T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
646.1 | | LEZAH::BOBBITT | each according to their gifts... | Wed Jan 16 1991 13:47 | 31 |
| I have this discussion fairly often with people, particularly when I
speak out about roles of men and women on TV, in movies, etc. I'll say
"wow, that's sexist", or even discussing children's toys and the
"wonders of the new Barbie" (she drives, she marries, she does hair - I
have yet to see "Chemical Engineer Barbie" or somesuch so not ALL the
options for women are represented yet).
Sometimes the response I get is a conversation which supports me and we
concur. Sometimes I get a response of a gentle nod and silence.
Sometimes I get a blank look. Sometimes they laugh and say I'm taking
everything too seriously. Or conversely, I hear that I'm focusing on
the little things rather than the big things and it'll get me nowhere.
But it's *out there* folks. It's *everywhere*. I can't turn a blind
eye to it anymore, and I ran out of cheeks to turn long ago.
It's like going with the flow when you know it's wrong. It's like the
"stoning" scene in Monty Python's "The Life of Brian" - it's right
because everyone else is doing it, and if you don't enjoy it you're
missing a really good time. It's like not being able to laugh at
Andrew Dice Clay. It's like boycotting certain stores or fruits or
stocks because of their practices or politics.
You do what you think is right, I'll do what I think is right. I have
an adequate sense of humor, it's just not equipped to run heavy-treaded
and groupthink-laden over all the daily examples of injustice, sexism,
religio-centric, etc, that I run into.
Don't tell me what to laugh at, and I won't tell you what to laugh at.
-Jody
|
646.2 | | ASABET::RAINEY | | Wed Jan 16 1991 14:06 | 20 |
| >don't tell me what to laugh at, and I won't tell you what to laugh at.
(DISCLAIMER: this is not a reflection on Jody's words, but
the comment itself "spoke" to me)
I think this is one of the problems that we run into in this
file, especially in emotional/heated dialogue. I sometimes
feel that if I have an opinion that doesnt concur with the
majority of a string, that the responses to my comment are
such that I *should* change my mind. When I offer comments,
my goal is generally food for thought and my intention is
not to change everybody's or anybody's mind. I sometimes
feel that those opposed to my views aren't respecting what
I have said and won't be happy until I "see the light" and
agree. It may be just a matter of perception, but this is
a very real feeling I have experienced here. Perhaps the
perception works both ways and those who oppose my views feel
that I'm out to change them?
Christine
|
646.3 | | ASABET::RAINEY | | Wed Jan 16 1991 14:15 | 12 |
| Suzanne,
Didn\t mean to focus on this file. It does happen everywhere.
I'm just saying that those are my feelings and thought the
comment belonged in this file. I just hate it when people
insist that I "prove" my thoughts because the implication
is that if I can't support my views with hard indisputable
facts, they are therefore invalid. I realize there are some
people who need to debate more that others. I'm just not
one of them unless I feel attacked.
Christine
|
646.4 | i'm trying to understand that forceful dissent != discrediting | ESIS::GALLUP | Swish, swish.....splat! | Wed Jan 16 1991 14:31 | 27 |
|
Christine..
I fully agree with you. When I place my thoughts and opinions into
this conference (and others), 99% of the time it's to express something
I feel and what to share.....the "food for thought" concept.
I have no desire to change anyone's mind, I just have a desire,
sometimes to say what I'm feeling.
However, I get the feeling that when I write things sometimes, people
feel that I am challenging them and I am disputing their beliefs. From
my viewpoint, that is never my intention.
I know that when someone writes an alternate viewpoint to something
that I write, and I go nonlinear about it, it usually becomes very clear
to me later that it's MY lack of self-assuredness in my belief that
caused my non-linear attitude. I feel challenged and I don't enjoy
feeling doubtful about anything. ("Damnit, I KNOW what I FEEL, and I'm
RIGHT!")
It's so much easier to blame someone else for the things I should be
taking responsibility for myself.
kath
|
646.5 | | SA1794::CHARBONND | Yeh, mon, no problem | Wed Jan 16 1991 16:54 | 6 |
| I think everybody has some subject where they have no sense of
humor, can't have a sense of humor, don't _want_ a sense of humor,
and are so because they have been _made_ sensitive to the subject.
