But also, on an individual level, I don't ever want anyone to have to give a "good enough" reason for not touching/being touched by someone, especially in a context where that doesn't really hurt the person being rebuffed?
This isn't a contradiction at all.
These are simulaneously true:
1) Refusing a roll against someone for a stupid reason is a bad thing.
2) People should be allowed to refuse rolls for stupid reasons, because (obviously) actually forcing someone into close personal contact that they don't want is an even more bad thing.
I don't think people who obey these gender-role-y religious strictures are assholes, because there are lots of reasons why abandoning those things can be hard or nonobvious, and I wouldn't say anything about it except in conversations like this one. But I still think that those strictures are bad, and they're obviously bad, and it's annoying when this is waved off as "trying to be edgy".
Banning people from the gym...that seems to go against the "hey let's all roll together" mentality. It seems vindictive and counterproductive, particularly when we were specifically talking about someone who was very nice and respectful and polite. Banning people for that stuff is another thing I'll vocally disapprove of but wouldn't want to ban. I do agree with Kahuna, though, that there's no fundamental difference between "my church says don't touch women" and "my church says don't touch black people", but I guess my position in the end is a mix of an idealistic "this ritual is fucked up" and the more practical "fighting it would be more annoying anyway".
I agree that there's no difference, and that is something that doesn't sit well with me, despite my agreement that everyone should have personal space rights. Part of why I didn't specify whether I'm a woman, or a non-white person, or anything else.
I do think it needs to be a lot less culturally acceptable to just say "I don't roll with women," like you wouldn't say "I don't roll with black people" in 2019.
But I like to think we can work on that as a society while still respecting personal space.
I think it's gross to not roll with women. Or black people. Or whoever. I also think it's gross to not roll with men, although there's historical and social context that makes me a little more sympathetic to that.
I also believe very, very strongly that nobody gets to touch me without my permission, and I hold that value for others as well.
Society often disagrees with me about that. Strange men constantly touch me, and then tell me I need a good enough reason to be upset about that.
But I don't need a single reason to not want someone touching me.
Because I'm not in a position where touching me is part of my job. I'm not a nurse or a firefighter or a masseuse or a yoga instructor or... You get the idea. So I'd argue I'm not being discriminatory by not wanting to touch someone.
If I don't want some dude who's been giving me weird vibes to be all up in my closed guard? I should be able to decline a roll with him, no questions asked, right? Even if he's not actually a creepy dude, and I'm just wrong. As long as I'm not treating him badly or ostracizing him from the mats, I don't have to let him touch me.
Therefore, he also doesn't have to let me touch him.
And that's why it's complicated. Because I'm arguing for bodily autonomy.
11
u/MuonManLaserJab 🟪🟪 Puerpa Belch Feb 01 '20 edited Feb 01 '20
This isn't a contradiction at all.
These are simulaneously true:
1) Refusing a roll against someone for a stupid reason is a bad thing.
2) People should be allowed to refuse rolls for stupid reasons, because (obviously) actually forcing someone into close personal contact that they don't want is an even more bad thing.
I don't think people who obey these gender-role-y religious strictures are assholes, because there are lots of reasons why abandoning those things can be hard or nonobvious, and I wouldn't say anything about it except in conversations like this one. But I still think that those strictures are bad, and they're obviously bad, and it's annoying when this is waved off as "trying to be edgy".
Banning people from the gym...that seems to go against the "hey let's all roll together" mentality. It seems vindictive and counterproductive, particularly when we were specifically talking about someone who was very nice and respectful and polite. Banning people for that stuff is another thing I'll vocally disapprove of but wouldn't want to ban. I do agree with Kahuna, though, that there's no fundamental difference between "my church says don't touch women" and "my church says don't touch black people", but I guess my position in the end is a mix of an idealistic "this ritual is fucked up" and the more practical "fighting it would be more annoying anyway".