So Facebook has been making some tweaks to some of its graphics. The company recently changed its already unexciting logo to one that is … even less exciting, but apparently easier to read on mobile devices.
But it’s what Facebook has done to its “friends” icon that has one lady MRA up in arms.
In a post yesterday, A Voice for Men’s still-banned-on-Twitter “Social Media Director,” known as JudgyBitch, declared Facebook’s “Feminist designers” to be “as shitty at designing as they are at equality” and offered them a virtual middle-finger in the style of Facebook’s iconic thumbs up icon.
So what has JudgyBitch in a snit this time? Well, a few months ago, Facebook design manager Caitlin Winner was struck by the fact that the site’s “friends” icon depicted the silhouette of a woman standing behind a larger man. This didn’t sit right with her. In a Medium post explaining the new graphics, she wrote
As a woman, educated at a women’s college, it was hard not to read into the symbolism of the current icon; the woman was quite literally in the shadow of the man, she was not in a position to lean in.
My first idea was to draw a double silhouette, two people of equal sizes without a hard line indicating who was in front. Dozens of iterations later, I abandoned this approach after failing to make an icon that didn’t look like a two headed mythical beast. I placed the lady, slightly smaller, in front of the man.
She also removed the silly spike in the man’s hair and gave the woman a cuter ‘do as well. (Scroll back up to see the old and new icons side by side.)
Facebook quietly rolled out the new icons, as well as several other icons Winner had tweaked (including an androgynous figure that can be read as male or female or neither). But not everywhere just yet: while the new icons seem to have made it into the mobile app, the old icons remain on the site’s web version. No one seemed to have even noticed the change until Winner posted her explanation earlier this week. The reaction has been mostly positive.
But to JudgyBitch, the fact that the woman is now in front of the man is yet more proof that feminism isn’t about equality at all, but female supremacy.
I honestly think a good number of women who call themselves feminists have swallowed the lie that feminism is simply about equality between men and women …
Hire a woman’s who went to a woman’s college if you want to see real feminism is action. …
Facebook is not making a business decision – our demographic skews heavily female, so we have changed our friends icon to reflect that – they are making an ideological one: men’s proper place is in women’s shadow.
Well, if you ignore the fact that the figures are now the same size, and simply look like two people standing close together.
JB also posted an assortment of generic icons of men and women to show that Facebook could have depicted a man and a woman together without one being in front of the other, or without the two looking like a two-headed monster.
Here’s one of her examples of icon equality in action:
You may have noticed that the man is in front of the woman. JB evidently didn’t.
Hey, the Men’s Rights movement needs a steady supply of phony outrages to keep itself going, and JB has provided it with yet another one.
H/T — @TakedownMRAs
@SFHC
Dunno if Orion did that particular thing, but I also remember him trolling at least once.
@Orion
…yes, we’re not a hivemind and somehow this makes us too closed. That makes sense.
By the way, the problem is that Mad Cow keeps derailing with “what about the menz.”
Orion,
Exactly why should mad cow get a respectful hearing? Why is anyone entitled to a debate? We tried to engage in good faith on the other thread and it was a clusterfuck. The feminists are equivalent to MRA because Valerie Solanas is the oldest troll move in the anti feminist book.
You’re spouting the same old anti feminist bullshit, expecting women to be nice and deferential at all times. Well, this is one of the few sites that refuses to uphold that sexist double standard. Again, if you don’t like it, tough!
I actually do agree that it exists and it matters. However, what I asked you was, why do you think it’s appropriate *here*, as in, on this blog, which is not an activist blog but a blog where people come to mock misogyny and misogynists, and *here*, on this thread, where it’s off topic?
The only reason I can think of is you want to blame feminism or feminists for this gap. If that is not the case, please tell me the reason you’ve brought this argument to this specific place.
@SFHC, 1st post
I wouldn’t describe this group as a clique, because you’re right — it’s quite easy to join. On the other hand, this group can turn on people very quickly, and it takes a long time to build up the cred to avoid a misstep. I was an occasional poster here for literally years, made threads people liked on the old forums, and yet a few months ago people started calling me a troll, an anti-feminist, and a bad-faith poster because I made a single comment people didn’t like. It’s happened a few times, but I’ve had the benefit of some forgiveness and some forgetfulness.
