(Close Window)
Topic: Sexually objectifying female spectators and assistants
Message: Posted by: Melies (Dec 15, 2018 06:50PM)
I just posted an article on this topic under "Feminine Mystique," but it should really have been posted here, since it raises questions that go to the heart of mainstream magical performance. Too many magicians continue to objectify women and trivialize their experiences:
https://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?forum=220&topic=681384.

Even if you don't read my post, check out the New Yorker cartoon that prompted me to write it--and think about what it says about the way the public still perceives our "art":
https://media.newyorker.com/cartoons/5c0041855cc0c92d353cfca0/master/w_1200,c_limit/181210_a22361.jpg

Q: When is the magical community going to have its #MeToo moment?
A: Not soon enough.
Message: Posted by: mantel (Dec 17, 2018 01:17PM)
[quote]On Dec 15, 2018, Melies wrote:
Q: When is the magical community going to have its #MeToo moment?
A: Not soon enough. [/quote]

Already happened last year: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/david-blaine-sexual-harrasment-new-york-natasha-prince-a8025821.html But went no where.
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (Dec 17, 2018 11:58PM)
There is always a time, place and market for everything. I'll be working with Dita Von Teese again for her New Years Eve show here in LA. Her quote just came to mind, "One of the last taboos to be liberated is to revel in being objectified, and I feel like indulging in taboos sometimes is a way to liberate them."

It is an unabashed evening of body positivity and objectification. I'll also note that about 80% of her audience is female.

That being said, we must always be ever vigilant against the typical "Magician's Assistant as a sex object" trope. I've always been very blessed to get to work with some of the most incredibly talented dancers/assistants who were very talented and yes, very attractive as well. There is however room for every body type and personality type in differing shows. Find what works for each of us.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Dec 19, 2018 02:21PM)
[quote]On Dec 15, 2018, Melies wrote:
... to the heart of mainstream magical performance. Too many magicians continue to objectify women and trivialize their experiences...[/quote]

So what do we do with "classics" including transgressions which were, shall we say, of their time?

Any ideas on how to estimate when a transgression is harmless?
Message: Posted by: Melies (Dec 19, 2018 02:50PM)
Ray, if it's such a good deal to "revel" in being objectified, maybe you should try walking around and performing in a G-string during your act. Just sayin'.

It isn't liberating or "transgressing" (Jonathan's word) to reinforce the same old, same old thing that one sees in every media venue, porn, fashion spread, etc., etc., day in and day out, throughout our culture. True liberation and transgression would look like something else entirely: namely, equality between the sexes. I know it's hard to imagine that. But we perform miracles every day of the week, don't we? Or is treating women as actual human beings more impossible than turning a bowl of rice into a bowl of flowers?
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 19, 2018 04:45PM)
[quote]On Dec 19, 2018, Melies wrote:
Or is treating women as actual human beings more impossible than turning a bowl of rice into a bowl of flowers? [/quote]

Interesting. You know, when I attended the 2007 New York Coin Magic Seminar, I was the only female magician there. I sat in the front row. Kainoa Harbottle was running around and suddenly looked up at me wide-eyed and said, "Are you the Laurie from the Café?" I responded in the affirmative, and then heard,
"Oh, I've got to get a picture of this... Curtis Kam doesn't believe you're REAL." I asked, "What?" and got something like, "Oh, nothing, nevermind."

David Roth, however, met me upon my entrance and introduced himself to me with something like, "Magicalaurie, David Roth. Very nice to meet you." which, of course, impressed me considerably. So, obviously, it's very possible, but many have got some more practicing to do, indeed. We're all here learning, and treating people kindly and with respect is a two way street, so I'm not interested in the nasty tone these "movements" can take- that turns it into outright hypocrisy and self righteous indignation, and I think we need more truth: compassion and understanding, and that begins within each of us.

:beatingheart:

P.S. I've since met Curtis, at WMS 33 in Vegas, and he kindly offered me some helpful advice and comments on my magic style and presentation leading up to my performance in the Close-up Challenge there. :)

And Siegfried seems never to have doubted I'm real. What a gracious man he is. :)

[img]https://magicalaurieblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/24874_10150122922030548_3041150_n.jpg[/img]


[img]https://magicalaurieblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/24327_10150128293420548_466989_n.jpg[/img]


[img]https://magicalaurieblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/24327_10150128293410548_8132014_n.jpg[/img]


https://youtu.be/CfPDJ27GfR0?t=122
Message: Posted by: Ray Pierce (Dec 20, 2018 01:48AM)
[quote]On Dec 19, 2018, Melies wrote:
Ray, if it's such a good deal to "revel" in being objectified, maybe you should try walking around and performing in a G-string during your act. Just sayin'. [/quote]

First, I treat all of my dancers and assistants with the utmost respect for their talent and abilities. I also treat everyone that comes on stage to help me with the same respect. I will never make fun of someone or objectify an audience member for any reason.

That being said, let's be realistic about the entertainment medium.

Do you think for a moment that Rick Marcelli's goal for David Copperfield wasn't to increase his sexual appeal by aligning 100% of his imagery and content with sexually provocative and appealing concepts? Why do most performers dress as they do... wear make up, style their hair, etc. It is to be appealing to the widest audience. Yes, there are certain character acts and performers which break this mold but they're in the minority.

Look at most professional acts working in major venues. They try and look as good as possible to be appealing to the most people. Like it or not, that is the initial appeal for many performers. After passing that goal post we might find out that they are talented and have many other likable traits that increase their appeal.

Why do you wear a nice black jacket and tuxedo shirt when you perform? Isn't it to make you look better? Why not wear jeans and a stained T shirt? Ah... because you want to be appealing so you choose things that make you look better. Like it or not, people are judging you and your choices every time you go on stage. They are making choices based on how you look before you even say a word. Welcome to performing. You're being objectified until you give them something else to think of.

I have performed in fairly bare costumes in my past years as a dancer in various revue shows. The goal was always to look our best. Believe me, if I looked the best in a G string now, I would have no problem wearing one. Dita, unlike me, still looks amazing in one and is probably a bigger draw than we both are.

Then again I work with Katy Perry, Heidi Klum, Salma Hayak, Jennifer Love Hewitt, Christina Applegate, Ingrid Michelson, Aisha Tyler, Bridget Marquardt, , Leeza Gibbons and many others. I'm very realistic in my opinions.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 20, 2018 07:30AM)
I'm sorry but I don't see the "objectification" in the cartoon. It looks to me like a bored assistant and terrible magician. Like ink blots, I guess you see what you want in it?
Message: Posted by: danaruns (Dec 20, 2018 09:30AM)
[quote]On Dec 20, 2018, Senor Fabuloso wrote:
I'm sorry but I don't see the "objectification" in the cartoon. It looks to me like a bored assistant and terrible magician. Like ink blots, I guess you see what you want in it? [/quote]

The caption is missing. It says something like, "Watch as I magically turn this ordinary woman into a sex object," or something like that. I forget, exactly.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 20, 2018 12:09PM)
So it is a pretty ham handed joke anyhow.
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 20, 2018 12:12PM)
The cartoon is called "A Self Aware Magician" by Will McPhail

https://cartooncompanion.com/dec-10-2018-issue/

Here it is with caption from the artist's Twitter:

[img]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DtsgA8QW0AMkzFd.jpg[/img]

https://twitter.com/willmcphail?lang=en
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 20, 2018 12:52PM)
I guess context is king.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 20, 2018 03:41PM)
[quote]On Dec 20, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
I guess context is king. [/quote]

Or Queen, depending on your perspective.
Message: Posted by: Melies (Dec 20, 2018 09:06PM)
Thanks for clarifying the caption, Dana (I hadn't realized that the link I sent didn't have it).
Magical Laurie, that's heartening to hear (about David Roth, etc.). I of course agree that compassion and understanding are the key to much social change. But I also think that indignation and anger are at times legitimate responses to sexism and male violence.

Ray, to say that I want to make myself "sexy" or appealing as a man on stage misses the point completely. Our society has a double standard when it comes to appearance and to sexuality, and women are made to feel lousy about their appearance every day of the week (check out Cosmo some time, or The National Enquirer--or Hollywood, or porn, or whatever you like). Furthermore, when a man makes himself attractive on stage, he is emphasizing his competence and power as a magical worker--someone who DOES miraculous things. As opposed to the "girls" on stage--I'm talking about the accessorized women who are there because they meet the straight (white) male fantasy about how women are supposed to be, with perfect bods and with their voice boxes removed ("Smile girls! Like you mean it!"). The women are almost without exception the DONE-TO. They are there either to serve as eye-candy for the straight men in the audience, or to be ACTED-UPON by the magical worker, or to mime surprise or "awe" at the (male) magical worker. But in every case, the woman is the subordinate. Unless the magician is a woman, which is why we need more girls and women in magic, and which is why we need to change how and what we perform publicly. I disagree with Ray here about what we should expect from the tradition of "entertainment." It was not long ago when white actors wearing black face were featured in Hollywood films and in vaudeville: should we cling to those practices too, because they were once "traditional"?

But the sexism in the magical arts extends far beyond the stage, as I've said, to the way we handle spectators and the way books, DVDs, chat rooms, etc., demean women continually, most often by putting them in the passive role (the DONE-TO). Just last night, I was at the local IBM meeting here in Boston for our annual Xmas Yankee Swap, and one of the books someone was giving away was Peter Duffie's "Card Compulsions." When I won the book, I discovered that it has lurid drawings of nude women throughout--as though somehow naked women and card tricks go together, that indeed such an association was self-evident. And guess what? Penguin still sells it (I just checked). So, if it's really "the same thing," show me a single magic book or DVD where the imagery depicts a fully clothed female performer surrounded by naked or semi-naked men.

When the next round in the swap came around, I traded the Duffie book for something else.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 21, 2018 01:25AM)
In other news Santa was just charged with sexual harassment for sitting little girls on his lap and asking them if they are naughty.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 21, 2018 07:54AM)
It's funny but in today's world, I could see it happening.
Message: Posted by: WitchDocChris (Dec 21, 2018 09:30AM)
When my wife and I started doing sideshow acts together, we purposely made her the "Strong" character to buck against gender norms. Lately we've been discussing how to make it more explicitly supportive of girls and women getting into performance styles and other arts that are traditionally male-dominated. It's very rewarding to have fans who come up after shows to tell us that we're inspiring their daughters to try things they hadn't thought about previously.

The issues at hand are so ingrained in our society that people think the joke Danny made is funny. When in reality, that joke is "I think it's silly that when a guy puts on a costume he can still get in trouble for flirting with children."

Look - people used to take arsenic because pale skin was thought to be attractive. But we realized that's bad and stopped. Same thing - we used to think it was OK to say and do certain things and now we've realized it's creepy. We should stop.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 21, 2018 09:47AM)
Yea no. The problem is when you have those who wish to be offended by absolutely everything at every opportunity.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fHMoDt3nSHs
Message: Posted by: WitchDocChris (Dec 21, 2018 10:27AM)
There are certainly people who seem to go out of their way to find offense. I will not deny that. Just like there are people who refuse to acknowledge legitimate examples of what is no longer acceptable. Extremes exist in all cases. The extremes aren't really the problem. The problem is the people in between who accidentally perpetuate the ideas with jokes and actions that fall into the grey zone without thinking about the potential problems those behaviors and jokes can cause.

It's built into our society (and by extension, this community) which makes it all the harder to acknowledge and fix. Just because it's hard or annoying doesn't mean it shouldn't be fixed, though.

