Principia Discordia

Principia Discordia => Apple Talk => Topic started by: Kai on November 17, 2011, 06:33:52 pm

Title: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Kai on November 17, 2011, 06:33:52 pm
If you're not familiar with Nature Journal, you should be. Like it's USAian counterpart, Science, Nature is one of the most prestigious scientific journals in the world. Not that you should use authority as value; as the joke goes, in Nature and Science, there is little of either. However, they are the most widely read and cited journals in the world, meaning they have a high impact value, which is the stupid yet true way universities and other research institutions measure publication success. And I'll admit, historically they have some of the most important papers.

One of the long running sections in Nature is called Futures, where a fiction author is invited to write a piece of science fiction for every issue. Never mind right now the issue of whether science fiction actually belongs in a science journal, or whether anyone actually reads that section. The issue at hand is a Futures from September 2011, which has received an incredible amount of flac and fallout but months after it was published.

Titled 'Womanspace (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v477/n7366/full/477626a.html)', you can read it in full here.

As the author says in the comments below, it was originally meant as tongue in cheek, but it's such a blatantly sexist piece of fiction that Nature Journal editor Henry Gee commented, "I'm amazed we haven't had any outraged comments about this story."

And now the angry letters have started, and the comment sections are filling up. You see, women scientists know and remember what it was like to be a woman scientist even just 30 years ago; catcalls when a woman professor entered a classroom were the norm, as was sexual harassment at professional meetings. It's a laugh against Nature that most people ignored the piece until 2 months after it was published, since apparently no one reads Futures.  :lulz:

http://all-geo.org/highlyallochthonous/2011/11/dear-nature-you-got-a-sexist-story-but-when-you-published-it-you-gave-it-your-stamp-of-approval-and-became-sexist-too/ (http://all-geo.org/highlyallochthonous/2011/11/dear-nature-you-got-a-sexist-story-but-when-you-published-it-you-gave-it-your-stamp-of-approval-and-became-sexist-too/) The title says it all.

http://www.paulanderson.org.uk/2011/11/an-open-letter-to-nature/ And another

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/doing-good-science/2011/11/16/in-which-i-form-the-suspicion-that-i-am-not-natures-intended-audience/ And another

http://lablemminglounge.blogspot.com/2011/11/even-bigotry-has-silver-lining.html OUCH

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/2011/11/16/the-charismatic-misogynist/ You get the idea.


In fact, the whole blowout has a hash tag on twitter now, #womanspace. https://twitter.com/#!/search?q=%23womanspace

The highlight is the parody coming out of this, the chief example being a mockup of "Nature Publishing Group's new journal: Womanspace" by insect photographer Alex 'Myrmecos' Wild http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/compound-eye/2011/11/17/nature-publishing-groups-new-journal/ And all the possible article titles posted in #womanspace.


This mess is really only just getting started. Nature and Science have been declining in quality for years now, despite the insistence of some institutions that publications in those journals are the only items worth considering on an application, and people are raring for a tearing.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Nephew Twiddleton on November 17, 2011, 06:59:14 pm
Some of the comments are pretty interesting- especially the suggestion that it was published to direct more traffic to the site. Makes sense. No one said anything about it until the editor said that he was surprised at the lack of outrage.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Kai on November 17, 2011, 07:04:56 pm
Some of the comments are pretty interesting- especially the suggestion that it was published to direct more traffic to the site. Makes sense. No one said anything about it until the editor said that he was surprised at the lack of outrage.

In other words, the 'greatest' science journal in the world has become nothing more than a marketing scheme for laboratory products.  :lulz: :horrormirth: :lulz:
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: BabylonHoruv on November 17, 2011, 07:05:03 pm
I was personally most surprised at how bad the story is.  It's incredibly soft sci-fi, with no look at why women are able to enter parallel universes, or the mechanics of it, or the implications, aside from being able to find better husbands.

