If only a handful of feminists are responsible for all that ails DU

[BainsBane]

Just put us on ignore. No need for under-the-influence, raged-filled rants. Ignore. Easy peasy.

Happy Holidays to all.

[Hobo]

1. Done and done

[Gravitycollapse]

2. I always go into these debates filled with righteous anger.

And leave them feeling like I died a thousand years ago. I can feel it in my bones.

Fuck everything. I don't know how some of you have survived so long under the weight of so much idiocy. It's not even common idiocy. It's vicious, mean spirited idiocy.

[kcr]

55. Yes, it's vicious

And then the blame gets put on feminists. Some of the people joining the dogpile don't even know what caused this. They just see there's a "gender war", and oh, it's those feminists again! Join in! It's nasty.

[Vashta Nerada]

3. They sure didn't unify the site today, did they?

Of course, no one did.

It's Christmas Eve, ffs. Peace on earth, goodwill to men and all that.

[BainsBane]

4. You mean because I posted that Indian PSA in HOF and RQ did in GD?

It's our fault that an Indian PSA is too progressive for some on this board? That post got over 125 recs, and a few members got upset. So what do you suggest we do to "unify" the board? "Say, hey it's fine if you harass and assault women in public. Don't feel bad."

They can decide to start to treat women like human beings. If that really is so difficult for them, their problems are far greater than can be dealt with on this website. As for the guys who have trouble differentiating normal attraction and appreciation for women from predatory behavior, that again is an issue they need to deal with.

[Bonobo]

5. Is a woman checking out a man's ass predatory behavior? nt

[BainsBane]

8. Depending on how it's done and how he feels about it

Yes, it can be.

[Bonobo]

11. But she can't really know at the moment, I guess.

Still, if the guy is walking in front of her, it would be hard to blame her.

At the same time, doing it so that HE KNEW that she was checking him out even after he was clearly repulsed by it, now THAT would be predatory.

But, I think a lot of couples get their start that way. Checking each other out, I mean.

Can't really tell until the moment is over whether it was mutual. If it wasn't, one side is going to be skeeved out more likely than not.

The central part is, I think, checking out while being mindful of the other persons' feelings. That we can agree on.

[BainsBane]

16. Good lord

That PSA isn't about checking someone out. This is something you all should have discussed with your fathers forty odd years ago.

[Bonobo]

20. Good lord, I didn't say it was. nt

[BainsBane]

27. Why did you even raise the subject then?

How is it relevant?

[Bonobo]

30. They are most certainly on a continuum.

Every person has a different definition of what is over the line and it also varies based on the parties involved and their level of attraction to each other.

To pretend that it is a black and white, binary issue is simply not credible or honest.

[BainsBane]

34. This began with an Indian PSA

about harassment, clearly linked to the epidemic of gang rapes and murders of women in that country. Although that post received over 125 recs, a handful of people found it an outrage, and have continued to pout and stomp over it. So if it makes you feel better to pretend this is about glancing at a woman in the supermarket, there is nothing I can do about that. Anyone with any reasonable degree of social skills knows how to behave in such situations. Some choose not to behave appropriately because their motives are hostile or predatory. There may be a few with poor or not fully developed social skills who need some guidance. However, what we have witnessed today is a few men who feel it is their right to ogle, harass and control public space--even going so far as to say that women who don't like it should stay home or wear Burkas. Like the men in India, it is about power for them. Only in this case these are largely powerless men who resent having to deal with women's opinions in public. They make a lot of noise in cyberspace because the anonymity of the keyboard emboldens them. Ultimately they are a dying breed, furious that we no longer live in the mid-20th century. Despite their sound and fury, time marches on.

[Scootaloo]

79. Bonobo's not going to get it

We've all tried, but apparently clues are against the poster's religion or something

[11 Bravo]

188. You did it again. "You ALL should have discussed with your fathers".

Fuck me with a rusty rake, but if you could just learn to type the simple word SOME on occasion, I'll wager that you would find that there are more than a few DU men who agree with you.

[BainsBane]

198. So some men should not learn from their fathers?

If you read my posts, no where did I say all men can't distinguish between normal sexuality and predatory behavior. In fact, I have clearly said the opposite. Now, if you take objection to the mere existence of a father son relationship, I truly am sorry. I have trouble anticipating all the things that incense people around here.

[11 Bravo]

217. Correct, some men should not learn from their fathers.

If you can't think of any examples, I hope you continue to find comfort in the insular world which you appear to inhabit. (And of course, you didn't say "some" you said "all". Typically dishonest BB horseshit.)
But as the father of two staunchly feminist sons, your "objection to the mere existence of a father-son relationship", straw-man, word-twisting bullshit is worse than dishonest. It's fucking predictable and tedious.

[kcr]

244. Wow. Talk about predictable.

Your twisting of BB's words. Very typical of what happens to the feminists on DU. But, I'm glad you have feminists sons. It's nice to see the next generation learning and growing.

[mercuryblues]

202. oh for fuck's sake

have SOME fucking men gotten over this argument yet? The poutrage is really getting old. Go look up the definition of men, then let me know the exact number it quantifies.

[11 Bravo]

213. Your inability to comprehend the meaning of the word "all" is not my problem.

Now, please continue, Governor.

[mercuryblues]

222. and you ability

to actually see past your nose and understand what was being said, is not ALL women's fault. I get it, you are easily outraged. boo-fucking hoo. And they say women are the emotional ones.

Have a Merry Holiday

[kcr]

223. I know

But it's this small group of feminists running around telling all of DU what to do, making everyone miserable. They're so controlling! It cracks me up every time I hear that claim.

[11 Bravo]

226. You couldn't outrage me even if you were coherent and intellectually honest.

Outrage was picking up pieces of my friends and placing them in bags. Outrage was telling a platoon mate to point his weapon away from a young Vietnamese woman, or I was going to fuck up his entire day. Outrage was listening to my Mom after a promotion that was rightly hers was given to her supervisor's nephew. Outrage was watching my darling wife damned near bleed out on the floor of a Catholic hospital after one of her tubes ruptured during an ectopic pregnancy, and those bastards refused to preform a therapeutic abortion.
Outrage is NOT listening to some pampered twit who lacks the cognitive skills to make a coherent argument, and the verbal skills to understand that words have meaning. I sincerely hope none of this was too mother-fucking emotional for you. (Because you know how we guys can get.)

You have a Merry Holiday as well.

[SomethingFishy]

216. +1... I would venture to say that a majority of men on DU are the "good guys"

and for the life of me I cannot figure out why they don't like getting lumped in with "creeps, pervs, and rapists". I mean really, they were born men, they should be prepared to be judged by the actions of all other men.

Merry Christmas!

[seabeyond]

234. they are not lumped in. and many men do not feel lumped in. that would be your clue in,

that men are not lumped in.

using that in argument to not address whatever issue though thru derailing is heavily handedly used.

[kcr]

221. I think it was pretty clear who BB was referring to.

The posters like Bonobo who want to distort this into a war on feminists.

