Women of Sex Tech, Unite(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
Women of Sex Tech, Unite
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/18/nyregion/women-of-sex-tech-unite.html
29 comments
Another asked if she was going to demonstrate her products for him.
Sigh... Anyone, of any gender, is probably going make this joke regardless of the gender of the other party.
If you can't laugh with the joke you probably shouldn't be in the sex industry. At all.
Nothing to see here. Move along.
Sigh... Anyone, of any gender, is probably going make this joke regardless of the gender of the other party.
If you can't laugh with the joke you probably shouldn't be in the sex industry. At all.
Nothing to see here. Move along.
No. Absolutely not.
I'm sure you have a female in your life who is important to you. A wife, daughter, mother? Would you be ok with an investor talking to your daughter like that? Joking that she demonstrate a sex toy for him? I would be absolutely furious.
This is not something to just ignore.
I'm sure you have a female in your life who is important to you. A wife, daughter, mother? Would you be ok with an investor talking to your daughter like that? Joking that she demonstrate a sex toy for him? I would be absolutely furious.
This is not something to just ignore.
Why should it matter if it weren't wife / daughter or my son / husband?
Buy anyway: passing joke? That's fine. Absolutely normal.
If the person demanded a demonstration that would be completely different.
Buy anyway: passing joke? That's fine. Absolutely normal.
If the person demanded a demonstration that would be completely different.
[deleted]
How is a the slogan on a T-Shirt "The future is female" supposed to be better then the "patriarchal" system which is misogynistic? Excluding a group (half?) the population for your vision of the future does not seem constructive at all.
I choose to read it as "the future is more female than the past, which was predominantly male".
If you choose to read it as "the future is only female" you can do that, but I'm fairly certain that's not how it's meant to be read.
To me inserting the "only" into the phrase is a lot like reading "black lives matter" as "only black lives matter". Sure the original slogan's phrasing is ambiguous, but it's a slogan and slogans are by necessity simplified.
If you choose to read it as "the future is only female" you can do that, but I'm fairly certain that's not how it's meant to be read.
To me inserting the "only" into the phrase is a lot like reading "black lives matter" as "only black lives matter". Sure the original slogan's phrasing is ambiguous, but it's a slogan and slogans are by necessity simplified.
>If you choose to read it as "the future is only female" you can do that, but I'm fairly certain that's not how it's meant to be read.
But there are many well-intentioned people that WILL read it as that. And with this I fault the the writer and not the reader.
I think this is one of the biggest problems modern liberal movements have with messaging. And I say this as someone who 100% is in support of "the future is more female than the past, which was predominantly male" and "black lives matter".
I don't think the issue is in the nature of brevity in communication. When these movements create their slogans, their number one goal seems to be motivating and incensing the base of people that already agree with them. It seems that the question is never asked: "how will this messaging come across to people who don't already agree with us?" - let alone, "how can we convince those people to acclimate to our viewpoint?" A shirt that says "the future is only female" seems likely to increase vitriol by pushing away and shutting down well-meaning disaffecteds that might otherwise be convinced of the liberal cause.
But there are many well-intentioned people that WILL read it as that. And with this I fault the the writer and not the reader.
I think this is one of the biggest problems modern liberal movements have with messaging. And I say this as someone who 100% is in support of "the future is more female than the past, which was predominantly male" and "black lives matter".
I don't think the issue is in the nature of brevity in communication. When these movements create their slogans, their number one goal seems to be motivating and incensing the base of people that already agree with them. It seems that the question is never asked: "how will this messaging come across to people who don't already agree with us?" - let alone, "how can we convince those people to acclimate to our viewpoint?" A shirt that says "the future is only female" seems likely to increase vitriol by pushing away and shutting down well-meaning disaffecteds that might otherwise be convinced of the liberal cause.
Are you saying that the slogan makes you anxious, or that it hypothetically harms the cause by being read badly by people who want to read it badly?
Because I'm not sure that it's possible to come up with a slogan that isn't read badly by opponents. If you have examples, I'd love to see 'em.
Because I'm not sure that it's possible to come up with a slogan that isn't read badly by opponents. If you have examples, I'd love to see 'em.
