Help Haiti auction one closes, some linkblogging

[soc_puppet]

I was totally going to do a post warning about how the main auction at help_haiti was closing soon, except A) I slept in until noon today, since school was canceled, and B) I got the closing time mixed up, not realizing it meant noon instead of midnight. W-whoops.

In any case! Bidding ended today a few hours ago. Here's something you may want to take a look at: Auction Closing Procedures. I will definitely be reading it closely myself at some point in the very near future.


In other linkblogging news: Liberal Bloggers to Obama and Dems: We Told You So


Also, while I normally have the utmost respect for Neil Gaiman, I really can't approve of his use of the word "bitch." (Trigger Warning for last link.)

Thanks to a lightbird777, I was expecting the Depp-seems-to-be-on-Team-Polanski thing. Even if I don't care much for Gaiman's solo work, however, this feels like more of a slap in the face.

Edit: Neil Gaiman, when negative reactions to his use of "bitch" were presented to him, has just said he will try to do better in the future". While he doesn't seem to feel contrite about its use in the George R. R. Martin post (where it is definitely used to mean "Someone who is at your disposal to use however you like", with the sexual implications all but out loud), it is at least slightly encouraging.

Edit 2: Aaaaand now we're moving backwards. *sigh*

-Trigger Warning-

Dear Mr. Gaiman,

On the off-chance that you are reading this post, I would like to take the opportunity to be a little clearer:

It makes me uncomfortable that you are using the term "bitch" to convey your sense of safety as a writer. As a woman, I am not afforded this same level of safety in regards to my basic personhood. There is as much as a twenty-five percent chance that I will become someone's "bitch" in my lifetime, and not in the sense you use it. It makes me cringe when I think of my friends and family members who have the same odds, or who already have been someone's "bitch".

The fact that you are comparing this to writing, or the idea that someone "has" to write something, is alienating and hurtful to me. I hope that, as someone who ostensibly makes a career out of being able to see things from the point of view of another person, fictional or otherwise, you may yet be willing to consider things from mine.

Comments

[meigui]

.............I actually had no idea that the term "bitch" was associated with rape, although perhaps I should have guessed--the context I first encountered it as connected to sex was in high school, where some of the counterculture kids would use it to mean "submissive sexual partner", which is how I thought GNeil meant it in the George R. R. Martin bit. Not that I thought the term itself wasn't problematic to begin with, but. Uh. Wow. :x

[soc_puppet]

Yeah, it's pretty problematic no matter how you slice it. On the plus side, he has just (within the last half hour, even) said he "will try to do better in the future".

Not that it was unproblematic in the George R. R. Martin post, but. It's a step in the right direction, at least.

[meigui]

Well, that's heartening, at least.

The thing that makes me uncomfortable on a global scale is that "dog" used to be pejorative in the same way, and had almost the same connotations of involuntary submission minus the sexual part, but that's fallen out of usage; meanwhile, "bitch" has risen to ubiquity and "bastard", which at least has the connotation of agency, has become almost exclusively male-gendered. Now "bitch" has started to be used for males, as well--in fact, in some circles, people who find it unacceptable to refer to a woman that way will feel perfectly fine using it on a man--but that still doesn't mean it's lost its genderedness, or all the crap that comes with the fact that it's a gendered pejorative. And that's a very uneasy sort of juxtaposition.

[soc_puppet]

Aaaaand now we've got backward momentum, sigh.

I think you've hit on something with the comparison to the word "dog" there; since "bitch" at its root is the female word for dog, it implies there is an inherent "sex object" quality to being female that was not present with the equivalent non-gendered term.

[perrito]

I might be missing some cultural context being a non-native speaker, but I don't find either of the uses particularly offensive and trying to think objectively I wouldn't find the equivalent in Spanish used in the same context particularly offensive either.

He obviously didn't mean to offend anyone and I tend not to take offense on stuff like this unless it's obviously meant to be offensive.