On the opposite end of things, the people who make the effort to change are providing examples and representation for those who have felt oppressed for decades. So at least there's that.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 21, 2018 10:28AM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, WitchDocChris wrote:
Look - people used to take arsenic because pale skin was thought to be attractive. But we realized that's bad and stopped. Same thing - we used to think it was OK to say and do certain things and now we've realized it's creepy. We should stop. [/quote]

Strawman argument. Obviously health concerns have changed in the face of scientific information. Show me where political correctness, has led to better health outcomes?
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 21, 2018 10:31AM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, WitchDocChris wrote:

On the opposite end of things, the people who make the effort to change are providing examples and representation for those who have felt oppressed for decades. So at least there's that. [/quote]

Feelings are not facts. Subjectively trying to control my actions based on ones feeling, is totalitarianism.
Message: Posted by: WitchDocChris (Dec 21, 2018 10:35AM)
No. Deciding that your opinion is what is true is totalitarian.

If the women are saying "We feel oppressed" and "We don't like the jokes and comments men make", men don't get to decide that those women are wrong.

One's right to behave as they choose ends at the point it affects someone else. You don't get to decide that you didn't hurt someone.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 21, 2018 10:42AM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, WitchDocChris wrote:

One's right to behave as they choose ends at the point it affects someone else. You don't get to decide that you didn't hurt someone. [/quote]

Hurt again is subjective and what so called hurts one may not hurt someone else. To blanketly condemn speech based on ones feelings, is not only tyrannical but fascistic. I get to decide how I live. If I choose to be an ahole, there will be consequences. If I choose conformity, there will be consequences. The key is that I CHOOSE not you or the state.

We can talk all day about ones so called hurt feeling placing all the emphases on the so called offender. Or we can realize that different people see thing differently and concentrate on the so called victim. Maybe they need a thicker skin? Or need to deal with their daddy issues in therapy? Or whatever they need to do to feel better? But the onus is on them, not me to accommodate them unless I CHOOSE to. They need to be responsible for themselves and their own, emotional well being.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 21, 2018 10:58AM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, WitchDocChris wrote:

One's right to behave as they choose ends at the point it affects someone else. You don't get to decide that you didn't hurt someone. [/quote]
Please document this claim for me.
Message: Posted by: danaruns (Dec 21, 2018 11:22AM)
Senor Fabuloso and Danny Doyle have done a wonderful job of demonstrating the problem. Well done, guys. You may now go back to being decent human beings.
Message: Posted by: danaruns (Dec 21, 2018 11:24AM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, Senor Fabuloso wrote:

Hurt again is subjective and what so called hurts one may not hurt someone else. To blanketly condemn speech based on ones feelings, is not only tyrannical but fascistic. I get to decide how I live. If I choose to be an ahole, there will be consequences. If I choose conformity, there will be consequences. The key is that I CHOOSE not you or the state.

We can talk all day about ones so called hurt feeling placing all the emphases on the so called offender. Or we can realize that different people see thing differently and concentrate on the so called victim. Maybe they need a thicker skin? Or need to deal with their daddy issues in therapy? Or whatever they need to do to feel better? But the onus is on them, not me to accommodate them unless I CHOOSE to. They need to be responsible for themselves and their own, emotional well being. [/quote]

So, if I go to magician meetings where I am consistently and universally treated like dog doo, the problem is mine? The onus is on me?

Asking for a friend.
Message: Posted by: WitchDocChris (Dec 21, 2018 12:01PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
Please document this claim for me. [/quote]

Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean by this? I consider it a basic element of human decency to treat others with consideration.

Does the constitution count as documenting it? The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

If we expect rights for ourselves, we should expect those rights for everyone. If a woman really wants to be a magician, that is her pursuit of happiness. If the community treats her like a lesser person simply because of her gender/sex (which is frequently the case), that community is denying her right to pursue happiness.
Message: Posted by: WitchDocChris (Dec 21, 2018 12:10PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, Senor Fabuloso wrote:
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, WitchDocChris wrote:

One's right to behave as they choose ends at the point it affects someone else. You don't get to decide that you didn't hurt someone. [/quote]

Hurt again is subjective and what so called hurts one may not hurt someone else. To blanketly condemn speech based on ones feelings, is not only tyrannical but fascistic. I get to decide how I live. If I choose to be an ahole, there will be consequences. If I choose conformity, there will be consequences. The key is that I CHOOSE not you or the state.

We can talk all day about ones so called hurt feeling placing all the emphases on the so called offender. Or we can realize that different people see thing differently and concentrate on the so called victim. Maybe they need a thicker skin? Or need to deal with their daddy issues in therapy? Or whatever they need to do to feel better? But the onus is on them, not me to accommodate them unless I CHOOSE to. They need to be responsible for themselves and their own, emotional well being. [/quote]

I'm not "blanketly condemning" speech based on my feelings. I'm saying that if you say something to someone, and that person says you hurt them, you did. Whether you feel that hurt is justified or not is irrelevant. You don't get to decide how they should feel - that would be imposing your opinion on them. Speaking of the magic community, there are quite a few women who have said many times that the men in this community often make them feel marginalized, uncomfortable, unaccepted, etc. Therefore - we don't get to say they're wrong. We can only work to fix it, or we will be continuing the problem.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 21, 2018 12:34PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, WitchDocChris wrote:
Speaking of the magic community, there are quite a few women who have said many times that the men in this community often make them feel marginalized, uncomfortable, unaccepted, etc. Therefore - we don't get to say they're wrong. [/quote]

Feeling something isn't the same, as it being so. FEELING ARE NOT FACTS.

To Dana, I have not only defended women who have been ACTUALLY treated like doo doo but have put quite a few men, in the hospital for such behavior. Being an ahole has consequences. But I have never been physical with anyone who wasn't physically threatening to anybody. Words can only hurt you if you give them the power to do so. At least feeling wise.

The so called adults in this thread might remember the childhood rhyme "sticks and stones". It would do wonders, for your emotional state.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 21, 2018 12:45PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, danaruns wrote:
Senor Fabuloso and Danny Doyle have done a wonderful job of demonstrating the problem. Well done, guys. You may now go back to being decent human beings. [/quote]

THIS is the EXACT problem I was pointing out. THANK YOU for showing us it in action. I made a harmless, seasonal joke. I then followed it with a clip of a great comedian doing a semi related routine. Then you tell me I am demonstrating the problem LOL. HILARIOUS! Irony much?

When we get to the point where PC is so important that jokes can't be told we are losing the plot of freedom.

NOBODY has condoned sexual harassment. Not Even Senior I don't think. But go ahead be offended by whatever you like. That is your right.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 21, 2018 12:55PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, danaruns wrote:

So, if I go to magician meetings where I am consistently and universally treated like dog doo, the problem is mine? The onus is on me?

Asking for a friend. [/quote]

By telling you the truth, I am being your friend.

In the situation you describe, yes you are at fault because you continue going to that meeting. If? You truly are being treated badly, go to those in charge of the meeting and complain. If not, and all it is is your feelings, move on to another meeting. If there is no other meetings, start your own. There you can set the decorum rules and control what people say. Don't look for anything other than conformation bias in any controversy, as you will be in charge and those who don't conform, will be kicked out. You get to be as totalitarian, as you like.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 21, 2018 01:02PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:

NOBODY has condoned sexual harassment. Not Even Senior I don't think. [/quote]

Not only have I never advocated sexual harassment on ANYBODY male or female but have helped, anyone needing my help, in those situations. Sexual harassment is a crime and I take my civic duty, very seriously.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 21, 2018 01:11PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, WitchDocChris wrote:
If a woman really wants to be a magician, that is her pursuit of happiness. If the community treats her like a lesser person simply because of her gender/sex (which is frequently the case), that community is denying her right to pursue happiness. [/quote]

As a member of the community I AM HIGHLY OFFENDED BY THIS REMARK. Not only don't I treat women "lesser" in the magic community but I don't treat them any different in life.


So Chris, now that you have offended me, will you keep to your word, being considerate? Or just go on offending me?
Message: Posted by: Melies (Dec 21, 2018 01:12PM)
Exactly, Dana: these guys are simply demonstrating the problem. We could go on all day responding to these ill-considered and thoughtless quips, equal parts malice and willful ignorance, but it would be a waste of time and virtual ink. There are two kinds of people, those who are interested in justice, and those who either don't give a *** about it, or who benefit from injustice themselves and want to keep it that way. I'll leave it to others to sort Danny and Fabuloso into which side they fall on. I will only say that what takes the cake for me is this one from not-so-Fabuloso, who writes: "In the situation you describe, yes you are at fault because you continue going to that meeting. ... You truly are being treated badly, go to those in charge of the meeting and complain. If not, and all it is is your feelings, move on to another meeting." Yeah, right. Sexism and racism are just "feelings" which "sensitive people" experience, rather than, say, institutional and discursive and affective, etc., structural features of society. And when a woman is being harassed or belittled or whatever, it's not on the MEN to change their behavior, but on the women to LEAVE. I would just note that this ugly attitude perfectly mirrors the attitude of many men (and some women) who have responded to allegations of rape, sexual harassment, etc., in the workplace via the #MeToo movement by blaming the victim.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 21, 2018 01:16PM)
Idiotic! Show me how a cartoon is the same as "allegations of rape, sexual harassment, etc., in the workplace via the #MeToo movement by blaming the victim." Nonsense like this is what has people FEELING like they can't speak publicly or anyplace else.

Danny, you want to get in line so we can goose step along with the rest of them?
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 21, 2018 01:21PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, WitchDocChris wrote:

One's right to behave as they choose ends at the point it affects someone else. You don't get to decide that you didn't hurt someone. [/quote]
Please document this claim for me. [/quote]

A person's right to behave has nothing to do with how it affects others. The Nazi party won the right to march in Skokie Illinois. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Party_of_America_v._Village_of_Skokie

Nobody can be denied the right to assemble and freedom of speech without some serious litigation. I am not saying a word about what is the right or wrong side of any argument. I am saying that the very idea that once it affects someone else is not the standard in the least.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 21, 2018 01:23PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, Senor Fabuloso wrote:
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:

NOBODY has condoned sexual harassment. Not Even Senior I don't think. [/quote]

Not only have I never advocated sexual harassment on ANYBODY male or female but have helped, anyone needing my help, in those situations. Sexual harassment is a crime and I take my civic duty, very seriously. [/quote]

Of course you have not. Yet people cherry pick 2 sentences on the internet to paint you with the wide brush for their own convenience.
Message: Posted by: Melies (Dec 21, 2018 01:25PM)
Got to love it: challenging sexism in our community is now equivalent to Nazism. Done here.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 21, 2018 01:28PM)
Good. You see how it works? If your uncomfortable, you get to leave.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 21, 2018 01:41PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, Melies wrote:
Exactly, Dana: these guys are simply demonstrating the problem. We could go on all day responding to these ill-considered and thoughtless quips, equal parts malice and willful ignorance, but it would be a waste of time and virtual ink. There are two kinds of people, those who are interested in justice, and those who either don't give a *** about it, or who benefit from injustice themselves and want to keep it that way. I'll leave it to others to sort Danny and Fabuloso into which side they fall on. I will only say that what takes the cake for me is this one from not-so-Fabuloso, who writes: "In the situation you describe, yes you are at fault because you continue going to that meeting. ... You truly are being treated badly, go to those in charge of the meeting and complain. If not, and all it is is your feelings, move on to another meeting." Yeah, right. Sexism and racism are just "feelings" which "sensitive people" experience, rather than, say, institutional and discursive and affective, etc., structural features of society. And when a woman is being harassed or belittled or whatever, it's not on the MEN to change their behavior, but on the women to LEAVE. I would just note that this ugly attitude perfectly mirrors the attitude of many men (and some women) who have responded to allegations of rape, sexual harassment, etc., in the workplace via the #MeToo movement by blaming the victim. [/quote]

How DARE you come in here after a few posts and pretend you know me. You are really wayyyyy off base with what you are accusing me of and are SYMPTOMATIC OF THE PROBLEM. You cherry pick and then you just choose to be offended and then assume the rest of what you think I am saying.

