I am an oversensitive lefty???

[man-chest-r]

On another topic I have been accused of being oversensitive. So guys, tell me, as a trendy Guardian/Observer reader, should I be pissed off by this kind of thing, or get a thicker skin?

Barbara Ellen in the Observer 4 Feb:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/magazine/story/0,,2003552,00.html

Kira Cochrane in the Guardian, 30 Jan:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,2001654,00.html

[man-chest-r]

well, no answers, lets take that as a yes.
I guess what pissed me off was so called right-on papers, supposedly feminist, happy to engage in freakshow pisstaking.
But, as has been said by others better than me, thats journalists for you.

[Hypo-is-here]

Let's be fair about it.

She is also having a go at herself for the thoughts she has and she is also trying to write a witty article.

I think she misses the mark and in trying to be witty falls on the wrong side of the divide and has ended up being insensitive, ironically something I am sure she would wish to mock in others.

It is like when a stand-up comedian tries to joke about disability or such like, some comedian's get it right and make interesting social commentary like Ricky Gervais and others end up sounding like Bernard Manning even if they are trying to be right-on like Gervais.

I am sure this woman is trying to play this close the line and get it right and be on the right side of the divide, because she isn't nearly as funny or clever as she would like to think she is she has got it terribly wrong.

Her crime if there is one is that she is not witty enough to get it right and ending up insensitive as a result IMHO.

If you emailed her and explained your offence I am sure she would feel upset and sick to the stomach by her failed intentions and what it has caused.

P.S

I too am a lefty and a reader of such papers- a little disappointing really.

[man-chest-r]

Hypo, humm. I did email the authors both, and got no reply, and fair enough, I sent it anonymously. I agree with most of your analysis, that they were trying to be witty etc.

But what particularly depressed me was that these authors claimed to be coming from a feminist perspective, but that they do the opposite of that with their "wit." As I said in the email to them, I think we live in a society which is particularly cruel to people who don't correspond to ideals of what a "normal" man or woman is, be it blokes with gyne or women with moustaches. These authors are examples of that cruelty, and betray that feminism if they play the game of taking the piss out of those of us who aren't "normal".  Bernard Manning is an apt comparison, for sure.

And lets not forget that these are powerful people, to have a platform in a national paper. Us, we got this board. So, that aint fair to start. There is also a right of reply column, and I got rejected by that too. So fairness works both ways. And should fairness not also mean we judge journalists for the Guardian by the same standards of those who work for Trisha?

And, Hypo, I know we have discussed this elsewhere, and maybe gyne isn't the worse thing that can happen, but it certainly is the case that it can really really mess people's lives up, and cause all sorts of personal and social problems, as the evidence of this board shows. And, as I know from your postings more than anywhere else, while gyne is likely to be caused by some adolescent hormonal disruption in most cases, there can also be other stuff going on that needs checking out, and I am not sure if this kind of article makes it more or less likley that that checking out will happen.

And as an aside, I checked out the websites of some of the other quality papers. I couldn't find the obsession with moobs that the Guardian in particular seems to have. It was mentioned in the Times health column, but taken seriously.

Hypo, am saying this with great respect, not to be adversarial, again, recognising we are both on the same side.

[Hypo-is-here]

man-chest-r,

I made a simple point, nothing more nothing less.  I accept what you say as being your opinion and I agree with much of it.  But people will not always agree with you or every word you say and certainly not down to the smallest minutia, this is something you have to accept.   In fact you have to accept it even where people are diametrically opposed to your opinions, that is the nature of opinion. 

In this instance we agree with much and certainly disagree with little if anything.  Sometimes it is worth looking at what you have in common instead of looking simply at what divides, our opinions here being a prime example. 

I could say things like;

A) I think you are overly sensitive

B) That you are placing too much weight in the opinions of individual columnists

C) That you talk in a manner which is to think that I have not gone through real problems with gynecomastia (I have suffered a lot with significant gynecomastia), when I have, that it just so happens I have gone through a lot more besides.

etc etc 

The above is the kind of thing that you seem to keep doing, due in my opinion to being overly sensitivity (sorry just being honest).  I can say now that the ABC list above is something you can just scrap and disregard. 

Why? 

Because although there some relevance in that ABC list, just as there are in some of your comments of this nature- they (my comments and yours of this type) miss THE most salient point entirely- which is; 

We are almost in complete accordance on this subject and there is no point in looking primarily to argue about what little we do differ on.

I am not trying to argue with you at all and I am not patronizing in any way, I am saying what I honestly feel.

We agree for the most part…..

On a wider note I do not feel this is anywhere near as much as an issue as program makers coming to this site (Trisha for instance) in order to try and recruit people for their shows.  As I see it such shows reach a far greater and wider audience than one columnist and because of the nature of such programs; whoever gets reeled in from this site can have their life ruined by such car crash television. 

You may disagree- that is perfectly ok.

My opinion doesn’t make what people like the columnist “right” and it doesn’t mean that I place a different standard in front of those from program makers.   

I am only one person so frankly what I do makes little difference in any regard….but for what it is worth.

I try to tailor my level of response to the level of potential damage that such things can cause.   

Also there is little I can do with regard to such articles, but there is something I can do when a producer from Trisha turns up here at this site trying to recruit people.  I would say that there is exploitation of people on shows like Trisha and they are in my opinion more malevolent in terms of their intent. 

Again you can disagree as is your preogative (trying to say things like this in a genuine- not patronising way).

But like I say, I can say something and help prevent people from being sold down the river when producers come here to exploit people- there isn’t much I can do about a poorly written article in the Guardian.

If you rail against everything that is unfair in life you will be very stressed out and very unhappy much of the time (tilting at windmills).  People get away with many things in life, many of them much worse than this article.  You have to change what you can for the better where you are able to do so, but equally accept that such things exist where you can’t change them- no matter how unsavory they might be....otherwise you will just make yourself ill.
 
All said and done we can’t change what has been written and we almost entirely agree with one another- that should be enough…..any further point made or discussed by either of us is less important.

I can't believe we have talked this much about this but...hey it is interesting enough......I just hope you don't make yourself ill with letting things like this article get to you and hope I don't come in for a salvo for having an opinion which is not exactly the same as your own ?

P.S

Your comments on feminism, the double standard, cruelty etc etc I agree with them all.