18. maj 2022

‘Ekspert’ undsiger Folkemøde-debat: ‘Velfriseret had og kæk fascisme er stadig angreb på rettigheder’

Jeg har været til folkemøde de sidste mange år, og de sidste par år har jeg mest været der for Bornholm. Før jeg besluttede mig for at blive hjemme, havde jeg sagt ja til at deltage i paneldebatter i det pågældende telt: ‘Mød en islamofob’, ‘Islamkritikere tiltalt efter § 264d’ mfl. Det kunne være spændende, men uden mig denne gang.

Debatternes blotte eksistens har vakt opsigt i Twitterland, ikke overraskende anført af den woke Christian Mogensen fra ‘Center for Digital Pædagogik’. Han agerer ofte ekspert om højrefløjen i større medier, men ret beset så anerkender han ikke modstridende holdninger til de emner han forsker i. Hans ytringsfrihed er god, din ikke-woke er derimod provokerende, tilsvinende, udtryk for ‘velfriseret had og kæk fascisme’, hvad tenderer opfordringer til vold. Bizart, når nu han indtil for nyligt var en del af Cybernauterne, der åbent henviser til venstreradikale Redox (skråstreg erklærede militante Antifascistisk Aktion).

“Jeg er ked af, at @Folkemoedet lægger hus til debatter som de her. Velfriseret had og kæk fascisme er stadig angreb på rettigheder og demokrati. Det her er, mildest talt, beskæmmende. (Jeg opfordrer iøvrigt til at forbigå teltet i stilhed. De jagter polemikken.) #dkpol #dkmedier” (Christian Mogensen)

(Christian Mogensen på Twitter, 17. maj 2022)

Mere Christian Mogensen

“Jeg mener, at langt de fleste diskussioner er værd at tage. Også selvom de højest bør vare 30 sekunder. Der er læringsmuligheder i *de fleste* dialoger. Men her er der tale om slet skjulte tilsvininger og provokationer. …” (17. maj 2022)

“Ydermere er der tale om en samling koleriske ‘debattører’ (hvis vi nu bruger det begreb særdeles gavmildt) som kun har til ærinde at provokere, for dernæst at påberåbe sig offer-rollen og cancel-kortet som bevis på, at ‘de andre’ er Udine, og at de selv er de nedtrådtes helte.” (17. maj 2022)

“Hvis vi nu underholder den hyper-demokratiske priviligerede argumentation, så vil jeg vove påstanden at hadtale – uanset hvor vandkæmmet og blankpoleret man kan gøre den – snuser så meget til opfordringen til vold, at den ikke er værd at give plads til. Se Carlson, Jones m.fl.” (17. maj 2022)



6. januar 2022

‘De taler meget om den ‘frie kunst’, men hvad er det? .. For os betyder det ‘fri for negative stereotyper’

Tidligere i dag kunne man på Radio4 høre cybernauten Christian Mogensen fortælle, at han agter at boycutte computerspillet Diablo 4, da firmaet bag dyrker ‘en rigtig rigtig usund pseudo-maskulin dude-bro-kultur’. I de første spil havde kvinderne eksempelvis ‘afsindigt store bryster’. Som person med en stemme i medierne følte han et ansvar for at undsige en kultur, der burde høre fortiden til. Før mediebranchen blev woke, forsvarede eksperterne voldelige computerspil overfør højreorienteret kritik. Nu angriber de alle fra venstre.

Morten Hesseldahl har begået en god kulturkommentar i Berlingske, hvor han fortæller om forholdene på Den Danske Filmskole med udgangspunkt i en vanvittig artikel på Ekkofilm.dk. Blandt de interviewede filmstuderende er Laura Dyhrcrone, der går på skolens ‘fiktionsinstruktørlinje’, og er blevet kritiseret for sin midtvejsfilm, der med udgangspunkt i ‘en antiracistisk, queer fortælling’ forholder sig til computerspillet Grand Theft Auto (GTA). Selvom hendes hensigt var at problematisere spillet, så møder filmen kritik fra medstuderende, og hun mener derfor selv, at hun har behov for ‘konsulenter og sensitivity readers’, så hun undgår blinde hvide vinkler.