Pity we're not all sensitive to the same subjects in the same
degree. Awkward when you inadvertently push someone's button.
|
646.6 | distancing | MR4DEC::HAROUTIAN | | Thu Jan 17 1991 11:06 | 11 |
| Not commenting on the particular topics in the basenote, but I have
come to realize that when I hear "you're being too sensitive", the
other person is distancing themselves from me and is not really
participating in the conversation - for whatever reason. Realizing
this, and realizing I can't change someone else, I have to decide if I
want to continue the conversation (either at present, or for the
future), and sometimes the relationship.
My $.02
Lynn
|
646.7 | | VINO::BOBBITT | the warmer side of cool... | Thu Jan 17 1991 11:37 | 10 |
| I think if only people didn't say it to me in such a condescending tone
I might not mind as much. It's like "you're a wimp" or "you're weak"
or "geez, where's your asbestos plating? lighten up, will ya?". Maybe
that's my projection of my own fears about being sensitive onto them,
but it *feels* judgmental. And as in .6, it also feels like my whole
attitude about that subject is being dismissed as they build that
judgmental wall between us.
-Jody
|
646.8 | agreed | WRKSYS::STHILAIRE | Food, Shelter & Diamonds | Thu Jan 17 1991 11:47 | 7 |
| re .7, I agree. "You're too senstive" always seems to be said in the
tone of someone pointing out a fault. It definitely feels judgmental.
I think people accuse others of being too sensitive when they have no
interest in dealing with the situation.
Lorna
|
646.9 | Too sensitive, indeed! No such thing! | GWYNED::YUKONSEC | a Friend in mourning. | Thu Jan 17 1991 12:06 | 10 |
| "You're too sensitive" *is* a judgemental statement. The person saying
it is saying that they have evaluated me, and I do not have the
"proper" amount of sensitivity. My level of sensitivity is defective.
PAH!
I say that person's level of sensitivity is defective: s/he doesn't
have *enough*!
E Grace
|
646.10 | | SUBURB::MURPHYK | You wouldn't let it lie | Thu Jan 17 1991 12:10 | 16 |
| If some of these comments have been aimed at me - I'm sorry, I didn't
want to appear judgemental.
Maybe I should be in a note for people who are too insensitive.
I'll start this one differently:
FWIW, IMHO, my �0.02's worth, etc.
I don't want to put people down for getting upset by certain
comments/criticisms. However, I feel that it saves an individual a lot
of stress if they can ignore/laugh at comments which are plainly
ridiculous, eg all men who wear earrings must be ginger beers or
something.
Treating it as 'water off a ducks back' can save your internal turmoil,
and will not provide the instigator with any ammunition to use against
you and other "minorities".
Ken
|
646.11 | another viewpoint | GUCCI::SANTSCHI | violence cannot solve problems | Thu Jan 17 1991 12:17 | 10 |
| Ah Ken, but if one does nothing in the face of such comments, then it
is automatically assumed that said comments stand unchallenged and are
therefore acceptable in polite society. Also, I will not make jokes
about my situation, that would appear that I don't take myself
seriously or have any respect for myself.
BTW, the stress already exists when one encounters those who utter their
"comments/criticisms" in a derogatory manner.
sue
|
646.12 | | SUBURB::MURPHYK | You wouldn't let it lie | Thu Jan 17 1991 12:42 | 16 |
| Don't get me wrong - I'm not putting people down who get upset at these
things. What I'm saying (not very successfully) is that that is usually
the reaction which was intended.
If people want to vent their anger, that's fine by me - but I don't
think they should get themselves so cut up about it, that the other
person feels they have achieved something.
If someone said to me "all Paddies are stupid ba$tard$", I wouldn't
personally get upset and angry. However, I *do* appreciate that some
people would, and respect their right to do so.
Personally, I would say "I'm surprised you have the mental capability
to structure a sentence, let alone formulate an opinion".
Hopefully, it would end up with them a lot more angry than myself.
Ken
|
646.13 | the colours of the Union Jack DON`T RUN. | SUBURB::COOKS | | Thu Jan 17 1991 12:48 | 11 |
| Personally,i wear short sleeve t-shirts even when it`s snowing,`cos i`m
right hard,me.
Also,i drink 60 pints and smoke 80 fags a day.
My girlfriend`s got big baps `n` all.
