#MoreThanMean - Massive Trigger Warnings for link

robeiae

Touch and go
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
46,262
Reaction score
9,912
Location
on the Seven Bridges Road
Website
thepondsofhappenstance.com
I've been verbally 'abused' at sporting events, and have verbally 'abused' others. Do not come into the blue seats in an Islander jersey and expect no one will say anything rude. I've never seen it directed on the basis of sex.

I don't have a problem with fans busting on other teams' fans.

I was watching some show last night on ESPN--"His and Hers"--and they were talking about the #morethanmean video. The female reporter--Jemele Hill--noted that she had been subjected to the same sorts of garbage. And she made two good points. The first was that some of these over-the-line insults are coming from established figures: players, other members of the media, and even show biz figures (here's an old story about Artie Lange being "funny").

The second point was that the idea that this kind of verbal abuse is funny and/or allowable stems directly from the idea that fans get to behave like douchenozzles to other people when they're in their role as "fans."

Not having a problem with fans being assholes to people they don't know--just because of the color of their shirt--is a part if the problem, imo. And frankly, a lot of the "busting" fans do on other fans (and on players, coaches, and refs) is misogynistic and/or homophobic.
 
Last edited:

Lyv

I meant to do that.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 5, 2007
Messages
4,958
Reaction score
1,934
Location
Outside Boston
This actually goes back with me to the 60s. The whole "Take back the night" walk in Buffalo. While I understood why they needed it to be lead buy women for women, I didn't understand why I had to be excluded because I had a penis. Seems to me now there was, and most likely still is a whole lot to work out. Thank Dawg we can still make babies together. ;)
I am guessing that you had to be excluded from that one particular walk, as opposed to an entire movement, because it was about women on their own walking in the night without men, who could and would, by many, be assumed to be their protectors. I found this on Wikipedia:

Early marches were often deliberately women-only in order to symbolize women's individual walk through darkness and to demonstrate that women united can resist fear and violence. (Most marches in the present day include men; the organization differs as each event is organized locally.) The women-only policies caused controversy on some campuses; activists argued that male allies and sexual assault survivors should be allowed to march in support of women and male victims of sexual violence.[5]

In current practice, Take Back the Night events are not only inclusive of men, but include men as victims, bystanders, and supporters.

This says the earliest Take Back the Night marches were in the 1970s, which is when I remember them, and I remember a more patriarchal society (of course, seems we're swinging back to that). You weren't excluded from the entire movement, but from a particular march in a particular space in a particular time in the movement. In the climate and society of that time, that march and others were women-only. IMO, it was important that they were, and a natural and welcome evolution that they aren't now. You want to march now? You can. But way back then, it worked best to have the symbolism of women walking alone in the night.

It's not exactly the same, of course, but I work with organizations as an ally pretty often. I'm not gay or black or transgender, so I take my cues from those running the show who are. Use me the best way to advance their cause because they understand it in a way I can't. When I speak up for them, I amplify their voices as much or more than I do my own. There have been meetings with legislators that included allies and some that haven't. There have been rallies that include allies as speakers and some that don't. That has never and shouldn't bother me. It's not about me. I help where and how I can. I listen and learn, take my cues from those with skin in the game. Sometimes, though mostly when I first started out, I walk on eggshells a bit, but that's my choice.
 

Ari Meermans

MacAllister's Official Minion & Greeter
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
12,854
Reaction score
3,057
Location
Not where you last saw me.
Bolding mine, and I'm not meaning to pick on you specifically, Ari, but I'm going to dispute this idea.

It's not hard to be an ally (which is a term I dislike for a number of reasons, but I'll use it because we all know what it means). It's hard sometimes to be yelled at when you feel you don't deserve it. It's hard to be excluded when you want to help. It's hard to try and try to do the right thing and find you keep getting it wrong (especially when you get mixed messages).

But do your convictions depend on someone else?

<snip>
Sticking up for people who are in situations you've never been in yourself - and will never be in yourself - means you're going to screw up from time to time. It's also going to mean that behaviors that feel supportive to one person are not going to feel supportive to someone else.

But if a negative reaction to something you're trying to do to help makes you wonder if you should stop helping...that's not being an ally. That's looking for a cookie and taking your toys and going home if you don't get one.

Certainly it's hard. Nobody likes putting a foot in it, and nobody likes getting yelled at when they're just trying to help. But I'm not going to go whining about how hard my life is as a well-meaning cis hetero lady. When I get it wrong, I try to listen, and I try to do better next time. But my convictions don't change just because someone was mean to me.

We were still on white knight and motivation. My apologies if "shorthand" was taking place in my post. Yes, it is hard, even for someone who doesn't want "a cookie", isn't involved because they want anything out of it except an end to injustice, abuse, and hate. It's hard because of your own awareness that you're using your privilege to fight for someone else's rights to be recognized, rights they already own whether legally or by virtue of the fact that they are human beings. You worry that using your privilege even then might somehow rob them of their dignity and right to be heard themselves. Yes, it's hard. It's hard if you care about them as persons and don't just see them as representatives of a cause. Real people with real feelings who you'd never want to feel diminished or less than. It's hard because you have to find a way to add to their voices without drowning them out. It's easy to overstep when every fiber of your being is offended and outraged. It's hard to find that balance when you DO care about the people most involved. Stop? Not while I still own breath. But, yes, I do strive to never use my own privilege in such a way as to make someone feel that I'm giving them a gift. That they should feel grateful. No, no. Never. And, yes, that can be hard because it's all about them and their hurt and struggle and dignity. And if our support is not focused on them and isn't because we care about them as living, breathing people, we're doing it wrong.
 
Last edited:

Amadan

Banned
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
8,649
Reaction score
1,623
But if a negative reaction to something you're trying to do to help makes you wonder if you should stop helping...that's not being an ally. That's looking for a cookie and taking your toys and going home if you don't get one.


I don't think that's always true.

In your case, you said something well-intentioned but a little condescending, and were politely corrected. Fair enough.

What if the response had instead been something like "FUCK YOU YOU PRIVILEGED CISHET PIECE OF SHIT!"

(Yes, that's an extreme response, and certainly not something that would happen here on AW, but it does happen elsewhere. This is not a straw man/hypothetical example. I have seen it and experienced it - not those exact words, but similar.)

You'd be wrong to "pick up your toys and go home" and decide that because of one asshole, you're not going to support marriage equality anymore.

But I don't think you'd be wrong to decide being an ally doesn't mean you have to be willing to be abused and then have "TONE ARGUMENT!!!" screamed at you when you ask not to be abused.
 

RedRajah

Special Snowflake? No. Hailstone
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
3,885
Reaction score
2,362
Website
www.fanfiction.net
Not having a problem with fans being assholes to people they don't know--just because of the color of their shirt--is a part if the problem, imo. And frankly, a lot of the "busting" fans do on other fans (and on players, coaches, and refs) is misogynistic and/or homophobic.

Exactly.

There's a "friend" of my husband that I can only stomach being in his presence for so long. Last time I had to deal with him, he was whining about one of the Cavs (Mosgov, I wanna say) and he kept using "feminine" to complain about how he played defense.