'll always have an excuse.

Or hey, you can "hope" that the world accommodates them perfectly, to whatever their tastes are and then everything will be great. Of course you'd need to do that for each individual, so it might take some time. Maybe start a thread here and let us know how your efforts are going

 

[berzeli]

It's not even necessarily problematic that women aren't involved in STEM. It might be an issue if they are being actively discouraged, and thats a legitimate debate but that's not been proven just asserted. There have been.... other assertions, but they must not be discussed as any intellectual should know. We do not talk about the uncomfortable, even if we are able to rule it out.

I was going to give you an actual answer to why the assertion that biological factors are the reason why women aren't interested in STEM is complete and utter bullshit. But the bolded has made it clear that you are not seeking an honest discussion.

 

[not_so_special]

This discussion has proven that your ability to identify low points is demonstrably terrible.

my hability to identify rude people who think they are holier than anyone still works ,thank you beacon of light

 

[KHarvey16]

I recall your nonsense from other posts. This would be a good try if you were relatively anonymous and the whole vague dismissal coupled with ad hominem attempt was a new tactic.

There is absolutely no ad hominem there. Fabricating arguments is becoming your specialty.

 

[stufte]

It's a culture that's by and large unwelcoming to her because she has a vagina. I hope that if you actually have a daughter, you're a bit more thoughtful when you're telling her to "walk it off" when it comes to institutionalized sexism. If that's all you have, maybe let her mom handle it.

Fighting one kind of sexism with another. I'm not sure anyone in here should be giving parenting lessons unless you are an actual parent. And even then... Don't.

 

[Opto]

A pornographer explains why the shirt was sexist:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/11/...guys-shirt-crash-landed/#.VGmk3jjs6N-.twitter

so yeah, don't say people against the shirt are sex-negative

 

[Dash27]

For the umpteenth time; the problem isn't Matt Taylor. It's people's reaction to this that have been far more problematic to digest.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=139226869&postcount=1827

And don't lecture me on the last part when you're just as guilty, if not more winded, of the same. I feel bad for your hypothetical daughter having no one to take comfort in when people dismiss her claims of a culture that's 'perfectly fine' with such attire being worn publicly, being applauded even by some as 'work and television appropriate'. Most people should have some sense of consideration to see it isn't so black and white.



I avoided the first 7 pages worth of posts for the same. "Shitstorm" huh?

I'm sincerely asking now if you're trolling. It's about "a culture that's perfectly fine with such attire" and not the guy who wore the attire.

I'm perfectly fine with the attire, and if it was something I found offensive, like a Che Guevara shirt or a Twilight shirt, or Justin Beiber, or Leg Warmers, or pink frilly dresses... I dont care about that either. My daughter will do what she wants to do and not stress about such garbage. Feminism is kicking in the door and saying "I'm here and I'm good at this" not crying about trivial shit.

 

[KHarvey16]

my hability to identify rude people who think they are holier than anyone still works ,thank you beacon of light

Again, not everyone that's wrong is wrong because of ignorance...people can be wrong for any number of reasons. But the most egregious and most unforgivable is willful ignorance. We have many posters being patient, sharing their opinion over and over and over and folks like Dash drop in seemingly with the explicit goal of not listening to any of them. They start off with strawmen and then fail to even destroy a fake argument with anything even approaching coherent reasoning and logic. It's compunding failure and I'm embarrassed for those making it their priority to engage in again and again.

Attempting to explain this whole thing is clearly not having the intended result. A person cannot be reasoned out of what they didn't reason into.

 

[Dash27]

I was going to give you an actual answer to why the assertion that biological factors are the reason why women aren't interested in STEM is complete and utter bullshit. But the bolded has made it clear that you are not seeking an honest discussion.

I'd be interested to hear but I don't want to stray too far off topic.

 

[Dice//]

I'm sincerely asking now if you're trolling.

Right back at you. So here, you got mentioned [yay!]:

Again, not everyone that's wrong is wrong because of ignorance...people can be wrong for any number of reasons. But the most egregious and most unforgivable is willful ignorance. We have many posters being patient, sharing their opinion over and over and over and folks like Dash drop in seemingly with the explicit goal of not listening to any of them. They start off with strawmen and then fail to even destroy a fake argument with anything even approaching coherent reasoning and logic. It's compunding failure and I'm embarrassed for those making it their priority to engage in again and again.