En midtvejsfilm der kritiseres for manglende moraliseren i forhold til den mandlige hovedperson, forsvares af instruktøren med ordene: “Folk, der stemmer på Stram Kurs eller Dansk Folkeparti, gider jeg ikke bare at kalde dumme. Det bliver de i øvrigt ikke færre af. Måske tværtimod.” Statsfinansieret politisk aktivisme.

Citater fra studerende Laura Dyhrcrone set på Ekkofilm.dk. Læs det hele på linket.

“Der er en yngre generation, der hungrer efter at tale om, hvordan vi fremstiller marginaliserede grupper på film, hvordan vi gør os fri af misogyne og racistiske stereotyper. Der er en helt anden bevidstgørelse i vores generation end mellem skolens lærere, som jo også er vokset op med et helt andet syn på kunst. De ser grundlæggende på kunst på en anden måde, end vi gør.

De taler meget om den ’frie kunst’, men hvad er det? Og fri for hvem? For os betyder det ‘fri for negative stereotyper’ og ‘fri for problematiske fremstillinger af minoriteter’, men jeg tror ikke, at det er den samme opfattelse, lærerne har af den frie kunst. Denne splittelse mellem generationer er ikke kun på Filmskolen, men noget, vi ser i samfundet.”

“Det handler om at undgå at reproducere nogle negative, dehumaniserende stereotyper i blinde, fordi man ikke har magtet eller gidet tage ansvar for det, man laver. Så ja, du kan godt tale om, at der er en anden ansvarsfølelse for os som filmkunstnere. Jeg oplever ikke, at vi censurerer og begrænser kunsten, men vi taler bare om den på en ny måde.

“Vi har fra starten vægtet repræsentation højt i vores midtvejsfilm, og mit mål var at lave en antiracistisk, queer fortælling, hvor jeg dekonstruerede spillet GTA, der er racistisk, misogynt og patriarkalsk i sin grundessens. … Jeg har haft en klar intention med filmen, men som hvid filmskaber må jeg erkende, at jeg har blinde vinkler, og det skal jeg tage ansvar for.”

“Fordi jeg har læst en række antiracistiske tekster, så ved jeg som hvid person ikke pludselig det hele. Det er arrogant og naivt at tro det. … Jeg har nu lært, at jeg behøver en hjælp fra konsulenter og sensitivity readers, der skal læse manuskriptet igennem og pege på, hvad der potentielt kan fremstå stødende for minoritetsgrupper.

(Stripbar-scene fra Grand Theft Auto 5; Foto: Youtube)

“På samme måde affejer skribenten også en anden væsentlig diskussion: ‘Det ender tit med en kedelig diskussion af ytringsfriheden over for krænkelseskulturen – den mest fordummende reducering af samtalen, man kan forestille sig.’ Det uddybes ikke, hvorfor det skulle være så dumt og kedeligt at værne om ytringsfrihed, men det er åbenbart blevet selvindlysende. (Morten Hesseldahl, Berlingske, 5. januar 2022)



18. november 2021

Museum udstiller ‘Agape’-skulptur: ‘En hybrid mellem det maskuline og feminine; en ammende mand’

I morgen er det ‘Mændenes Internationale Dag’, og det vil jeg fejre ved hård fysisk arbejde, nøjagtig som alle andre dage. Der er gratis entre på KØN (tidligere Kvindemuseet), hvor der blandt andet er ‘DareGender’-paneldebat med folk som Mikkel Thorup og Christian Mogensen. Først er der dog ‘artist talk’ med Aske Kreilgaard, individet bag skulpturen ‘Agape’. En ammende mand…

(KØN – Gender Museum Denmark på Facebook, 17. november 2021)