[meigui]

...Actually, given the way the question was worded, I would have interpreted it as "why are you using cuss words on the internets?" without the immediate context of the discussion in that post. It's possible he didn't make the connection between the ones asking about rape culture and the ones asking about George R. R. Martin, except to think that maybe someone's been spreading links around or something.

Well, yes, that's why I brought it up in the first place xD I can't think how else the current usage could have evolved, though, other than the two having once been roughly analogous until "dog" started losing currency, at which point "bitch" became its own word, so to speak, and the sexual meanings started to take over.

I rather wonder, actually, whether the usage of "bitch" to mean "to complain" is spillover from the Yiddish loanwoard "kvetch", which sounds kind of similar except that it's harder to pronounce. It's certainly not uncommon for similar-sounding words to get confused often enough that their meanings start to conflate--take "bemused" to "amused", for example, the former of which seems to be in the process of changing--some dictionaries lately will list a definition that incorporates the incorrect interpretation from conflating it with "amused". "Bitch", as a slang term, is naturally more sensitive to such forces because there is no prescriptive force on them, or at least nothing as definitive (hah) as a dictionary--the colloquial usage is itself the correct usage, always.

This might have in turn had an effect on the usage of "bitch" as a pejorative [edit: that is to say, the pejorative with the "rape" connotation as opposed to without], which I don't think entirely follows from the original pejorative use of "dog", which usually seemed to imply either unseemly dependence and deference (e.g. Alexander Pope's famous "I am his Highness' dog at Kew; pray tell me, sir, whose dog are you?")--in other words, submission--or cowardice (which I think is probably a newer usage that derived from the aforementioned). But then you add complaint to submission, and--well.

...I'm sorry, I hope this isn't a derailment on my part :x

[soc_puppet]

The basic idea here is that using a feminine term to mean "something to be dominated" (here, physical domination is implied) is hurtful to all women, and perpetuates a culture in which we are marginalized. (Longer post on it here, if you've got the spoons for it.)

Here, specifically, I'm pretty sure Mr. Gaiman didn't mean to hurt anyone. Either he was speaking from unexamined privilege, or (as may be more likely, given the knee-jerk reaction) he has examined his privilege in regards to this word, and justified it to himself for any number of reasons.

In fact, it is because I think he doesn't want to hurt or offend anyone that I almost made my letter up there a closed letter in addition to/instead of an open one. (Social anxiety is winning that battle so far.) It's because I think he could easily come to understand my/our position that I even consider addressing him directly. It's because of his relatively good feminist track record that the post was made in the first place. It's because I think he might be willing to listen, which is more than I expect of people who are offensive because they mean to be.

[perrito]

I skimmed the post to get an idea of what it was about. I know very little about the feminist movement and I live in a culture that is still very patriarchal, so maybe I'm just desensitized to it, but I'm of the opinion that words have the meaning people choose to give them.

My lack of cultural context is probably affecting my view of things, but my understanding of the word 'bitch' is 'female dog' It is an insult because you are calling someone a female dog, 'Nobody's bitch' means 'Nobody's female dog' it does imply being submissive but I don't think people normally call other people bitches after considering the meaning and implications of the word. I don't think Neil Gaiman did and I certainly don't when I bring it up in jokes with friends.

I asked half-joking yesterday if 'manwhore' would've brought a less strong reaction. I mean, the man didn't mean any harm and we all know he has an excellent record with social issues, so the whole intrawebz explosion seems like a huge over-reaction to me.

[soc_puppet]

That wouldn't surprise me, which is actually another reason I'm holding off actually sending the letter I left open up there.

I actually found that to be genuinely fascinating, but uh. Can't seem to generate any other comment on it at the moment ._.a *likes her some etymology*

[soc_puppet]

That's the original meaning of the word "bitch", yes. Cultural context definitely adds more layers, though, and I'm not sure how many of them translate exactly :|a Seeing your icon (and putting it together with the discussion up-page) is reminding me of something I could possibly use here, though.