[BainsBane]

18. Mr. Scorpio explains it perfectly

Thank God for him. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4220427

[Matariki]

12. I've done it n a predatory manner, so yes

I did it to a guy who did it to me first. I turned around and followed him down the street and described his ass in detail, how he moved it, and all the things that could be done to it. He didn't like it any more than I did.

[seattledo]

138. If she's much larger than him, then yes.

Otherwise no. That's why it's so bad when a man does it. They have the means to follow through with the threat.

[Vashta Nerada]

15. Plenty of ad hominim attacks, strawmen, and red herrings today.

I hid 18 threads today because they were divisive. Watching one group attack another isn't how I want to spend the holidays. Heck, even the Germans put down their weapons on Christmas.

[BainsBane]

19. I can hardly blame you for that

It gets pretty ugly. Trash thread is your best option when that happens.

[Vashta Nerada]

37. I don't believe posting that India PSA was innocent either.

Everyone knows damn well what subjects are controversial and divisive on this board. I think you knew what you were doing posting that OP. You knew it would cause a stir, and it did.

I've seen people behave that way on other boards and those people were trolling for responses like what happened here today and yesterday.

[BainsBane]

42. I really don't give a fuck

If people can't handle a PSA from India, of all places, that is a very serious problem. I'm not going to revert to 19th century views of gender to satisfy some who become enraged at the idea women should be treated like equal human beings with full civil rights. Moreover, I want nothing to do with anyone who finds something so basic as that PSA controversial. When they don't even wish to aspire to the level of modernity and enlightenment as a developing nation like India, they aren't worth a second of my time. I belong to a Democratic Party that is majority women and people of color. I will not have my posts and ideas censored to accommodate reactionary mentalities, angry at the reality of demographic change and shifting power in the country. It in nearly 2014. Some people need to face up to reality.

So by all means, put me on ignore because if that little PSA bothered you, you won't like the rest.

[theHandpuppet]

45. I appreciated your post of the PSA

It reminded me that there are still folks left on DU who aren't afraid to bring the issues of homophobia and misogyny to the forefront. Thanks very much and have a happy holiday.

[1monster]

178. +1000 I got accused of adding flames to the gender war when I posted a piece about

a tandem writing homework assignment that I found really funny because it was so true to my experience as a teacher...

No flames, fuel or even thoughts of gender wars were intended by my posting.

[Squinch]

48. A PSA airing on Indian TV is "not innocent?" What is it, guilty?

Really, it should have been a relatively benign object of interest on a progressive board.

The fact that it turned into a maelstrom is not due to people seeing it and saying, "hmm. Interesting."

It is due to people seeing it and saying, "they can't say that to me! They are insulting me!" Which is an interesting response in itself.

[treestar]

63. Right. The conversation has been distracted away from the idea of imagining

just what do you look like when you're doing that - there are men who don't want to think about it. That's why the mirror theme. The men in the PSA didn't like what they saw - didn't like it themselves.

[Squinch]

71. And it seems that some on DU are quite horrified by the possibility that those leers being reflected

might not be welcomed or appropriate.

Seems pretty basic to me.

[treestar]

74. Yep, it's probably men who know they do that sort of thing

and don't want to think of it as wrong. Sorry, it's evolutionary, scientific, hard wired, we can't help ourselves, it's in our DNA and you just have to live with it. Maybe with some embarrassment at the fact that there are other men whose DNA does not cause them to do this stuff.

[Squinch]

76. My favorite:

why don't you just take it as a compliment!

Blech.

[sabrina 1]

22. This isn't India. What is your point?

[BainsBane]

26. The point is the context of the PSA that upset a few around here today

[redqueen]

87. If you believe that stuff is only a problem in India, you are so very sadly mistaken.

http://www.everydaysexism.com/

I don't know how any woman could possibly think that that PSA applies only to problems in India.

[xulamaude]

103. Oh but we're supposed to be grateful that we

are blessed enough to live in the USA where men never leer at women in public.

GRATEFUL!!1!

[redqueen]

110. Seriously.

I can't believe that post. This isn't India?

[Whisp]

132. That was a doozy, wasn't it?

oiy.

:

[Shandris]

50. As someone who has no personal problems with you or any of the feminists on the board...

...I'd like to point something out to you, Bains. Your post LITERALLY just said that if you fail to agree completely with the Indian PSA, then you're not -progressive enough- (No True Scotsman) and that you don't treat women like human beings.

It's not the feminism that upsets people. It's the (likely unintended) arrogant presumptiveness.

Merry Christmas.

[tkmorris]

53. Exactly so

[boston bean]

100. Well by all means, don't speak about the PSA, criticize those you agree with

because you would have said the same thing a different way.

[redqueen]

172. Obviously being offended at someone's uppity attitude is more important than the issue at hand.

Obviously. Especially if that person is a woman.

[Shandris]

191. Consider it a matter of principle...

...but I'll note that no one in the thread that I've seen -- and certainly not in this portion of the subthread -- made any note about 'especially' anything and women. I get that it is easy to categorize people by what you think -might- be true, or by what you might -want- to be true, or what is most convenient to -pronounce- as true...but none of those -make- it true.

I guess you could say that it is...presumptive.

[oldhippie]

143. +2 .....

That's what I have been trying to express but it doesn't come out well.

[mokawanis]

167. Exactly right n/t

[BlueToTheBone]

58. you mean good will to all

I hope. Goodwill to men is rather sexist, sorry. My 87 year old mother used to say that too when she was alive, but she was old and absorbed the sexism and didn't even realize it was.

[Vashta Nerada]

65. Really?

Ugh.

[BlueToTheBone]

91. Really. You left out 51%

of the population by only wishing men a whatever. Really. When your head stops hurting, I hope you can take in the rest of us.

[Vashta Nerada]

109. I was quoting a lyric to a Christmas song.

Wow.

[BlueToTheBone]

128. Sorry, I missed

those quotation marks. Without, it does seem to be your words. Have a great holiday!

[BainsBane]

7. The Great Pumpkin brought it back

to GD several months ago. perhaps even earlier than Halloween.

[BainsBane]

14. Well it certainly has picked up dramatically

[BainsBane]

21. You didn't miss the attempted flame out?

Did you? That's what this OP was in response to. Hey, you hate a few feminists, ignore us. Chill. Enjoy the holidays.

[BainsBane]

24. Here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024221456

[PassingFair]

144. OMG...that THREAD! HOF is communiss!

[xulamaude]

162. How did I miss that one?!

Was the "bat signal" out of gas or something?

[seabeyond]

171. wasnt that a pretty disgustingly offensive Op and thread. and i was told to not take it personally.

not be bothered. nothing to see here.

and they say i am the ugly one.

[The Straight Story]

9. So what you are saying is: Ignore others, it is easy. huh. Have you tried that in real life?

Like if a man looks at you, just ignore it? Easy peasy.

[BainsBane]

13. I do it all the time

All of us do. It wasn't so easy when I was 4, 10, and 12 though. At my age it's now less common and I'm long used to tuning it out. It doesn't terrify me like it did when I was a small child. However, the point of the behavior shown in that Indian PSA is to force women from public space, to claim it as male space. To force women to not go to public places, as is evidenced by the members here who said if we don't want to be harassed we should stay home or wear Burkas.