All it really is is a not very interesting "what if" that the author didn't even bother to actually expand into a story.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Nephew Twiddleton on November 17, 2011, 07:14:12 pm
Some of the comments are pretty interesting- especially the suggestion that it was published to direct more traffic to the site. Makes sense. No one said anything about it until the editor said that he was surprised at the lack of outrage.

In other words, the 'greatest' science journal in the world has become nothing more than a marketing scheme for laboratory products.  :lulz: :horrormirth: :lulz:

Nothing does what it says on the label anymore. :sad:
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 17, 2011, 07:20:27 pm
Wow, that was... something.

It smacks of the desperation of a clueless aging man in charge of a journal with declining readership trying to play the controversy card. And that story was not even vaguely funny, although the premise could have been amusing in the hands of a more skilled writer/thinker.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Nephew Twiddleton on November 17, 2011, 07:22:58 pm
Wow, that was... something.

It smacks of the desperation of a clueless aging man in charge of a journal with declining readership trying to play the controversy card. And that story was not even vaguely funny, although the premise could have been amusing in the hands of a more skilled writer/thinker.

Yeah, isn't it supposed to be a sci-fi story? It seems more like half-thought musings.

That was the other thing I found funny about the comments- apparently you need to cite other papers for fiction, or what is supposed to be fiction?
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 17, 2011, 07:41:18 pm
Wow, that was... something.

It smacks of the desperation of a clueless aging man in charge of a journal with declining readership trying to play the controversy card. And that story was not even vaguely funny, although the premise could have been amusing in the hands of a more skilled writer/thinker.

Yeah, isn't it supposed to be a sci-fi story? It seems more like half-thought musings.

That was the other thing I found funny about the comments- apparently you need to cite other papers for fiction, or what is supposed to be fiction?

No, I think that someone was trying to defend it by saying it's "observations" and other people were saying that if it is observations or commentary in a scientific journal, then the observations needed to be backed with citations.

It was wretchedly written and really barely qualifies as sci-fi. It was pretty much just completely fucking stupid. I'm more offended by the bad writing than the sexist content. THAT got published?
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Nephew Twiddleton on November 17, 2011, 07:54:53 pm
Wow, that was... something.

It smacks of the desperation of a clueless aging man in charge of a journal with declining readership trying to play the controversy card. And that story was not even vaguely funny, although the premise could have been amusing in the hands of a more skilled writer/thinker.

Yeah, isn't it supposed to be a sci-fi story? It seems more like half-thought musings.

That was the other thing I found funny about the comments- apparently you need to cite other papers for fiction, or what is supposed to be fiction?

No, I think that someone was trying to defend it by saying it's "observations" and other people were saying that if it is observations or commentary in a scientific journal, then the observations needed to be backed with citations.

It was wretchedly written and really barely qualifies as sci-fi. It was pretty much just completely fucking stupid. I'm more offended by the bad writing than the sexist content. THAT got published?

It was pretty bad.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Reginald Ret on November 17, 2011, 08:04:35 pm
I've never read so much wasted potential in one short story.
And it didn't even have that much potential!
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Kai on November 17, 2011, 08:22:29 pm
I find it funny that the "OUCH" article above suggests sending good articles instead to Science Journal. It's like politics! Just switch Science and Nature for Republicans and Democrats, and notice that there is really no difference.

Neither of them are honestly relevant anymore. Sure, once in a great while they might have something relevant to any one researcher (which is why I subscribe to the E-table of contents), but for the most part reading them is useless for me. I could read Scientific American and get really good science writing, or I could read a specialist journal like Zootaxa or J-NABS or Proceedings of the Linnaean Society. Nobody READS Science or Nature anymore. Just like no one READS the New York Times anymore. If anything we just page through to see if there's anything interesting, and then toss it back on the pile.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Reginald Ret on November 17, 2011, 08:24:47 pm
We need to rewrite it!
 
