Women's climbing festival

Mason Stone wrote: Hi Tim,

I knew you had it in you. Not O'brien, Fanon, Said, among others. But you still think power means physical violence, I will concede it is a form of power but physical violence is coercion and as I mentioned is not true power. Yes you get the pain and some emotional scarring but it is not enough to be wrought after a fashion. It is not, "the instinctual rejection of the other," that drives racism because racism is not instinctual, discrimination via trial and error, getting burned is as you say instinctual, that is why I think you err in your thesis and many do so as well when they equate racism/power to physical acts, including acts of violence. What I will call true racism or power is taught it is modified behavior based on a particular line of thinking, as I mentioned above, it is passed from one generation to the next, enculturated. And yes it could happen in the opposite direction if historically the darker masses were held in the highest regard worldwide like the lighter minority but this has not been the case.

I know people are afraid of what they misunderstand as racism and power in physical acts especially of violence, has nothing to do with instinctual rejection of the other. Consider that worldwide the tables have turned. Not to the power structure, the superclass continues to be overwhelmingly of the light skinned ethos but the numbers to stem the tide just aren't there anymore. That is what Trumps wall is about.

Consider reading about power, Stephen Lukes, has among the most cogent arguments I have found, Bertrand Russell and Michelle Foucault will give you a primer on historical uses of power. For a primer on mass culture read Revolt of the Masses, Jose Ortega y Gasset. Don't bother secondary sources of the preceding, find your own voice. You might continue tracing power but you'll end up with Hegel and Heidegger to an extent. While I am at it read Hanah Arendt.

Please also consider that some folks may read your suggested texts and still hold an alternate point of view.

I think anyone who has issues with women only climbing events should read Sigmund Freud

amarius wrote: I think anyone who has issues with women only climbing events should read Sigmund Freud

But do you even read Lacan bro?

Mason Stone wrote: 
So dudes, what I think people are saying is we can set the power structure in our heads aside, or attempt to and as mentioned upthread imagine, not equal to what has been or the wheel reinvented but new ways for engaging each other.

I was thinking that a gender-inclusive Woman's festival, featuring and celebrating women while bringing all climbers together, could present new ways to engage. The movement to create safe spaces has been around since I was an undergrad reading Foucault, and doesn't seem all that progressive in my opinion.

Briggs Lazalde wrote:

You are in favor of discrimination....I'm not....we definitely don't see eye to eye

And your blood for blood mentality is juvenile. You're older than me and should therefor have the life experience and wisdom to understand that your form of justice is hypocrital and shows a lack of intelligence. I'm 2nd hand embarrassed for you

lol straw man lol.

How's that?

This sentence, from the brilliant mind of gender theorist Judith Butler, should make things crystal and sparkling:

"The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power. "

Christian wrote: This sentence from the brilliant mind of gender theorist Judith Butler should make things crystal and sparkling:

"The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power. "

Well, yeah, of course.

Christian wrote: This sentence, from the brilliant mind of gender theorist Judith Butler, should make things crystal and sparkling:

"The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power. "

That sentence really rolls right off the tongue

Speaking of self actualization, if you haven't watched Century of the Self, check it out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnPmg0R1M04

Documentary that examines “the rise of the all-consuming self against the backdrop of the Freud dynasty,” or as Director Adam Curtis puts it, “how those in power have used Freud’s theories to try and control the dangerous crowd in an age of mass democracy.”

Then we can put these social campaigns by REI and other corporations into a historical context. Modern day Torches of Freedom, if you will.

I'm not going to get into this too much, since this thread basically started as almost a shit show and only got worse, but I will say this...

For the people saying "well just do men's only outings!", its not that simple.  In the past it may have been as simple as that, but now if you do a "men's only event", there is somehow this expectation now that you need to do a women's only event as well or you'll be crucified.  For example, in my personal experience, I've been a part of a group of guys who go out doing trailwork on different parts of the country several times a year.  The catch is that the group only accepts men, and for some reason the amount of pushback we get for this is really outlandish.  We've had multiple national/ state parks and such tell us to shove off because we won't become "more inclusive", and this is basically strictly volunteer work.  Its frustrating to see work that needs to be done but won't be because somebody decided having more "diversity" is more important than helping fix stuff that needs fixing.

I don't mind the "women's climbing festival" on a theoretical level, but the double standard for these gender exclusive activities is kind of appalling.     

^^^why the fuck do you need to do volunteer trail work in a "men's only group"???

Just go have a drum circle somewhere and sacrifice a few willing virgins.

Thank you for proving my point.

The fact that I need a reason at all should show you how bullshit the "make your own groups!" argument is.

No, you don't get it.

The reason other more marginalized groups want their "us only" group without you is to not have to put up with your BS.

You want your "male only" group so that you can have your BS sausage party and wallow in the shizzle too lol?

inb4 "women aren't good volunteer trail builders".

I can think of a million reasons to exclude men from any event. Buncha dicks lol.

I can't think of one reason to exclude women from a trail building event.

Harumpfster Boondoggle wrote:I can think of a million reasons to exclude men from any event. Buncha dicks lol.

I can't think of one reason to exclude women from a trail building event.

For crap's sake, sir, perhaps a men's AA group organizes a trail day???!? Or, a women's rape recovery group does the same???? Do I want to join Solid Rock Climbers for Christ, as a Jewish person??? Not particularly. Do I resent their "exclusivity"? Hardly. Fetch yourself a second cup of coffee, you simply weren't thinking.

