Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[lemon10]

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/mexico/article/Mexico-cartel-issues-booklets-for-proper-conduct-1473149.php

Ho god, the hypocrisy : a Mexican drug cartel pretend to be a moral authority saving the country from their depraved way, claim religious merits, and is apparently the first supplier of meth in Mexico. Wow, just wow.

These "knights templars" are distributing pamplets which advocate against drug trafficking and drug use amongst other things.

Actually, reading the article, it says they "including prohibiting using or selling drugs within Mexican territory". Not against drug use overall, just in mexico.
While taking what governments say with a grain of salt is good, I can't find anything anywhere that says they aren't a gang and dealing drugs, so I think its pretty safe to say that they are actually a cartel.

[G-Flex]

Why does it have to be either feminist or sexist?
I'm sick of these ultra-PC blogs, written by whiny academics who want everything to fit into their pretentious worldview.

Well for starters, you can't execute positive change in society if you don't recognise that there are problems with it, and that many aspects of society just add onto the problem.

Not many people would say that this world we live in is perfect, thus we have people who analyse the problems with it.

My problem is when people criticize a work for being sexist, prejudiced, etc., simply because the characters are, or events in the story are. Obviously, people and society in real life have their own prejudices and shortcomings, so those are going to be represented in any work that treats them realistically. Even if, say, the roles of women in a book are fairly marginalized, that doesn't mean the book itself is sexist except in the sense that it portrays a sexist world, which isn't a problem. Yeah, authors definitely can still be sexist in how they write, but a distinction needs to be made here.

[Virex]

Why does it have to be either feminist or sexist?
I'm sick of these ultra-PC blogs, written by whiny academics who want everything to fit into their pretentious worldview.

Well for starters, you can't execute positive change in society if you don't recognise that there are problems with it, and that many aspects of society just add onto the problem.

Not many people would say that this world we live in is perfect, thus we have people who analyse the problems with it.

My problem is when people criticize a work for being sexist, prejudiced, etc., simply because the characters are, or events in the story are. Obviously, people and society in real life have their own prejudices and shortcomings, so those are going to be represented in any work that treats them realistically. Even if, say, the roles of women in a book are fairly marginalized, that doesn't mean the book itself is sexist except in the sense that it portrays a sexist world, which isn't a problem. Yeah, authors definitely can still be sexist in how they write, but a distinction needs to be made here.

The problem is that when an artist portrays, say, a sexist world in her books without condemning it, people will assimilate the ideas presented by the book, often without the proper amount of critique. To some extend, writing about a sexist or racist world means you're actively supporting that world view, by presenting it as normal. Showing people that what the book portrays is actually an abomination is the least one could ask from anyone, but apparently some are willing to help the GOP set us back to the dark ages in the name of litterary freedom...


To fortify my point, take Salmongod's post. He's defending Harry Potter without paying head, or probably even realizing that reading those books imprints the idea on the minds of young people that a world like that is somehow normal, which is not only very dangerous but since we're talking about children it also destroys decades of feminist's work.

[Korgus]

And, presumably, that feminist felt that disabled people were being attacked by the work, so the blogger spoke up about it.

Yes, but I seriously doubt any disabled person would be offended by it. Just to put it in context, this was a badass cyborg war hero sacrificing himself to save his entire civilisation and way of life. And I just don't like the idea that authors should be trying to be PC rather than trying to write a good story.

[Reelyanoob]

While taking what governments say with a grain of salt is good, I can't find anything anywhere that says they aren't a gang and dealing drugs, so I think its pretty safe to say that they are actually a cartel.

It's an American article. I do not trust that source either.

Seriously: You can NEVER tell from a single source. So, saying "this article contains no counter information" is a rubbish argument. American media is 80% propaganda.

Don't take my word for it, read Chomsky (at chomsky.info) for example.

[Virex]

And, presumably, that feminist felt that disabled people were being attacked by the work, so the blogger spoke up about it.

