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

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: pfishy

Rot? The only rot I see is making fun of a group of people who decide to hold their meetings slightly differently than most people do.

I am not making fun of anyone. Nor have I even vaguely attempted to. Also, I have attempted to make the clarification now that this specific incident was based upon consideration for a group of disabled students, which I both find perfectly reasonable and was not aware of when I first read the OP. So, yes, in this circumstance, jazz hands all you like. But one thing discussed in the OP was the bullying and intimidation of society by subset groups that seemingly exist only to find reasons to be offended, and it managed to turn the temperature up under my kettle by a notch or two. But congratulations to the OP. In all the time I've been here, as a member or just lurking before that, this is the first thread that has managed to get an emotional response out of me.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
What were you really attempting to ridicule or attack or be so alarmed about here?

I'm attacking the idea that the many should accommodate the few in all things.
I'm attacking the ideology that dictates to the modern world "Person XYZ has a gripe, STOP THE FREAKING WORLD SOMEONE HAS AN UNMET NEED THAT MUST BE APPEASED!!!!"
I'm attacking stupidity, arrogance, and attention whoring.
I'm alarmed that the concept of feminism has retarded from a policy of equality to one of special deference in all things.
I'm alarmed at the trend of humanity constantly bowing down before the lowest common denominator.
I'm alarmed at the audacity of always expecting life to kowtow to you rather than acknowledging reality which states that sometimes you're the problem and your issues are personal, meaning only you can and should be expected to change.

I'm doing slow, sarcastic jazzhands at this idea.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Because ridiculing a well-intentioned idea that someone had to alleviate what they see as a problem that some people have and are empathetic toward it and are trying to help in a positive way is the way of this very ugly world today.

I get it. Ridicule away. That's your prerogative.

Haha that's ridiculous besides clapping and whooping mean enthusiasm, jazz hands just looks stupid. Just picture a standing ovation with jazz hands

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: pfishy

Rot? The only rot I see is making fun of a group of people who decide to hold their meetings slightly differently than most people do.

OK I am assuming you are a man, and you see nothing wrong with the idea that entire groups of women are unable to feel safe in the presence of a man?

I'm a woman, and I see enormous problems with that statement.

That sentence from the article seems charged to incite sexism. How do you know these women aren't victims of past abuse at the hands of men and they have real reasons to fear them? You are assuming that these women have been conditioned to fear men through feminist fear propaganda.

Try taking out women and man and inserting various ethnic and religious groups. Go ahead. Have a ball, and then get back to us and whether or not we're just making fun of people holding their meetings differently. Think of the jazz hands bit as a mere distraction to the real problem.

The real problem is that this is a sensationalist article that is trying to paint feminists in a bad light by overhyping a concession made on part of some people as part of the meeting as some crazy feminist scheme. I really have trouble taking any part of that article seriously.

So it's wrong to give feminists the clap?

Just wondering. . . .

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: pfishy

Rot? The only rot I see is making fun of a group of people who decide to hold their meetings slightly differently than most people do.

OK I am assuming you are a man, and you see nothing wrong with the idea that entire groups of women are unable to feel safe in the presence of a man?

I'm a woman, and I see enormous problems with that statement.

Try taking out women and man and inserting various ethnic and religious groups. Go ahead. Have a ball, and then get back to us and whether or not we're just making fun of people holding their meetings differently. Think of the jazz hands bit as a mere distraction to the real problem.

There are underlying reasons why those particular women feel unsafe around men. Again, that's a medical issue, another disability which should be kept in it's proper context, that being, violence against women.

Feminists a huge waste of the female gender if you ask me. Just when you think it's possible not to be hit by the dumbest damn thing everyday, here's something else.

a reply to: pfishy

Yea sorry that was a general statement about the overall attitude in this thread from most of the contributors and not entirely meant to gripe on your actions. I also didn't see you walk your statement back until after I posted either.

originally posted by: Beach Bum
Feminists a huge waste of the female gender if you ask me. Just when you think it's possible not to be hit by the dumbest damn thing everyday, here's something else.

I'm a feminist. So is just about every woman I know.

Thanks for telling me we are wastes of the female gender. Good to know.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

No, I'm not. I am well aware that they are talking about women who might have been victimized. However, the only way to make your fear better is to confront it. Why do you think that the most successful phobia programs in the world all work through desensitizing you?

You never get over your fear of anything by isolating yourself from it entirely.

However, I can see where it would serve a feminist agenda to propagate a fear of men in women. After all, half of the feminist agenda these days relies on rhetoric against the oppressive patriarchy. How much more believable is that if you already fear men and are never encouraged to get over that fear in any meaningful way?

a reply to: ketsuko

That is one broad stroke of the brush for everyone.

Well it seems that this is all over a single tweet by the UK National Union of Students Womens Campaign:
twitter.com...