.........

Yes. There can be many reasons. There are women's teams and men's teams in sports. There are women's and men's meetups for all kinds of things. Shit, there are elite wildland firefighting units that are all female, and, I'm pretty sure, one of those is made up of Navaho women (Google it yourself).

Again. Any of you ever go to a bachelor's party???? Organize father/son only camping trips? Or, father/daughter only camping trips???

Give it a rest, people. This is simply not in the same category as not allowing women to vote, or HMOs that specify whites only.

These are private groups, choosing how they ​choose to associate, and with whom.

Yes. I am tired and cranky. Half a hundred years of it, and you might be also. Report back in a decade or three and let me know how it's going. Hopefully, this will be quaint ancient history by then. If I'm able to do anything in my 90s, I sure as hell would rather it's climbing, than this nonsense. ;-)

Best, OLH

lol? Trail building, Helen....Trail building.

wonderwoman wrote

I just don't get all the drama.  Why are you guys being so emotional?

Its not that you don't get it, its that you don't want to. 

The important idea to discuss is that as a society we are agreeing that; inclusivity is a universally accepted norm we all accept and practice for the benefit of everyone.

If inclusivity is a universally accepted norm, then there should be no situations where it is okay to exclude others. By having any exclusive event it is violating the idea that it is a universally accepted truth.

Adam O wrote: I'm not going to get into this too much, since this thread basically started as almost a shit show and only got worse, but I will say this...

For the people saying "well just do men's only outings!", its not that simple.  In the past it may have been as simple as that, but now if you do a "men's only event", there is somehow this expectation now that you need to do a women's only event as well or you'll be crucified.  For example, in my personal experience, I've been a part of a group of guys who go out doing trailwork on different parts of the country several times a year.  The catch is that the group only accepts men, and for some reason the amount of pushback we get for this is really outlandish.  We've had multiple national/ state parks and such tell us to shove off because we won't become "more inclusive", and this is basically strictly volunteer work.  Its frustrating to see work that needs to be done but won't be because somebody decided having more "diversity" is more important than helping fix stuff that needs fixing.

I don't mind the "women's climbing festival" on a theoretical level, but the double standard for these gender exclusive activities is kind of appalling.     

"We are Alpha Beta Whatever Fraternity, and we'd like to come out and do some volunteer trail work as part of our community service week"-- I can't think of any park that would have trouble with that.

"We are a local chapter of the Navy SEAL foundation, and we would like to do some trail-building work at our next get-together"-- Again, I can't think any park would be complaining.

Both of the above would be examples of groups where only men would be members, and only men would show up for the trail day.

In fact, i can't think of any park saying no, if you simply contacted the park with your desire to volunteer, and it just so happened that a dozen guys showed up for the trail day, and no women.

However, if you contacted the park and said, "we are a no-women-allowed trail volunteering group, and we would like to do some work"... It has a very different flavor.

Harumpfster Boondoggle wrote: lol? Trail building, Helen....Trail building.

Yes. Of course women can build trail, sir. You said, you could think of no reason to exclude a woman from a group doing this. My reply? A male only recovery group, which decides to get their guys outside building trail. You know as well as I, the special ways being outside can help people's heads, when those conversations can happen that might not come up otherwise. What if the trail building is a weeklong trip on a long hiking trail? Would that change this? Again, that sitting around outside, somehow, is therapeutic. I can see lots of instances when it is helpful to have a rather narrow group. You can see that too, because of your comment about women.  Goes both ways. 

How about guys facing prostrate cancer? I have no problem with them having a trail building event. Or, the guys from the prison. Sir? You and I are on the same page, here, I'm guessing.

Thanks for softening the "lol". With Lutz right on your heels, this was discouraging, I admit it.

Best, Helen

grog m aka Greg McKee wrote:

Its not that you don't get it, its that you don't want to. 

The important idea to discuss is that as a society we are agreeing that; inclusivity is a universally accepted norm we all accept and practice for the benefit of everyone.

If inclusivity is a universally accepted norm, then there should be no situations where it is okay to exclude others. By having any exclusive event it is violating the idea that it is a universally accepted truth.

Fine. Are you saying you are comfortable discussing erectile disfunction in a group with women? Sure, maybe. But perhaps others would like to have guys to help them get through that?

Should we integrate basketball teams? On and on?

Greg, I simply disagree with you. Inclusivity doesn't mean you get to sit on my lap while I take a shit. It means we can both have a stall, or, shudder, take turns in the john.

Just take off your climbing shoes.

Best, Helen

wonderwoman wrote: 

I just don't get all the drama.  Why are you guys being so emotional?

Because when White Male Priviliege is challenged they become drama queens?

But I am gonna invite Kyle to my "Male only Survivors of Internet Drama" meeting   . I hope he makes it. No wild women allowed....:P

Seriously, I challenge the "Male Only Volunteer Trail Builders" to give me their (apparently) good reason for excluding women.

If its genuinely good, I owe them an apology. If not, they owe the women they've excluded an apology.

ps Men should benefit greatly from having women at a Prostate Cancer Survivors event, imo. Not to hear their stories (obviously), but to gain their acceptance as whole men.

Having done rather a lot of Breast Cancer surgery I can totally sympathize with women excluding men from their survivors meeting, as the risk of inappropriate comment is all too likely....just don't see it at the Prostate Cancer event, sorry. Women tend to know better. Men tend to think they must say something and often screw it up.