I read the thread you linked, and yeah, it’s bad. It’s really bad. (Mad Cow: the Men’s Rights “Movement” is nothing like 60’s feminism. That you would compare them suggests that you either came in bad faith or *really* didn’t do your research. Your refusal to trust our deep knowledge of MRAs was condescending and disrespectful. And we really are tired of talking about Solanas. You shouldn’t have made the first post, you shouldn’t have dug in and defended it, and I think the people who wanted you banned were justified)
SHFC, maybe The Mad Cow should have banned, but they weren’t banned. If we’re going to let people post here, we should show them a basic level of civility; nobody deserves the treat Mad Cow got in this thread. If we allow someone to post, we should allow them to be heard. We aren’t obligated to read everything from posters we find tedious, but we shouldn’t sabotage other people’s ability to read them.
This isn’t the first thread The Mad Cow ruined, because it isn’t any thread the Mad Cow ruined. Maybe she ruined the Nolan thread, but I truly don’t see any reason to complain about her behavior in this thread. Sometimes people act like assholes. They get stuck on a bad idea and won’t let go, or they have a serious blind spot, or they have a bad mood, or some part of them enjoys confrontation. It happens. Past bad behavior is a reason for wariness, but I think it’s worth trying to judge people on their current behavior, not just the past.
[A million Maleficent gifs]
@orion, I don’t know if you checked the dates on the Nolan thread but Mad Cow was just indulging in that behavior like two days ago. Pretty current if you ask me.
Weirwood,
It’s not, really. I don’t like the numbers game either. Bras and periods is better because at least it’s funny, and because it can generate threads that are legitimately interesting in their own right. Random gifs are worse than numbers ninja because they’re less democratic. A smaller number of posters can fill more space, so it’s easier to shut someone down without a real community consensus. Also, they make the page harder to load.
Also, I know better than to think that all feminists are women. I can’t swear that I’m not affected by unconscious sexism, but I can say that I behave pretty consistently in all kinds of groups. I have strong opinions (I’d like to say “pinciples”) about how people should act, and I speak up about them when people aren’t living up to them. I’ve posted regularly for years on a very small forum devoted to gaming and game design. Unsurprisingly, it’s overwhelmingly male. I routinely call out other regulars when I think they’re being unfair or sabotaging discussion.
Falconer,
That’s my point. Some people are bored; others are asking questions. The bored people are ruining it for the people asking questions. They should stop doing that. I don’t understand the rest of your comment. Yes, people called for bans in the past and they call for bans now. I have no problem with that and I don’t think it’s a bad thing. Your historical note that posters did not always spam images is kind of irrelevant. Spamming is bad. People didn’t spam before; now they do. It’s not an improvement.
@Orion:
There are a few things that a good male feminist should do. One of them is that when female feminists are being angry, we should never step in and demand that they’re civil or that they moderate their pissed offness. M, WWTH and Jackie are respected community members who are capable of being extremely civil most of the time; as such when they decide that rudeness is called for, they’re probably right.
@Orion
Actually, people don’t jump on people for every little misstep. I’ve made some. But Mad Cow sealioned all over another thread and is now covering this one in “what about the menz” stuff. I don’t think your tone policing is particularly useful, either.
And WWTH
Agh, hit post too early. And WWTH, SFHC, and Pandapool’s posts have given much-needed troll-mocking to the tealest cow. This is a site for mocking misogyny; trolls are gonna get mocked.
1
Did you read what Mad Cow said in the other thread? They said MRM has good ideas and that it’s a legimate movement. For several teal deers over several pages. I ain’t taking anything they say seriously.
@andiexist,
I didn’t say the group is too closed, I said it puts people with unfavored opinions–both trolls and legitimate dissenters–in an unfair position. If 4 people are asking you questions and 4 people are telling you to shut up, there’s no right answer. At some point the regulars really need to work it out between themselves and not put that on the troll. There are self-policing communities with a “don’t feed the troll” ethos, but this isn’t one of them. Nobody addressed me, alan, and binjabreel and told us not to talk to mad cow, they just complained that mad cow answered.
By the way, there’s a great example in this thread of the way this group papers over internal dispute by offloading aggression onto a single target: marinerachel. She’s been a poster in good standing for a while now, as far as I know. She spoke up and agreed with me. People called me a troll and an anti-feminist, but only one person acknowledge marinerachel’s post, and only in passing. For consistency’s sake, you should either call her a troll, tell her why she’s wrong, concede that my position is not out-of-bounds, or reconsider your own position.
@Orion
…in my case, both of those are for the same reason — I was reading posts in email and somehow my brain thought you’d posted the clique thing. Sorry. >_<
@Mari
Glad to hear we’ve helped so far! I can still be flippant myself sometimes (although more in regards to my blindness than my mental illness), but since delurking here I’ve learned that nothing beats being able to talk it out without being judged. Even with the ableist trolls, I feel better about my illness than I have in, well, ever.
