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
Mad Cow, it’s time for you to take a break. You’ve made your points, at great length, over the course of several threads. Go post elsewhere for a while. Or, I dunno, go for a walk.
Oh boo, I was just about to ask the bovine one if this
was meant to refer to our “privileged white female” reaction on this thread. Because I ain’t white.
[Maleficent eating popcorn gif]
WWTH, your patience is admirable; as is your anger when that patience becomes exhausted. Please accept an internet high five.
Really disappointed at your incorrect use of apostrophe. “Facebook’s iconic thumb’s up icon” – what about thumbs needs an apostrophe? As much as I hate to say it, it lowers my regard for you by an awful lot. Please go and study the correct use of the apostrophe in the English language.
http://38.media.tumblr.com/1794f452b8a1b9b60eadafef94b9b869/tumblr_n04wmuC5i01r1hjuro1_400.gif
“Mad Cow, it’s time for you to take a break. You’ve made your points, at great length, over the course of several threads. Go post elsewhere for a while. Or, I dunno, go for a walk.”
The Dark Lord has spoken!
EJ,
Thank you and accepted!
http://i.imgur.com/VP0Es19.jpg
(1) Regarding infant circumcision: I had the disopleasure to see it performed on my infant son without anaesthesia 45 years ago. The poor kid, less than 15 minuites out of his private heated swimming pool, was screaming loud enough to wake the dead while they cut on a very sensitive part of his body. I thought it was beyond barbaric. It was not, however, in any sense the equivalent of FGM, which is (as I understand it) usuallly performed without anaesthesia. As far as I can recall, the doctor had asked my wife if she wanted it done, and since everyone did it …. Several years later, my wife’s sister had her son — who was 9 months older and born on an Army base in Germany — circumsized so that “the boy’s would look alike.” Even though it was done under anaesthesia and was apparently not traumatic, I thought it was silly. When my second son was born 29 years ago, my wife and I discussed it, and we agreed not to have it done.
I would comment, however, that in primitive conditions — such as prevailed among the Hebrew people 3000 years ago — it may have well been a good idea. Also, remember that hot running water, making regular showers and good hygiene easy, has only been available to non-rich people for a relatively short time. On the other hand, I believe there was formerly a concern that an uncircumcised penis might itch, leading to handling of the penis and then self-abuse — i.e., masturbation — which was once held to have huge unhealthy consequences.
(2) Regarding sentencing disparity between men and women: It is extremely difficult to design a study that does not compare apples to oranges, because men and women tend to commit different sorts of crimes for different reasons. However, there is no question that historically women have been treated much more leniently than men. A classic example was mentioned on a thread here about a week ago — the Paul Bernardo case, where his female accomplice served only 12 years. HOWEVER — the undoubted cause of this was sexism: most judges have been men, and many suffer from a false sense of chivalry and the extremely sexist view that women are intrinsically less responsible for their actions than men. Therefore feminism actually is working to decrease this disparity, as the number of female judges increases and the false chivalry decreases.
Mad Cow had a couple of valid points, but they didn’t actually support the anti-feminist case s/he was apparently trying to make. The sentencing disparity is not an entitlement, it is sort of a tiny compensation for major disadvantagement in other areas of life. And anyone who starts out with a claim that Valerie Solanas is, or ever was, a major figure in the history of feminist thought — particularly that the SCUM Manifesto was ever considered as something that might actually be a blueprint for action — forfeits any chance of being taken seriously by people who actually know anything about the subject.
I meant to add that I would certainly advise circumcision for Roosh V, given his aversion to hygiene. I do not think he needs to worry about loss of sexual sensation, given his likelihood of finding cooperative women.
Reblogged this on Nadia's blog.
@grumpyoldsocialjusticemangina
“It was not, however, in any sense the equivalent of FGM”
Nope, circumcision is not, and never will be, the equivalent of FGM. The mere fact that women give birth, and any genital scarring can screw up the birth process and potentially KILL the woman, or the baby, makes FGM completely different,. Even the clitoral hood removals that MRAs favor as metaphors to male circumcision increase the risk of complications death to the fetus and the mother during birth, so nope, apples and oranges MRAs.
Doesn’t change the fact that “hygiene” is a poor excuse. Girl privates are arguably far dirtier than boy privates; girls don’t just get smegma like the boys do, we bleed out bloody, disintegrating uterine tissue once a month. One of the main excuses for FGM in Africa *is* better, easier hygiene.
Even *if* we could make FGM as safe and “satisfying” as male circumcision, no-one here would argue that performing it on baby girls for “hygiene” is justified, would they? Because circumcised or not, male or female, your genitals will stink and may become infected if you never wash them. Circumcision is *not* a solution for hygiene.
Also, how the hell are parents supposed to keep the circumcision wound clean without soap and hot water, anyway? Babies routinely crap all over their genitals.
I apologize for all the shitty phone keyboard typing, poor grammar, and sentence drops in the above post. 🙁
Isn’t, like, FGM, clitorial removal which is meant mostly by this, the equivalent of cutting off the entire head of a penis? Or, like, the entire penis pretty much or am I just really bad at biology?
@ Pandapool
There are several levels of FGM of various severity. The most severe involves cutting off the clitoris, inner labia, and sewing the mons basically shut. The least severe consists of removing the clitoral hood (basically the analog of the foreskin), or pricking the genitals for a ritual bloodletting.
Oh my, what a wonderful point you have their. Im’ sure David’ll get rite on that. We woodnt’ want two look unlettered, now wood ? we We might loose everyones’ respect.
Oh, and no, me. you’re not bad at biology. Cutting off the glans of the clitoris is basically equivalent to cutting off the glans of the penis. FGM =/= Male circumcision.
I just think that “hygiene” is a poor excuse, which is why I said that *IF* they were the same, FGM would still be criticized by feminists. Hell, labiaplasties in the West by grown women get criticized by feminists, including
* Oh, and no, pandapool, you’re not bad at biology
What are you trying to say, phone?
Is that idiot sealion still here?
(peeks)
Aw, shit.
Your phone is trying to say, “Fuck you, here’s autocorrect, fucking clean my screen you fuck, greasy prints all over the place.”
And thanks for the info. Usually when I think of FGM, I think of the clit being cut off because I am very afraid to look into what FGM actual entails for reason I think we all understand.
http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/wiiging-out.gif
Did somebody really just delurk to correct David’s punctuation? Although it didn’t happen after mad cow got put on moderation, so maybe 123 is him?
http://www.standfirminfaith.com/images/tin_foil_hat_cat_thumb.jpg
Uh, did happen rather. Oh, pinot grigot.
@
Mad Cow123David was just subtly negging you.
How about you pull that apostrophe out of your ass and understand that sometimes people make typos? There are ways to point that out without sounding “Holier than thou because apostrophes don’t go there”. David makes typos on occasion. He’s a business of ferrets in a human suit. These things happen.
So, would you kindly fuck off with your apostrophe condescension?
In fact, here’s a book you should study.
Girls privates are “arguably far dirtier than boys”?
Fuck you. Seriously. And fuck the clique that doesn’t think it exists that accepts this bullshit clique attitude.
Oh, hi mad cow!