I'm not sure how you interpreted anxiety on my part here?
The slogan does not make me anxious. I know what it "really" means, and as I stated previously I am 100% in support of that message. I am frustrated because I believe there are better ways to communicate it to people in a way that is generally more persuasive.
I don't think it "hypothetically" harms the cause, I believe that it does. I only need speak to my more traditional extended family members, who will read slogans like this and react in a negative way, even though I know they could be convinced otherwise. Does it suck that they can't "read behind the lines" with slogans like this? Yeah. But public messaging is hard, and just amplifying existing messages won't solve that problem.
Lastly, "I'm not sure that it's possible to come up with a slogan that isn't read badly by opponents" seems like kind of a cop-out. Of course it's impossible to say something someone will take issue with. Communicating messages isn't an all-or-nothing game, what I am saying is I think people need to do a better job changing minds than they are now.
The slogan does not make me anxious. I know what it "really" means, and as I stated previously I am 100% in support of that message. I am frustrated because I believe there are better ways to communicate it to people in a way that is generally more persuasive.
I don't think it "hypothetically" harms the cause, I believe that it does. I only need speak to my more traditional extended family members, who will read slogans like this and react in a negative way, even though I know they could be convinced otherwise. Does it suck that they can't "read behind the lines" with slogans like this? Yeah. But public messaging is hard, and just amplifying existing messages won't solve that problem.
Lastly, "I'm not sure that it's possible to come up with a slogan that isn't read badly by opponents" seems like kind of a cop-out. Of course it's impossible to say something someone will take issue with. Communicating messages isn't an all-or-nothing game, what I am saying is I think people need to do a better job changing minds than they are now.
> who will read slogans like this and react in a negative way, even though I know they could be convinced otherwise
I guess what I'm saying is "out of the closets into the streets" probably didn't convince anyone that gay people were not pedophiles coming out into the streets to molest their children when it was being chanted by "rioters" in 1969. But the people who were inspired by that slogan and came out to their families and friends... that convinced a lot of people.
Slogans aren't always about converting other people to join your cause, they can be about convincing the already converted to act on their beliefs.
I guess what I'm saying is "out of the closets into the streets" probably didn't convince anyone that gay people were not pedophiles coming out into the streets to molest their children when it was being chanted by "rioters" in 1969. But the people who were inspired by that slogan and came out to their families and friends... that convinced a lot of people.
Slogans aren't always about converting other people to join your cause, they can be about convincing the already converted to act on their beliefs.
Well glad you could read between the lines for me. Because I sure don't get the impression this is meant to be 'let us work together for a better future were everyone is maximizing their potential as human beings' kinda slogan ...
What part of it makes you uncomfortable?
The future is female, NOT male
What would be wrong with a female dominated world? Are women treated badly in a male dominated world or something?
It's an anti male statement
When you add the anti male bit on it is.
"I love ny, not nj" is an anti nj statement.
"I love ny, not nj" is an anti nj statement.
[deleted]
We live in an age of identity politics. It will be interesting to see the society that forms when the sexes and the races hate each other. I assume that science will thrive. Soon heterosexual men might choose to pay for a child via in vitro productions rather than couple with a female out of sheer distrust. We've already seen children from three parents. Perhaps we can use eggs from another species to make our new hate born children.
I literally pray for better.
I literally pray for better.
It's just a t-shirt.
How is that a good argument? The swastika is just a symbol.
It also fits some of the more vague definitions of hate speech.
Like which one?
Is my "I (heart) NY" shirt xenophobic as well?
The one that also says it's bad taste to make a "the future is male" or "the future is white" shirt.
[deleted]
Bad taste does not equal hate speech
If you saw a "the future is male" shirt, what would your first impression be?
"that guy doesn't listen to, or maybe listens but doesn't believe, women when they speak about their lived experience of oppression in our society."
> was told by a potential investor that she'd be a good C.E.O because "you're not Kim Kardashian-attractive, but you're girl-next-girl attractive," she recalled. Another asked if she was going to demonstrate her products for him.
Sigh... There has been more talk recently of publicly outing investors/anyone that makes these kinds of comments. I support it fully.