1. Boring everyday predictable sexism. Don't they know that sexism can be intellectually, philosophically challenging and funny?
2. They tried to make it acceptable by talking badly about themselves too, but that only works if the self-mockery is taken to greater heights than your target's.
3. ... did they seriously depend on internet fora for reliable observations?!!
4. the 'theoretical physicists take every good idea' bit might have been good if they'd fleshed it out a bit. Sounds like a perfect spot for some stereotype-filled dialogue not centered around men vs women. This would make the story more about stereotypes than about 'men are from mars, women are from alpha-centauri prime'.
5. This story needs a conspiracy, and many crossdressing women to fullfil all the 'manly' roles where a 'true man' would have figured out what was happening, like, i dunno, a warehouse manager for any store ever? (except for electronics stores and other manly stores ofcourse, the Secret Woman's Alliance For Female's Eternal Law (http://www.expatica.com/nl/news/local_news/Dutch-word-of-the-year-is-swaffelen.html) created these stores so the men would never grow suspicious for their lack of male warehousemanager friends.
6. etc?

I find it funny that the "OUCH" article above suggests sending good articles instead to Science Journal. It's like politics! Just switch Science and Nature for Republicans and Democrats, and notice that there is really no difference.

Neither of them are honestly relevant anymore. Sure, once in a great while they might have something relevant to any one researcher (which is why I subscribe to the E-table of contents), but for the most part reading them is useless for me. I could read Scientific American and get really good science writing, or I could read a specialist journal like Zootaxa or J-NABS or Proceedings of the Linnaean Society. Nobody READS Science or Nature anymore. Just like no one READS the New York Times anymore. If anything we just page through to see if there's anything interesting, and then toss it back on the pile.
Heh, what is it called again? the two man con?
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Triple Zero on November 17, 2011, 09:02:41 pm
what a stupid story.

also, the author is an idiot in the comments. he really doesn't seem to grasp that his story is offensive, or that it doesn't really matter whether he did not intend it to be offensive or not, his intentions are irrelevant, and he should just stop think and realize that. not that he will, because he believes his intentions were not bad, so why should he change his mind about anything? and then he even got his wife to stand up for him?? :lulz: the word "sock puppet" briefly flashed through my mind, but that would probably be too beautiful ...
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Kai on November 17, 2011, 09:05:51 pm
what a stupid story.

also, the author is an idiot in the comments. he really doesn't seem to grasp that his story is offensive, or that it doesn't really matter whether he did not intend it to be offensive or not, his intentions are irrelevant, and he should just stop think and realize that. not that he will, because he believes his intentions were not bad, so why should he change his mind about anything? and then he even got his wife to stand up for him?? :lulz: the word "sock puppet" briefly flashed through my mind, but that would probably be too beautiful ...

What really makes me think sockpuppet are the comments in response to this article: http://isisthescientist.com/2011/11/17/what-womanspace-really-looks-like-and-why-nature-can-suck-it/

Love the title btw.  :lulz: Check out the comments by Stein and Chebag; sounds like they could be sock puppets set up by Nature.

ETA: or just Stein. Got to pay more attention not to get fooled by Poe's Law.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Kai on November 18, 2011, 02:36:51 am
On another note, I just told off a butthurt male in a facebook thread who was harrassing a female scientist friend of mine expressing her displeasure at this shitty story. I basically told him to shut up and listen, let her talk about what's bothering her instead of treating her offense as, well, "hysterical" in the classical sense that word was used to refer to women getting upset about their mistreatment.

I am sick and tired of "but look, men are treated badly too!" As far as I can tell, men weren't treated as a whole as second class citizens barely higher than slaves for most of human history.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 18, 2011, 02:47:18 am
On another note, I just told off a butthurt male in a facebook thread who was harrassing a female scientist friend of mine expressing her displeasure at this shitty story. I basically told him to shut up and listen, let her talk about what's bothering her instead of treating her offense as, well, "hysterical" in the classical sense that word was used to refer to women getting upset about their mistreatment.

