Feminists request use of "jazz hands" rather than clapping to avoid triggering "anxiety" [OP UPD

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Ok I got you. Didn't catch that's what you were saying.

As stormdancer said above, basically, it's about the crazy-sauce spilling into the society stew, here.

I bet that a year from now, some of these women will be at co-ed events giving men the stink eye for being so disrespectful as to clap and cheer for someone, instead of flapping around like those big tube puppets at used car dealerships.

Yeah I try to stay out of these threads with divisive authors but I'll have to share what others have, looks like an authors spin on the story not crazy feminists.

Plus

Reply to OP,

From my experience with family members suffering from PTSD, one thing I have learned is that the sufferer bears the responsibility to change, NOT those around the sufferer (assuming it isn't a personal space issue at fault.) Yet here we are, once again, seeing suggested behavior changes directed at those who don't have the problem, to accommodate the sufferers. Yet again these particular feminists are left looking pretty weak, frail, and whiney.

Really you think PTSD suffers can just go and change every thing that bothers them willingly? Never mind the fact of years in therapy, medications, etc. Oh, boy I wish it was that easy.

a reply to: KAOStheory

I think you are still missing the point. The clapping was a trigger for these women's anxiety disorder. There is nothing being shown here to say that the women are associating clapping with male oppression. The only reason the word "feminist" should have shown up in this article was to label the group who requested the jazz hands instead of clapping. This is an example of a feminist organization assisting women with anxiety disorder by requesting that a meeting alter its form of applause. I have trouble even calling that news worthy, but Breitbart turned it into a slam against feminism and an example of feminists trying to put themselves above men. So here we are.

This is a great case study in media manipulation and propaganda though. Look how many still can't shake the idea that feminists were trying to oppress men somehow. As soon as it was shown that this was related to mental illness, the anti-feminists started attacking the women with mental illness. Accusing them of getting special treatment and such.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Yes, it's buried in the main article in the lower paragraphs - some (i.e one or two out of tens of thousands) FemSoc members have called for men free zones in NUS meetings, votes and rallies which completely goes against the NUS and general academic view of feminism being about equality.

Already the main NUS conference has no-entry zones for men, it wouldn't matter if it was for something unimportant but for something as major and influential as the NUS it's a stupid policy and I say that as someone who co-chaired the FemSoc while at my Uni.


EDIT: I completely agree that the newspaper are taking a sensible policy and turning it into feminist bashing nonsense.

Guys go to HR and complain discrimination. Being isolated creates anxiety and destroys our self-esteem .

Someone said early on here, "feminism is not today what it once was."

I think the bottom line of it all, is that feminism was a big part of ALL human evolution. The acceptance of new outlooks on society was very far reaching in all aspects of our daily lives, across the planet. Growing up in the 70's with a single mom and sister (dad was around but just weekends mostly) really shaped who i am as a man.

However, it was opening people up to accepting others differences, not forcing people to bend over backwards for every little whim one group, sex, race, religion, whatever, may pull out of their collective butts, and then 3 people decide it's the issue of the friggin year.

lt was about live and let live, not "you are affecting my ability to live because i have an issue with YOU." which is basically sociopathic.

And it's not just women, everyone is being allowed to do this now. It seems to be the norm, not the exception. And that may just be the publicity, the nature of headlines like this, but it creates a collective consciousness about it, and those IN it tend to continue to fulfill their expectations as "wacky" to stay in the media.

originally posted by: bastion
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Yes, it's buried in the main article in the lower paragraphs - some (i.e one or two out of tens of thousands) FemSoc members have called for men free zones in NUS meetings, votes and rallies which completely goes against the NUS and general academic view of feminism being about equality.

That is an example of sensationalism. Point to a few crazies within the ranks to try to paint the people requesting help as evil feminists. Classic propaganda technique.

Already the main NUS conference has no-entry zones for men, it wouldn't matter if it was for something unimportant but for something as major and influential as the NUS it's a stupid policy and I say that as someone who co-chaired the FemSoc while at my Uni.

EDIT: I completely agree that the newspaper are taking a sensible policy and turning it into feminist bashing nonsense.

And I'm not trying to say that all feminists are awesome. I recognize that there are feminists who truly want to stand where men stand now in the gender order, but pointing them out to disparage a group of people trying to help hurt women just to push your hard line anti-feminism stance is sneaky and deplorable .

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: KAOStheory

I think you are still missing the point.

Ok i re-read the op. I hear you.
The recent attention to the special needs of "trans-gender" MINDED people, whether they are actually trans-gender or not, in threads on ATS. probably sparked a lot of the comments in the thread, and I don't think they are any less valid.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Still no mention of roping women off from men so they can be at ease.

..and you'd be wrong.
s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com...

Motion 404: Creating and Defending Closed Intersectional Spaces
Submitted by: Oxford University Students’ Union
Conference Believes:
1. The NUS Women’s Campaign has policy that affirms that ‘a feminism without intersectionality is no feminism
at all’ (Women in Leadership, 2014).
2. The NUS Women’s Campaign has policy that ‘resolves to support and defend self-defining women only spaces’
(Women-Only Spaces, 2013).
3. Closed spaces for liberation groups are extremely important.
4. Many Women’s Officers and other women’s representatives represent women who identify into liberation
groups that the representatives do not identify into, and therefore may benefit from advice on how to support
and defend the spaces of groups that they are not a part of.
5. Closed intersectional spaces can be difficult to create and to defend.
Conference Resolves:
1. To mandate the Black, Lesbian, Bisexual, Trans and Disabled Representatives on the Women’s Campaign
Committee to provide resources and support for women’s representatives and/or Unions that want to create,
support, improve or defend closed intersectional spaces on their campuses.

Oh, lookie, lookie, the NUS Women's group is taking the additional step of ensuring they invite all special interest minority groups to their events so that they are only perceived as being discriminatory against men, which is apparently socially acceptable.

On a related note, the entire document I just found and linked to is hair raising and concerning.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Holy crap.
How is that not just "separitist," plain and simple?!

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Aren't those the talking points of the actual conference? I've seen no evidence that they were employing those things in the meeting.

PS: Looks like it would have been a far better thread to link to that document originally instead of the stupid hit piece in the OP.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: KAOStheory

That "safe place" thing was made up by Breitbart.

Did Breitbart also compose the NUS Women's Conference list of motions?
s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com...
...because if Breitbart did not compose the above, and it actually came from the NUS, then your above statement is utterly FALSE.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Aren't those the talking points of the actual conference? I've seen no evidence that they were employing those things in the meeting.

No, they are the list of motions and official Conference leadership positions. Essentially, if the motions pass (and based on the official conference support under each motion, it is likely they will), then they will become part of the NUS bylaws and be officially "on the books" for the group.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: burdman30ott6
PS: Looks like it would have been a far better thread to link to that document originally instead of the stupid hit piece in the OP.

NO CRAP!!!! I'm adding it now. I may be mistaken, but I think it just went online since the original flap over the "Jazz Hands" hit the media.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

yea that doc is just great. "pronouns" are dangerous!

see, this tells people that this is ok, that it's normal social behavior. it's pandering to anxieties, phobias, and disorders, and that's actually dangerous and highly irresponsible.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: burdman30ott6
PS: Looks like it would have been a far better thread to link to that document originally instead of the stupid hit piece in the OP.

NO CRAP!!!! I'm adding it now. I may be mistaken, but I think it just went online since the original flap over the "Jazz Hands" hit the media.

Nothin stoppin you from postin it as it's own thread.

There are a lot of interesting and disturbing points int it.

ETA: and reading further down, some really good stuff in it too.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Still no mention of roping women off from men so they can be at ease.

..and you'd be wrong.
s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com...

Motion 404: Creating and Defending Closed Intersectional Spaces
Submitted by: Oxford University Students’ Union
Conference Believes:
1. The NUS Women’s Campaign has policy that affirms that ‘a feminism without intersectionality is no feminism
at all’ (Women in Leadership, 2014).
2. The NUS Women’s Campaign has policy that ‘resolves to support and defend self-defining women only spaces’
(Women-Only Spaces, 2013).
3. Closed spaces for liberation groups are extremely important.
4. Many Women’s Officers and other women’s representatives represent women who identify into liberation
groups that the representatives do not identify into, and therefore may benefit from advice on how to support
and defend the spaces of groups that they are not a part of.
5. Closed intersectional spaces can be difficult to create and to defend.
Conference Resolves:
1. To mandate the Black, Lesbian, Bisexual, Trans and Disabled Representatives on the Women’s Campaign
Committee to provide resources and support for women’s representatives and/or Unions that want to create,
support, improve or defend closed intersectional spaces on their campuses.

Oh, lookie, lookie, the NUS Women's group is taking the additional step of ensuring they invite all special interest minority groups to their events so that they are only perceived as being discriminatory against men, which is apparently socially acceptable.

On a related note, the entire document I just found and linked to is hair raising and concerning.

You certainly are very selective in your choice of motions, as well as not posting the reasoning behind that particular motion.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: burdman30ott6
PS: Looks like it would have been a far better thread to link to that document originally instead of the stupid hit piece in the OP.

NO CRAP!!!! I'm adding it now. I may be mistaken, but I think it just went online since the original flap over the "Jazz Hands" hit the media.

Yea, because this travesty of a thread TOTALLY needs to continue... Let's find more reasons to hate on women with General Anxiety Disorder. YAY! /sarcasm

originally posted by: KAOStheory
a reply to: burdman30ott6

yea that doc is just great. "pronouns" are dangerous!

Of everything in those motions, the pronoun debate raises my eyebrows the least. Society has been desensitizing pronoun traditionality for awhile now, trying to force people into calling people by whatever the individual demands they be referred to as. (see the Facebook has 81 gender options argument). I frankly don't let that stuff bug me, but I call a man 'he' and a woman 'she' regardless.

originally posted by: InTheLight
You certainly are very selective in your choice of motions, as well as not posting the reasoning behind that particular motion.

I posted the whole motion... perhaps NUS should have provided the rationale behind it? Sorry it doesn't reinforce your opinions.