bennroe wrote:Ugly Nora wrote:But the problem is, by calling for bans against Pussy Melter, and not something like the Big Muff, is you are still saying your values are more important than other people's values. That is to say, I gaurantee some woman somewhere is offened by the name Big Muff. First of all, not only is it a pussy reference, but the majority of women shave these days. So, it is also an old outdated stereotypical pussy reference. But you (and I am using you in the generic sense by the way), for whatever reason are not offended by the name Big Muff. So, you drew a line in the sand and said Pussy Melter is bad, and Big Muff is good. Why does your value system get to decide that for me? Why can't I decided what is good and what is bad for me?
I can't tell how much of this argument you actually believe, and how much is meant to be provocative, but nobody is trying to decide what's good or bad for you, because it isn't about you. In fact, I doubt anyone would make a fuss at all if the toneprint went back up on the site with a different name and description and no association with Satchel, because it isn't about the toneprint either. It's about marketing in ways that indicate to women that they're not part of the club. You're right that being opposed to that infringes on the values of others, but only if their values include the belief that women should leave playing guitar to the men. Do you believe sexism is a value that should be tolerated? The Big Muff has nothing to do with any of this, regardless of the origins of its name (which I frankly doubt have much to do with female anatomy), because vaginas aren't the issue. As far as I'm aware, Sovtek and EHX never marketed the Big Muff by saying anything like "muff-expanding tone to help you get between her legs". That would be problematic. I've never heard anyone complain that hearing the name of that pedal made them feel excluded, but maybe I'm off-base.Ugly Nora wrote:Do you want to know the real reason people are attacking Pussy Melter and not Big Muff? It's because the Pussy Melter pedal/algorithm or whatever it is probably sounds like crap and is most likely never going to be used by anybody. In other words, there is little to personally lose by having it banned. On the other hand, probably half the people complaining about the Pussy Melter use, or have used a Big Muff or Big Muff clone and it is a core component of a lot of people's sound. Therefore, there is a lot to personally lose if that was banned. Heck, doesn't Dwarfcraft have a pedal based on a Big Muff?
Nobody gives a fuck about how the toneprint sounds because it's not at issue. If the Big Muff had been called the Pussy Melter or otherwise marketed as women-need-not-apply, there would be outrage over it too. I can't say how history would have been altered, but I'm sure the circuit would have perservered under a different name for the reasons you mentioned. I'm not sure why you think that amounts to hypocrysy on anyone's part.Ugly Nora wrote:The ironic thing about this whole situation is that if this uproar didn't occur, it wouldn't have been a blip on anyones radar and would have died a quiet death on its own because it was just plain stupid. But thanks to the "Streisand effect", Steel Panther is probably more popular than ever. TC Electronics, probably not so much though. They'll probably take a bit of a sales hit.
This not being a blip would have been way more insidious, because many woman who stumbled upon it would have been made to feel shitty and/or quietly question their involvement in a hobby they likely enjoy. Blowing this up in a spectacle shows those women it's not something guitar culture at-large will tolerate anymore, which is great.
Big Muff is very relevant to the discussion, because our resident expert of how we should all think, feel and act said:
aens_wife wrote:So when a company makes a "joke" like this with a product, what they are saying is that they don't give a fuck who is uncomfortable with said joke. That generally shakes out to them not caring about women's thoughts on this stuff. Sure, some women don't care. But everyone knows that *some* women do care. A lot. By making these jokes, companies are telling women that they do not prioritize them as customers - that they want the men who will laugh at that joke more than they want the women who will not.
So, by this logic, as long as one woman cares about the name Big Muff and thinks it is distasteful or sexist or whatever, that should be cause for alarm and indicative that the company doesn't care about females.
And again, the reason for the lack of outrage towards the Big Muff, is because it would be too inconvenient for the outrage brigade to do so because they use the product. It is easy to boycott and be outraged by stuff that has no impact on you if it disappears. It is not so easy to do so when it will actually require sacrifice on your part.