I am sick and tired of "but look, men are treated badly too!" As far as I can tell, men weren't treated as a whole as second class citizens barely higher than slaves for most of human history.

Yeah, that's a line I have no patience for. It's also a sort of strawman variation on the Dawkins Fallacy... I'm sure there's already a term for it; the implicit argument that being AGAINST the oppression of one sex or race means you are FOR the oppression of another. "Why are women complaining when men have it bad too?" is a variation, and also my (un)favorite variation, which goes something like "That joke wasn't just making fun of blacks and Jews, it made fun of the white guy too" or in this case "but the author was poking fun at himself too because the male characters were also portrayed as being boring, bumbling, and incompetent".

Except they weren't. They were still portrayed as being the "smart" ones, in a world where women were unwittingly conferred their only advantage through an unexplained fluke of nature which they weren't even capable of recognizing. It's actually incredibly analogous to the argument that women are conferred a natural advantage simply due to having vaginas and being desired by men, so therefore men HAVE to keep them down in order to retain any bargaining power. It doesn't actually make any rational sense, in any way, but it's appalling how many men I have heard argue that men oppress and control women because they feel powerless against the face of their natural sexual desirability.

Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Nephew Twiddleton on November 18, 2011, 02:57:22 am
Yeah- its the sort of shit when people are like "what about white peoples rights"

chill out bubba were already more equal than others. Making everyone equal equal doesnt make us less equal.

The privileged-whoever they may be in  a particular situation- always have to find a way to bitch about their alleged problems. It would be funny if so many people didnt buy into that. If theyre in a fucking trailer its not because some black people have houses. And anyway its their own fault for having that trailer right? Arent they always saying that occupiers should get jobs? Until its time for them to get jobs in then its all about the mexicans and affirmative action again.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 18, 2011, 02:58:28 am
Yeah- its the sort of shit when people are like "what about white peoples rights"

chill out bubba were already more equal than others. Making everyone equal equal doesnt make us less equal.

The privileged-whoever they may be in  a particular situation- always have to find a way to bitch about their alleged problems. It would be funny if so many people didnt buy into that. If theyre in a fucking trailer its not because some black people have houses. And anyway its their own fault for having that trailer right? Arent they always saying that occupiers should get jobs? Until its time for them to get jobs in then its all about the mexicans and affirmative action again.

DRIVES ME FUCKING CRAZY.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Nephew Twiddleton on November 18, 2011, 03:00:55 am
Its your fault youre not rich nigel.

Its also somehow your fault that im not rich.

Yep. Bakes a lot of sense.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 18, 2011, 03:02:10 am
Its your fault youre not rich nigel.

Its also somehow your fault that im not rich.

Yep. Bakes a lot of sense.

Damn women minorities, dragging everyone down. :cry:
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Nephew Twiddleton on November 18, 2011, 03:05:23 am
Its because of taxes benefits and maternity leave. And needing to breastfeed wherever you go. If it wasnt for that glass ceiling youd all take over and then youd make us all slaves.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 18, 2011, 03:09:42 am
Its because of taxes benefits and maternity leave. And needing to breastfeed wherever you go. If it wasnt for that glass ceiling youd all take over and then youd make us all slaves.

 :lulz:
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Kai on November 18, 2011, 03:27:16 am
Its because of taxes benefits and maternity leave. And needing to breastfeed wherever you go. If it wasnt for that glass ceiling youd all take over and then youd make us all slaves.

If you recall, that was the warning at the end of the story. "and now they're out for better versions of us"

Which is basically, watch out, if you don't keep them down they'll take over.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Kai on November 18, 2011, 03:36:25 am
On another note, I just told off a butthurt male in a facebook thread who was harrassing a female scientist friend of mine expressing her displeasure at this shitty story. I basically told him to shut up and listen, let her talk about what's bothering her instead of treating her offense as, well, "hysterical" in the classical sense that word was used to refer to women getting upset about their mistreatment.