So don`t call me sensitive.
Joe Strummer.
|
646.14 | Mother, may I? | CALS::MALING | Working in a window wonderland | Thu Jan 17 1991 20:04 | 15 |
| While I agree 100% that the comment "You're too sensitive" is
judgemental, there is an angle to this issue that often gets
overlooked.
"Being sensitive" sometimes becomes a subtle form of control in a
relationship and the "over-sensitive" person refuses to recognize
it as such. As in "I feel so jealous when you talk to so-and-so"
and "I get angry when you do such-and-such", which really translate
to mean "Don't talk to so-and-so" and "Don't do such-and-such" and
"if you don't do what I want my feelings are gonna be hurt and its
all your fault." Ever dealt with a person whose feelings were so
fragile, you felt like you were walking on eggshells and had totally
lost the freedom to be yourself? It stinks.
Mary
|
646.15 | Sure is a Hot Button For Me | USCTR2::DONOVAN | | Fri Jan 18 1991 00:52 | 4 |
| It'd seem condescending for someone to trivialize my feelings by
telling me that what I'm feeling isn't right. I get ticked at that.
Kate
|
646.16 | but there *are* people who are overly sensitive | CSSE32::RANDALL | Pray for peace | Fri Jan 18 1991 08:56 | 16 |
| All of the points about control, invalidation of feeling, and so on are
well taken, but on the other hand you do run into people of all sexes,
orientations, backgrounds, and beliefs who are too sensitive. You say
good morning and they look at you funny and wonder what you're trying
to get out of them; you ask if they saw the new movie that everybody's
talking about and they get upset because the movie was _War_of_the_Roses_
and they think you're accusing them of being on the verge of divorce.
(True story, by the way.)
I guess I don't have any right to tell them they're too sensitive, but
sometimes I just want to scream, "Not everybody is watching every move
you make!!! We can't follow you into your home and watch your home life!
I wouldn't want to anyway! All I want is a mildly pleasant interaction
while we're waiting for coffee!"
--bonnie
|
646.17 | | STKHLM::RYDEN | Dr of Comparative Irrelevance | Fri Jan 18 1991 09:37 | 21 |
|
Several answers seem to indicate a decline and fall of the sense of
humour, IMHO.
<<< Note 646.15 by USCTR2::DONOVAN >>>
-< Sure is a Hot Button For Me >-
> It'd seem condescending for someone to trivialize my feelings by
> telling me that what I'm feeling isn't right. I get ticked at that.
> Kate
Do you really mean to say your feelings are always right?? *I* know
that my feelings certainly aren't right always, but maybe that's
because I'm a
MAN!!
Bo ;-)
|
646.18 | Yeah | HYSTER::DELISLE | | Fri Jan 18 1991 10:45 | 4 |
| re .16
I love it...
|
646.19 | | WRKSYS::STHILAIRE | an existential errand | Fri Jan 18 1991 11:02 | 9 |
| re .14, the only times I've felt like I was walking on eggshells and
had lost the freedom to be myself, has been in relationships with men
who had problem tempers. I was afraid to say or do something that
would set off their tempers and make them start yelling at me. But, I
never thought of this as being a sensitivity problem on *their* part!
Maybe on mine?
Lorna
|
646.20 | remember the "blue eyes" experiment | GUCCI::SANTSCHI | violence cannot solve problems | Fri Jan 18 1991 11:05 | 5 |
| when an intrinsic part of my being is being held up to ridicule, I
don't consider a response on my part to be looked at as "too
sensitive".
sue
|
646.21 | Who sez? | COLBIN::EVANS | One-wheel drivin' | Fri Jan 18 1991 14:01 | 9 |
| What's neither-here-nor-there to one person is life-and-death
to another. Telling someone they're "too sensitive" or "overreacting"
is certainly a judgement, and often an attempt at control.
How one reacts is really no-one else's business, so long as the
reaction doesn't result in broken bones...
--DE
|
646.22 | | OXNARD::HAYNES | Charles Haynes | Fri Jan 18 1991 17:38 | 6 |
| A line from the net that I like (paraphrased)
If you cannot laugh at yourself then others will do it for you,
which is much less pleasant.