Now, how do you suggest those Indian women ignore rape? The point of that PSA is that behavior is linked to rape. The cultural attitudes that excuse that kind of harassment are the same that perpetuate rape, and indeed many of the individuals who harass in public also rape. But surely no one on this board is so out of it not to realize there is an epidemic of rape and murder of women in India, so you know very well that is part of what that PSA seeks to address. That some are see cultural efforts to curb harassment and rape as an assault on them says more about them than they realize.

[Jesus Malverde]

25. Ignore just leads to dupes..

BainsBane, you seem to opine on a variety of issues with a thoughtful fresh perspective.

Thanks for your contributions.

[BainsBane]

29. 'Thank you

very kind of you to say. I appreciate many of your posts as well.

[dipsydoodle]

31. I've never put anyone on ignore

and don't intend to start.

Merry Christmas.

[BainsBane]

32. Merry Christmas to you as well, dipsydoodle!

[grahamhgreen]

33. Why ignore? Too much fun! Love ya:)

[CFLDem]

51. +1

[wyldwolf]

35. This is an odd debate. It has plenty of merit, but the lines are so gray in my opinion.

I met my wife because my glance turned into a gaze. Men are visual and she was dressed to attract attention.

At the same time, I've seen men staring at my 8 year old girl which is REALLY creepy and at those points in time, the sexiest supermodel wouldn't have been able to divert my attention from the men who might have been paying a little too much visual attention to my daughter.

[BainsBane]

36. I've been that 8 yr old girl

and they are sick. WTF is wrong with them, and why aren't they in jail?

[wyldwolf]

38. they usually haven't done anything 'wrong.'

... or illegal. And who am I to say the visual attention is sexual (even at times I would testify it was)? But when you're a dad, every man is suspect.

But the 'male gaze' to an age appropriate female? I just can't agree it's inherently wrong.

[The Straight Story]

40. You do hit on something interesting

It seems some people believe/feel that staring equals something sexual. That the person must have sex on the mind and is undressing/fantasizing about something sexual.

Why do people think that way? Maybe because that is what they are doing when they stare?

I've noted elsewhere I can stare at people like John Barrowman (Torchwood/Dr. Who) and Matt Smith (Dr. Who) easily. But my mind would not be on undressing/sexual things (though if I were ever to have a 'bromance' it would be with Barrowman).

I can marvel at a mountain or a cactus (and I do miss the desert) and just stare at the beauty. Some things are simply pleasing to the eyes without their being anything sexual at all involved (a female example would be Arwen in the LOTR movies. Just absolutely beautiful in some of the outfits she wore. Could look at her all day and not think a sexual thought but could appreciate the beauty).

I think it is a bit presumptuous , if not telling, that woman think all men looking at them are thinking sexual things. It is a bias that is perpetuated by a few (who probably believe everything a male does is sex oriented).

[wyldwolf]

41. good points

I 'stare' at my own daughter and she'll catch me sometimes and ask me why and I'll explain to her it's because I love her and she's the best thing that has ever come from me.

After 20 years I still stare at my wife for the same reasons I first did.

And yes, I still do take quick peeks at other women - often younger, sometime older. But I have found my eyes are drawn by women who resemble my wife. The feelings are often sexual (I'm only human) but there are many more feelings involved. Memories of where we were at that point in time in our lives or where we might be years from now.

I do have to say as I've hit my early 40s, I try not to be as obvious.

[KitSileya]

46. It doesn't happen divorced from context.

Few are the women who haven't experienced that even glancing at men who stare is taken as an invitation for more, and many of us have been met with escalating aggression when that advance is rebuffed. When again and again you are called b!tch, or ugly, or a frigid ugly b!tch for refusing to smile on command, or for wanting to read your book on the subway, or spend time with your friends at a bar, instead of pandering to guys who think it is their god-given right to interpret even the smallest scrap of token politeness as a license to hit on you, you get very cynical about men looking at you. You certainly get a lot of training in determining the intent behind the glancing/staring/leering - you don't think we can't see who looks at us admiringly, and who is sizing us up for sexual fantasies or as a piece of meat. I am pretty sure you can see whether a guy who looks at you has no ulterior motives, or for example is looking for a brawl. Same difference - just a question of experience and socialization.

[MostlyAmused]

54. Blurred lines

A mountain is a thing. A cactus is a thing. A person is not a thing. Staring at a person is not the same as staring at a thing.

Objectification can be obvious or subtle, but the blurred line does start right there, with confusing a person with a thing, or not caring about the difference.

[treestar]

56. IT could depend on her experience

Women you don't know could have been raped or molested as kids. I would think men would realize not to stare at women they don't know for those reasons.

[BainsBane]

44. Did you watch the PSA?

Because I am getting seriously sick of people conflating looking at a woman with harassment. They are basic concepts that anyone who reaches adulthood with any modicum of social skills should know.

Then read this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4220427

[wyldwolf]

47. I did and I know exactly where you're coming from

No arguments from me on that point.

[xulamaude]

64. "But when you're a dad, every man is suspect."

You know what? When you're a girl/woman every man who is leering at you is suspect.

Take your discomfort and multiply it by about a million.

[HERVEPA]

164. In jail for looking at a little girl that way? Are you nuts?

Creepy yes. Disgusting yes. What is your charge. Leering???

[BainsBane]

186. I assume anyone who leers at little girls

Is a pedophile. It's beyond creepy. It's sick.

[HERVEPA]

219. That is an incorrect and I believe ridiculous assumption

They should be arrested for what they are POSSIBLY thinking???
Plenty of people have crappy thoughts and don't act on them.

[BainsBane]

220. Clearly they are pedophiles

If they have acted on it they have child porn and raped children. I really am not interested in hearing people defend men who prey on Children. My tolerance for the complete denial of human rights to anyone but men has reached its limit.

[HERVEPA]

243. My post was in response to men who looked at kids a certain way.

You took it far beyond what I said.

[treestar]

57. In what context?

So if we don't want to be stared at, we have to limit our wardrobe?

Do you want your wife to dress to attract attention now?

There are men who care about what goes on in the woman's head, too.

[wyldwolf]

60. In MY context

I've only spoken from my personal experience.

Do you want your wife to dress to attract attention now?

She often does. Even when she's dressed for work or church, she attracts attention. If she wants to dress sexy when we go out, I'm fine with that.

Sorry, while I understand being leered at can make someone uncomfortable, it's a fact of life and beyond that, it's evolutionary. I believe it's impolite to stare, but no one as the right not be looked at.

[treestar]

61. You mean you can't help it?

That's what the science defenses usually mean. Yet so many men can control themselves.

It's too bad if someone doesn't like it?

[wyldwolf]

66. Sorry, 'science' is not a defense, it's a fact

Are you denying men (and to a lesser extent women) have an evolutionary predisposition to gravitate to what they see as a more physically appealing mate?

If you have a chip on your shoulder for some reason, fine. I can sling shit with you all day. But scientific fact is just that - fact.

[treestar]

68. I'm denying that people have to stare at strangers who aren't enjoying it

And that they can't control themselves from doing that.

So many men can. It's scientifically observable that people do have manners sometimes.