I am sick and tired of "but look, men are treated badly too!" As far as I can tell, men weren't treated as a whole as second class citizens barely higher than slaves for most of human history.

Yeah, that's a line I have no patience for. It's also a sort of strawman variation on the Dawkins Fallacy... I'm sure there's already a term for it; the implicit argument that being AGAINST the oppression of one sex or race means you are FOR the oppression of another. "Why are women complaining when men have it bad too?" is a variation, and also my (un)favorite variation, which goes something like "That joke wasn't just making fun of blacks and Jews, it made fun of the white guy too" or in this case "but the author was poking fun at himself too because the male characters were also portrayed as being boring, bumbling, and incompetent".

Except they weren't. They were still portrayed as being the "smart" ones, in a world where women were unwittingly conferred their only advantage through an unexplained fluke of nature which they weren't even capable of recognizing. It's actually incredibly analogous to the argument that women are conferred a natural advantage simply due to having vaginas and being desired by men, so therefore men HAVE to keep them down in order to retain any bargaining power. It doesn't actually make any rational sense, in any way, but it's appalling how many men I have heard argue that men oppress and control women because they feel powerless against the face of their natural sexual desirability.



An easy way to tell if any joke is sexist is to replace "women" with "jews". If it's not funny with jews, it's not funny with women either. One of those letters mentions how Nature wouldn't have published a story about jews or blacks, because apparently while it's no longer socially acceptable to treat those groups like shit, it's completely acceptable to treat women that way.

If Nature did (which they never will, since Henry Gee is Jewish) publish a story like the above except about jews, there would have been a public outcry and the credibility of the journal would have been forever destroyed. It would have been literally finished. Rightly so, of course. The same should have happened with this, would have happened if complaints by women were not ignored, demeaned, disregarded, pushed aside, laughed at, and played a variation of the Dawkins Fallacy.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 18, 2011, 03:59:14 am
Its because of taxes benefits and maternity leave. And needing to breastfeed wherever you go. If it wasnt for that glass ceiling youd all take over and then youd make us all slaves.

If you recall, that was the warning at the end of the story. "and now they're out for better versions of us"

Which is basically, watch out, if you don't keep them down they'll take over.

Not just better... better-looking. Because of course, lacking depth, it's not like women actually form profound emotional connections with the men we love that go far beyond appearance.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Nephew Twiddleton on November 18, 2011, 04:02:01 am
I dont know if i were married to him i might be inclined to trade him in for a better model ;)
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Cain on November 18, 2011, 07:14:45 am
Hahaha, it was all a sociological experiment, and you're doing exactly what the editor wanted!
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Triple Zero on November 18, 2011, 11:15:16 am
On another note, I just told off a butthurt male in a facebook thread who was harrassing a female scientist friend of mine expressing her displeasure at this shitty story. I basically told him to shut up and listen, let her talk about what's bothering her instead of treating her offense as, well, "hysterical" in the classical sense that word was used to refer to women getting upset about their mistreatment.

I am sick and tired of "but look, men are treated badly too!" As far as I can tell, men weren't treated as a whole as second class citizens barely higher than slaves for most of human history.

I do believe that even without the historic angle, the story is offensive wrong and misogynistic.

Because IMO technically an individual cannot really be held responsible for history they weren't part of, so from that perspective alone the story would be at most ignorant and insensitive, and make the man who wrote it an asshole for defending it.