-- Charles (who finds himself an endless source of amusement)
|
646.23 | | COLBIN::EVANS | One-wheel drivin' | Fri Jan 18 1991 18:24 | 7 |
| Charles, I absolutely agree. But then I think taking one's self
too seriously is somewhat different than being "too sensitive".
Finding absurdity in one's self and the world is one way to stay sane.
--DE
|
646.24 | JMO | CALS::MALING | Mirthquake! | Fri Jan 18 1991 20:03 | 9 |
| re: .19
I guess it all depends how you look at it, Lorna. I mean didn't you
feel like the anger was manipulating you to conform to his desires?
To me getting angry a lot is being over sensitive. The emotions
of feeling hurt, angry, and afraid are often all present at once, but
may not all be externally visible in the persons's actions.
Mary
|
646.25 | In All Due Respect | USCTR2::DONOVAN | | Fri Jan 18 1991 22:10 | 26 |
|
<<< Note 646.15 by USCTR2::DONOVAN >>>
-< Sure is a Hot Button For Me >-
>
>> It'd seem condescending for someone to trivialize my feelings by
>> telling me that what I'm feeling isn't right. I get ticked at that.
>>
>> Kate
>
> Do you really mean to say your feelings are always right?? *I* know
> that my feelings certainly aren't right always, but maybe that's
> because I'm a
>
> MAN!!
Bo ;-)
Hi Bo,
It's Ok in my book to question my facts or my beliefs but please, not
my feelings. Do you understand my point?
K ate
|
646.26 | | OXNARD::HAYNES | Charles Haynes | Mon Jan 21 1991 15:37 | 13 |
| Re: .23
> But then I think taking one's self too seriously is somewhat different than
> being "too sensitive".
Hmm. That's interesting. Taking yourself too seriously is certainly one way of
being too sensitive, but you're right - it isn't the only way. It seemed to me
that the previous notes had focused on that aspect though.
What does that say about those people who don't take themselves too seriously,
but are (or are called) "too sensitive"?
-- Charles
|
646.27 | Greater sensitivity from sexual minorities? | SUBURB::MURPHYK | You wouldn't let it lie | Tue Jan 22 1991 08:23 | 26 |
| Slate me if you want, ignore me if you want, moderate me if you want.
This note is not intended to cause upset or distress. I would just
like to know if anyone has got any comments on why people have been
getting rather angry over the last few days.
It appears to me that gays/lesbians/bi's perhaps react more strongly to
prejudice than other groups. Whether this is good or bad is probably
irrelevant, but am I right and if so, is there a reason for it?
As some people who have bothered to read any of my notes may have seen
- I am half Irish and half English, and do not get upset when people
are prejudiced against me on those grounds.
I have been to places on the Continent where the English are despised
and have been called an Englischer scweinhund (sp?) by Germans in
Spain. I have heard many an anti-Irish comment in this country.
IMO "Paddies" is a colloquial name for Irishmen, as "poofs" is for
homosexuals. I would not personally use either term. In my
experience there seems to be more outrage against
ignorance/prejudice/stereotypes as witnessed by sexual minorities, than
by racial, religious, cultural and others.
This is JMHO but am I right and if so why?
Ken
|
646.28 | Because they are more discriminated against than you are? | WMOIS::B_REINKE | she is a 'red haired baby-woman' | Tue Jan 22 1991 09:42 | 16 |
| Ken
I'm Irish/English/Scots/Welsh....
and I don't take offense at 'put down's' to any of those nationalities
or to ones about being an American.
I think that sexual minorities, like people of color, have only
recently started standing up for their rights as people, and telling
people that commonly used expressions are offensive to them. Prejudice
against someone for being Irish or English or American doesn't normally
classify them as 'sub normal' or something to be despised in main
stream culture. However, there are many people, today who still have
such feelings about sexual minorities or people of color.
Bonnie
|
646.29 | | SONATA::ERVIN | Roots & Wings... | Tue Jan 22 1991 09:50 | 63 |
| Ken,
>>It appears to me that gays/lesbians/bi's perhaps react more strongly to
>>prejudice than other groups. Whether this is good or bad is probably
>>irrelevant, but am I right and if so, is there a reason for it?
Yes, I think that there is a reason for it.
>>As some people who have bothered to read any of my notes may have seen
>>- I am half Irish and half English, and do not get upset when people
>>are prejudiced against me on those grounds.