@orion, so, on a blog that’s about mocking misogyny, you want the commentariat to stop mocking misogyny? your position is not logical.
Orion,
Are you done talking to us like we’re naughty children for not posting things you find entertaining enough in response to sexist douchebaggery?
You do this an awful lot. It’s rude. We do not need you to police our responses to repetitive, dishonest,sexist drivle. This is a site for mockery. We mock. The gifs are appropriate. You’re tone trolling is not. If you’d like to talk to Mad Cow without being interrupted by women mocking misogyny , why don’t you two go have a nice chat elsewhere?
Marinerachel,
I disagree strongly. I find WHTM to be extremely friendly and welcoming. Not suffering fools and calling one another out doesn’t make us look bad at all, imo. Toes get stepped on and wires get crossed, but that’s what happens when people get together. It’s how we walk it back, admit mistakes and forgive those mistakes that make WHTM something special. You’ve made similar complaints concerning civilityon Pharyngula. Could you tell me of a website comment section you do like participating in that you feel does not make the commenters there look bad or drive honest, well meaning people away while not being a haven for bigots and liars? I’d like to go there and take notes, because I may well be doing this whole internet thing wrong. I’m starting to think I shouldn’t be internetting at all.
[Spock gif]
@Orion & the complaint
I’m going to say the same thing to you that I would say to JB’S stupid complaint, or the original feminist that got upset over icons of men standing in front of women;
LOL Internet. Get over it. No-one’s being hurt by gifs, or the layout of icons. Just scroll past them if you don’t like them, post what you were going to say anyway, and go on with your day. No harm done.
*orion & the complaint that GIFs take up too much space.
Oh sentence, where did you go?
Hey, guess what, I found it.
Orion, maybe people call you a troll because you tone-police us in the most snotty way possible and go on three-page rants about Anita’s work not being up to your standards in threads about literal Nazis saying she should die in a concentration camp.
Actually, that might be why he’s so angry at us for not immediately forgetting what Mad Cow did in the Nolan thread – because we didn’t immediately forget what he did in that thread.
This has been an interesting thread. Double LOL the Maleficent gifs.
If I can weigh in, I’m with isidore13 on this one. Although the gender gap in sentencing is an interesting one, why bring it up here, now? Although the Mad Cow says it was because of,
this doesn’t really hold water when you look at opening posts like this
So there’s some disengenous hooha from the word go. The Mad Cow originally tried to force the issue when people didn’t want to engage and actually had no ‘personal interest’ in the topic, accusing the commentariat of ‘willful blindness’ because they weren’t having the discussion she wanted them to have. Co-opting the thread and then trying to gaslight the hell out of everybody wins no gold stars from me.
So, again, I think the question of why the Mad Cow is bringing up teh menz arguments on a feminist blog is a relevant one.
By the way, people weren’t having a discussion about gender inequality in criminal sentencing because of bizarre conspiracy-style-attempts-to-enforce-a-dominant-narrative or whatever. It was because they were talking about male circumcision. You know, simply talking about something else.
But I guess a combination of bad faith and an axe to grind can stop you from seeing the obvious.
I’m sorry, this is coming out harsher than intended. The Mad Cow’s analysis of those studies was quite interesting. However, in the context of
1) Forcing the issue and making odd passive-aggressive comments,
2) Serious bad faith posting in the Nolan thread and
3) Ignoring the context of other’s posts (establishing a cause for this disparity in criminal justice proceedings) and focusing solely on their own (establishing that it exists at all, which doesn’t actually seem to be in question),
I don’t think The Mad Cow’s intent for posting here is a good one.
Ordinarily I would agree, but context might suggest otherwise. That context being that the Mad Cow’s bad behaviour was yesterday, not last year.
@Misha
Yeah. I’d be a lot more interested in discussing this if not for the teal deer, menzing, and gaslighting.
@Mad Cow, if you’re still around
It’s not that we don’t want to have discussions, it’s that we don’t want to have them with you.
Orion,
Who are you to decide what’s interesting? I like looking at gifs and pictures of animals, hot guys, drag kings and queens and any other images we’ve deployed when trolls are being tedious. The only person complaining about this tactic has been you. And BTW, people posted pictures and gifs since before I got here.
And thanks for telling me that all feminists are women I was totally unaware of that! /s
What I was saying is that the posters you’re scolding are women. A man telling female feminists how to behave in a feminist space is not a good look.