It is the internet, and things can get mixed up. I am not going to jump on you about anything you have said and I am going to give you a chance to step back and maybe learn a little about who I am just so stupid flame wars don't happen for no reason. But suffice as to say you have me pegged dead wrong. If you are willing to step out of your ego and your preconceived notions for a bit you may be able to see that. If not then cool it won't be a shock.

I have NEVER said a thing about anyone in a magic club. I have NEVER said anyone should be treating anyone else like dog doo. I have never said it was the bully doing so is the one who should not change.

I will say that I think you are mixing several different things. For example it is the bullies RIGHT to treat people like dog doo. They are an idiot for doing it and it is anti social behavior, but it is their RIGHT to do it. Now that is all well and good until you get into a situation like a magic club that has a structure and has officers and should have a code of conduct. That club has the RIGHT not to allow that sort of behavior and if you show up you should have an expectation to be treated in a way that is proper. (I won't get into all of what that means but certainly equal is the benchmark.) If the club does not properly fix the problem, then what CAN you do about it? You can go join another club or a host of other options.

Now when you get to work it is an entirely different situation. Workplace crap like this requires laws to protect women and in reality legislation is probably a few decades in arrears. But in the workplace it is absolutely intolerable.

But something like a club, a private matter than you have the option and should use it, to go somewhere else. It is not your "fault" that something is happening. It is however your choice to stay. If it is not going to change and you stay it is still the bully who is wrong. "Should" it be different? Of course. Nobody disputes that. Is the person who is being treated badly in the wrong? Absolutely not. "Should" they keep subjecting themselves to such treatment? Well I personally would not. That is as far as I can go. "Would" I do what I can to make certain it stopped if I was somehow in the club or involved? ABSOLUTELY!

So go ahead and explain to me again how I am part of the problem.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 21, 2018 01:42PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, Melies wrote:
Got to love it: challenging sexism in our community is now equivalent to Nazism. Done here. [/quote]

You were not challenging sexism, you were making unsubstantiated claims. Do you even SEE the difference?

And it is such an admirable trait to have the inability to listen to any point of view that is not your own.
Message: Posted by: danaruns (Dec 21, 2018 02:44PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, Senor Fabuloso wrote:
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, danaruns wrote:

So, if I go to magician meetings where I am consistently and universally treated like dog doo, the problem is mine? The onus is on me?

Asking for a friend. [/quote]

By telling you the truth, I am being your friend.

In the situation you describe, yes you are at fault because you continue going to that meeting. If? You truly are being treated badly, go to those in charge of the meeting and complain. If not, and all it is is your feelings, move on to another meeting. If there is no other meetings, start your own. There you can set the decorum rules and control what people say. Don't look for anything other than conformation bias in any controversy, as you will be in charge and those who don't conform, will be kicked out. You get to be as totalitarian, as you like. [/quote]

This is why there are so few women in magic.

And yet, this will confound some of you.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 21, 2018 02:51PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, danaruns wrote:

This is why there are so few women in magic.

[/quote]

I won't pretend to talk for all women in magic like you do Dana but the women I have met in magic, are strong and resolved to succeed. They wouldn't let anything as small as men, stand in their way. I always saw you, as just such a woman. Was I wrong?
Message: Posted by: danaruns (Dec 21, 2018 03:51PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, Senor Fabuloso wrote:
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, danaruns wrote:

This is why there are so few women in magic.

[/quote]

I won't pretend to talk for all women in magic like you do Dana but the women I have met in magic, are strong and resolved to succeed. They wouldn't let anything as small as men, stand in their way. I always saw you, as just such a woman. Was I wrong? [/quote]

Allow me to repeat, with emphasis for clarity: This is why there are SO FEW WOMEN in magic.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 21, 2018 04:54PM)
Not sure what your reiteration is suppose to mean but I'll just take your word for it, that I'm the cause of so few women in magic. Anything else you want to put on my shoulders? Maybe I'm responsible for all gender bias, if such a thing exists? Or perhaps race relations around the world is my fault to? How about income inequality, homophobia, ageism, and every other manner of supposed white privilege in existence? Never mind that I've served with every shape, color, creed, sexual orientation, I can think of, without ever feeling that my brothers and sitars in arms were any different than me and whom I would have laid down my life for. The arrogance of social justest warriors and antifa like bigots, makes me sick. Instead of talking, on an internet magic board about how victimized you all are, how about doing something about it? I sure have and do for you.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 21, 2018 04:59PM)
It seems to me as if you are speaking for a large number of women in and out of magic.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 21, 2018 05:02PM)
Sisters not sitars. It must have been the music in my head.
Message: Posted by: danaruns (Dec 21, 2018 05:11PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
It seems to me as if you are speaking for a large number of women in and out of magic. [/quote]

I am. That is literally my job as a board member of the WMA.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 21, 2018 05:15PM)
To speak for women not in the association? THAT is your job? Interesting.
Message: Posted by: danaruns (Dec 21, 2018 07:22PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
To speak for women not in the association? THAT is your job? Interesting. [/quote]

Yes, I find it interesting, too. And inspiring. And a good deal of work, and listening, and studying, and leading. It is sometimes dispiriting, occasionally elating, often satisfying, and always an important responsibility. I get to speak with hundreds of magicians, and women and girls who want to become magicians, I produce and participate in performances, I write, and the worst part of it is that I have to negotiate the politics, the prejudices, and the tremendous inertia of culture. Hopefully, it all helps.

Here's a link to the senior thesis by Angela Sanchez that actually led to the creation of the WMA, if you're interested. https://angelamsanchezdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/sanchez_senior-thesis-2013.pdf It's a wonderful jumping off point for the discussion of how women in magic have been treated for the last hundred or so years.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 21, 2018 09:30PM)
And just how much of that hundred years is it that you want to seem to hold me personally responsible for?

And I don't care what you say, you do not speak for all women in or out of magic. No matter what title you want to claim.
Message: Posted by: Dougini (Dec 21, 2018 10:53PM)
No Danny. I'm at fault too. Dana has quoted some of my quips and poor humor. But ya know? I'm effing SICK of this. Double standard? Ha! Some women are JUST as guilty. Fan the flames and cry VICTIM! In my 63 years I've seen a lot! Apparently, it ain't over. Hey, I'm banned from FaceBook! I am NOT PC nor will I ever be! I do not choose to offend, but I'll be D@MNED if I am going to cower and slink away because some WOMAN was offended! I had a woman boss once. I could write a BOOK about the BS I had to go through! Sexism, favorites, jealousy, and PMS! I wanted to kill myself. You wanna talk about SUPERIORITY? Good thing I crawled outta there in time. Yeah, we MALES are the problem. Right. I know a few women who would vehemently disagree. Women CAN be part of the problem as well. As this thread shows...

Doug
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 21, 2018 11:51PM)
Ummm errrr ummm. Yea I don't know what to do with that.
Message: Posted by: Dougini (Dec 22, 2018 07:43AM)
Me, I just press on. I will continue to do what I do. We will always have those who are easily offended. And I, myself, am an EQUAL opportunity offender! I was banned from the Café for two months. I stayed away for a year and a half! Life's too short. While my hydraulics still work, I am HAPPY to sexually objectify females! And believe it or not, I know some that LIKE it! And I am rewarded with hugs! Violence and force I DO NOT CONDONE!

Now they've banned "Baby, It's Cold Outside"! This is where the dominoes start falling...where does this end up? Ya know, if I knew Dana and Melies personally, I'd probably like them! But reading these threads leaves a really bad taste in my mouth! I'd like to think I'm free to praise a magician woman's LEGS if I feel the need! Or her face. Or outfit. Without some feminist being OFFENDED! I mean, I COULD say, "Nice ASS!", but that has gotten me in trouble lately. So WHAT? Years ago, a gal walking behind me said that to ME! OH! I'm OFFENDED! Woooo!

Double standard. OK for YOU but NOT for ME! [i]Pferd Sheiße![/i]

Doug
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 22, 2018 08:26AM)
Here is the real problem https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_F3zv-hAYs I truly dislike using Fox for anything but when they get it right, I will.
Message: Posted by: Psyfl (Dec 22, 2018 03:33PM)
If a woman willingly consents to taking on an assistant job in which they are "objectified" as you call it, what is the issue? I would not want to take their right away to do that, and a number of women enjoy such roles.

Right now women are generally able to get into magic just as easily as men are. I doubt any magic store is going to turn down a woman's money, and there are numerous successful women magicians who have performed at big events like Penn and Teller Fool Us, for instance.

However, the fact remains that there are many more men who are interested in being magicians than females, whereas females are more likely to take on assistant roles rather than men. That is not necessarily a bad thing. It is just the natural differences between men and women taking their course. To be honest I am sick of people trying to socially engineer the world with a sense of moral superiority, and I think this has led to an unfair demonisation of men in many cases. The MeToo movement, for instance, entailed many false/highly spurious allegations against men. Just my take.
Message: Posted by: Dougini (Dec 22, 2018 04:07PM)
[quote]On Dec 22, 2018, Senor Fabuloso wrote:
Here is the real problem (link) [/quote]

OMG! Senor, that...whoa. Yeah. Houston, we have a problem...
Message: Posted by: Wendy Wylde (Dec 23, 2018 04:18PM)
So.... this isn't going to be popular post, and I apologize in advance to all the women who are about to declare me a traitor of kind, but here is another viewpoint from someone with the same "parts" as you.

I am a woman. I am a woman magician. I have performed professionally and (after being out of it for a while for dumb reasons) I plan to perform professionally again.

I have never been an assistant. I don't fit in boxes. I have never worn a g-string on stage (I would look like a pear with a rubber band wrapped around it. Not the look I like for myself). I do not do "sexy" magic and I never have. I am in a local magic club that is AWESOME. I'm not saying there aren't some snags (because any time you get a group of people together there will be personality conflicts of one kind or another), but for the most part they are all pretty great. Our oldest attending members are in their 80s I believe.

So here's the secret: If you want magicians to respect you - DO MAGIC BETTER. Fight for it like you are the 3rd monkey trying to get on the ark. Practice it like your life depends on it. That is what the really amazing guys in my local group do (and I daresay most really amazing professionals). If you don't have the time to practice and to be good, then you don't get to whine that they're treating you poorly based on your genitalia. I've seen them be mighty cruel to other male magicians who weren't any good too. It has nothing to do with gender.

Here's where it gets REALLY unpopular: If there is rampant sexism in the magic community it isn't the fault of the men. People treat you the way you LET them treat you. You know who hurts women in magic? Women magicians who dress like assistants. If you don't want to be treated like a sex object, if you do not want to see women objectified in magic, then empower and teach them to stop letting people treat them that way.

This is a picture of Melinda First Lady of Magic. http://www.rscotthooper.com/works/melinda_cycle.html In no way does that help women in magic. And in that image right there, in all of her TV specials with sparkly body suits and stiletto heels, she told the world THIS is what a female magician looks like. THAT has done more damage than any male magician objectifying his assistant. THAT was the image little girls grew up with as to what you had to look like to be a female magician.

And it's a mystery why there are so few women in magic? Melinda isn't the only one, she's just the quickest example I could come up with. Don't EVEN get me started on Ursula Martinez.