However, if you are living your life as a heterosexual person, you have the
opportunity to have your spouse viewed as your valid and legal partner (if
you choose to marry). Once you have chosen to marry, society gives you
certain status and privileges. Digital, as your employer gives you and
your family certain benefits. All these types of legal, societal and
company sponsored benefits are denied to gay/lesbian/bisexual persons.
Gay/lesbian/bisexuals can't choose to be legally married. Lack of choice
makes a difference.
This is the first little difference that may cause some extra sensitivity.
It is very difficult and hurtful to have an entire society not be willing
to recognize our relationships, our lives, our hopes and dreams. When my
older sister got married (to a man) my parents shelled out a ton of money
on a big wedding (sit down dinner for 250 people) plus my parents gave them
several thousand dollars as a 'gift' to get them started in life. I
recently had a ceremony of commitment with my partner. My parents weren't
in attendance, nor did they even know the event had happened. I'm tired of
these constant inequities, of not being seen, of being afraid of being seen
because of the consequences that it might have on my life...like even
coming out in a public notes file forum could impact my career at DEC.
Then layer on things like, gays/lesbians/bisexuals regularly get harassed,
beaten up and discriminated against if we do things like, hold hands in
public, or kiss in public, or attempt to put some legal structures around
the life that we have built to protect our households, life insurance
payments, personal property, etc., from "well-meaning" families who feel
that they are entitled to our estates once we're gone at the expense of our
significant others. When a man or woman shows us a picture of their
heterosexual spouse and children, for example, that is called sharing.
When we show someone a picture of our same-gender significant other, that is
called being blatant.
The other day I was at a gas station and the gas station attendant made
some comment about a not too swift thing that a fellow did in another car
when he pulled up to the gas pump. The attendant made the comment that the
driver of the car must be Polish. Well, I'm French and Polish. Did his
comment bother me? No, it rolled right off my back. If the attendant had
called the guy a 'faggot' would I have gotten upset? Yes. I think that
the level of sensitivity has a lot to do with the appalling lack of civil
rights and human rights that gay/lesbian/bisexual people experience all over
the world.
I have been fighting for my rights for a long time now and feel that little
progress has been made. It is discouraging. I'm tired and weary and have
no sense of humor when it comes to attacks and insults at
gay/lesbian/bisexual people. Maybe someday when I have the *same* civil
and human rights as heterosexual people I'll no longer be so sensitive
about such comments.
Laura
|
646.30 | Same sensitivity-to-consequences ratio | REGENT::BROOMHEAD | Don't panic -- yet. | Tue Jan 22 1991 11:06 | 25 |
| Ken,
One reason that they react more strongly is that such negative
comments remind them that their lives are in danger.
Surprised?
Then you should read the news more carefully. Men and women are
beaten up, raped, and murdered -- by complete strangers -- for
the "crime" of being perceived as gay.
Would you be happy to be called Irish if you knew that it increased
your chances of being put in hospital? Would you even consider
wearing even one earring if you thought it would get your head
bashed in?
Perhaps you wish to reply, But we didn't refer to any individual.
The answer to that is: What you have done is called `re�nforcing
behavior'. It enables others to see themselves as justified in
their "gay bashing", because *you* have (as they see it) endorsed
their attitudes and behavior.
Don't do that.
Ann B.
|
646.31 | | SUBURB::MURPHYK | You wouldn't let it lie | Tue Jan 22 1991 11:33 | 18 |
| Ann,
I'm sorry that you think I'm reinforcing anti-gay attitudes. The
intent of my note was to find out if other people feel that sexual
minorities defend themselves more vehemently than others. I received a
couple of interesting replies which I found informative.
>> Would you be happy to be called Irish if you knew that it increased
>> your chances of being put in hospital? Would you even consider
>> wearing even one earring if you thought it would get your head
>> bashed in?
I appreciate the analogy you're drawing. I think I've risked being put
in hospital many times, because of being Irish/English/white/on my own
whilst walking home.
One thing I have never felt threatened for, however, is wearing
earrings.
Ken
|
646.32 | Clarification | REGENT::BROOMHEAD | Don't panic -- yet. | Tue Jan 22 1991 12:19 | 17 |
| Ken,
I gather that your INTENT was NOT to reinforce anti-gay attitudes.
