icon_uk: (Default)
[personal profile] icon_uk posting in [community profile] scans_daily
From Paul Cornell's website



"Okay, so this was something I came up with yesterday, and it's mad, and is, frankly, a rod for my own back, but what the hell, it's going to make this coming year a lot more interesting.

I think there should be gender parity on every panel at every convention. I'm after 50/50, all the time. I want that in place as an expectation, as a rule. Now, to make that happen, what really should be done is a ground-up examination of society, huge changes at the heart of things which would automatically lead to women being equally represented everywhere, not just on convention panels. Well, we've all wanted that and worked for that for decades, especially those of us in fandom, and it just hasn't happened. So, this year, I've decided that I'm going to approach this problem via the only moral unit I'm in charge of: me. I'm going to approach this problem from the other end. And this approach is going to be very much that of a blunt instrument.

If I'm on, at any convention this year, a panel that doesn't have a 50/50 gender split (I'll settle for two out of five), I'll hop off that panel, and find a woman to take my place.
"

There's more text at the website, but I'm impressed by his initiative.

So, thoughts people? :)


For legality, the cover to Demon Knights 7 by Mike Choi, which includes a rather impressive outfit for the Questing Queen, a little action-figure-y perhaps, but given my Saint Seiya tastes, that's not really a problem for me! :)


Date: 2012-02-20 04:20 am (UTC)
From: [personal profile] gerardotejada
Genitalia oriented is when assertions on sex are only based in superficial caracteristic not taking care the whole biology.

The difference in the sexual area, men and woman are different sexes.

Im getting angry because you dont lisent/read

This is good:
http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1980-05376-001

I havent read these:
http://www.nature.com/nrn/journal/v5/n9/abs/nrn1494.html
http://www.nature.com/?file=/neuro/journal/v3/n4/full/nn0400_404.html
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=6562304

A friend read this one:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B005BR1KTM

Please grow up

Date: 2012-02-20 04:23 am (UTC)
valtyr: (Steve rain)
From: [personal profile] valtyr
I'm sorry, you're citing things you haven't read to support your argument?

Date: 2012-02-20 04:48 am (UTC)
From: [personal profile] gerardotejada
I dont need to read It, I just jump into the end of the texts. I trust the people didnt make any mistakes and I have no degree in neurology so I didnt read It all.


Here is the link my friedn send me, I dont find It to be good but my friend is really into feminism and she liked the idea Of the boxes and wires.
http://tobey100.hubpages.com/hub/Mens-Brains-Womens-Brains

I guess I cant force you to change your belifs, I ve tried with arguments, theory, papers. I know you dont read my coments because I said like three times biology wasnt the only variable and you seemed to dont have noticed It.

The train of thought that appears to me is that you are not trying to see my point or to follow my arguments. Im not really angry anymore because I see I just cant reach you in any way. Good night and Goodbye

Date: 2012-02-20 04:57 am (UTC)
valtyr: (americat)
From: [personal profile] valtyr
Yes, you do need to read something before you cite it. I don't know where you studied, but I'm horrified.

That link you give there is garbage. It's some random person talking about how they think men and women are different. You might as well cite Cosmopolitan.

I guess I cant force you to change your belifs, I ve tried with arguments, theory, papers.

No, you've said 'I believe this! You should Google it to see I'm right! Here are some papers I haven't read that might agree with me! You're obviously bitter and lacking in understanding!' You have no clue what you're talking about, and no idea how to support an argument, and you don't even know what constitutes a reliable source.

I know you dont read my coments because I said like three times biology wasnt the only variable and you seemed to dont have noticed It.

In this comment I quoted and directly addressed the point you say I haven't read.

Im not really angry anymore

Ah, so while accusing me of being bitter and telling me I needed to calm down... you were angry?

Date: 2012-02-20 05:20 am (UTC)
From: [personal profile] gerardotejada
Thi is It, Im very proud of my shcool, I trow that article as an easter egg, obviosly you couldnt handle the serious ones or you dont have a student acount to acces some one. There you had the abstracts.

I know what Im talking about, you on the other hand are not talking about nothing but guessing.

I verify the articles not just "might" agree with me but that they did.

I told you you were pissing me off, I tried to be calmed, It took an effort, yet you insist to go after the adhominem.