If you want to be treated like a magician then BE A MAGICIAN. Dress like yourself. Figure out YOUR character and YOUR magic and then DO IT, BE that. But understand that there are so few female magicians that you represent us ALL when you're on stage. So if you decide to perform in a g-string, that is your choice, but know that it reflects on us all and you are making the lives of other female magicians more difficult.

I have only had one person verbally abuse me because I was a woman doing magic - she was the wife of a magician.

It is so easy to blame this on the men, and comforting. Because acting like a grown up and learning how to actually do magic WELL is a lot harder.


tl;dr version - People will treat you the way you LET them treat you. If women in magic want respect then we need to tell each other to quit dressing like assistants who stole the magic wand and be FEMALE MAGICIANS, not strippers. The rest will follow. *shrug*
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 23, 2018 04:58PM)
I'm pretty sure that makes the point.

Let me just add this to make it even better.

OH WAIT... I CAN'T! That is about as good as it gets for an explanation.
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 23, 2018 05:54PM)
I daresay there's more to it. Otherwise, you're suggesting I was going around- dressed like a stripper, doing bad magic- when I was declared to be "not real". That just wasn't the case.

In fact, I was fully clothed, and spoke intelligently (I've been told).
That, I think, is what led to the astonishment at my realness.

Men have their own minds and can think for themselves, regardless of what Melinda told them.

Siegfried and Roy and The Amazing Kreskin, among others, have in the past referenced [i]imagination[/i].
Message: Posted by: Wendy Wylde (Dec 23, 2018 06:51PM)
[quote]On Dec 23, 2018, magicalaurie wrote:
I daresay there's more to it. Otherwise, you're suggesting I was going around- dressed like a stripper, doing bad magic- when I was declared to be "not real". That just wasn't the case.

In fact, I was fully clothed, and spoke intelligently (I've been told).
That, I think, is what led to the astonishment at my realness.

Men have their own minds and can think for themselves, regardless of what Melinda told them.

Siegfried and Roy and The Amazing Kreskin, among others, have in the past referenced [i]imagination[/i]. [/quote]

I am not saying that there aren't male magicians who are jerks. There are male NON-magicians who are jerks. There are women (magicians and non-magicians) who are ALSO jerks. Though I have met more nice people in magic than jerks, to be honest.

I agree with you: Men have their own minds and they do think for themselves. And you cannot MAKE anyone think something different. You can try to influence, you can try to convince, but you cannot CHANGE someone else. Ultimately, you can only change yourself. And that means the responsibility for changing how women are perceived in magic lies with us, the women. And it will not happen by beating men over the head telling them they're terrible people for having a different opinion.

There are many reasons why there are so few women in magic, but I felt most were beyond the scope of this conversation. However, Melinda and what she presented as "The First Lady of Magic" is definitely part of why women are objectified as sex objects in magic: if women magicians, big name women magicians, present themselves AS sex objects then it shouldn't be super surprising that people take that as a cue to objectify them. People treat us how we TELL them to treat us, through conscious or unconscious actions on our part.

If women want to be taken seriously in magic, they we are going to have to take OURSELVES seriously as magicians. And we must understand that what we do, each of us as an individual woman magician, is representing a larger group. There are so few female magicians in the world that opinions are based on the few that people see.

That is a big responsibility and to be honest, women are just barely starting to step up to it. It is easier to be sexy and suggestive on stage than to learn to do a trick well. Either will make money. Either will get you attention. One is just a lot harder than the other. There are a lot of young women magicians today, maybe more than there have ever been, and the ones I know seem to be trucking along just fine (with their clothes on, even) ;) . So instead of going on about how horrible male magicians are, why not focus instead on encouraging these new women magicians? This happens through women standing behind each other. Empowering each other. Letting each other know that they don't have to play dumb, or be cute. They don't have to dress like an assistant to get people to look at them. Just learn some magic and practice! But it's easier to say "Oh, it's all men's fault. They're terrible, sexist pigs." It's an easy excuse. Far more proactive is to do something about it. And constantly whingeing about how awful men are does not count as "doing something". Not something productive and useful, anyway.

Time and tide melt the snowman... things will change. Things ARE changing. But they're not going to change through beating men over the head, telling them what horrible human beings they are for disagreeing, which is mostly what I saw going on in this thread. *shrug*
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 23, 2018 07:39PM)
Maybe, but I was doing something else. In keeping,



"But if you want an ally, you have to at least acknowledge they’re on your team, not your rival."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.macleans.ca/society/want-men-to-support-feminism-stop-treating-them-as-the-problem/amp/
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 23, 2018 07:43PM)
I just want to thank you Ms. Wylde for not only speaking from a feminine perspective that can be applied to women but to men as well. Where men to substitute "men" in everyplace you said women (which I did) we could learn, more about how to be better magicians. I personally was inspired by your words. Way to go. Us chauvinist pigs, need to stick together. lol :)
Message: Posted by: Aus (Dec 24, 2018 06:55AM)
Wendy Wylde I just want to support everything you just said, there seems to be a lot of finger pointing by ideologues that when faced with a reasoned argument resort to ad hominem attacks rather than a reasoned argument of their own.

Objectification as a term needs more clarification as to where it emanates from before we start pointing fingers or whether fingers need to be pointed at all.


Wikipedia classifies sexual objectification as:

Sexual objectification is the act of treating a person as a mere object of sexual desire. Objectification more broadly means treating a person as a commodity or an object without regard to their personality or dignity. Objectification is most commonly examined at the level of society, but can also refer to the behaviour of individuals and is a type of dehumanization.

If according to the above definition, if sexual objectification is based on sexual intent, is it possible that two people can look at the same image/person and one sees it unobjectifying well the other objectifying? If so, does that make objectification subjective by its very nature?

[youtube]vdbD7EF4Byw[/youtube]

In terms of imagery or media, is it only objectifying based on the intent of the purveyor/artist of the image and their intended purpose or the agency of the subject of the image who is willing to be objectified? If I see a Girl at the bar and say she's hot then that's objectification apparently (I've been told), but if the intention of the girl was to look hot does that mean she is objectifying herself?

I mean the argument always seems to be that a girl has the right to dress any way she wants, however, does that mean there isn't a cause and effect equation here?

I mean one thing that's being lost in this whole discussion is women's agency to want to put themselves in objectifying positions. Look at Krystyn Lambert photo shoot:

[youtube]V82jdZT4gkw[/youtube]

Was Krystyn Lambert coerced into doing that shoot or did she do that shoot willingly? Who was objectifying who here, the magazine for projecting her sexualised images to the masses or Krystyn Lambert willingly putting herself in a position to be sexually objectified in the first place or both?

Now one could argue that just because she is dressed in a certain way doesn't mean she is a certain way, which is true, but that doesn't mean it isn't bloody confusing. It would be like me dressing up as a police officer than someone asking me for help then responding to that person that just because I'm dressed like a police officer doesn't mean I am a police officer.

In Krystyn Lambert's example though I think it's pretty much clear what she was going for here.

Magically

Aus
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 24, 2018 09:31AM)
Well besides the problem with men being not "allowed to be men" in society today, there is of course women not being allowed to be women. The above post clearly shows how some women WANT to feel sexy and use it both personally and in business. The point, which I illustrated early on in this thread is that, choice is key. Vilifying choice, helps nobody. Not women not men. Best to once again consider "different strokes for different folks" and move on. FREEDOM to chose is the only way to insure that everyone is being respected. Lack of freedom respects nobody but those taking away the freedom and even they, aren't respected. They are FEARED.

Having said that and read my words carefully, NOBODY is allowed to FACTUALLY hurt anyone, (except in selfdefense situations) without suffering consequences. Should you and I mean any of you, need assistance in a factually threatening environment and I'm there, KNOW that I will defend you regardless of your gender and only if you want me to? See I have a bit of "knight in shining armor syndrome in me) so it will be good for me as well, to be able to act out, my own mental and emotional, dysfunctions. SERIOUSLY!
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 24, 2018 09:55AM)
Men and women are different. Why deny it?
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 24, 2018 12:04PM)
Dude, I don't deny it. Equality of opportunity however, is where I believe we should be equal. Equality of outcome, is where we differ. I won't even begin to talk about biological differences both physically and mentally, as there would be those who would lose there minds, if I did. Not that I care much if people go crazy, just that I don't want to be the catalyst.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 24, 2018 01:43PM)
Oh no not you.

Speaking of an unpopular position Harvard has taken on the gender wage gap myth.

https://fee.org/articles/harvard-study-gender-pay-gap-explained-entirely-by-work-choices-of-men-and-women/
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 24, 2018 02:22PM)
How 'bout:[url=https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/2940ABCE-0344-11E7-91A1-9CBD611D1FD6]Women’s unpaid work is the backbone of the American economy[/url]?
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 24, 2018 02:27PM)
[quote]On Dec 24, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
Oh no not you.

[/quote]

Actually it's true. I don't mind mixing it up a bit and starting healthy debates but I'm not at all interested, in conflict for the sake of conflict. That's just a labor in futility. My goal in most debates is to exchange ideas, in an intellectual and productive way. In those repartee, it's fine to scrap a bit but if I see it going nowhere, I will usually drop out. It's just not worth my time. Not online anyway. Sharing that, will give those who look to dominate conversations and supposedly "win" arguments, my Achilles heal? But in the end, it saves me a ton of energy which is how I win, in the long run.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 24, 2018 02:32PM)
[quote]On Dec 24, 2018, magicalaurie wrote:
How 'bout:[url=https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/2940ABCE-0344-11E7-91A1-9CBD611D1FD6]Women’s unpaid work is the backbone of the American economy[/url]? [/quote]

When you have to go all the way back to 1965, to try proving your point? I'd say you have already lost the argument, in 2018.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 24, 2018 02:34PM)
[quote]On Dec 24, 2018, magicalaurie wrote:
How 'bout:[url=https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/2940ABCE-0344-11E7-91A1-9CBD611D1FD6]Women’s unpaid work is the backbone of the American economy[/url]? [/quote]

So instead of addressing the point, you choose to shift the goal posts. Interesting.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 24, 2018 03:06PM)
I wonder if the women posting in this thread, would concede that women are better nurturers, than men? And if not, point me to any study that reports differently.
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 24, 2018 05:05PM)
Senor, the article is current and discusses the current nature of a continuing issue.

I don't see this as an argument to win or lose, or, Danny, as a competitive sport. To me, it is a discussion. Men and women are different. And this is an area we often differ in. Many men compete and debate and argue and assume a woman is wanting to do the same, when she is actually wanting to share, engage, connect and expand and be heard in conversation. There is focused awareness and there is open awareness.

Let me make it clear that I see such unpaid, "invisible" work as an issue for men who have filled a traditionally woman's role, as well.

The point is in recognizing the work people do. When economic measurements don't have that work on their radar, people are being denied recognition for the work they do. That is a current and longstanding facet of income inequality.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 24, 2018 05:16PM)
How can it be a discussion when you just post random points and never address those brought up by others? That is not a discussion but a rant instead.

So discuss the point I made please.

It seems once a counter point is made all you want to do is ignore it. That is OK but please don't then preach about a discussion. It is not a discussion when you do that.

And please stop lumping all women into your convenient categories. PEOPLE differ in the same ways you have just put on men and women. I just get tired of the categorization for convenience, even when in this very thread a woman has put the myth to rest very eloquently.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 24, 2018 06:02PM)
[quote]On Dec 24, 2018, magicalaurie wrote:

Let me make it clear that I see such unpaid, "invisible" work as an issue for men who have filled a traditionally woman's role, as well.