Unfortunately, intent and actuality can be different things. I
think Some People tend to forget that.
"I meant well" is a pretty pitiful excuse in the face of a resultant
disaster. (This is why the warning, "Practical jokes aren't." exists,
and why the pious line, "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions."
continues to remain in vogue.)
BTW, you actually didn't answer my question about being *labelled*
as Irish. You only commented (whether you realized it or not) that
you believed a readily observed trait (your skin color) increased
your risk in certain areas.
Ann B.
|
646.33 | just a few reasons of many | TLE::D_CARROLL | get used to it! | Tue Jan 22 1991 13:04 | 34 |
| I think Laura's response hit it on the nose.
While some people may dislike you for being (Irish, English,
Whathaveyou) you are still basically their equal in the eyes of the
law, the eyes of society, etc.
Also LesBiGays are in the unique position of growing up in a subculture
that despises them. Racial minorities, while they may be despised for
their race by those around them, at least have parents who are of the
same minority. Thus their subculture, at the most basic level (their
family) is supportive. Most LesBiGays grow up in families that are at
best tolerant and at worst downright hateful. For a young LesBiGay
there is little of the solidarity that is available for, say, black
youth. (I can't comment on discrimination against English, so I will
instead use examples applicable to the US.) It isn't surprising that
they might be extra sensitive.
Also, I think you might *percieve* them as being more sensitive because
you (generic) are less sensitive. In recent years, people in general
have become very sensitive to racial issues. It is considered in the
poorest of taste to make a racially prejudiced remark, even if you
really feel that way. No such social restrictions against statements
against homosexuals exist. The recent homophobic basenote would simply
never have been written about, say, Hispanics. While someone might
hate hispanics, to say so would bring down the world against them, so
they learn early on to keep such statements to themselves. Statements
against gays are *supported* by society as a whole (=wn=
notwithstanding.)
therefore, since you more often encounter blatant prejudice against
LesBiGays, you will correspondinly more often hear LesBiGays and their
supporters getting upset at such incidences.
D!
|
646.34 | Um, uh, I think there's something else going on here... | ASHBY::FOSTER | | Tue Jan 22 1991 13:58 | 28 |
| Um, uh, I'm not so sure that I'd agree.
I don't think "lesbigays" are more sensitive to negative comments than
blacks or native Americans or Jews, who have all had, and CONTINUE to
receive a fair share of abuse for their very existence.
But in THIS file, there has been an unusual amount of outreach to the
Lesbian community, and therefore, there are a lot of out Lesbians here.
Far more than the number of "out" black people. There's me and Karen
Wharton (who rarely notes here) and nobody else makes a point to even
bring it up! I don't know of any native Americans in the file. The
people who are Jewish don't constantly bring it up, they just don't get
all into the scores of "ohboyitsChristmasIcan'twaittobewithmyfamily-
orspendtimewithmylovedonesandwishforpeaceonearthonceayear" notes.
In fact, color can be rather transparent in notes files...
So, a lot of what you're seeing is strength in numbers and unity, and a
conscious decision to speak out against gay-bashing because one does
not stand alone when doing so. I think if there was only one lesbian
here, and no one was bending over backwards to relate to her
difference, she would not defend herself so loudly, unless that was the
nature of her personality.
The thing about lesbigays is that they can't blend in in notes files
because their differences come out whenever they use pronouns. The only
other option is silence, and understandably, some of them are sick of
it. But I can ASSURE you, they aren't more sensitive. They're just
being more vocal.
|
646.35 | interesting point | TLE::D_CARROLL | get used to it! | Tue Jan 22 1991 14:54 | 20 |
| ren, I never thought of that, but you are right!
In most areas, racial prejudice differs from prejudice against
LesBiGays because LesBiGay people have the option of hiding their
orientation, while black people, hispanic people, et al do not.
(In this area Jews and other religious minorities are similar to
LesBiGays.)
But in notes the situation is reversed!
This has the makings of a great sociology dissertation.
D!
[PS: Before anyone from either "camp" flames me, let me point out that
I didn't say one kind of prejudice was worse or more important or
whatever, than the other, just different. The abilities of gays to be
"in the closet" has it's good points [avoidance of getting beaten up]
and it's bad points [pressure from "well-intentioned" others to stay in
the closet.]
|