I dont know whats your problem, you fail to elaborate your arguments, you dont have any theory or example, you are not interested in my arguments yet you said you would try to understand.

Maybe you read but you dont understand, anyway. I still dont know if you understand the difference between gender and sexes, I argue that sex has an impact (among other variables) on gender and that impact must not be overlooked

Date: 2012-02-20 05:32 am (UTC)
valtyr: (Steve d'oh)
From: [personal profile] valtyr
Thi is It, Im very proud of my shcool, I trow that article as an easter egg, obviosly you couldnt handle the serious ones or you dont have a student acount to acces some one. There you had the abstracts

If your school is a good one, it should have taught you that you need to read papers before citing them. Feel free to check that with your professors.

obviosly you couldnt handle the serious ones

These would be the ones you haven't read?

I know what Im talking about, you on the other hand are not talking about nothing but guessing.

No, you don't. If you knew what you were talking about you'd be able to support it. I haven't guessed anything - I've asked you to support your statements. You're unable to do it.

yet you insist to go after the adhominem.

No, I haven't. I have at no point said that any of your personal qualities render your arguments invalid, which is what ad hominem is.

I dont know whats your problem, you fail to elaborate your arguments, you dont have any theory or example, you are not interested in my arguments yet you said you would try to understand.

I haven't made any arguments, that's why. I'm asking you to support your argument, and you are unable to provide any evidence.

I argue that sex has an impact (among other variables) on gender and that impact must not be overlooked

Riiiight, what I asked you to support originally was: The fact that both genders are completly equals is a mistake from feminist theory (the term is out dated in academy work, I call myself into gender studies not "feminism") Men and Woman are different and that is good thing.. How has that become: sex has an impact (among other variables) on gender? These goalposts have shifted so far they're cricket stumps.

Date: 2012-02-20 06:50 am (UTC)
From: [personal profile] gerardotejada
Yeah is funny, I should have followed my own advice, I just drink glass of cool water now I see what you were asking.

Yeah I should read them all, It was foolish I made a mistake and lost It. You can excuse me right? We all make mistakes.

Since the beginig I was a little inconex to say the least. I should have been able to suport my argument well, yet I didnt.

Lets try once again. The first article was about how sex refers to the sexual body and Gender to the cultural caracterisation. Diferent sexes exist because of the nature of sexual reproduction, man and woman are marked by a single cromosome that determines this difference Right?

Well It happens that researches in neurology have found that the extension of the sex difference extends to the way the brain functions. Brain works different for both sexes.

"Continuous visuospatial navigation in familiar and unfamiliar environments is a requirement of daily life." to study this function scientist relized experiments with navegations through 3d Mazes. They observed brain regions that were activated exclusively by the male or by the female group of test subjects.

Woman and Men brains are different, with this I think the main point is partially covered.

When I implied that both genders werent completly equals I made two mistakes, I said Genders when I should have said sexes and I forgot what equals meaned. Sex equality is out of the question, I shold have said they are not "the same".

There are many branches of feminism, before "The Second Sex" there were other works that said the "woman" was a despicable condition into were some subjects were throw by discrimination against their bodies. The fact that the existence of "something" femenine was taken as something that came from men not something someone could own.

Modern femisim tried to adress the difference as a source of identity, correct me If Im wrong
Society has Male as the standard, so there were XVIII century intelectuals that thought "Woman" was just a deviation of the standard. So equality then was that the woman was more like men (the standard). This old view still exist on society as people we should not care about gender when hiring people etc. Based in a false equivalence that set subconsiously the fact that there is a standard (that has been made modeled as a male) sexism is made by failing to recognise the woman.

How does biology fits in this? By showing the differences of ways of thinking, different biology goes to form a diferent cognitive aproach, that brings diversity. Ultimately both sexes work different but that is not what defines gender, We can agree that most women have basic treats like having breast or having her menstrual cycle, gender interact with biology in how subjects interact with their bodies.

Other evidence that men and women are different can be found in the hypothalamus that differs from men to woman and Is thought is related also to sexual orientation. Brain atrophy also vary, men have more problems with brain atrophy while aging than women.

The issue of the biological body and how you adress that body is a comon trope on some writers, the phrase "writing with the body" is comonly found in the work of feminists like Julia Kristeva. The body is a part of the equation followed by the culture that determines how a body can be adressed, both things are featured on the so called "women's writing" thats It the political/cultural implications of biology.