[/quote]

I think this point is addressed in the legal system, with things like alimony and palimony? But I'm not a layer so don't quote me.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Dec 24, 2018 06:23PM)
[quote]On Dec 24, 2018, Senor Fabuloso wrote:
... But I'm not a layer so don't quote me. [/quote]
Objectively ... well not on Christmas Eve.

How's the ghost of Christmas past there?
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 25, 2018 12:23AM)
[quote]On Dec 24, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
PEOPLE differ in the same ways you have just put on men and women. [/quote]

Yes. I haven't said otherwise.

You said,

"Men and women are different. Why deny it?"

What did you mean?
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 25, 2018 07:42AM)
Lawyer not layer I must have been thinking about one of my presents.
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 26, 2018 02:53PM)
Https://www.fastcompany.com/3031631/are-we-speaking-a-different-language-men-and-womens-communication-blind-s


"Are men and women different? Certainly. Should we celebrate these differences as we learn to work together? Absolutely. Are men always from Mars and women always from Venus? My instinct says no. But the conversation about how and why we miscommunicate, and how to work around those disconnects, can be enormously useful, so long as we don't get too caught up in the minutiae of brain biology and ensure that it is not used as a weapon to disqualify the inclusion of a particular stripe."

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/careers/career-advice/life-at-work/mixed-messages-why-women-and-men-miscommunicate/article12138162/
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 26, 2018 03:20PM)
[quote]On Dec 24, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
Oh no not you.

Speaking of an unpopular position Harvard has taken on the gender wage gap myth.

https://fee.org/articles/harvard-study-gender-pay-gap-explained-entirely-by-work-choices-of-men-and-women/ [/quote]

So you just want to ignore this part of it huh?
Message: Posted by: danaruns (Dec 26, 2018 03:32PM)
Well, this thread certainly has taken a turn since the last time I visited.

So, this is about whether or not female spectators and assistants are in some manner sexually objectified in magic.

I'm guessing that means, for the spectator, the (male) magician making comments or somehow objectifying the volunteer's bodies; e.g., "Put this card where no one can see it," to a volunteer in a slinky or low-cut dress with no pockets. And for the assistant, it means having young, pretty assistants dress in bathing suits and heels, and parading them around the stage for the audience to enjoy. And I suppose implied in all that is a discussion of women's roles in magic, generally, in terms of sex and gender expectations and usage.

Now, where were we in terms of discussing that? Because when we are getting to calculations of wage disparity, it seems we've moved off-topic.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 26, 2018 03:53PM)
Of course.

But getting into accusations of people with an alternative opinion being the problem are directly on topic right? Hilarious, but transparent.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 26, 2018 04:30PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, danaruns wrote:
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
To speak for women not in the association? THAT is your job? Interesting. [/quote]

Yes, I find it interesting, too. And inspiring. And a good deal of work, and listening, and studying, and leading. It is sometimes dispiriting, occasionally elating, often satisfying, and always an important responsibility. I get to speak with hundreds of magicians, and women and girls who want to become magicians, I produce and participate in performances, I write, and the worst part of it is that I have to negotiate the politics, the prejudices, and the tremendous inertia of culture. Hopefully, it all helps.

Here's a link to the senior thesis by Angela Sanchez that actually led to the creation of the WMA, if you're interested. https://angelamsanchezdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/sanchez_senior-thesis-2013.pdf It's a wonderful jumping off point for the discussion of how women in magic have been treated for the last hundred or so years. [/quote]

OK so since the topic of you speaking for all women in and out of your association, when one posts that it is NOT the case why don't we talk about that for a second? Turns out a couple of women posted here who you do not speak for.
Message: Posted by: danaruns (Dec 26, 2018 04:37PM)
Fine, Danny. Say what you want to say on that subject.
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 26, 2018 06:01PM)
[quote]On Dec 26, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
[quote]On Dec 24, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
Oh no not you.

Speaking of an unpopular position Harvard has taken on the gender wage gap myth.

https://fee.org/articles/harvard-study-gender-pay-gap-explained-entirely-by-work-choices-of-men-and-women/ [/quote]

So you just want to ignore this part of it huh? [/quote]

No, Danny, and I haven't. The article I followed with addresses points made in the article you linked to and expands on the issue.

"On Equal Pay Day, it’s also important to recognize the unpaid work women do." ...


"But, even as women are increasingly taking on a larger role in the paid workforce, they’re still expected to take on the bulk of chores, like laundry, cooking, cleaning and child care that allow households to function.

'It’s become much more equal, but with women still doing more unpaid work,' Parker said. The result: Whether by choice or not, men still end up doing more paid work. 'Women, even full-time working women, spend fewer hours on average doing paid work than their husbands or partners do. That may be due in part to the fact that there’s this expectation or default arrangement where they are doing more of the child care or housework.'" ...

"But the time women spend on unpaid work is affecting their individual careers and families as well."

"The assumption that women will take on child care and other responsibilities may mean that their subconsciously passed up for career opportunities, like more travel or international placements, that could lead both to career development and more money"...
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 26, 2018 06:13PM)
More:

https://www.oecd.org/dev/development-gender/Unpaid_care_work.pdf

"Gender inequality in unpaid care work is the missing link in the analysis of gender gaps in
labour outcomes, such as labour force participation, wages and job quality"
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 26, 2018 06:52PM)
So why don't women just choose to cook less?

Isn't unpaid work a choice like any other? Simply choose not to have a family you cook for.

But I guess it is off topic.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 26, 2018 06:54PM)
[quote]On Dec 26, 2018, danaruns wrote:
Fine, Danny. Say what you want to say on that subject. [/quote]
Point is you don't speak for all women in and out of your club.
Message: Posted by: danaruns (Dec 26, 2018 07:03PM)
[quote]On Dec 26, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
[quote]On Dec 26, 2018, danaruns wrote:
Fine, Danny. Say what you want to say on that subject. [/quote]
Point is you don't speak for all women in and out of your club. [/quote]

Very obvious point taken. Of course, I don't claim that. I claim to advocate for women in general, both in and out of my organizations. Probably surprising to you, I completely agree with Wendy, and don't see what she says as contradicting what I said. Two things can be true at once.

Also, this isn't about "blame," no matter how hard Senor Fabuloso and others try to make it that way. Recognizing fact is separate and apart from assigning "blame," which is a judgment I have no desire to make. I simply want to change the way women are treated, and for men to recognize their roles historically in that area. Otherwise, there can be no change. This isn't a "me too" kind of thing. This is a "let's fix the problem" kind of thing.
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 26, 2018 07:46PM)
[quote]On Dec 26, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
So why don't women just choose to cook less?

Isn't unpaid work a choice like any other? Simply choose not to have a family you cook for.

But I guess it is off topic. [/quote]

I think it is the very root of the topic. The article addresses how societal systems define and assign women by "feminine and reproductive" roles.

"On account of gendered social norms that view unpaid care work as a female prerogative, women across different regions, socio-economic classes and cultures spend an important part of their day on meeting the expectations of their domestic and reproductive roles"

"How society and policy makers address issues concerning care has important implications for the achievement of gender equality: they can either expand the capabilities and choices of women and men, or confine women to traditional roles associated with femininity and motherhood (Razavi, 2007). The unequal distribution of unpaid care work between women and men represents an infringement of women’s rights (UN, 2013) and also a brake on their economic empowerment."

"The day-to-day lives of women around the world share one important characteristic: unpaid care work is seen as a female responsibility."


What do you mean by: "Simply choose not to have a family you cook for." ?

What about those women who are denied opportunities because they are women who the opportunity provider assumes will want to have kids?

If a third party can be hired to do this work for remuneration, why can't a first party be remunerated for the same work?
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 26, 2018 08:06PM)
[quote]On Dec 26, 2018, danaruns wrote:
[quote]On Dec 26, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
[quote]On Dec 26, 2018, danaruns wrote:
Fine, Danny. Say what you want to say on that subject. [/quote]
Point is you don't speak for all women in and out of your club. [/quote]
This isn't a "me too" kind of thing. This is a "let's fix the problem" kind of thing. [/quote]

You certainly came across as assigning blame.

If this is your point, then progress can be made.
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 26, 2018 08:11PM)
To continue:

"Women and men’s opportunities and behaviours are determined as much by social institutions, including traditional gender roles and beliefs, as by the conditions of the communities and countries in which they live. Social institutions, such as formal and informal laws, social norms and practices, shape or restrict the decisions, choices and behaviours of groups, communities and individuals (Jütting et al., 2008). By defining which behaviours are deemed acceptable or unacceptable in a society, social institutions influence gender roles: in most societies, working for pay is considered a masculine task, while unpaid care work is seen as women’s domain."

"Reducing the level of discrimination in social institutions encourages gender roles to evolve allowing for more opportunities for the share of unpaid care work to be redistributed between the genders. Women are less associated with reproductive and domestic roles. Similarly, social norms open up new opportunities for men assuming domestic and care responsibilities."
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 26, 2018 08:13PM)
[quote]On Dec 21, 2018, Melies wrote:
Exactly, Dana: these guys are simply demonstrating the problem. We could go on all day responding to these ill-considered and thoughtless quips, equal parts malice and willful ignorance, but it would be a waste of time and virtual ink. There are two kinds of people, those who are interested in justice, and those who either don't give a *** about it, or who benefit from injustice themselves and want to keep it that way. I'll leave it to others to sort Danny and Fabuloso into which side they fall on. I will only say that what takes the cake for me is this one from not-so-Fabuloso, who writes: "In the situation you describe, yes you are at fault because you continue going to that meeting. ... You truly are being treated badly, go to those in charge of the meeting and complain. If not, and all it is is your feelings, move on to another meeting." Yeah, right. Sexism and racism are just "feelings" which "sensitive people" experience, rather than, say, institutional and discursive and affective, etc., structural features of society. And when a woman is being harassed or belittled or whatever, it's not on the MEN to change their behavior, but on the women to LEAVE. I would just note that this ugly attitude perfectly mirrors the attitude of many men (and some women) who have responded to allegations of rape, sexual harassment, etc., in the workplace via the #MeToo movement by blaming the victim. [/quote]

Ok so Dana is this assignment of blame? Because it very specifically seems to if you ask me.

Funny how she seems to say she is agreeing with you and toy don't refure it at all that I have seen.

And maybe if you tried to communicate without sarcastic barbs about "this is why there are so few women in magic" your message would be better received.

Oh and isn't that quip in and of itself assigning blame? Then when you say it again for sarcastic effect what was it?

Sorry but your story simply does not add up.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 26, 2018 08:15PM)
[quote]On Dec 26, 2018, magicalaurie wrote:
To continue:

"Women and men’s opportunities and behaviours are determined as much by social institutions, including traditional gender roles and beliefs, as by the conditions of the communities and countries in which they live. Social institutions, such as formal and informal laws, social norms and practices, shape or restrict the decisions, choices and behaviours of groups, communities and individuals (Jütting et al., 2008). By defining which behaviours are deemed acceptable or unacceptable in a society, social institutions influence gender roles: in most societies, working for pay is considered a masculine task, while unpaid care work is seen as women’s domain."

"Reducing the level of discrimination in social institutions encourages gender roles to evolve allowing for more opportunities for the share of unpaid care work to be redistributed between the genders. Women are less associated with reproductive and domestic roles. Similarly, social norms open up new opportunities for men assuming domestic and care responsibilities." [/quote]

Are women forced into these rolls?
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 26, 2018 08:17PM)
Are men forced into their roles?

Continuing:

" Equal amounts of maternity and paternity leave increase women’s employment by increasing employer incentives to hire woman. In Sweden, for example, a minimum share of available parental leave is reserved to fathers on a ‘use it or lose it’ basis, encouraging an equal sharing of caring responsibilities.
 Family-friendly working conditions enable parents to balance their working hours and caring responsibilities. A flexible work schedule or teleworking allows women and men to choose working hours that better accommodate their caring responsibilities"
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 26, 2018 08:20PM)
"What are the consequences of excluding household production from national accounts?
 It leads to misestimating households’ material well-being and societies’ wealth."

"How can the time devoted to unpaid care work be valued?
 Input valuation gives a monetary value to the time devoted to unpaid care work using as cost of time either the market wage of the person who performed unpaid work (opportunity cost) or the market wage of a domestic worker if the family hired an external person (replacement cost).
 Output valuation gives a market-equivalent value to the public good produced"
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 26, 2018 08:32PM)
Do you want to rant or discuss? Please let me know.

But essentially you think a value should be assigned for working at home for the family. How does one arrive at that value exactly?
Andplease don't quote or post links. Use your own thoughts.
Message: Posted by: Aus (Dec 27, 2018 02:49AM)
[quote]On Dec 26, 2018, danaruns wrote:
Well, this thread certainly has taken a turn since the last time I visited.

So, this is about whether or not female spectators and assistants are in some manner sexually objectified in magic.

I'm guessing that means, for the spectator, the (male) magician making comments or somehow objectifying the volunteer's bodies; e.g., "Put this card where no one can see it," to a volunteer in a slinky or low-cut dress with no pockets. And for the assistant, it means having young, pretty assistants dress in bathing suits and heels, and parading them around the stage for the audience to enjoy. And I suppose implied in all that is a discussion of women's roles in magic, generally, in terms of sex and gender expectations and usage.[/quote]

Yes, and part of that discussion is women's agency to choose some of these things as my previous post highlights and how that image portrays to the overall perception of women in magic. A lot of outward finger pointing going here not very much of the discussion on self-empowerment in the fashion Wendy prescribes. When a more holistic perspective starts to happen then I might consider acknowledging our role in this issue, until then this seems nothing more than finger-pointing and men blaming.

Magically

Aus
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 27, 2018 10:11AM)
Round and around we go, where it stops nobody knows? Women and children are first to go into the lifeboats, where is the push for so called equality then? It really is comical and why at the height of what some call the women's movement, the best selling book was 50 Shades of Grey. How do women explain that? I'll attempt to answer the question from my own gender biased brain. Because as society pushes for gender neutral sexes, there is a deep longing for REAL men by women, in those same societies. While gender neutrality SEEMS like a good idea, it isn't because without gender specific roles in society, the sexes get confused about where they fit. And how does that help anyone know themselves or their purpose in life?
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 27, 2018 11:44AM)
Danny, please don't tell me how to be.
I do not have to copy your style to be valid in conversation. Your questions are answered in the points I quoted, which is why I quoted them. I don't expect others to simply take my word for things. It is relevant to share and reference supporting information.

Senor,

"The current guidance gives no advice on prioritising different groups of passengers. There must be adapted life boats for people with mobility impairments, not including babies or toddlers, but they are otherwise not prioritised in the evacuation process. The idea is that the procedures should allow all people to leave the boat safely."

"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check-with-polly-curtis/2012/jan/16/costa-concordia-women"
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 27, 2018 11:55AM)
So you don't have any thoughts of your own, you just want to rant. Got it.
Message: Posted by: danaruns (Dec 27, 2018 01:21PM)
[quote]On Dec 27, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
So you don't have any thoughts of your own, you just want to rant. Got it. [/quote]

And you just want to criticize and argue. I think she was responsive, but that's me.

You're one of the more well-known agitators on this forum. I'm not sure your style is free from criticism, either. Nor mine, nor any of ours. How about we all post in good faith and leave other's style to them.
Message: Posted by: danaruns (Dec 27, 2018 02:30PM)
[quote]On Dec 23, 2018, Wendy Wylde wrote:
There are many reasons why there are so few women in magic, but I felt most were beyond the scope of this conversation. However, Melinda and what she presented as "The First Lady of Magic" is definitely part of why women are objectified as sex objects in magic: if women magicians, big name women magicians, present themselves AS sex objects then it shouldn't be super surprising that people take that as a cue to objectify them...

If women want to be taken seriously in magic, they we are going to have to take OURSELVES seriously as magicians. And we must understand that what we do, each of us as an individual woman magician, is representing a larger group. There are so few female magicians in the world that opinions are based on the few that people see.

That is a big responsibility and to be honest, women are just barely starting to step up to it. It is easier to be sexy and suggestive on stage than to learn to do a trick well. Either will make money. Either will get you attention. One is just a lot harder than the other. There are a lot of young women magicians today, maybe more than there have ever been, and the ones I know seem to be trucking along just fine (with their clothes on, even) ;) . So instead of going on about how horrible male magicians are, why not focus instead on encouraging these new women magicians? This happens through women standing behind each other. Empowering each other. Letting each other know that they don't have to play dumb, or be cute. They don't have to dress like an assistant to get people to look at them...[/quote]

This is a great quote. And it is what we do in the WMA, thank goodness. I have a couple caveats to your point, though.

First is that what you say is for discussions by women, between women, for women. Women need to say this to each other. I'm not sure this forum, vastly male, is the right audience or right group to discuss it productively.

Second is that it's a complex discussion, because on the one hand you're absolutely correct for the larger picture, yet in the meantime women need to do what they need to do to get booked. It's sort of a chicken and egg problem that runs afoul of practical difficulties. I don't know if I mentioned it in this thread, but I had a producer of a magic show say to me, "Why would I hire two female magicians for the same show? I wouldn't do that, any more than I would hire two jugglers. Women are a novelty act. I'll hire one, and it will be the prettiest one." Yikes! I can't believe that was said to me in 2017. Yet, that kind of mentality is still out there. So, people gotta put food on the table, so they do what they have to, and sometimes that means sexing it up. Then there is the subset of women who, for whatever reason, go out of their way to make themselves sex objects, which frankly ****es me off, though they have every right to do so.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 27, 2018 02:41PM)
[quote]On Dec 27, 2018, danaruns wrote:
[quote]On Dec 27, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
So you don't have any thoughts of your own, you just want to rant. Got it. [/quote]

And you just want to criticize and argue. I think she was responsive, but that's me.

You're one of the more well-known agitators on this forum. I'm not sure your style is free from criticism, either. Nor mine, nor any of ours. How about we all post in good faith and leave other's style to them. [/quote]
Right. YOU call me an agitator, while in this VERY THREAD you accuse people of things and then claim it is not about assigning blame. Then you ignore it when called on it. You use sarcasm and nastiness and when called on it you don't step up to admit it.

Yep I am the agitator. Just because we don't lay down for your dictations of male behavior. Go figure.

So how about you define "post in good faith" for us? So us terrible men know how to avoid being responsible for the atrocities committed against women of magic for the past 100 years.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 27, 2018 02:56PM)
[quote]On Dec 27, 2018, danaruns wrote:
[quote]On Dec 23, 2018, Wendy Wylde wrote:
There are many reasons why there are so few women in magic, but I felt most were beyond the scope of this conversation. However, Melinda and what she presented as "The First Lady of Magic" is definitely part of why women are objectified as sex objects in magic: if women magicians, big name women magicians, present themselves AS sex objects then it shouldn't be super surprising that people take that as a cue to objectify them...

If women want to be taken seriously in magic, they we are going to have to take OURSELVES seriously as magicians. And we must understand that what we do, each of us as an individual woman magician, is representing a larger group. There are so few female magicians in the world that opinions are based on the few that people see.

That is a big responsibility and to be honest, women are just barely starting to step up to it. It is easier to be sexy and suggestive on stage than to learn to do a trick well. Either will make money. Either will get you attention. One is just a lot harder than the other. There are a lot of young women magicians today, maybe more than there have ever been, and the ones I know seem to be trucking along just fine (with their clothes on, even) ;) . So instead of going on about how horrible male magicians are, why not focus instead on encouraging these new women magicians? This happens through women standing behind each other. Empowering each other. Letting each other know that they don't have to play dumb, or be cute. They don't have to dress like an assistant to get people to look at them...[/quote]

This is a great quote. And it is what we do in the WMA, thank goodness. I have a couple caveats to your point, though.

First is that what you say is for discussions by women, between women, for women. Women need to say this to each other. I'm not sure this forum, vastly male, is the right audience or right group to discuss it productively.

Second is that it's a complex discussion, because on the one hand you're absolutely correct for the larger picture, yet in the meantime women need to do what they need to do to get booked. It's sort of a chicken and egg problem that runs afoul of practical difficulties. I don't know if I mentioned it in this thread, but I had a producer of a magic show say to me, "Why would I hire two female magicians for the same show? I wouldn't do that, any more than I would hire two jugglers. Women are a novelty act. I'll hire one, and it will be the prettiest one." Yikes! I can't believe that was said to me in 2017. Yet, that kind of mentality is still out there. So, people gotta put food on the table, so they do what they have to, and sometimes that means sexing it up. Then there is the subset of women who, for whatever reason, go out of their way to make themselves sex objects, which frankly ****es me off, though they have every right to do so. [/quote]

We all have to live in the world as it is. This will not change no matter how angry you get at it. Yes one producer said that he hires the prettiest woman. So what? The VAST majority of producers out there hire the act that will make them the most money. Ugly, not ugly the one who earns the most money gets the job. This is how it works in the real world of people doing real work for real money full time. I have NEVER once heard a producer (Of which I deal with dozens in many aspects of ENTERTAINMENT, not just magic.) be willing to make less money just so he can hire the better looking female act. This is anecdotal evidence that you have, and that is a thing. But it is not as common as you seem to think.

One problem you seem to be missing is that not all acts are created equal. Not all women, or all men are qualified to do a job. It is possible, whether you want to admit it or not, that the female act might just not be as good as the male act. It can be and quite often IS that simple. THEN when a female act instead of stepping up her game decides to make themselves a sex object it does not help them or the cause you want to champion. I think that the idea somehow the solution to getting booked requires men to think differently is simply self defeating.

You do not produce shows. You deal with a very limited number of producers of any gender. OK no problem. But you can not universalize your experience and paint that mentality as prevalent. It simply is not the prevailing thinking. Trust me when I tell you that producers who do this on any real level do so in order to make money. I personally produce shows I don't even much like because the audience does and they make money. It is that simple.

Here is the thing. It happens to EVERY full time performer of EVERY sort. You reach a plateau. Your show is "busy" but not booked as much as you want or on a level that you believe it should be. SOMETHING has to be done. Producers give you an excuse that you just don't buy as to why they are not using you and using this other act. You have to change things to get further than you are. It is at this point that quite often women think that the move to the "sex object" is a good idea. It is a poor choice. Often it is just a matter of waiting for your experience to kick in. But it happens to men as well as women. It is often the point at which a choice has to be made.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 29, 2018 10:24AM)
[quote]On Dec 27, 2018, magicalaurie wrote:

Senor,

"The current guidance gives no advice on prioritising different groups of passengers. There must be adapted life boats for people with mobility impairments, not including babies or toddlers, but they are otherwise not prioritised in the evacuation process. The idea is that the procedures should allow all people to leave the boat safely."

"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/reality-check-with-polly-curtis/2012/jan/16/costa-concordia-women" [/quote]

Those may be the guidelines but in terms of implantation, we all know how it works.

But the lifeboat thing aside, why is it wrong for women to choose for themselves what they want in life. IF? a woman wants to be scantly clad in an outfit helping a male magicians, so be it. How many of these assistants are the wives, of popular performers? I think in those circumstances it's just BOTH male and female doing their part to support the family. As a person who once body graded Mick Jagger and his then wife Jerry Hall, I can tell you that she wasn't cooking or cleaning anything. He had his music career and she her modeling career. Would you have said that because her husband was a musician, that somehow her chosen profession, was sexists? It's an inane argument.

Choice ladies and gentlemen. That's what equalizes the sexes in the workplace, more than anything else. CHOICE!
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 29, 2018 01:11PM)
[quote]On Dec 29, 2018, Senor Fabuloso wrote:

Choice ladies and gentlemen. That's what equalizes the sexes in the workplace, more than anything else. CHOICE! [/quote]

A great summary. Short and makes the point perfectly.
Message: Posted by: Melies (Dec 29, 2018 09:17PM)
I think the problem with any online forum of this kind is that it prevents the kind of human-to-human exchange that can lead to genuine understanding, and to the "Aha!" moment when people on different sides of an issue can find common ground. But this conversation is particularly maddening, because one side in the debate continually appeals not to reason or fact, but to common, ugly prejudice, while meanwhile closing itself to any counter-factual historical or sociological piece of evidence that doesn't jibe with its proponents' preexisting biases.

It is quite striking to me how quickly this thread has devolved into blaming *women* for the fact that they are treated as subordinates in society--including in the magic community. Yeah, and it was the fault of Africans to allow themselves to be sold into slavery, and it was the fault of gays that they had their heads smashed in by cops and were driven to suicide in the pre-Stonewall period, and it was the fault of the Jews that the Nazis rounded them up and sent them to points East, etc. etc. The reason I started this thread was merely to say that we in this community, both men and women, yes, but particularly men, have a responsibility to change our sexist culture and to make it more inclusive and more in line with basic principles of equity and justice. And look what a firestorm that modest proposal ignited!

There seem to me two main problems with this "debate." The first is that the men participating in it fundamentally don't seem to respect women, and therefore cannot tolerate anyone who shines a light on regressive attitudes they simply take for granted, finding it just too threatening to examine their own beliefs or to question the status quo of society at large. The second, which is an outcrop of the first, is that the people engaging in this discussion have either never been exposed to feminist thought or have simply never bothered to read any of it. Yet Simone de Beauvoir wrote "The Second Sex" way back in 1949, and since then there have been literally thousands of other books on the subject, not one of which, I am sure, has been read by most of the people who have weighed in on this subject. How odd is that? Imagine someone who had never studied engineering or math, say, and who didn't know the difference between Newton and Olivia Newton John, who nevertheless went online and began pontificating about the best way to build bridges or spaceships. How could anyone who actually was an engineer, and knew something about the subject, have a conversation with them about anything engineering-related? Meanwhile, our Know-Nothing continues to pontificate as a Know It All. Of *course* one can build a jet engine out of brittle materials ("sexual objectification is in the eye of the beholder"), of *course* bridges can be built without thought being given to structural frequency ("women have only themselves to blame if someone is insulting them or discriminating against them"), of *course* computers can run on orange juice ("women are as much to blame as men for sexism"), etc. But the self-made "expert" knows better than the one who really knows. And the man doesn't need to listen to, or learn from, the woman's experiences or perspective, because he knows in advance of every possible fact that he is right.

None of the following lines of argument, all of them repeated here by different people, stands critical scrutiny: (1) sexual objectification is a matter of personal taste or judgment, not a social phenomenon that disadvantages one sex more than another; (2) the fact that some women allow themselves to be made into pin-ups or models or porn stars, etc., to please straight men, is evidence that women as a class consent to such behavior--and furthemore are not (as a class) disadvantaged by it; (3) social change is impossible, and even undesirable; (4) how one is treated by others is a matter of personal choice, not a matter of social power; (5) whatever "the market" tolerates or encourages, i.e. whatever leads to profit-taking, is morally acceptable or appropriate; (6) there is no systemic discrimination against women in our society, no sexism, and therefore no problem.

But continuing to argue publicly with persons who are not operating in good faith, and who clearly don't give a *** about matters of justice, does seem tragically pointless.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 29, 2018 09:26PM)
Nobody can have a debate when you only want to make accusations and blanket statements.
Message: Posted by: Tom Cutts (Dec 29, 2018 11:58PM)
[quote]On Dec 29, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
Nobody can have a debate when you only want to make accusations and blanket statements. [/quote]
Those who wield double edged swords tend to only see one of those two edges.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Dec 30, 2018 12:06AM)
Tragically pointless... talking down from an ivory tower to people who work in a craft. And isn't it nice that they aren't snapping back at you about academia? So far your credentials seem more bookish than about bookings. Danny, Laurie and Dana are your potential allies in this matter.

Is our current literature really that gender biased? Some facts would help there for use of he/she/volunteer/they/your spectator... Do we really ignore the engaging and talented magicians who don't flirt with gender norms? Sure, let's highlight our craft above base beauty contests.

Good call on an awkward moment in the cheese routine. Let's see if he does that moment in with other volunteers. And if it's only women maybe a short note to the guy might handle that.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 30, 2018 06:17AM)
Melies, are you just trying to be provocative or do you really believe your BS? Who here doesn't respect women? Who here is "blaming women" for ANYTHING other than their own choices in life? And it's not even really "blaming" as much as it's an acknowledgment of a woman's right to choose. You really need to learn to read and read to learn. Did you not read a woman's perspective (thank you again Wendy) validating much of what the men here have said?

If you knew anything about history you would know that it's true that "Yeah, and it was the fault of Africans to allow themselves to be sold into slavery" and that in FACT, some cannibalistic African tribes helped the so called white man to enslave people from other Waring tribes. So while again the strawman argument you make is ridiculous, it really does show your ignorance to history.

Be that as it may, so called social justice is nothing more than a totalitarian attempt at a politically correct society that tries to limit speech. and your constant accusations about people you don't know is a glaring illustration, of why it's wrong.

Finally a MAN is only as good as his word and earlier in this thread, you said you were "done here". Having not kept your word, I can't take anything you say seriously.
Message: Posted by: Aus (Dec 30, 2018 07:44AM)
Melies I think you need to widen your gaze a little mate. Aside from magic as a past time, I have an interest in gender politics and I'm alarmed at what I see in the broader political sphere. Apart from the old chestnuts of misogyny, bigotry and ignorance, I feel there is a real sense of scepticism and fear of any positive movement for equality for women due to malicious acts that have been perpetrated under the banner of equality and women's rights, and the reason for that, in my opinion, is feminism.

Now I know what feminism is meant to stand for, but like all social movements, I tend to judge them empirically rather than by dictionary definitions. As they say, the proof is in the pudding.

There is a toxic form of victim feminism that holds that all men are all brutes and men are the totality of women's problems (the patriarchy) and women are helpless victims, it's fainting couch feminism and I don't think it does women any good. I think it's very retrograde and I think it's turning back 100 years of feminism that said women were meant to be strong and equal.

Now before someone says it isn't the mainstream representation of feminism, I would beg to differ. I believe it to be the loudest form and it's the most prominent form.

Now do all feminists think this way? No, I don't think all feminists think this way but I do think the reigning paradigm of the feminism you see in the media that you read about is this creeping insidious attack of males and masculinity.

We have seen cases of this with the weaponisation of #metoo in the Brett Kavanaugh hearings for political motivations, Aziz Ansari the comedian who I can best describe as a victim of nothing more than a bad date. The fears of sexual misconduct and false allegations and the lack of strict lines of what is and isn't acceptable in the corporate world have meant the alienation of women in wall street and the implementation of the Mike Pence rule by men in an effort to mitigate risk to themselves.

Now I have been accused on this thread and in others that I don't listen to women and their issues and that I should shut up and do so. We tried that with the "believe all women" mantra the feminist hordes sprouted out during the #metoo campaign, and look where that got us. The blind benefit of the doubt that empowered women to make men lose their jobs, their current and future education prospects along with their political reputations in the court of the public opinion without any substantiated proof or presumption of innocence.

Now, why do I say all this?

Because I want to make CLEAR that my opposition to this isn't because of misogyny, bigotry and willful ignorance but for me at least a compelling sense of distrust that I have on women's rights activism. You have one hell of a high bar to prove to me that your motivations are genuine, and you have feminism to thank for it.

Magically

Aus
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 30, 2018 02:14PM)
In my opinion, you've bypassed the very real issue here, Aus. I don't like "isms", generally, because I feel they tend to be divisive rather than inclusive. But having acknowledged the true definition of the term "feminism", where do you suppose it sprang from? For you to decide all women are disingenuous is to treat sincere women as unfairly as sincere men have been treated by those leaping to fear and hate instead of understanding and compassion.

I don't think Kainoa Harbottle is or was hateful.

In fact, I consider him a friend.
But for him to say something that completely negated my very existence, as though if I hadn't been present it would be completely normal to say. As if it was completely normal for grown men to be discussing that magicalaurie was some guy hiding behind a picture of Laurie Telgen at the Magic Café. As if it was impossible magicalaurie could just be magicalaurie.

I'm real. I've been treated as though I don't exist by more than one man on this forum and in ways that I've allowed to hurt me immensely.

My mother was in labour for two and a half days giving birth to my twin sister (who's also been accused of not being real by male members here) and I. My mother, my sister, and I, almost all died in that childbirth. My sister and I were 2 1/2 months premature but were very fortunate that the neonatal ward had just opened at CHEO and we were transferred there. I have a family who cares about me, I care about life, I'm here to live it, and some guy who can't see I'm real even in posted videos gets to decide I don't actually exist? And that doesn't leave me at a disadvantage among the "brotherhood"?

I spent money I don't have to go to this seminar to meet someone who matters deeply to my life and I'm met with this. I don't even exist among his "friends". These things matter. It's not a small thing to completely negate someone this way and I can only wonder why anyone would feel a need to do so to anyone. One thing I know is it is based in fear.

[img]https://magicalaurieblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/Screenshot_2018-12-30-15-22-401.png[/img]
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Dec 30, 2018 02:44PM)
Have toy ever been treated as if you don't exist by a woman? Indeed most men have.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 30, 2018 06:22PM)
Laurie, could it have been that so enamored by you, that the men who SEEMED to be denying your existence, were just fascinated by meeting you? Online personas are often lies and when they met you, it could have just been astonishment, that a dynamic individual like yourself was in fact real. From personal experience, I can tell you that often, things are not how they appear. But of course you know that, being a magician :)
Message: Posted by: landmark (Dec 30, 2018 06:22PM)
[quote]Is our current literature really that gender biased? Some facts would help there for use of he/she/volunteer/they/your spectator... Do we really ignore the engaging and talented magicians who don't flirt with gender norms? Sure, let's highlight our craft above base beauty contests.
[/quote]

I think the record pretty much shows that magic is one of the lagging arts when it comes to innovation--including the social, political, and artistic standpoints. Things within magic [i]are[/i] changing, but slowly, probably substantially slower than the general society at large. That understandably makes it difficult and frustrating for many.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Dec 30, 2018 06:53PM)
[quote]On Dec 30, 2018, landmark wrote:
[quote]Is our current literature really that gender biased?...[/quote]
I think the record pretty much shows that ...[/quote]
Changing the topic that way is not going to work. Nor does claiming quaint nostalgia serve as excuse. How nice to forget everything which happened after 1900! ? :(
So, about today's literature and what we are doing today... How are we doing?
Folks what do you see?
Message: Posted by: landmark (Dec 30, 2018 08:15PM)
[quote]Changing the topic[/quote]

? You have read the thread title, right?
And if you read my post as excusing anything, then I've either written poorly or you've misread me.

[quote]So, about today's literature and what we are doing today... How are we doing? [/quote]

Odd to ask that question, get a direct answer and then not have my answer acknowledged:

[quote]Things within magic are changing, but slowly, probably substantially slower than the general society at large.[/quote]
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Dec 30, 2018 10:12PM)
@landmark - it's not about you. Let's see if there's privilege in play here.
Message: Posted by: Aus (Dec 30, 2018 10:59PM)
[quote]On Dec 30, 2018, magicalaurie wrote:
In my opinion, you've bypassed the very real issue here, Aus. I don't like "isms", generally, because I feel they tend to be divisive rather than inclusive. But having acknowledged the true definition of the term "feminism", where do you suppose it sprang from? For you to decide all women are disingenuous is to treat sincere women as unfairly as sincere men have been treated by those leaping to fear and hate instead of understanding and compassion.[/quote]

No one said any of this was right and reasonable, if anything, what can be said about it is it's understandable. What we are boiling down to now is the boy who cried wolf syndrome where feminism continues to propagate that men are perpetrators under their patriarchal doctrine. We have taken up the olive branch of solidarity before and we have been burnt badly by it and men learning from that mistake are now falling into defensive positions. None of this is proactive it's reactive, and if feminism wants to see the reason for that, all it has to do is look in the mirror.

[quote]But having acknowledged the true definition of the term "feminism", where do you suppose it sprang from?[/quote]

To put simply, a lie, maybe this video might be an elaboration on that point.

[youtube]M_Ed2BIOHbQ[/youtube]



Magically

Aus
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 31, 2018 01:12AM)
Thank you for sharing, Aus. I think that's helpful information.
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 31, 2018 01:23AM)
Laurie, helpful how? Just curious to know what may have changed for you, with that video posting?
Message: Posted by: magicalaurie (Dec 31, 2018 06:09AM)
Helpful as in it provides insight that aids in understanding what's inspired his comments on the issue and it's educational info in and of itself, as well.
Message: Posted by: Dougini (Dec 31, 2018 07:57AM)
[quote]On Dec 30, 2018, magicalaurie wrote:
...As if it was completely normal for grown men to be discussing that magicalaurie was some guy hiding behind a picture of Laurie Telgen at the Magic Café. As if it was impossible magicalaurie could just be magicalaurie.

I'm real. I've been treated as though I don't exist by more than one man on this forum and in ways that I've allowed to hurt me immensely.
[/quote]

Darn right you're REAL! I consider you a friend. Remember our discussion about your cow? I cannot imagine ANYONE denying you (or your sister) are a real and a wonderful woman! I like your magic. Ya know...I'm embarrassed by that behavior. It makes us ALL look bad. Some "guy" posing as a woman on a forum? It happens. But in this case, I will stand with Laurie. She is VERY real. We share a love for animals. We share love for magic. No one, and I mean NO ONE will get away with denying her existence.

Doug
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Dec 31, 2018 09:02AM)
[quote]On Dec 31, 2018, Dougini wrote:
Some "guy" posing as a woman on a forum? It happens.
Doug [/quote]

More often than you think, Doug.
Message: Posted by: Dougini (Dec 31, 2018 09:49AM)
[quote]On Dec 31, 2018, Senor Fabuloso wrote:
[quote]On Dec 31, 2018, Dougini wrote:
Some "guy" posing as a woman on a forum? It happens.
Doug [/quote]

More often than you think, Doug. [/quote]

And that, my friend, disgusts me TO THE CORE! Nothing one can do. So...I shake my head. RUEFULLY!

Doug
Message: Posted by: Senor Fabuloso (Jan 2, 2019 06:11AM)
I'm not disgusted just aware, that all is not as it seems on the net. It's that awareness that would have me shocked by ANYONE being who they say they are online and TRULY being the person in realtime. I think that may be what happened in the case of Laurie's experience? Idk I wasn't there but I offer it as a possibility and gentler, explanation of why and how she was treated the way she was. Or the guys could have just been jerks? It happens. Either way, to paint all men, with such a wide brush as to think us all sexist, is a mistake.
Message: Posted by: Aus (Jan 4, 2019 05:36AM)
[quote]On Dec 29, 2018, Melies wrote:
I think the problem with any online forum of this kind is that it prevents the kind of human-to-human exchange that can lead to genuine understanding, and to the "Aha!" moment when people on different sides of an issue can find common ground. But this conversation is particularly maddening, because one side in the debate continually appeals not to reason or fact, but to common, ugly prejudice, while meanwhile closing itself to any counter-factual historical or sociological piece of evidence that doesn't jibe with its proponents' preexisting biases.[/quote]

I think the problem is your strawmanning of our opinions being nothing more then women blaming or prejudice, like the following comment which I assume refers to a previous post I made:

[quote]the fact that some women allow themselves to be made into pin-ups or models or porn stars, etc., to please straight men, is evidence that women as a class consent to such behaviour--and furthermore are not (as a class) disadvantaged by it.[/quote]

Your mistake here was to assume that the context of my post was indulging in some sort of nadir fallacy which is to say I'm judging women as a group based on the worst members of that group, so by extension that is representative of the entire group. My intention, if you had time to ask, was to bring further diversity into this discussion and that was what part women play in terms the objectification process and how we would deal with women's AGENCY TO CHOOSE THIS OBJECTIFYING BEHAVIOUR. This to me is a natural extraction of the objectified and sexualised female assistant trope that you say has existed in magic from the dawn of time. Also, my questions of the origin of objectification were in an effort to further define the source of objectification and it's many forms so we can get to the root of the problem. My questions were not intended as accusatory but exploratory in nature.

But let's be honest here, you're not interested in any self-reflection in the same way you expect us to be, otherwise, you would have spoken up on danaruns attempt to squirrel further discussion of Wendy's comments about women's agency and empowerment behind closed doors for exclusivity among the proverbial sisterhood. You have set the parameters of this topic with an agenda of what MEN say, what MEN do and what MEN think rather than the holistic perspective of all related issues that are reflective of a complicated and multifaceted topic. You're not here on good faith or for open discussion, you're here with an agenda, to point the finger and to preach, so please save us your diatribe about us and our biases and being closed minded, and when you can practice what you preach then we can start talking in good faith. Until then don't waste our time.


[quote]It is quite striking to me how quickly this thread has devolved into blaming *women* for the fact that they are treated as subordinates in society--including in the magic community. Yeah, and it was the fault of Africans to allow themselves to be sold into slavery, and it was the fault of gays that they had their heads smashed in by cops and were driven to suicide in the pre-Stonewall period, and it was the fault of the Jews that the Nazis rounded them up and sent them to points East, etc. etc. The reason I started this thread was merely to say that we in this community, both men and women, yes, but particularly men, have a responsibility to change our sexist culture and to make it more inclusive and more in line with basic principles of equity and justice. And look what a firestorm that modest proposal ignited![/quote]

Again without the context of our points, you're indulging in a False equivalence fallacy of our positions. Let's take your African slavery example, slavery among Africans was a common practice among Sub Saharan Africans before the involvement of the Arabs, Berbers and Europeans. There were three types: those who were slaves through conquest, those who were slaves due to unpaid debts, or those whose parents gave them as slaves to tribal chiefs. Chieftains would barter their slaves to Arab, Berber, Ottoman or European buyers for rum, spices, cloth or other goods. Selling captives or prisoners was commonly practised among Africans, Turks, Berbers and Arabs during that era.

Now, this is not victim blaming this is a historical fact and if you don't believe me do a google search and look it up yourself. Now in saying that, am I saying that all Africans are at complete fault of the slave trade? No, I'm not. Am I saying Africans played a role in Slavery? Yes, I am. Could have Africans contributed to the problem of slavery? Yes, they possibly did.

The point I'm making here is your feminist dogma makes you completely void of any sense of nuance at all, and the fact you can't see it only proves my point. How do you propose to get to the root of a matter when you can't even see the forest through the trees.


[quote]There seem to me two main problems with this "debate." The first is that the men participating in it fundamentally don't seem to respect women, and therefore cannot tolerate anyone who shines a light on regressive attitudes they simply take for granted, finding it just too threatening to examine their own beliefs or to question the status quo of society at large. The second, which is an outcrop of the first, is that the people engaging in this discussion have either never been exposed to feminist thought or have simply never bothered to read any of it. Yet Simone de Beauvoir wrote "The Second Sex" way back in 1949, and since then there have been literally thousands of other books on the subject, not one of which, I am sure, has been read by most of the people who have weighed in on this subject. How odd is that? Imagine someone who had never studied engineering or math, say, and who didn't know the difference between Newton and Olivia Newton-John, who nevertheless went online and began pontificating about the best way to build bridges or spaceships. How could anyone who actually was an engineer, and knew something about the subject, have a conversation with them about anything engineering-related? Meanwhile, our Know-Nothing continues to pontificate as a Know It All. Of *course* one can build a jet engine out of brittle materials ("sexual objectification is in the eye of the beholder"), of *course* bridges can be built without thought being given to structural frequency ("women have only themselves to blame if someone is insulting them or discriminating against them"), of *course* computers can run on orange juice ("women are as much to blame as men for sexism"), etc. But the self-made "expert" knows better than the one who really knows. And the man doesn't need to listen to, or learn from, the woman's experiences or perspective, because he knows in advance of every possible fact that he is right.[/quote]

So basically you're saying that without reading feminist literature and accepting their viewpoints as facts we can't have a valued opinion or substantive grasp on the issue and we are ignorant fools who don't know what we are talking about. It must be illuminating being the only one holding all the answers and the facts. How arrogant.


[quote]But continuing to argue publicly with persons who are not operating in good faith, and who clearly don't give a *** about matters of justice, does seem tragically pointless.[/quote]

Finally, something we do agree on, come back when your attitude is conducive to constructive debate, then we'll talk.

Magically

Aus
Message: Posted by: TomB (Jul 21, 2019 07:32AM)
Funny, I saw the comic without the caption and wondered why is it offensive. It was not offensive until the comic put a stereotypical caption meant to cause faux outrage.

Scantily clad women used as assistants are often the wife of the magician. Sometimes the future wife. It's quite an assumption to say these people are being mistreated. It is also very dangerous.

I think you have to look at the target audience. If it is mostly young males, then sex sells. Its basic advertising. You do not see beer commercials without young, attractive women. This is human nature. No one is ever going to change that.

I do not see disrespectful magicians chasing away women. I just think most females have no interest in being a magician. You might have stage fright. You need to practice a million times something that may never be useful. You need the desire to want to trick someone. You need money to buy magic toys. There are many reasons why most women are not into magic. And that is not necessarily a bad thing.

I am an engineer. There are not that many female engineers either. Its not because they are objectified. Females typically are more nurturing and want to be nurses, rather than solving math problems. That's not to say females cannot, just most prefer not to.

I have taught my kids math on a much higher level than the school does. I also teach them to wonder the impossible. I have taught them magic is great for entertaining. With engineering, the hardest part is coming up with the idea. Making the impossible possible is innovation. I would argue magic also needs new ideas and new innovation.

My two young daughters are performing magic. Every magician they have come in contact with has given them so much support. In fact, the red carpet treatment is given to them because they are females.

I disagree that magicians need a metoo movement. Unless there are tons of rapes going on that I am unaware of, then I can see why so many magicians are offended. Most of the guys I have seen are stand up guys that would aid in stopping any mistreatment of women.
Message: Posted by: TStone (Jul 22, 2019 02:54AM)
[quote]On Jul 21, 2019, TomB wrote:
Females typically are more nurturing and want to be nurses, rather than solving math problems.[/quote]
That sounds pretty sexist. And it doesn't agree with the statistics where I live. Here, of all who take university degrees in natural science, math and computer science; 45% are women.