[wyldwolf]

70. ok, I'm with you on some people not enjoying being looked at...

... but how does one KNOW? If I was single and a woman caught my eye, am I doing something wrong by checking her out? I don't think so. Again, where is the line drawn?

[seabeyond]

84. best of both worlds and easy answer. see her as a person. if she is interested, you would actually

be able to recognize, cause you are already seeing her as a person and will be able to pick up on the cues.

it seems to me, when all right is in one answer, maybe that might ought to be the answer

seeing her as a person, women just feel the difference, so they do not have back up. they are receptive. warm. you will be respectful, that is always a good thing to give. and you will be able to connect, which seems to be the want

[seabeyond]

77. why would you suggest it is evo when in fact, from a young boy culture taught you it was your right

to be presented the female body to oggle.

being a parent and having watched child development, i know that it is much more likely a culture of continually presenting the man a thing to look at. all the friggin time, day in and day out, day after day after day.

why wouldnt men walk thru there day seeing women as a thing being presented to them

it seems way more likely than what happened zillions of years ago

dontcha think?

[HERVEPA]

165. no.

[seabeyond]

169. lol

[Festivito]

39. If there are trolls, they would have a wonderful time fostering these fights.

And there are trolls.

AND THEY CAN TROLL ON ALL SIDES EVEN OPPOSING SIDES OF ANY ARGUMENTS THEY CHOOSE JUMPING BACK AND FORTH UNDER DIFFERENT NAMES.

Don't fall for it please.

[Sheldon Cooper]

43. I have most of the MRAs from the He-Man's Group on Ignore, and it's made a huge

difference in my enjoyment of this site. If people don't like me, I heartily invite them to do the same.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

242. Someone just lost their alerting priveleges for 24 hours ...

At Tue Dec 24, 2013, 07:23 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

I have most of the MRAs from the He-Man's Group on Ignore, and it's made a huge
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4222512

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

MRAs have been defined as being a hate group on the level of skinheads, and neo-Nazis, etc. This person just accused the folks who are in the Mens group of being MRAs, i.e. members of a hate group. That should be hideworthy. You cant call fellow DUers skinheads or Nazis.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Dec 24, 2013, 07:32 PM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Why was this put on alert?
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: yawn.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: MRA is the acronym for Mens Rights Activist. While some MRAs certainly behave hatefully, I dispute that MRAs collectively a "hate group." Sheldon Cooper's comments were civil. Vote to leave it.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Wow, the alerter is really stretching it. Wasted effort. Not going to hide.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: This thread getting out of hand. I say nuke the whole thing. This post in particular does not stand out enough to be hidden.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Sheldon Cooper]

245. Hahahahahahaha!!!!!

And a merry Christmas to all!!

[etherealtruth]

49. I am still trying to figure out why ...

... feminists expressing feminist thought, on a reportedly liberal forum, would be identified as causing dis-harmony ...

One would think feminism and all other ideologies seeking equality for all would be welcome and embraced here.

[oldhippie]

52. It's not the thoughts that are being expressed .......

..... it's the way they are expressed.

[xulamaude]

62. Like the way they were expressed in the PSA?

The PSA that ruffled up some MRA feathers enough to cause comments along the lines of 'if you don't like men looking at you just stay home' and 'it's men's job to approach women' and 'women stare at boobs just as much as men - science fact!'?

Are those the expressions you're talking about? Or are your referring to how the feminists aren't being 'nice' in the face of that crap?

[oldhippie]

72. I never saw the PSA .....

I am referring to the means of expression of certain of the feminists here in the face of that crap. I find it offensive.

And no, I won't provide examples. That would be calling out.

[xulamaude]

75. Then maybe you should watch it -

it is linked to in this very thread.

Then you can see for yourself why some feminists were rightfully offended by those types of comments.

[oldhippie]

81. Why or if they were "rightfully" offended ....

... is irrelevant to my comment.

[xulamaude]

86. Yeah. Far out. nt

[oldhippie]

90. Far out?

Ha! You just made me think about Maynard G. Krebs.

[xulamaude]

93. Old Hippie??

[oldhippie]

101. Yep, though I believe ol' Maynard ....

... was probably more officially a "beatnik" rather than a "hippie." I'm dating myself, but I actually remember the beatniks.

[seabeyond]

88. i am done with this old. too many people are doing just what you did. creating an animosity toward

us purposely to create a dislike.

stop.

no one is being disrespectful to you. you are only feeding the hate toward us.

[oldhippie]

98. Yes ma'am!

I understand that I am to stop expressing any opinion contrary to what you or any feminists say on DU, as that is being hateful and creating dislike. Furthermore, any opinion I have as to whether the conduct of certain posters is offensive to me is strictly forbidden.

Yes ma'am!

And I can't help but ask (I hope this is not construed as being hateful), but is your SHIFT key broken?

[seabeyond]

106. you did the exact thing with this post. it is all about creating a hateful caracture to dismiss

voice. i am not painting you as a hateful creature. i am addressing what you post. you on the other hand are too busy talking about me and purposely misstating what i am actually saying, to create your ugly

i am allowed to say... stop.

[xulamaude]

114. HEY? IS YOUR SHIFT KEY BROKEN?

I ONLY ASK BECAUSE IT IS TOTES RELEVANT TO THIS THREAD AND YOUR MENTAL HEALTH STATUS.

REALLY, I AM CONCERNED FOR YOUR WELFARE BECAUSE MAYBE YOUR SHIFT KEY IS MAYBE BROKEN.

[seabeyond]

119. ya know. cant argue, go to this. so silly. obviously i have no desire to shift.

yet for decades people feel the need to suggest i do. like what. all of a sudden i am going to do what others want me to do, when i feel no need, nor have a desire to do it.

ya, i am that pliable. the signs are everywhere.

[etherealtruth]

111. That may be true sometimes

We all have our unique reactions to others. I do notice a relatively small group of posters that appear heavily invested in denying that sexism exists or that women are negatively impacted by it ... regardless of who says it or how they say it.

In truth there is also a cadre of posters that deny that racism exists as well ... I don't know if there is overlap in these groups. Additionally, (it has been some time) there was a group, years ago, that appeared to have a blatant homophobic agenda at worst and were absolute deniers of bias and abuse against the LGBT community. I see many of the same tactics and attitudes directed toward "feminist posters"

My hope is that posters would seek to enrich themselves from the viewpoints of others. I have no first hand knowledge of what it can be like to be a black man in the US ... but, I am capable of understanding how prolific racism remains.

[oldhippie]

121. Thank you for a civil reply .....

For the record, I am not one that would deny that sexism, racism or homophobia exists. And attempting to educate and correct those issues is a good and noble cause. But some (too many) here go over the top in their rhetoric and that I can find offensive. Some here will take any generalization and try to turn it personal, just to be able to further their rants.

And sadly,:

My hope is that posters would seek to enrich themselves from the viewpoints of others.

That only works when it is a viewpoint accepted by the group. There are a number of viewpoints that are totally unacceptable, and makes your hope impossible here. How many here have expressed an interest to enrich themselves from the viewpoints of the Duck guy?

Again, my point was that I don't have much problem with the issues that certain members here feel important, it is the way that they express them, and that they feel entitled to express them in any way they wish because they are so passionate about the subject.

[JTFrog]

131. So sick of the this fucking tone argument.

I'm glad your feathers are ruffled. It obviously means that someone is doing something right.

[oldhippie]

139. Well, gee, thanks .......

I think you just said, "I'm glad you're being offended."

Thank you for taking the time out of your busy Christmas Eve to say that.

Unbelievable.

[JTFrog]

145. I make no apologies for women who stand up

and scream from the top of their lungs:

I AM WOMAN
HEAR ME ROAR

Sorry you are offended by strong outspoken women who won't just smile and talk in a whisper.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

176. You don't need to make apologies on behalf of women. You need to apologize for your own behavior.

I just went back to make sure I didn't miss anything that oldhippie posted. I didn't. He started by saying something about the tone of what's being said, and he drew a clear distinction between the content (which he agrees with) and the tone (which he doesn't agree with). From that, one poster tells him he's spreading the hate, then clarifies (incomprehensibly) that she doesn't mean he's hateful. And now you're screaming Helen Reddy tunes at him and assuming he's "offended by strong outspoken women who won't just smile and talk in a whisper". You're making shit up. Not cool at all. Oldhippie said nothing at all in his posts to deserve this sort of character assassination. You're making DU suck. Please stop.

[seabeyond]

179. a consistent argument from people that are anti feminism tell us... if we would use a different tone

be more feminine. softer. quieter. sugar than vinegar.

so though you may not find it offensive being directed to change our tone, it is something we hear often. and it really does not matter how we say it, the tone is always wrong. hence, making us always the culprit. the one causing the problem. we are the reason particular people will not listen.

that is why we pick up on "the tone" argument and you may not have.

[JTFrog]

227. I will not apologize.

I refuse any and all finger wagging from men about "the tone of what's being said".

Helen Reddy rocks. I'll continue to "scream" her lyrics anywhere and anytime I want.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

228. Yeah, I was pretty sure it wasn't in your character to apologize for being boorish

And here...have a virtual cookie for asserting your right to bellow music from the 70's. You've really advanced the cause of...well, I'm sure you can come up with something.

[seabeyond]

229. not that you actually addressed the issue that i pointed out to you. so you can better understand

why women react to the "tone" argument. seems like your purpose is to merely insult, and lacks any intent for productive progress.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

231. My purpose was to let the other poster know they were being rude for no good reason

I saw your reply. Do you insist on a response for each of your posts? While it was nice for you to provide background, I considered it and still found the poster to be unnecessarily rude. Go fight with someone else if that's your thing. Not interested.

[seabeyond]

232. when tone is used as a dismissal of ones voice, and we know what it as used as,

why would be be correct frog as rude for rejecting the condescending instruction to shift tone, instead of addressing the poster that first brought up tone?

i do not get that. i see it often. the offending party over looked to go after the person that calls that person out. i have never understood that.

and i am talking to you civilly. it is not about a fight. why would you throw that in?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

233. Merry Christmas, seabeyond. nt

[seabeyond]

235. thank you. and the same to you and yours. nt

[JTFrog]

236. There was very good reason.

THE TONE ARGUMENT IS NOTHING MORE THAN AN ATTEMPT TO SHUT WOMEN UP.

That's not going to happen no matter how many times it's tried here.

I couldn't care less how rude you think I am.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

238. Merry Christmas, JTFrog. nt

[stevenleser]

241. Part of the problem is that a slogan is no reason to stop using common sense.

It's true that in the struggle for equal rights, African Americans, Latinos, LGBT, Jews and various other groups, yes, women too, at times needed to be loud and confrontational to make progress.

That doesnt mean you turn being disagreeable into your preferred modus operandi. The slogan "well behaved women rarely make history" is cute, all of these groups I mentioned had a variation of it and had adherents to behaving in such a way, but the folks most successful in making progress didn't behave like disagreeable jerks.

A cute slogan is just that, a cute slogan. It shouldn't be your entire behavioral philosophy.

[NoOneMan]

59. If we ignore, that means you can brow beat the new posters and non-ignorers unchecked

[xulamaude]

67. Nag, nag, nag...

Brow-beating (?!) the poor defenseless noobs.

Man.

[seabeyond]

89. brow beat? please quit with the insults.

[NoOneMan]

92. If I had a better word, I would use it

I didn't intend to insult you, but be descriptive. I apologize if you took offense.

[seabeyond]

96. it is a caricature that is being continuously created of us women. we are allowed opinion, thought

without nontruths to distract from what we are actually talking about.

i have been insulted so many times over the last week or two, as i continue to be civil. yet, i am created in this caricature to continue an animosity.

address what i post, and i will do the same with others.

[NoOneMan]

99. "created by us" could be more accurate

And by women, I mean a few, and the same usual suspects.

i have been insulted so many times over the last week or two, as i continue to be civil.

Come on now. I think we both know you've given back quite a bit as well.

address what i post, and i will do the same with others.

Ditto.

[seabeyond]

108. suspects? choice of words. and do post where i name call or personally attack. i address the issue

when that cannot be argued, you and others go to personal attacks. i think that is dishonest.

i think it is creating a falsehood that is dishonest.

i will say something.

what i "give back" is an argument you do not like. i am not attacking you. i and replying to what you post.

[NoOneMan]

115. Yep. The Usual Suspects. Its a great pop-culture movie.

Rent it. Its enjoyable, though very few women in the cast.

what i "give back" is an argument you do not like.

That's a strawman (a logical fallacy). Do not try and define people's arguments for them. I wont do that for you.

And when I said that, I meant insults, like calling someone a "douchebag".

[xulamaude]

117. Ah, the lack of context

has stricken many a man low.

[seabeyond]

120. ah nooneman, i am done. i give in good faith, and then the game begins. have a happy holiday.

[NoOneMan]

122. You too!

[oldhippie]

113. Brow beat, hectoring, harping, hen-pecking, ....

... are all on the list of potential forbidden words, as someone, somewhere may consider them sexist and take offense. Oh, and don't even try to mention that a "man-hater" may exist somewhere in the world, as that will surely get your post hidden. (But gun-humper is perfectly acceptable and could not possibly be offensive to any real democrat.)

(Dear jury - please note that I have used all those terms in an illustrative manner and did not direct them at any members of DU. I do not wish to offend, but merely to inform.)

[seabeyond]

123. you would be incorrect. man hater is accepted. i have been called it by at least 5, 6, 7

men, on du, in the last week.

facts are much better than fiction.

you picked a bunch of sexist terminology that has been used against women forever. yet, you feel the right to be able to use the sexist terminology, and offended that you MIGHT, though i doubt, get a post hidden.

argue the right to use racist terminology. lets see how far that gets you.

[oldhippie]

125. No, you would be incorrect ....

I just had a post hidden this morning specifically for using that one term, in general, and not directing it at any particular member of DU.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=inbox&view=1321099

[seabeyond]

129. the link goes to "that is not your message". and good. i am glad to hear. thank you. but, no

that does not make me incorrect as i have had it repeatedly said to me in the last couple weeks and it stands. so maybe it is allowed to be said to me. or, maybe now community standard will step up. it does not invalidate my experience.