Thats what I can say without bringing quotes and stuff, hey I bet you write some nonsense in your essays some times so forgive me If I got tangled on an internet site

Date: 2012-02-20 07:12 am (UTC)
valtyr: (my little captain)
From: [personal profile] valtyr
These things happen, let's move on. As you say, we all make mistakes.

Diferent sexes exist because of the nature of sexual reproduction, man and woman are marked by a single cromosome that determines this difference Right?

Well, not always. XX male syndrome, for instance, and there are several other variants on the typical chromosome/sex arrangement. Not to mention intersexed persons.

Based in a false equivalence that set subconsiously the fact that there is a standard (that has been made modeled as a male) sexism is made by failing to recognise the woman.

Yes, I see your point that femaleness has been characterised as weakness and deviation from the male 'norm'. However, your point seems to be that we should acknowledge femaleness and maleness as valuable, but different. Would it not be more appropriate to recognise that the behaviours we see as 'male' and the behaviours we see as 'female' both have value, and can be performed by either gender?

As an example - if sexism has girls playing with dolls, and boys with trucks, and old ideas of equality gave the girls trucks, you seem to be proposing we should go back to giving girls dolls. But wouldn't it be better to give both girls and boys trucks and dolls?

different biology goes to form a diferent cognitive aproach,

But you see, you seem to be assuming that different biology comes first, rather than cultural conditions affecting biological development. Look at something as simple as stereotype threat for the pervasive effect of culture on the mind.

Date: 2012-02-20 06:50 pm (UTC)
From: [personal profile] gerardotejada
Yes now we understand.

Look it at this way, our bodies are canvas that are colonized by discourses. Imagine une piece of bronze and one piece of silver, from both you can make the same sculpture but the aproach of the artist would be different in order to confront the material.

Material objects come first, but they appear to our consiousness in a diferent way. Both sexes became "genders" only into an Structure, but the sexes can form thousand and more genders. Is the dinamic between both sexes that create the genders, and when that dinamic is fixed and closed the the Femaleness and Maleness appears, that is the "Idealism" of gender that came from the material causes but dont identify whit them.

The aproach of a woman and a men in the same subject, (trucks dolls, wathever) is different without meaning that that difference should be caged into a single oposition of gender. The material dinamic Man/Woman have endless posibilities that spawned different genders across history, what we understand about male or female gender hs changed.

The material difference Men/Woman is basic to diversity.
Many corporation do the exercise of mix men and womam, the team work dinamic and aproach to the subject is different. Even if a full male or female team coukd do the same job executive preffers this way of working.

In the end giving a boy a truck and a girl a doll would erase the girl/truck and boy/doll. I mean we have to stop looking at the basi doll/truck but see the interaction of four elements girltruck boytruck girldoll boydoll.

Culture is imprinted in our bodies, but our bodies themself are capable of beign imprinted.

Difference between man and woman offer a lot of possibilities, by default a stereotype limits this posibilities of diversity by stablish rigid relationships on a static structure and erradicates a lot of variables that add to the different relationships.

As you see the stereotipe girl-doll boy-truck fool us into thinking there are just 2 elements and late I show how There can be 4 pieces. Now we can expand by saying that children playing with dolls and truck is also a old western stereotype, children can also play with animals, computers, etc.

Culture builds over this material conditions, culture can mold the material they have but without the material they have nothing to mold.

Saying that I argue that bodies matter, biology matters, in a way that even if everything remained the same my biological circumstances change who Am I.

This as oposed tho the "idealistic" view that my body is a smple container

Date: 2012-02-20 04:29 am (UTC)
valtyr: (Steve What?)
From: [personal profile] valtyr
And your final link is to a novel called The Deerflat Chronicles, about a small town with colourful residents? How is that relevant?

Profile

scans_daily: (Default)
Scans Daily
Founded by girl geeks and members of the slash fandom, [community profile] scans_daily strives to provide an atmosphere which is LGBTQ-friendly, anti-racist, anti-ableist, woman-friendly and otherwise discrimination and harassment free.

Bottom line: If slash, feminism or anti-oppressive practice makes you react negatively, [community profile] scans_daily is probably not for you.

Please read the community ethos and rules before posting or commenting.

August 2014

S M T W T F S
      1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 2930
31      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags