JoshuaZ comments on LW Women- Female privilege - Less Wrong

24 [deleted] 05 May 2013 01:58AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (236)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: OrphanWilde 07 May 2013 08:49:38PM 4 points [-]

The earring signal has been completely destroyed by straight people who got earrings because it was cool, and... handkerchiefs? What?

A quick Googling immediately informs me why I haven't encountered this. This code wouldn't work where I grew up; Hispanic gangs use colored handkerchiefs as their own form of signaling.

...and apparently my white handkerchiefs I always carry with me signal that I'm into masturbation. Huuuh. Oh well.

Getting back on track, the lack of cultural unity was not in fact generally a problem a few decades ago, before the internet. Each community could have its own standards and this wouldn't pose too much of an issue, and this is more or less the way things worked. This system dissolved long before television, which was heavily regulated (hell, they weren't allowed to show belly buttons), became able to seriously impact standards of provocative clothing.

(I'm not arguing those were "the good old days" by any stretch of the imagination, mind. I'll take society as it exists today. But certainly we had this kind of signaling capability before and it was dismantled.)

Comment author: JoshuaZ 08 May 2013 02:47:38AM 3 points [-]

Getting back on track, the lack of cultural unity was not in fact generally a problem a few decades ago, before the internet. Each community could have its own standards and this wouldn't pose too much of an issue, and this is more or less the way things worked. This system dissolved long before television, which was heavily regulated (hell, they weren't allowed to show belly buttons), became able to seriously impact standards of provocative clothing.

I think you are overestimating pre-internet uniformity here. If for example one spent time in Crown Heights one would have Orthodox Jews, generic African-Americans (mainly Christian), and some Muslim African-Americans. Each group has different ideas of what would constitute provocative clothing. Or to use a different example: when I was an undergrad I was involved in an interfaith Jewish-Muslim group. One thing that struck me was that among many of the Orthodox Jews, women wearing pants was considered what you would probably call provocative, but hair covering wasn't an issue. In contrast, for many of the Muslim women, the reverse held (pants fine, uncovered hair immodest).

Comment author: Fronken 13 September 2013 07:42:27PM *  0 points [-]

ಠ_ಠ

Each community could have its own standards and this wouldn't pose too much of an issue, and this is more or less the way things worked.

The reply:

I think you are overestimating pre-internet uniformity here [...] Each group has different ideas of what would constitute provocative clothing.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 14 September 2013 01:49:27AM *  2 points [-]

I'm not sure what your point is with those two quotes. Are you trying to say that OrphanWilde already addressed what I was saying? If so, the points are different: Orphan was discussing was how distinct groups have different standards. The point I was making that in small geographic areas one can have a large number of groups with different standards that all have to interact with each other. And the example of the Modern Orthodox showed, even within a small, superficially uniform group, there can be a lot of variation.

Comment author: Fronken 14 September 2013 03:13:14PM *  2 points [-]

Sorry I thought you were pointing out something Orphan had acknowledged already - that's a different point. Retracted & upvoted.