“Hele november: Se færdiggørelsen af en 3,5 meter høj skulptur af en nærende mand. Skulpturen “Agape”, som kunstneren Aske Kreilgaard står bag, er en hybrid mellem det maskuline og feminine; en ammende mand. Kig forbi og få en snak med kunstneren om tankerne…” (KØN)



29. november 2020

CFDP-rapport: 100+ ikke-voldelige mænd er imod BLM & MeToo, krænker minoriteter… ‘emotionally’

Jeg har tidligere blogget om Christian Mogensen fra Center for Digital Pædagogik (CFDP), senest da han til DR Nyheder advarede mod ‘antifeminismen’: “…vi har det retoriske tilløb. Vi mangler bare det ene angreb.” Der er gode stillinger i at forske i postulerede ‘voldelige højreradikale’, og sammen med Cand.psych Stine Helding Rand har han netop udgivet et skattefinansieret rapport for Nordisk Ministerråd. En på alle måder overflødig udgivelse, hvis vage forbeholdne konklusioner, kun giver basis for det forventelige: Behov for yderligere forskning.

Titlen er ‘The angry internet – A threat to gender equality, democracy & well-being’, og formålet er at undersøge den danske og nordiske ‘manosfære’. Der er ikke et eneste dansk eksempel på vold med udspring i antifeminisme, men Breivik er stadig et selvstændigt argument. Der gennemgås kvindehadske miljøer på Twitter, Reddit og 4chan, og begreber såsom Incels (Involuntary celibates), MRAs (Men’s Rights Activists), MGTOWs (Men Going Their Own Way) og PUAs (Pick-Up Artists). Uha, der findes mænd der åbent modarbejder venstreradikale feministers agenda.

Symptomatisk for rapporten, så bruges der to helsider på at beskrive Gab, et mindre censoreret alternativ til Twitter (s. 73-74). Det erkendes, at ‘the lack of open discussion and equal exchange of ideas’ radikaliserer subkulturer, hvad udgør et demokratisk problem, men rapporten anbefaler naturligvis ikke mindre censur på sociale medier. Bemærk tvetydigheden…

“One threat of free speech-platforms like Gab is that if only one political ideology feels a need for free speech, those views will seldom be challenged and it therefore effectively becomes a digital echo chamber. This incentivises a strong us vs. them-narrative, as noted on both Gab, incels. co, 8chan etc. where users talk of ‘normies’, blue- pills, soyboys and more, as a political and societal opponent, though without engaging in discussions with them, as they are on separate platforms.” (s. 74)

Det ville være befriende, hvis rapporten så anbefalede mindre censur på sociale medier, men det er ingenlunde tilfældet. De mange tilknyttede konsulenter er en broget forsamling af ekspert og identitetspolitiske aktivister – i det omfang det overhovedet giver mening at skelne. Det være sig eksempelvis Zetland-skribenten Frederik Kulager, der festede på skrift, da Youtube begyndte at shadowbanne Rasmus Paludan. Listen inkluderer derudover feministen Emma Holten, aktivisten Natasha Al-Hariri og mere ukendte Michael Bang Petersen, Lasse Lindekilde, Lumi Zuleta, Lene Stavngaard, Helena G. Hansen, Rasmus Munksgaard og Esther Chemnitz.

Der er ingen klare definitioner, og alt er således problematisk per definition, men alligevel konkludereres det at de anslåede 100 til 850 nordiske debattører i ‘The Manosphere’ ikke er farlige: “In the data gathered for this report, however, no indications of intentions to act upon misogynistic opinions have been noted.” (s. 30)

Det understreges i slutningen af rapporten, at der i øvrigt heller ikke er mange danskere i de her ikke-voldelige subkulturer, som de statsansatte feminister målretter sit virke imod.

“A quick look on the Nordic search key reveals that the Danish search key is more developed than the Swedish and Norwegian search keys… However, as visible in Table 3, Denmark does not come out as the dominant of the Nordic languages on any of the platforms, even though the Danish part of the search key is more elaborate. On 4chan it even appears that Danish is the second rarest language. (s. 101)

Det skrives ikke ordret, men kan man læse lidt mellem linjerne, så handler det ikke for frygten for vold. Det handler om frygten for ideologisk modstand, camoufleret bag plusord. Den yderste venstrefløj vil gøre dissens illegitim, og da selverklærede demokratiforkæmpere ikke åbent kan bifalde censur, så er der nødt til at være et farligt voldspotentiale et eller andet sted derude. De kommende år vil de formentligt tale om ‘mørketal’.

Frygten er dog også, at tilfældige debattører risikerer at blive ‘desensitized to the violent and anti-progressive rhetoric’, og det er naturligvis også hæmmende for minoriteters ytringsfrihed, at de møder modstand på sociale medier: “… poses the risk of causing harm to others, physically and/or emotionally.”

Minoriteters følelser trumfer højrefløjens ytringsfrihed. Racisme er ikke en ytring, men en handling, kan man læse i diverse AFA-skrifter. Her er den akademiske udgave. Jeg har ikke læst rapporten slavisk, og det kommer jeg heller ikke til. Livet er ganske enkelt for kort til den slags.

(Center for Digital Pædagogik, 2020; Mere: The Angry Internet / Dansk resume)

Udpluk

“In this report it is concluded that specific Nordic misogyny is present on all three platforms though the amount varies from platform to platform – from 0.4% on Twitter, over 1.6% on Reddit, to 5.0% on 4chan1. Based on these numbers, it was estimated that a total of up to 850 active Nordic users had posted misogynistic and antifeminist content on the three select forums during the last year. … While the estimated amount of up to 850 Nordic aggressively misogynistic users can seem trivial in a political perspective, it does not take into it does not take into account how many passive consumers of the 850’s rhetoric there is. These passive consumers are at risk of being desensitized to the violent and anti-progressive rhetoric used by the 850. Through qualitative interviews and field observations the analysis identified spillover effects of misogynistic content, in the form of phrases, neologisms, ideologies, and worldviews, migrating into ‘mainstream social media’. This spillover effect risks establishing a discourse of acceptance toward misogynistic rhetoric, which in turn could deter women (especially young) to refrain from participating in the public online debate.

One important point established in interviews with participants on aggressively misogynistic forums, and through observations on the same forums, was that many of the users had originally sought emotional and social support from the forums. Later these supportive structures had given way to narratives thought to be less ‘un-manly’, dealing less with vulnerability and unhappiness, and more with vengeance, assertiveness and ideas of (taking) power (back). Some of these forums were formulated in perspective of a ‘men vs. women’ idea, and as such had a (male) user base already feeling alienated from the usual intergender socializing. The users often describe themselves as ‘losers’ or (socially) unattractive, but seem to lack pro-social and pro-male communities, outside of these.

In order to deal with the issues of misogyny the following main recommendations are put forth:

– Forming partnerships with the most troubled forums to educate current moderators, or by installing volunteers, to help establish and reaffirm the support systems that these online communities are for many of their users. By mitigating the echochamber effect that these forums can often hold, and by trying to build bridges to the society that the users feel have shunned them, the brunt of the harmful ‘us-and-them’ rhetoric and mindset could be avoided.

– Building literacy and developing a more equal perspective on the possibilities and capabilities of each gender. Such engagement should target both children, youth, adults, and professionals, through a greater focus on gender, gender identity, and gender development. Furthermore, this can lead to changing and expanding gender norms and ideals to become more inclusive and to create room for diversity and standing up against traditional and stereotypical gender roles.

Requiring identity authentication in order to create accounts on social media platforms would diminish the amount of fake accounts considerably. …” (s. 2)

—–

“One often cited solution to any such problems of hate speech or gender- or minority targeted aggressive rhetoric is to close down the platforms. De-platforming the ideas, and hoping that they dissipate. Even if the notion of de-platforming carried any anti-radicalizing merit, it would largely negate the problem initiating the complex situation to begin with…

De-platforming can be viewed as a tool to close down particularly problematic networks, but should not be done without any secondary action, to ‘catch’ the users before they simply migrate from the now closed down forum, to the next – often to an encrypted or more elusive forum. Likewise, banning certain users will either motivate them to move on to other platforms or create new accounts. In the best of worlds, this will solve the democratic problem of these users preventing minorities and women from participating in the democratic processes of discussions online, but will not solve the problem of the wellbeing of the men themselves. Therefore, different strategies should be employed.

Having a place to talk about one’s problems is often a good thing, seeing as this can offer relief, and thereby limiting the probability of the individual needing a physical (or verbal) outlet. On the other hand, the culture on these platforms can also further fuel already budding thoughts, cementing them as peer-qualified political and social opinions. In essence, there is a fine line between having a place to vent, seek boundaries, and develop one’s identity, and fostering societally undesirable beliefs and attitudes. The former is a positive, while the latter poses the risk of causing harm to others, physically and/or emotionally.

… tackling this issue requires interventions on multiple fronts. Creating a change in culture requires early intervention, but such changes take a long time to take effect. Therefore, more immediate action is required as well. Early intervention could be in the form of educating child caregivers to be less gender stereotypical in their daily interactions and verbal exchanges with the children. Instead of lauding girls for their princess-like appearances and niceness, whilst at the same time complimenting the boys on being tough, fun or assertive, a more gender-neutral approach should be considered.

These small day-to-day interactions are part of a bigger picture, forming the way children see themselves and others in terms of gender, what is expected of each gender, and what each gender is and is not capable of. … The authors of this report see it as evident, when observing in maledominated online communities, that men more easily identify with aggressive emotions and strategies than ‘weak’ and emotional ones. This trait can lead to the problems being re-framed as political and gender-oppressing of men, and a call-to-arms to fight back against perceived evil oppressors, instead of daring to talk about the negative feelings that led the men there in the first place.” (s. 24)

—–

“The Men’s Rights Activists is a reactionary movement, meaning, it has emerged as a reaction to another social movement gaining support and momentum – in this case a reaction to feminism and multiculturalism (e.g. MeToo and Black Lives Matter). MRA’s can, in some instances, divert from past egalitarian movements such as the aforementioned BLM and MeToo, as it is focusing rather on removing rights from others, than gaining some for its own. Many key objectives for MRA’s are to roll back or halt the changes other movements are making.

They are trying to attain this goal by focusing on key feminist issues, such as equal pay, sexual assault, abuse against women, and the representation of women in popular and entertainment media, from a conservative ‘men suffer more than women, and women are actually just trying to blame men for their problems’ point of view. Most rape stories are perceived as false, and campaigns like #metoo are seen as ‘witch hunts’ designed to demonize men. By combating the feminist goals, under guise of them attacking women, they aim to reframe an anti women’s-rights-movement as a Men’s Rights Movement.

Most MRA movements see rights and power as a zero sum-game. Here the notion of women and minorities gaining the same liberties and societal influence as them is a threat to what they have always had. What the others gain, are feared to be lost on their own account. Therefore the feminist movement gaining traction throughout the last decade, becomes extremely threatening to the ipso facto sovereignty of the white man. Furthermore, the MeToo-movement, aiming at protecting women from men, is seen as an attack on the rightful rule over the sexual landscape, and therefore also an attack on said sovereignty.

Thus, Men’s Rights Activists are not only interested in protecting the rights of men, but also in cutting short the rights of women. Interestingly, MRAs and feminists focus on a lot of the same issues; e.g. oppressing gender-based stereotypes, violence and aggression in men, the overlooking and ignoring of assault against men, the skewed division of parental leave and child care, and the lack of openness towards men showing emotions among other issues. However, where feminists see this as being the fault of the patriarchal society and gender-based norms, MRAs see feminism as the root cause. (s. 48)

Denne weblog er læst af siden 22. juni 2003.

 

 

Vælg selv beløb



Blogs


Meta
RSS 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0
Valid XHTML
WP






MediaCreeper