[redqueen]

141. Oops

[seabeyond]

146. seems to be two different posters. though i am glad to see that poster finally get one of his posts

hidden. i would like to see oldhippies hide he is talking about, so i can see the validity in his statement.

[oldhippie]

148. Nope, sorry, that wasn't my post .....

This is why mine got hidden:

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Referring to DU women as "man haters" is an offensive personal attack.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Tue Dec 24, 2013, 01:30 AM, and voted 4-2 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: Divisive nonsense like this post shouldn't be welcome on DU. We should strive to be polite and refrain from calling any group of posters here "haters".
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Why bother deleting this post when the OP is about as offensive as you can get?
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: Personal attack. Especially in the context of the sub-thread.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: I find this whole discussion silly. Either you get off on reading posts like Benny's (a guy jerking off nel cuore nella notte) and you roll with it, or you ignore it because it's kinda boring (which, IMHO, it is.) The person who sent the alert needs some psychotherapy or to grow up or at the very least, make a life for herself.

Somehow, in the mind of the alerter, a general comment about some posters in a class (DU women) is a personal (against a specific personality) attack.

OK, this is DU. Live and learn.

[redqueen]

151. Yeah, I thought you posted that other one, mea culpa.

That comment from Juror 6 was very nasty. Interesting that they'd vote to hide your post, and then write that.

[oldhippie]

161. I thought that was kind of strange also .....

.... but people have been known to hit a wrong key. The thing that interests me is that a general comment about the subject and tone of the recent discussions in the "neighborhood" is somehow a "personal" (a person) attack. I learn that some personalize everything.

[seabeyond]

154. #6 sounds like on your side, hit wrong button. i would like to see your post. jsut saw another

accusation of man hater, waiting for a hide. though i did not alert. surely someone will.

[BainsBane]

192. Brow beat: daring to challenge privilege

and worse yet, women expressing views you don't approve of. God forbid.

[NoOneMan]

194. I was more referring to redundant, tag-team shout downs

But yeah, hey, its open to interpretation. If you keep making up things I say, and I keep reciprocating, lets see where we all get at the end of the day. I'm pretty sure its nowhere.

[BainsBane]

195. Oh, so the problem is that more than one woman disagrees with you?

and tells you so? So there is a quota on how many women can speak in one thread?

Making up stuff? I'm pointing to the obvious. You have issues with the fact someone disagrees with you. So put us on ignore. Really, no one will miss you. I promise.

[NoOneMan]

197. So yeah, you keep making up things I say and Ill just reciprocate

Merry Christmas

You disagreeing with me would necessitate we are in a discussion. All you are doing is nipping at me and trying to get a certain response (yep, thats me telling you what you are doing--how's that feel?)

[BainsBane]

199. Oh dear. I spoke out of turn again

I'm such a bad woman. How terrible for me to take exception to my expression of an opinion being called brow beating. I really must learn to rise to the level of intellectual discourse you approve of by using insults rather than having the nerve to disagree with a man.

[NoOneMan]

200. Your behavior has nothing to do with you being a woman

I've seen all sorts behave in this manner. Please don't think it is a reflection of your gender

[BainsBane]

201. Oh, so you say the say thing in all the NSA threads

or the Snowden threads, the Hillary-Warren threads, and anywhere else where people have the nerve to disagree with you?

[NoOneMan]

203. If the shoe fits, Ill call it out

But besides a specific group discussing a certain subject matter, most people know how to behave with civility and act pretty independently. Hence, why this is becoming a problem....

Your turn to pretend I said something immensely offensive about women.

[BainsBane]

205. Really. Are you among that group?

Your transparency page suggests otherwise.

Don't think for a minute your agenda isnt' clear. You resent the fact that some women here raise issues of importance to us that challenge your privilege. This is not the 19th century. You are going to have to deal with it. No one forces you to read any thread. No one forces you to insult people. No one forces you to do anything on this board. It is all your choice. Your bullshit excuses are transparent.

[NoOneMan]

206. With all due respect, wargle bargle

Fart noise here.


Your pretend fan fiction of me deserves no dignified response.

[BainsBane]

210. right, I do recall your saying telling someone

to (blank blank) was completely acceptable. Anyone can see that for themselves on your transparency page. Apparently civility has nothing to do with expressing ideas without insult but instead on having the decency to refrain from posting while feminist.
I don't generally like to bring up such things, but you insisted I could not debate with civility, while it is clear it is you who responded with insults about "brow beating," while your prior insults have been far worse. I suggest you practice what you preach.

[NoOneMan]

212. Yes, it was. I do not think people should cower in the face of prejudice.

An OP that attacks people based on their race, religion, creed, gender, etc, deserves the filthiest responses.

[BainsBane]

207. This OP had a simple message

The ongoing meme is just a handful of feminists make DU suck. If people feel that way, ignore is an easy solution. Then I wished people Happy Holidays. You responded by saying my expressing of my views was "brow beating." You turned a non-confrontational suggestion into an insult. You are in no position to lecture me about civility.

[NoOneMan]

211. Its not that simple. You cannot define acceptable behavior and responses for people

This is the "Shut the fuck up and listen approach" (listen), or "Shut the fuck up and shut the fuck up" (ignore).

My first run in with this group was ugly. I never noticed them before that. I never forgot them after. The tactics and bullying were unacceptable in my opinion. My choice was to either say nothing, or ignore it? What about new DUers subject to that sort of abuse? What about the real world, where people are subjected to bullying or prejudice? The only choice is to listen to it or walk away? We are all just supposed to accept bullying because you have a bad day or a bad life (due to things largely out of our control that we all fight against anyway)?

This entire OP is telling people to either agree with bullying, sexism and generalization (from this very group) or ignore it and let others bear the brunt selectively until they ignore it or leave DU. That is how you let rot fester in a community.

Not going to happen. You want to make generalizations, say prejudice things and bully people? You will be challenged.

You want to discuss gender issues in a rational, reasonable manner to educate and reach consensus? Cool

Now I imagine you are going to respond with something hateful about a man telling you how you are allowed to proceed. Fine. Whatever. I heard the witty retort already. You can respond anyway you want. But you won't always be taken seriously. Clearly, we all don't communicate with the intent of becoming jokes I would imagine.

[RC]

196. The word you are looking for is "Bully".

That is the elephant in the middle of DU's living room. DU's the biggest problem. One side denying it even exists, that they are "just expressing an opinion". The opinions themselves are seldom the problem. It is how they express it. The resultant pile-on, on their current victim. The result is the victims is often afraid to stand up to them after that, for fear of getting too many post hidden. They will alert at the drop of a post. Especially when the bully is losing in the discussion.

I have been on several Juries lately where there was nothing wrong with the post, except for a difference of opinion, and sometime not even that. Most of the rest of the jurors though so too, for the jurors let it stand. The alerter's comments were not fitting the description of the so-called problem of the post in the alert.

Another favorite tactic of the bully, is to accuse others of what they themselves are doing. That you are the bully. Why? Because you stood up to them. How dare you not to be intimidated!
This has been going on since at least since META and is getting worse lately.

You are correct, putting them on ignore is counter productive because it silences the bully to that DU'er and frees the bullies to go to work on others to, intimidate, to silence, run off DU, or to rile a member up to justify an alert and a possible hide.
Democratic Underground itself is going to have to come together to deal with this problem. Someone said there were a dozen members at fault. I am only seeing six or so. All on my black list.

Google 'Adult Bullying' or some similar. The information is illuminating.

[center][/center]

[NoOneMan]

218. Thank you. That is exactly the issue

People will still continue to be bullied, even if we don't see it or challenge it.


And whenever I've alluded to this, I get the expected "oohhhh men are such victims" line. I'm tired of lines.

[LWolf]

69. Why is there even a controversy about feminists?

Shouldn't a supposedly Democratic/democratic/liberal/left website ALL be feminists or male supporters of women and women's rights?

It says a lot about the legitimacy of the site when women are attacked HERE for standing up for themselves.

[wyldwolf]

73. based on my limited knowledge of the threads in question (there have been many)

The discussion has gone from men licking their lips like a hungry lion at the site of a woman (yes, creepy) to, in some cases, guys being shamed for checking out an attractive women in social settings if she doesn't want to be checked out (as if she wears a sign saying such.)

[xulamaude]

78. Limited knowledge, indeed.

guys being shamed for checking out an attractive women in social settings

That is pure bullshit - it was the some fellows spinning what we women were saying.

[Squinch]

80. I think that's a little off.

It went from objections to the hungry lion lip licking to some dependable DUers claiming that those objections amounted to guys being shamed for checking out an attractive woman.

That's very different.

It also included a lot of feigned obtuseness from some posters who claimed they didn't know the difference between showing appreciation and creepy ogling.

Then it went into the very dependable track of "well, if those women don't want men to look at them, why are their breasts visible?"

[LWolf]

82. One man once told me

that "all guys check out women; some are evolved enough to be discreet."

I don't know if that's true, but it sounds like it might have an appropriate application.

[treestar]

85. It's actually not

There were some posts on the difference.

It's the men's rights types purposely conflating that in order to distract. No one said don't check people out, it is the creepy staring. Some want to conflate that in order to justify the staring aspect.

[seabeyond]

94. that is what the argument devolved to because it is much easier for SOME men to derail

a discussion, when they don't want it discussed. it is easy to repeatedly yell accusations with no back up regardless of what is actually being said.

[NoOneMan]

107. some

Merry Christmas


Applies to women too. Some people. Frankly, the argument style here could use a whole lot of improvement in regards to a lot of these hot button threads.

[seabeyond]

112. yes. because i gave you and others more credit to be honest, than what you obviously deserved.

and i gave you credit that you would actually hold some integrity in discussion. when i obviously am not talking about ALL men, i think it is insulting to have to put a qualifier, believing that we are grown up and educated enough to recognize men, in general, is not ALL men.

but, that seems to be something that SOME men refuse to do. so hence forth, i will what i feel, treat you with less respect and qualify everything i say. or i will attempt anyway. personally i find it insulting and it is hard for me to purposely insult.

[NoOneMan]

118. I appreciate that

Believe it or not, qualifying a statement converts it from a prejudice, gender based generalization to an anecdotally supported observation, which many are quite fine discussing. I think its a great step toward a more healthy dialogue for DU

[seabeyond]

124. i think it is dishonest. nt

[Marr]

174. Women don't communicate clearly.

By "women", of course, I mean some women.

But that's just pedantic, surely. How could anyone take offense at what I said, when I meant something else? Qualifiers are such a waste of time.

[seabeyond]

175. actually the opposite. saying women is not saying ALL. you know it. i know it.

[Marr]

183. At best, it's ambiguous.

I think most people would interpret unqualified statements like that very broadly. They can only read your words, not your mind.

http://www.generalsemantics.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/words-and-what-they-do-to-you/pages/CM_wordsL14.html

[BainsBane]

193. They chose to make it about that

They chose to express poutrage over the horror of an Indian PSA because they think those values too radical. These are the same guys who insist every rapist ever accused is innocent and every woman who goes to authorities ab out rape is a liar. It's really not too hard to figure out what the agenda is.

[NoOneMan]

83. I'm not sure there i

DU should definitely support feminists and their issues. But using that flag as an excuse to divisively attack people repeatedly over trivial issues ad naseum gets a little old and a little suspicious. The backlash isn't against feminism, but against disruptors claiming to be feminists.

[xulamaude]

97. Define feminist for us "disruptors" "claiming" to be feminists,

if you will.

[NoOneMan]

102. To state that people claim to be feminists doesn't state they are not in fact

I do not know if they are or not. Its the internet afterall.

As far as disruptors, a great definition is those that cause disruptions.

Anything else?

[xulamaude]

104. Wut? Um, no thanks.

[Squinch]

134. Do you tell people you "take Obama at his word" when he says he's an American?

[NoOneMan]

135. Is Obama an anonymous internet poster with patterned behavior of disruptive e-fights?

This is the internet. Everyone might be who they claim to be. It still isn't wise to assume anyone actually is

[Mopar151]

105. The controversy isn't about feminisim per se

So much as it is about certain styles of "debate". Like pre-emptively kicking potential posters out of your sandbox if they see certain desparities between stated ideals and reality...... Or co-opting the "meme and narrative" messaging popular in Authouratarian circles, rather than accept the Egaltarian model of debate, which uses fact and logic.

[LWolf]

185. Maybe.

Or maybe it's something like the choice issue: men shouldn't have a say over women's bodies, and men can't really speak from the point of view of the victim, unless they have been a victim of such predation. One man on one of these threads TRIED to present the idea that females are as predatory as males as far as the leering, jeering, commenting, and other behaviors that make women feel preyed upon; that it's not a male/power problem. I disagree. While I know that there are always outliers, and I'll defend men against female predation as fiercely as I do women, I don't think it happens with the same frequency or to the same degree.

I personally think that men SHOULD be part of the conversation; nothing will change, if they are not. I don't think that "debate" should include advocating for the right of men to treat women less than respectfully, any more than I think there should be "debates" about the right to racism; at least, certainly not on a website that is SUPPOSED to be Democratic/liberal.

I would hope that people who claim to be "liberals" would have evolved beyond that.

[seabeyond]

189. you walk into someones sand box, be respectful. i do when walking into another. not respectful,

expect to be kicked out.

that would be fact and logic.

i suggest that you may not being seeing the side that uses fact and logic the same as i do. i address what a poster says. i do use fact and logic. if an opinion, i state, i think. those that respond generally take the authortarian approach ignoring the fact and logic, using emotions. insults. personal attacks. i stay away from it.

so, depending on exactly what you meant in your posts, i might or might not agree with you.

[rrneck]

95. Ignore? No way.

Not when I can watch true believing fundamentalist proselytizers on one side feeding on their own sanctimony and logicians on the other trying to solve a problem with no data.

I was raised in fundy Christian south and this is nothing new to me.