Some delegates are requesting that we move to jazz hands rather than clapping, as it's triggering anxiety. Please be mindful! #nuswomen15

It is NOT an agreed policy, just a tweet in response to the requests of some delegates.
The NUS is a free vote style organisation and a majority of members is needed to agree anything such as a policy change banning clapping.
Now I've seen that it is a bit of a non-story to me because until or unless the NUS Women vote for a change on applause policy at their conference, clapping is still acceptable.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: pfishy

Rot? The only rot I see is making fun of a group of people who decide to hold their meetings slightly differently than most people do.

OK I am assuming you are a man, and you see nothing wrong with the idea that entire groups of women are unable to feel safe in the presence of a man?

I'm a woman, and I see enormous problems with that statement.

Try taking out women and man and inserting various ethnic and religious groups. Go ahead. Have a ball, and then get back to us and whether or not we're just making fun of people holding their meetings differently. Think of the jazz hands bit as a mere distraction to the real problem.

You are correct in your estimation of my gender. However, you are incorrect in your interpretation of who I am. Unfairly categorizing me as being unable to have any sort of understanding of what I'm saying is impolite, at best. But, you are entitled to your point of view, as am I. But, if you would kindly go back and read a couple of the edits I have made recently, or my further remarks, I would appreciate it.
And while I'm sure you feel you have a perfectly valid reason for stereotyping me as a 'typically' dense and callous person because I have the opposite set of genitalia as you, it seems rather disingenuous of you to do so. Not that I am in the least bit obligated to explain myself to you or anyone else here, I would like you to know your assumption, which you based on my gender, misses the mark. Widely.
But let me ask, if I had made some baseless and negative assumption based on your gender, would you have been in the least bit surprised? Or would you have expected me to because I have a penis, and therefore must be ignorant, insensitive and obtuse?

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No, I'm not. I am well aware that they are talking about women who might have been victimized. However, the only way to make your fear better is to confront it. Why do you think that the most successful phobia programs in the world all work through desensitizing you?

So you think it is a good idea to inspire the possibility of these women having psychotic breakdowns in the middle of a meeting? I know that addressing your problems head on is the best way to take care of them, but it is silly to assume that all people are ready to do that. This is a meeting to disperse information, not treat psychological issues.

You never get over your fear of anything by isolating yourself from it entirely.

However, I can see where it would serve a feminist agenda to propagate a fear of men in women. After all, half of the feminist agenda these days relies on rhetoric against the oppressive patriarchy. How much more believable is that if you already fear men and are never encouraged to get over that fear in any meaningful way?

How do you know they aren't seeing psychiatrists for this very reason? They may be seeing a shrink weekly who helps them face their problems head on, but they could be so distraught that they have to take it in small doses or something. In any case, it matters little. This wasn't a psychiatrist visit. It was an international meeting. People aren't there to solve each other's emotional problems. So the host makes a small concession for them so that the meeting goes more smoothly. It's pretty damn simple and non-offensive if you think of it like that.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

The original request was made by students from Oxford University.

SE Students' Union women's officer Gee Linford-Grayson said: "Loud clapping and whooping can be intimidating and distracting when you're speaking on stage."

An NUS spokesperson said: "The request was made by some delegates attending the conference.

"We strive to make NUS events accessible and enjoyable for all, so each request is considered."

Big things made of nothing, so they had a request some of the speakers had a request, it truly is distracting when people make a ton of noise in the middle of a speech, I hate it when public speaking myself.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

So if the women are so traumatized by men that the mere presence of one can cause them to have psychotic breakdowns ... How on earth did they manage to get to that meeting in the first place?



Did the city the meeting was being held in agree to accommodate those poor ladies by keeping all men locked up and safely hidden away?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No, I'm not. I am well aware that they are talking about women who might have been victimized. However, the only way to make your fear better is to confront it. Why do you think that the most successful phobia programs in the world all work through desensitizing you?

So you think it is a good idea to inspire the possibility of these women having psychotic breakdowns in the middle of a meeting? I know that addressing your problems head on is the best way to take care of them, but it is silly to assume that all people are ready to do that. This is a meeting to disperse information, not treat psychological issues.

You never get over your fear of anything by isolating yourself from it entirely.

However, I can see where it would serve a feminist agenda to propagate a fear of men in women. After all, half of the feminist agenda these days relies on rhetoric against the oppressive patriarchy. How much more believable is that if you already fear men and are never encouraged to get over that fear in any meaningful way?

How do you know they aren't seeing psychiatrists for this very reason? They may be seeing a shrink weekly who helps them face their problems head on, but they could be so distraught that they have to take it in small doses or something. In any case, it matters little. This wasn't a psychiatrist visit. It was an international meeting. People aren't there to solve each other's emotional problems. So the host makes a small concession for them so that the meeting goes more smoothly. It's pretty damn simple and non-offensive if you think of it like that.

Thought it might interest you to know, but I think your point is perfectly valid, and I actually agree with it. As I have stated in previous messages, this thread actually managed to illicit a relatively strong emotional response from me and I began commenting without doing my due diligence. But I have made several statements regarding the hijacking of the majority by the vocal few who demand more than equal rights would dictate. And not people with disabilities. Other people and organizations. And also the underlying hypocrisy of many of them. Discrimination,racism/sexism and intolerance are wrong, no matter which direction they are flowing.