I think it's important in order to get through to such people--where possible, which is among the younger population that may just be starting to form their opinions and ideas on matters like these--the argument is best made in terms of why this sort of thing is wrong right here and now, on its own (lack of) merits. And from there, if needed, it can be likened to "this is just like it's always been in history (etc)", which is true, but if you start out with that, the immediate screeching knee-jerk response is going to be "well yeah but I'm not like those guys in history, it's not my intention to repress anyone, it's just a funny story see?" (and if you don't consider it funny it's just a matter of taste)

I'm just saying because I remember from long long ago that a younger me wasn't entirely able to "see" what is wrong with this reasoning. (Not that I made it myself btw)

Its because of taxes benefits and maternity leave. And needing to breastfeed wherever you go. If it wasnt for that glass ceiling youd all take over and then youd make us all slaves.

If you recall, that was the warning at the end of the story. "and now they're out for better versions of us"

Which is basically, watch out, if you don't keep them down they'll take over.

And still, if done right, the idea could have made a pretty awesome story.

Except you'd need to wrap it up somehow. The fact is, in reality, women are not able to reach into extradimensional spaces. But in the story this is the case, and the only reason for this being so is "the author is male and really doesn't know any better, hey it *could* be right?" which is about as stupid and offensive as white people writing scary stories about Native American curses and possibly horror stories about Eastern European hostels :-P

Anyway, women having access to extra-dimensional spaces, is a concept not happening in our universe. So either you formulate a sort of alternate universe, which you can indicate by hinting at a few other things that might be *ever* so slightly different than in ours, because even women were unaware, some things would have been different. In fact, as soon as the men in the story discovered what was going on, I really was expecting them to be kidnapped by the Illuminatrix or whatever.

Another possibility is that this all is happening in the dreams of a really misogynistic man. Which is sort of the case, except the man is the author. Which can be resolved either in a "ghost of christmas" style waking up and realizing the errors of his ways, or in a creepy horror Lovecraft style where he never wakes up from his nightmare, or in a cold and brutal and bleak, he wakes up and continues to treat women like shit the dream having strengthened his phobia for women to paranoid levels.

Finally, and this just shows the author's complete lack of imagination, how can you write about women having access to pull objects from extra-dimensional spaces and NOT draw some sort of parallel with the womb?? I mean come on, symbolism!

Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Kai on November 18, 2011, 05:58:38 pm
Hahaha, it was all a sociological experiment, and you're doing exactly what the editor wanted!

Which makes it even more important that Nature receives shit for this. Henry Gee apparently has a history of screeching at women.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: BabylonHoruv on November 18, 2011, 07:19:46 pm
Another neat idea would be women from another dimension reaching into ours.  Even if they were just doing it to shop it could lead to all sorts of interesting results.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Emo Howard on November 18, 2011, 08:22:45 pm
Another neat idea would be women from another dimension reaching into ours.  Even if they were just doing it to shop it could lead to all sorts of interesting results.

(http://i283.photobucket.com/albums/kk316/Jerry_Frankster/BigMeh.gif)
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Kai on November 18, 2011, 11:09:03 pm
On another note, I just told off a butthurt male in a facebook thread who was harrassing a female scientist friend of mine expressing her displeasure at this shitty story. I basically told him to shut up and listen, let her talk about what's bothering her instead of treating her offense as, well, "hysterical" in the classical sense that word was used to refer to women getting upset about their mistreatment.

I am sick and tired of "but look, men are treated badly too!" As far as I can tell, men weren't treated as a whole as second class citizens barely higher than slaves for most of human history.

I do believe that even without the historic angle, the story is offensive wrong and misogynistic.

Because IMO technically an individual cannot really be held responsible for history they weren't part of, so from that perspective alone the story would be at most ignorant and insensitive, and make the man who wrote it an asshole for defending it.

