How to out oneself

[pecunium]

Over in matociquala's journal she made a post about rock-climbing, which had a passing comment on how Criminal Minds had managed to deconstruct a bit of the male gaze in its most recent episode.

It was the passing comment which led to the amusements. Setsuled asked a reasonable question. Bear responded, and as is her wont (and right, and privilege) she teased setsuled about how easy it might have been to look it up.

In the course of the subsequent responses (to which I added a few words) it became plain the user was unclear on a few basic concepts (not all of which are things one would be expected to know; though some are ones which the engaged participant would be expected to delve into).

It also became plain the user has a very subtle form of male-privilege, one which might work fairly well in the general run of the world, but was doomed to end up in disaster in a place like Bear's journal.

The things about which he was unaware were all asked with a reasonableness that hid the nature of his exploitation of privilege. If the conversation hadn't kept going, his misogyny might have remained hidden.

It was an interesting unfolding (and you are abjured from wading in to make comments. The subject, insofar as he is concerned is closed. Make your own call on substantive addressing of the issue, but he, and his comments, are a done deal there. I don't want to re-open it. Not only am I not trying to make a dogpile, but the poor thing isn't able to respond. That would make it rude to Bear, and unfair to him; so do me the favor, ok? Thanks).

The initial comments weren't too bad. There was something bothersome about them, but they weren't offensive. Just a trifle privileged, and even that was subtle. One got the feelng he was well meaning, but not well-informed.

As time went on, he got more defensive, and more dismissive, and (qu'elle surprise) evinced more use of privilege. Then he tied the rope around his neck, with an inappropriate comment.

He could have pulled back from the edge. In fact he seemed to, but not quite. And then he jumped. He got pissy about people pointing out he was being, not just rough and tumble in debate, but rude.

As I said, it's an interesting case study in someone outing themselves; from nice guy, to "Nice Guy" to jerk, to asshole, to banned, all in one day.

Comments

[lalouve.livejournal.com]

That was a spectacular crash and burn. I particularly like the way he resorts to stupid jokes and comments on being king of the world - that tells me a lot of things about his world view, and probably not the things he thinks it conveys. What a spoilt little boy.

[cucumberseed.livejournal.com]

Wow. Textbook.

[cucumberseed.livejournal.com]

On a slightly more personal note, I was once internets friends with the very same fellow until he pulled something similar which got him banned by a much closer friend of mine. I also jettisoned him, but recently considered dropping in on his journal to see what he was up to. This saves me the trouble and reminds me that I ought to know better.

[stillnotbored.livejournal.com]

I read the post and the first set of comments when the post first went up. I didn't go back, so the last comment I read from him was saying he thought he'd finally found a way to talk to Bear. I left feeling kind of sorry for him. There are a lot of people I don't know how to talk to.

Now? Wow, what a jerk. He went downhill quickly and seemed to relish digging the hole deeper. Any sympathy I had is gone.

[ckd]

Well, I'm sure glad I missed watching that one go down in realtime.

[kightp.livejournal.com]

I read that when it was happening, and my reaction mirrors was pretty much exactly yours. With a side order of "dude, can you possibly be this rude and clueless?"

[ruthless1.livejournal.com]

That was. Well - like a bad accident. A train wreck. I couldn't stop reading it, but it kind of made me sick. Just wow. Truly clueless.

[saoba.livejournal.com]

I saw about the first three comments from him before I made a side bet with myself about whether or not he'd manage to get himself banned before I came back to look at the thread this afternoon.

I now owe me twenty Internet Dollarz.

But I never ever would have expected the degree to which he'd self-destruct. I mean, seriously, inappropriately sexualizing a woman on her own LJ to win points in an Internet Slap Fight? Dumb. Doing it to Ebear and trying to blow it off as her being too thin skinned? Felony Stupid.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

But it was worse than that. Not only was she thin skinned; but he apologised, before he got ore defensive.

I mean, his comment about saddling her and using a crop to get definitions from her is as obvious, and subtle as, The Great Dictator pretty much put paid to what was already an account deep in arrears.

[kouredios.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the heads up. I hadn't been following that.

I've seen folks go through that same process on Pandagon a few times, but you're right; it was a nice, self-contained, crystalized example, and nested (unlike Pandagon).

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Yep. I've seen it before too, but this was nice and collected.

There were some aspects of it which were new/rare. The sheer range of apparently decent to would far rather never meet to I'd like to punch in the nose, was pretty amazing, and the speed....

Breathtaking.

I think I am in love with that thread

[beable]

solely for commodorofied's awesome snark in "How NOT to apologise, a short play in five acts".

Re: I think I am in love with that thread

[commodorified.livejournal.com]

*mwa* I have my days...

Re: I think I am in love with that thread

[starcat-jewel.livejournal.com]

Yes, that was indeed awesome. May I quote that bit (minus specific identification of its location or the other players) in my journal?

Re: I think I am in love with that thread

[jonquil.livejournal.com]

"If I'm not laughing too hard to hit you" totally made my day.

[starcat-jewel.livejournal.com]

Whoa. I don't read that journal, so I just went and skimmed thru the entire thing. I think there must have been some timing issues that aren't obvious from the threading, because when you just follow down the sub-threads in order, it looks as though the inappropriately-sexual comment just came out of nowhere. But ye ghods. Downright canonical, he was.

[benet.livejournal.com]

I've noticed there's this particular flavour of trolling that sometimes comes from people who are not total doorknobs, but who seem to be overwhelmed, betimes, with the intense desire to throw rocks at hornet's nests. I don't know why. But I got a strong impression that this guy wanted people to be mad at him.

Ahh, but not mad at him for any reason. Coming in with a "your so gay" comment would have that effect, but not in a satisfying way. No, I think the enjoyment comes from playing intellectual martyr. "Their definitions were unsound," he thinks, "so I questioned them. All I cared about was the truth. Like Socrates, man. Like Galileo." The trouble is that what's really happening is not that he's applying cold, merciless logic to what people say to him: he's actually just responding with a dismissive smirk, and then brainstorming a follow-up question by picking semantic nits so that it sounds like he's being all Socratic.

I knew so damn many people in high school who loved playing that game. Most of them grew out of it.

[commodorified.livejournal.com]

You're more charitable than I shall ever be. *I* think it was a case of "Look! I am a Nice Guy Who Wants To Learn! Love Me!


... wait. WHERE THE FUCK IS MY BLOWJOB, BITCHES?"

Also, I was observing to pecunium a bit ago that back in the Pleistocine when you and I had that, um, discussion about apologies of the form "I'm sorry, BUT...", I probably did you the best turn I've ever done anyone.

*loves*

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

I think he started with something else. He wanted to engage in conversation. I don't know if he wanted to explain away the idea of male gaze. There are inconsistencies in his story which are big old flags (e.g. he didn't understand typical subjects in matociquala's Lj, but he, "never has anything to to say," to her).

I do, however, from looking at his journal, think he expected to be able to explain things about how the world works, and; as the way he closed his comment to me, with an attempted barb, which failed for misquotation, though it would have been worse had he quoted me correctly), shows, he's not as clever as he thinks he is (his intelligence we can't plumb).

And it was his attempts at clever which set his doom. A lack of actual examinatiin of what was happening sealed it, but he overreached his talents trying a 5.10, when 5.5 is about his max.

At which point he does get to play the martyr, so he probably sees it as a win/win situation.

[cucumberseed.livejournal.com]

This.

Also, I think he was trying to win at internet, which is something you can only do in one move. If you make your one move and have not won, you can only lose bigger. And lose big he did.

[elf]

I think you've got it.

I kinda wish it weren't frozen, so someone could point out that, in these contexts, "privilege: translates to "I have opportunities and freedoms that are bought by oppressing the lives, freedoms and identities of other people--in this case, women"... and to proudly say "I love being privileged," while getting all upset at being called a misogynist, is an elegant example of hypocrisy.

OTOH, while I think that new ways to describe "privilege" can be useful, I don't think he'd be the one getting any use out of it.

I wish I were still active on LJ so I could ban_set him. (I could, but it's not like I post in my journal.)

[akirlu.livejournal.com]

*sigh*

It really bothers me when people treat the theoretical constructs of feminist and so-called 'critical' theory as if they are objective facts about the world.

Bear in her first reply says:

...if you were female, you would absolutely have no doubts about how the media generally objectifies, sexualizes, and dehumanizes women.

Really? Er, dude? I am female. And yet, the doubts, I can haz them.

If I had watched in real time, I would undoubtedly have ruffled my share of feathers, and not out of any male privilege but out of deep fucking annoyance that (yet again) the followers of Post Modern theory act as if no one can can discuss anything unless they first become versed in, and believers of, same.

GAAAAAAAAH. As far as I can tell, Post Modernism has the singular capacity to turn anyone who buys into it into a self-righteous asshole.

[elf]

I used to have doubts. While I noted a definite male bias in the media, I didn't agree that it objectified & dehumanized women--at least, not as a constant.

Then I ran across the Bechdel/Wallace Test. (Original)

Then I went to IMDB and looked at the most popular movies, and got depressed trying to figure out if any of the top 40 or so pass the Test. Then looked at the Oscars winners for best picture, and got more depressed. And then found out that this system is consciously enforced in the film industry.

I'm very blurry on what "Post Modernism" is. (Don't link me to Wikipedia; I've read it. I'm still blurry. I'm okay with that.) But it doesn't take deep, critical analysis, nor special philosophical training, to recognize that our mainstream media portrays women as less-than-human--that "men" are normal, and "women" are something else, so that a movie needs a reason to have them, or to put them in notable roles.

"A person," in medialand, is male. (And white. And middle/upper-class. And Christian. And speaks English. And so on.) All deviations from that are considered modifiers to "personhood."

[akirlu.livejournal.com]

Oh, and I just love it when one of the lit crit kiddies comes in and starts opining about what is, or isn't, a valid argument, as if the lit critters could recognize validity with both hands and a truth table. Feh.

[hammercock.livejournal.com]

Oh no he di'int...

...

Wow, he did.

That's some impressive WTFery right there.