Attempting to explain this whole thing is clearly not having the intended result. A person cannot be reasoned out of what they didn't reason into.

 

[Opto]

The "sexy women shirt perpetuates anti-female science agenda" is on the same jump to conclusions level as "videogames make murderers". Its the exact sort of shallow slacktivism outrage that has been giving plenty of other movements a bad image this generation.

After the current 5-10 year period of "New Internet Feminism" the whole movement is going to need to distance themselves from the radical and immature twitter/tumblr sect, fracturing and rebranding under some new umbrella to actually become serious again and not reactionary PETA level whirlpool of misdirected rage.

I love that so many people think twitter and tumblr is some kinda super progressive hivemind.

And no, we won't rebrand, because fuck you, we're more vocal than ever and we're not stopping this party train just cause you're afraid you can't wear offensive shirts anymore

 

[Opto]

Once again

For the upteenth time

The shirt is symptomatic of the problems with being inclusive to women in STEM fields. It, specifically, does not produce all of the toxicity and other things that is found to be problematic in the fields. It is the straw that broke the camel's back. It's the drop in the bucket that made it run over.

Wearing a shirt with partially naked space bondage babes is VERY different from a real, living woman choosing to present her self as sexy. One is an object, and the other is a person with agency.

 

[Kano on the Phone]

I'd rather she be more like her parents, successful and not intimidated by clothing. You can feel free to teach any kids you may have to cry "institutionalized sexism" because of a tacky button down. It is safer that way as you'll always have an excuse.

Or hey, you can "hope" that the world accommodates them perfectly, to whatever their tastes are and then everything will be great. Of course you'd need to do that for each individual, so it might take some time. Maybe start a thread here and let us know how your efforts are going

No one is intimidated by the shirt. You're inventing this to fit into your narrative.

Fighting one kind of sexism with another. I'm not sure anyone in here should be giving parenting lessons unless you are an actual parent. And even then... Don't.

There's no reverse sexism here that I'm seeing. Please elaborate how you feel that anything being talked about is sexist toward men. I simply suggested that someone with a more level head approach the subject. You can replace "her mom" with "her dad" if you like. I don't know if the poster I responded to is a woman or a gay male.

 

[jorma]

I'm assuming you quoted the wrong post by me.

I do stand by that post as a mean of illustrating the ways of how and why a shirt can be perceived as being exclusionary and what exclusionary entails. I have no idea how you can have gotten any other impression.

My comments about covering it well was about that it covering how it wasn't jumping to conclusions to say that attire can be perceived as exclusionary. You are ignoring the context to what I said.

I am honestly not following your argument about geekiness and Dalí and I think that you are not understanding what Mumei is saying.

" a Star Trek poster, geeky comics, video game boxes, junk food, electronic equipment, and technical books and magazines. The second arrangement was substantially less geeky: the poster was an art one, water bottles replaced the junk food, the magazines were general interest, and the computer books were aimed at a more general level."

In Mumeis example women were less interested in STEM when it was presented in a room furnished with geeky stuff.
This isn't an example of exclusion, it's an example of not wanting to be included in something. They are not the same thing. They aren't being excluded because they don't feel like they're missing out on anything.

And again, i don't see how it has anything to do with shirtgate, and i don't see why Mumei posted it, here or anywhere. And i don't see how it explains anything. Unless you think that star trek shirts and similar "geek-stuff" are problematic. Which, apparently, you don't.

 

[berzeli]

I'd be interested to hear but I don't want to stray too far off topic.

I'm not going to put in any effort with regards to linking research in this since even when I do people aren't reading the research and I still see a lot of issues with the way you presented that stance.

But basically the biological/genetic variation within the genders is large enough to dispel the idea that the genetic variation between the genders is a significant factor. Combine that with the fallibility of viewing gender as a binary (for instance how it can't explain the existence of intersex and transgender people) and you really can't claim that there is something inherent about being a woman that prevents you from being interested in STEM.

 

[TedNindo]

These kind of reactions to the shirt is exactly why I couldn't take a side in that whole Gamergate joke.

How is this not bullying?