I think it's important in order to get through to such people--where possible, which is among the younger population that may just be starting to form their opinions and ideas on matters like these--the argument is best made in terms of why this sort of thing is wrong right here and now, on its own (lack of) merits. And from there, if needed, it can be likened to "this is just like it's always been in history (etc)", which is true, but if you start out with that, the immediate screeching knee-jerk response is going to be "well yeah but I'm not like those guys in history, it's not my intention to repress anyone, it's just a funny story see?" (and if you don't consider it funny it's just a matter of taste)

I'm just saying because I remember from long long ago that a younger me wasn't entirely able to "see" what is wrong with this reasoning. (Not that I made it myself btw)

Its because of taxes benefits and maternity leave. And needing to breastfeed wherever you go. If it wasnt for that glass ceiling youd all take over and then youd make us all slaves.

If you recall, that was the warning at the end of the story. "and now they're out for better versions of us"

Which is basically, watch out, if you don't keep them down they'll take over.

And still, if done right, the idea could have made a pretty awesome story.

Except you'd need to wrap it up somehow. The fact is, in reality, women are not able to reach into extradimensional spaces. But in the story this is the case, and the only reason for this being so is "the author is male and really doesn't know any better, hey it *could* be right?" which is about as stupid and offensive as white people writing scary stories about Native American curses and possibly horror stories about Eastern European hostels :-P

Anyway, women having access to extra-dimensional spaces, is a concept not happening in our universe. So either you formulate a sort of alternate universe, which you can indicate by hinting at a few other things that might be *ever* so slightly different than in ours, because even women were unaware, some things would have been different. In fact, as soon as the men in the story discovered what was going on, I really was expecting them to be kidnapped by the Illuminatrix or whatever.

Another possibility is that this all is happening in the dreams of a really misogynistic man. Which is sort of the case, except the man is the author. Which can be resolved either in a "ghost of christmas" style waking up and realizing the errors of his ways, or in a creepy horror Lovecraft style where he never wakes up from his nightmare, or in a cold and brutal and bleak, he wakes up and continues to treat women like shit the dream having strengthened his phobia for women to paranoid levels.

Finally, and this just shows the author's complete lack of imagination, how can you write about women having access to pull objects from extra-dimensional spaces and NOT draw some sort of parallel with the womb?? I mean come on, symbolism!



The "women having access to extradimensional spaces" is actually done well elsewhere, especially by the Japanese. There's even a trope for it: Hyperspace Mallet, subtrope of Hammerspace (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HyperspaceMallet). Named because the 'womanspace' in question usually contains a large, blugeoning instrument specifically for knocking around males who happen to be acting like dickbags.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Kai on November 18, 2011, 11:10:02 pm
Another neat idea would be women from another dimension reaching into ours.  Even if they were just doing it to shop it could lead to all sorts of interesting results.

GTFOutta my thread.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Triple Zero on November 18, 2011, 11:16:38 pm
The "women having access to extradimensional spaces" is actually done well elsewhere, especially by the Japanese. There's even a trope for it: Hyperspace Mallet, subtrope of Hammerspace (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HyperspaceMallet). Named because the 'womanspace' in question usually contains a large, blugeoning instrument specifically for knocking around males who happen to be acting like dickbags.

Hahahaha yeah :) I thought of the same thing but didn't want to make my comment too zany :D
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Freeky on November 19, 2011, 12:24:03 am

The "women having access to extradimensional spaces" is actually done well elsewhere, especially by the Japanese. There's even a trope for it: Hyperspace Mallet, subtrope of Hammerspace (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HyperspaceMallet). Named because the 'womanspace' in question usually contains a large, blugeoning instrument specifically for knocking around males who happen to be acting like dickbags.

This might be predictable, but that is one of my favorite tropes ever. 

Ever.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 19, 2011, 12:33:24 am

The "women having access to extradimensional spaces" is actually done well elsewhere, especially by the Japanese. There's even a trope for it: Hyperspace Mallet, subtrope of Hammerspace (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HyperspaceMallet). Named because the 'womanspace' in question usually contains a large, blugeoning instrument specifically for knocking around males who happen to be acting like dickbags.

This might be predictable, but that is one of my favorite tropes ever. 

Ever.