Yes, but I seriously doubt any disabled person would be offended by it. Just to put it in context, this was a badass cyborg war hero sacrificing himself to save his entire civilisation and way of life. And I just don't like the idea that authors should be trying to be PC rather than trying to write a good story.

Oh, authors can be as rude as they like for all I care. They just need to realize that if they chose the wrong targets they're roughly on the level of the GOP in terms of 'positive' influence. Now, there could be writers to whom this doesn't matter, but I don't think we should value their oppinion's too highly.

[Vector]

Oh, I'm not meaning to say that traditionally feminine tropes are necessarily bad.

It's sort of the stereotypical "sacrifice a woman to move the plot" thing, though.  Everyone's sad because her personality was basically appealing, with no human flaws.  Even Snape was attracted to her!  She makes Snape sympathetic!  She makes James into less of an ass!  Then she dies for her little boy.  It's just so... stereotypical.  Harry's past is dominated by seven men (Marauders, Snape, Voldemort, Dumbledore) and in all of that Lily's main role seems to be to sacrifice herself.  She isn't an active player, like the others.  She's off on the side "wearing the white muslin dress."  I would have really liked to see more of her, get to know her and so on.  Not just as a sacrifice-in-a-box/McGuffin.

As for Molly, I'm a bit disappointed that we never get to see her as anything but a mother.  That's who she is.  She's a mother.  She isn't anyone or anything else, except for the part where she takes down Bellatrix Lestrange at the end, and that felt tacked on to me even before I found out about Rowling's setup.  Hobbies?  Interests?  Tastes?  I just never get a sense of who this person is outside of being an overworked mom.  It also sort of felt like that stereotypical sitcom setup.  Momma hen (a chicken) pecks and annoys her far-more-sympathetic husband, who just wants to tinker around with his toys in the garage.  That's not the most generous portrayal for men, either...

It's not so much a disappointment with Ginny not being uber-powerful.  It's that I'd like to see another strong female character from Harry's generation, and she looked like a spectacular candidate.

I'll also say that I'm pretty disappointed that our local Jesus-figure seems to have never figured out quite how to see women as his equals, in that case.

Yes, but I seriously doubt any disabled person would be offended by it. Just to put it in context, this was a badass cyborg war hero sacrificing himself to save his entire civilisation and way of life. And I just don't like the idea that authors should be trying to be PC rather than trying to write a good story.

*shrug*

I don't know, then, man, but don't judge all feminist blogs off this one.  I've seen someone rip into Firefly so heavily that I could barely stand to read it--and I don't even like Firefly that much, and do agree it has a few issues.  It just seemed like the person in question was kicking up dust that didn't need to be kicked.  On the other hand, more power to her for going for it.  She did open my eyes a little.

The point is that one should indeed write a good story.  Not a cliched story.  Not a story which tells the same damned lies about people over and over again, which we hail because it's "funny" and supports our sense of power, or anything like that.  A great, wonderful, beautiful story that also takes into account nuanced minority characters, because they exist, too, and they have stories to tell.  I don't think that should be too much to ask for--a little originality to go with that great world-building and spiffy plotline?

Take what exists, and write about it.  Do it well.

We're just asking people to continue expanding their idea of "what exists."

[SalmonGod]

To fortify my point, take Salmongod's post. He's defending Harry Potter without paying head, or probably even realizing that reading those books imprints the idea on the minds of young people that a world like that is somehow normal, which is not only very dangerous but since we're talking about children it also destroys decades of feminist's work.

This makes sense to me.  I think accusing Harry Potter of destroying decades of feminist's work is a bit over dramatic... since it does better service to women than the majority of popular fiction, thus promoting at least a slightly higher standard in the mainstream, even if just a little.  I follow your logic, though.

[Virex]

To fortify my point, take Salmongod's post. He's defending Harry Potter without paying head, or probably even realizing that reading those books imprints the idea on the minds of young people that a world like that is somehow normal, which is not only very dangerous but since we're talking about children it also destroys decades of feminist's work.