In FMA, it is generally translated in to English that, in order to do the research he needs, Ed must become the "dog of the military". In this sense, being a dog means that he must follow all of their commands, bow to their whims, and generally do everything they say - good or bad, demeaning or not - because he is subservient to them, as a dog is subservient to its master. Additionally, because he has submitted himself to the will of the military, there is the implication that he can't say no.

The term "bitch" adds the layer of gender to it, suggesting that to submit to the will of another, or to have one's autonomy removed, is an inherently feminine. "Dog", meanwhile, has gone out of usage, perhaps even -because- it is gender-neutral.


Sadly, "manwhore" is nowhere near the same :( For one thing, there's the double-standard of men vs. women and sex: while men are encouraged to go out and have sex with as many women as possible (see: romantic "conquests", and if that isn't a deeply problematic term, I don't know what is), women are much shamed for doing much less. Also, "whore" suggests that at least the person going out and having sex wants to be doing so, while bitch/dog implies that it is something they are not in control of.


Again, I get that he didn't mean any harm, I do! But, to go back to a popular analogy from RaceFail '09 (simply because I think it will also work well here, and not because I mean to suggest that one marginalization is interchangeable with another, though if that's what I have done I apologize)...

Anyway, to get back to that analogy: If someone steps on a stranger's foot, but it was a complete accident, does that mean that the stranger's foot no longer hurts? No. It means that it was an understandable mistake. The hurt is still there, but if the person who did the stepping-on chooses, they might be able to learn from it, and avoid situations where they would step on someone else's foot in the future. They apologize and move on.

Or, as the case may be, they deny that any foot stepping-on ever took place, accidental or not, and thus the person whose foot hurts is imagining things - and besides, think of all the good things the foot-stepper-on has already done in life! That makes them a good person, who is incapable of ever treading on someone else's toes, even by accident, and there are absolutely no flaws in that logic ever ever ever.

[meigui]

Actually, I was wrong--Neil got the connection, but he was being defensive because of a delicate situation that was demanding the majority of his attention at the time (and still is)--Melissa McEwan has posted a followup in response. I think in this case I'm inclined to be sympathetic towards GNeil for his twitter responses--it's understandably difficult to engage in this kind of discussion when you're worried about your cat who is possibly dying at the veterinary hospital actually dying, period, lol I can has reading comprehension.

Etymology is my hobby! iloveitsomuch :3

Actually, it's funny--in its current usage, "bitch" seems to mean two things that are opposite--both "submissive person" and "pushy person", generally trending male in the first case and trending female in the second, though not necessarily. (Which. Lolproblematic again but!) There's a technical name for when you have a word that's its own antonym like that, but I can't remember it, and that frustrates me :(

[perrito]

I understand the meaning culture has given to the word, I don't want to go into marginalization and racism because that's a whole different can of worms, but to go with the foot stepping analogy, in this case I think the internet at large is claiming that an accidental toe-stepping broke their leg and now they will never be able to walk again. Which in my very personal and detached opinion, is very silly.

[soc_puppet]

I saw Liss' followup post, and have read through the comments (current as of, oh, five minutes ago - I saw you there!), but haven't gotten to his post quite yet. I definitely feel for him on the pet front, and just thinking about it is making me want to snuggle my boys right this minute. While I might have done things differently in his circumstances - for example, explained in a post that I was dealing with a sick pet, and that I would like to give the language thing more thought/attention when I was not splitting my attention - I can understand that he might think that, as a public figure, he has to deal with it now or there will be worse consequences. So, while I am still somewhat disappointed by his reaction, I'm doing my best to temper it with this.

Etymology is so awesome ♥ It teaches me things I didn't know I knew about words I already know! ...Did that make sense?

It's certainly a fascinating word in that respect. Actually, as it's applied there, I would almost interpret it as "one who acts contradictory to the way they were socialized to act in accordance to gender". And then it meets woman-as-submissive and knocks that option out of the water. O words, u so weird.

[soc_puppet]

If you got the impression that this is being blown out of proportion from my post, then I have probably screwed it all up, and would like to apologize. If you got that impression from Liss' post, however, I don't really think there's anything I -can- say. I don't personally see it anywhere in her words, but I'm not you.

The Terrible Bargain We Have Regretfully Struck: The idea is that we're used to having our toes stepped on by the world at large - by the media, by co-workers, by random people on the street - and therefore is more painful from someone whom we have come to expect the opposite from, if only because we have let our guard down.

See also: Feminists are hyper-sensitive hysterics and are looking for something to get mad about [link]. Or humorless and too-thick-skinned [link], depending on which argument is going on.

[perrito]

It was more the other post than yours, I actually appreciate your patience a lot.

I don't have time to read any of those thoroughly right now, but my impression in general is that people on the internet (not necessarily feminists) get offended very easily. Sometimes people get angry and I can understand why they're angry and support the cause (LJ trying to remove the unspecified gender option, Amazon accidentally banning books, Gerg Grunberg being a dick about Chaz Bono) but in this case I just can't understand the reaction, I'm sorry.

[meigui]

Mmm, I find it's often better to be forgiving than not; for one thing, we all make mistakes, and we all sometimes cause hurt without meaning to, especially when we ourselves are hurting. I don't know. For me, it's partly from wanting to be fair to them and whatever aspect of their experience of which I might be unaware or unable to conceptualize on a personal level, but also partly as a personal defense mechanism. Double consciousness will drive me nuts if and when I let it keep me poised to jump all the time, which sometimes I do when I get a particularly bad headspace, and it does nothing at all to help get me out of it.

Actually, can I PM you about this? I have some personal anecdotes to share that I think might be useful for you, but I'm not sure it's appropriate to discuss in a public post.


You know, I think it's telling that usually the woman-as-submissive and man-as-pushy usages are--in my experience, anyway--found far more commonly in countercultural contexts, particularly GLBT communities or communities that have a lot of people who are also part of GLBT communities; so, actually, you might have something there.

[lightbird777.livejournal.com]

Depp didn't sign the Polanski petition as far as I know but he did make a statement on video that leaves many people questioning just how he would think and feel if someone did something similar to his own daughter, who is three years shy of being the same age that Polanski's victim was at the time. I'm not surprised though. When the petition first came to light I assumed that he would sign or take that side - I'm only surprised that he waited this long for him to take a stand. Not only did he work with Polanski, he's good friends with Emir Kusturica and Terry Gilliam, two of the first directors to sign the petition. If you watch the video, Kusturica is there next to him filling stuff in and influencing him. Depp pretty much regurgitated what Kusturica, Gilliam and others had to say months ago.

I think life would be a lot easier if we didn't actually have to see and hear celebrity interviews. There have been tons of people whose work I enjoy, either books that they've written, music or films that they've made, etc. and when I see/hear an interview in which they reveal themselves to be a total douchebag it's very disappointing. It kind of taints all the good things they've contributed, you know?

[soc_puppet]

Ack, you're right >_< Also, I now remember it was -you- who prepared me for this. Clearly, I should have done my checking better. *slinks off to correct*

That's true, yes. Still, I find it a million kinds of heartening when someone I admire turns around and reveals themselves to be an anti-douchebag. And sometimes, we can talk them around, too.

[lightbird777.livejournal.com]

LOL, it's okay. You don't need to correct or credit me with anything. I was just venting about the topic.

And yeah, that took a lot of courage on Emma Thompson's part. Not only will she get flack from many of her peers who support him, but it's not easy to come out in front of the vast public and admit that you made a mistake. That really took guts.

[soc_puppet]

But I like being right! :<

So true. She has a lifelong admirer in me for that, let me say.