Ohhhhhhh

Now I understand why you liked my story so much. :)
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Freeky on November 19, 2011, 12:46:05 am

The "women having access to extradimensional spaces" is actually done well elsewhere, especially by the Japanese. There's even a trope for it: Hyperspace Mallet, subtrope of Hammerspace (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HyperspaceMallet). Named because the 'womanspace' in question usually contains a large, blugeoning instrument specifically for knocking around males who happen to be acting like dickbags.

This might be predictable, but that is one of my favorite tropes ever. 

Ever.

Ohhhhhhh

Now I understand why you liked my story so much. :)

I just thought it was a good story, really. 

I mean, when Roger and I start bantering about all this horrible shit and we're pretty blase about it, you (plural, as in many people) might think we're exaggerating either the horrible or the blase, but no, we're not.  Sometimes I get puzzled when people are acting all :horrormirth: when all I feel is :lulz: or :lol: , but then I realize it's just Tucson.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 19, 2011, 12:51:00 am

The "women having access to extradimensional spaces" is actually done well elsewhere, especially by the Japanese. There's even a trope for it: Hyperspace Mallet, subtrope of Hammerspace (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HyperspaceMallet). Named because the 'womanspace' in question usually contains a large, blugeoning instrument specifically for knocking around males who happen to be acting like dickbags.

This might be predictable, but that is one of my favorite tropes ever. 

Ever.

Ohhhhhhh

Now I understand why you liked my story so much. :)

I just thought it was a good story, really. 

I mean, when Roger and I start bantering about all this horrible shit and we're pretty blase about it, you (plural, as in many people) might think we're exaggerating either the horrible or the blase, but no, we're not.  Sometimes I get puzzled when people are acting all :horrormirth: when all I feel is :lulz: or :lol: , but then I realize it's just Tucson.

Yes, but Roger thinks I broke Tucson when I visited.  :cry:
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Freeky on November 19, 2011, 12:54:16 am

The "women having access to extradimensional spaces" is actually done well elsewhere, especially by the Japanese. There's even a trope for it: Hyperspace Mallet, subtrope of Hammerspace (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HyperspaceMallet). Named because the 'womanspace' in question usually contains a large, blugeoning instrument specifically for knocking around males who happen to be acting like dickbags.

This might be predictable, but that is one of my favorite tropes ever. 

Ever.

Ohhhhhhh

Now I understand why you liked my story so much. :)

I just thought it was a good story, really. 

I mean, when Roger and I start bantering about all this horrible shit and we're pretty blase about it, you (plural, as in many people) might think we're exaggerating either the horrible or the blase, but no, we're not.  Sometimes I get puzzled when people are acting all :horrormirth: when all I feel is :lulz: or :lol: , but then I realize it's just Tucson.

Yes, but Roger thinks I broke Tucson when I visited.  :cry:

Well, only a little bit.
Title: Re: Womanspace, Nature Journal, and the huge blowout.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 19, 2011, 01:13:05 am

The "women having access to extradimensional spaces" is actually done well elsewhere, especially by the Japanese. There's even a trope for it: Hyperspace Mallet, subtrope of Hammerspace (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HyperspaceMallet). Named because the 'womanspace' in question usually contains a large, blugeoning instrument specifically for knocking around males who happen to be acting like dickbags.

This might be predictable, but that is one of my favorite tropes ever. 

Ever.

Ohhhhhhh

Now I understand why you liked my story so much. :)

I just thought it was a good story, really. 

I mean, when Roger and I start bantering about all this horrible shit and we're pretty blase about it, you (plural, as in many people) might think we're exaggerating either the horrible or the blase, but no, we're not.  Sometimes I get puzzled when people are acting all :horrormirth: when all I feel is :lulz: or :lol: , but then I realize it's just Tucson.

Yes, but Roger thinks I broke Tucson when I visited.  :cry:

Well, only a little bit.

Hopefully it'll get the funny back.