This makes sense to me.  I think accusing Harry Potter of destroying decades of feminist's work is a bit over dramatic... since it does better service to women than the majority of popular fiction, thus promoting at least a slightly higher standard in the mainstream, even if just a little.  I follow your logic, though.

I have to admit, you wouldn't be the first to call me out on using too many hyperboles 

[Korgus]

And, presumably, that feminist felt that disabled people were being attacked by the work, so the blogger spoke up about it.

Yes, but I seriously doubt any disabled person would be offended by it. Just to put it in context, this was a badass cyborg war hero sacrificing himself to save his entire civilisation and way of life. And I just don't like the idea that authors should be trying to be PC rather than trying to write a good story.

Oh, authors can be as rude as they like for all I care. They just need to realize that if they chose the wrong targets they're roughly on the level of the GOP in terms of 'positive' influence. Now, there could be writers to whom this doesn't matter, but I don't think we should value their oppinion's too highly.

I'm pretty sure he wasn't trying to offend disabled people.
Also the books are Philip Reeve's Mortal Engines Quartet, and the "review" is here http://disabledfeminists.com/2009/12/23/talking-down-disability-while-talking-down-to-young-people Not as negative as I remembered, but still whiny.

[Gamerlord]

This is confusing to me. I don't really understand you're problems with this stuff.

[Virex]

And, presumably, that feminist felt that disabled people were being attacked by the work, so the blogger spoke up about it.

Yes, but I seriously doubt any disabled person would be offended by it. Just to put it in context, this was a badass cyborg war hero sacrificing himself to save his entire civilisation and way of life. And I just don't like the idea that authors should be trying to be PC rather than trying to write a good story.

Oh, authors can be as rude as they like for all I care. They just need to realize that if they chose the wrong targets they're roughly on the level of the GOP in terms of 'positive' influence. Now, there could be writers to whom this doesn't matter, but I don't think we should value their oppinion's too highly.

I'm pretty sure he wasn't trying to offend disabled people.
Also the books are Philip Reeve's Mortal Engines Quartet, and the "review" is here http://disabledfeminists.com/2009/12/23/talking-down-disability-while-talking-down-to-young-people Not as negative as I remembered, but still whiny.

It could just be my foggy memory, but was Mortal Engines not also full of one-dimensioal action girls?

[KaelGotDwarves]

Besides all the other stuff -

I just realised that the Hogwarts Witch Professor of Arithmancy is named Professor Vector. No relation I presume?

[Vector]

Yeah, I'm not seeing the "whiny."  I'm always willing to concede if you can explain why you feel that way, other than a kneejerk reaction of "that woman insulted my stuff," but I'm not seeing it right now.

I just realised that the Hogwarts Witch Professor of Arithmancy is named Professor Vector. No relation I presume?

Th-that's right!  No relation at all!

[lemon10]

While taking what governments say with a grain of salt is good, I can't find anything anywhere that says they aren't a gang and dealing drugs, so I think its pretty safe to say that they are actually a cartel.

It's an American article. I do not trust that source either.

Seriously: You can NEVER tell from a single source. So, saying "this article contains no counter information" is a rubbish argument. American media is 80% propaganda.

Don't take my word for it, read Chomsky (at chomsky.info) for example.

You are largely right about not being able to trust American media as a unbiased news source.
However, if you are unable to find a single source ANYWHERE disagreeing, then odds are fair that what they are saying is true, especially on a topic as large as this.
Everything that I can see on the internet seems to agree that the Knight Templars are a drug violent drug gang, and I can't find anything saying they aren't a violent drug gang, while that doesn't necessarily make it true (I suppose their could be a massive mexican-american-entire internet conspiracy dedicated to calling them a drug gang and fabricating evidence and stories, I think its pretty unlikely though), its pretty damning evidence.