[seabeyond]

116. so, you manner in addressing is to create a false caricature to paint a group of women in an

image you will find easier to argue with. i am not a fundamentalist. please, do not give this to me. it is an insult as i am sure you meant it to be. argue what is posted, not a false characterization.

[rrneck]

130. Liberals are all about cultural change.

Some change is slow, some change is rapid. Generally speaking, the more liberal you are, the more cultural change you want. There is a reason the word "revolution" appears so often in left leaning discourse.

It's my understanding that revolutionary movements have a fairly predictable life cycle. As success is achieved through change, there is always a group of revolutionaries who are more radical than the rest. Thus, there is a certain amount of tension between those revolutionaries that have achieved a measure of their revolutionary goals and those who feel that more change is in order. So now, the actual "winners" in the revolution become "conservatives" and thus enemies of the "true revolutionaries". Depending on the power dynamics there could be purges by the the radicals against the conservatives within the revolution, or the radicals could just become a contentious fringe.

So why doesn't this process of change through ideological purification continue until a utopia arrives? I think one way is that the more "radical" the radicals become the more they focus on ideology and doctrine than on how it will actually work in the real world. It becomes a litmus test to judge others instead of a plan for change. Whether the most radical of the radicals are actually able to enforce this adherence to their understanding of doctrine depends on how much real world power they have.

So now, consider the history of HoF here at DU. There was contention, a power struggle, an attempted coup, ideological splintering, demands that rivals be purged, and constant drum beating demands that others adhere to an ideological ideal.

You don't need a god to have a religion. And you don't need a holy book to have a sacred text. It all depends on the passion and objectives of the true believers. Is this a bad thing? Not really. There's nothing wrong with devotion to an ideal. Philosophers and shamans have devoted their lives to such things for millenia, and since politics is the religion of the enlightenment, that impulse continues right along with it.

[seabeyond]

136. you create what you want to argue. one can also argue that we have been thru all this in the past,

backlash and taking huge steps backwards makes it appear radical when in reality we are standing on the same ground we were on three decades ago,

you can create your own story to live that will meet your agenda.

secondly. if you do not have people putting furthering ideas out there, to sit with people, whether going forward or not, you will never have forward movement. hence the need of the radical to keep progression moving forward.

you want to create it into a religion, you can. i will not sit in your creation. i will not allow another to define me in a nontruth. present evidence of the behavior and i will address that. simply creating it? no.

[rrneck]

157. I'm sure you're aware of how HoF was created

and there have been plenty of demands that members be banned and demands for changes in the TOS. Anyone that has posted here for any length of time can see it. I don't have to present evidence since I am not attempting an indictment, since an indictment assumes wrongdoing. Devotion to ideology is not necessarily a bad thing.

ETA

I should never be surprised when I only have to look as far as the thread I'm in to see what I'm talking about.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024222212#post133
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024222212#post140

[seabeyond]

170. the Op says if you do not like us, ignore us. that is nothing to do with banning, nor changing the

tos.

talking about repug war on woman and fighting men on du has nothing to do with your post either. or was it the picture i put up and wishing frog a happy christmas. i do not get that.

second link went to my picture. again, i do not get the relevance to you comments.

as far as discussing changing the TOS. changing it back to what du has always had. it was brought up from a host in the feminist forum. not hof. it was argued by women universally, not only hof. you accusation is incorrect.

[rrneck]

177. Why would I want to ignore someone who so desperately wants to be heard?

That would be rude.

Link #1:
"It just sucks that we have to fight a few so called democrats around here as well."

Fighting "so called democrats" who aren't as passionate about the liberal ideal I suppose.

And link #2 is where you agreed, all in the space of a few minutes.

As far as changing DU back to what it always had, well that's an interesting idea. You see, the political right has its radical members as well. The difference is that the right doesn't push for change to something new, but for change to what has already been. And that might be why the feminist left and the religious right find themselves on the same page when it comes to porn.

[seabeyond]

180. again, you were supposedly giving suport to your argument we want to change TOS and something else.

those two posts did not address what you had in the post i was replying to hence my comment.

you are arguing something different.

"Why would I want to ignore someone who so desperately wants to be heard?" all kinds of people have all kinds of reasons they do not want to listen. if you expect me to tell you why you may not want to hear what is being said, i cannot give you an answer.

As far as changing DU back to what it always had, well that's an interesting idea. You see, the political right has its radical members as well. The difference is that the right doesn't push for change to something new, but for change to what has already been. And that might be why the feminist left and the religious right find themselves on the same page when it comes to porn.

you made the accusation that hof wanted to change the TOS. i corrected that accusation. that seemed to be the only point in you bringing up the tos and other thing i do not remember. again, here you are going in a totally different direction. you are creating reasons for the tos change, without knowing all the number of reasons so many women across the board, gave. i am not arguing this with you. nor supplying the info. go into help forum adn you will see the thread. gormy cuss started it. you can educate yourself if you are interested.

i am off to participate in my christmas

happy holidays.

[rrneck]

182. Happy holidays to you as well.

The nice thing about internet forums is that anybody really interested in running down information can do exactly that. Those that are interested will have a look. Of course, those most likely to look are the same ones involved in the controversy in the first place, hence the ones who least need to look. Funny, ain't it.

[Zorra]

126. Duck Dynasty's PREACHER PATRIARCH Phil Robertson: "A good woman is hard to find. Mainly because

these boys are waiting until they get to be about 20 years old before they marry 'em. Look, you wait till they get to be about 20 years old, the only picking that's going to take place is your pocket. You gotta marry these girls when they're 15 or 16, they'll pick your ducks." - Phil Robertson

Land o' Goshen! What point is this handful of subversive feminists trying to make? What could it be? Can't they just explain what their problem is in plain simple English?

[Jester Messiah]

127. I just regret that we're dividing this house when we should be fighting the Republicans. [nt]

[JTFrog]

133. Republicans want to control women and their bodies.

We are fighting the Republicans. It just sucks that we have to fight a few so called democrats around here as well.

[seabeyond]

140. and you, woman. because i love you so. and have not heard your voice in so long... YOU...

have a beautiful couple days.

love you so much.

[JTFrog]

142. Thank you sea.

Happy Holidays!

[JTFrog]

150. You poor thing.

Bless your heart.

[Jester Messiah]

153. And yours.

But, better be getting on with the reporting and post-hiding and whatnot, I'm sure you've got other business to be about.

[JTFrog]

156. Does it make you feel better to tell me what to do?

I bet it does.

[Jester Messiah]

158. It's a prediction, not a command.

I personally couldn't give a rat's ass what you do.

[JTFrog]

160. Hence all your posts on what

the evil wymmens is doing on DU.

But thank you for not dropping a rat's ass into the thread.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

163. Are you or are you not

trying to help RadFems control his eyes?

[JTFrog]

166. The war on men is obviously out of control.

[xulamaude]

184. LOL!

[NoOneMan]

137. +1

[redqueen]

147. Ah, the old 'More Important Issues' derailing tactic

http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/resources/mirror-derailing-for-dummies/#moreimportantly

We all agree about fighting republicans. If you have an issue pertaining to that which you want to discuss, start another OP and hide these.

[Jester Messiah]

155. Funny you should mention rail.

It certainly feels like this place is being railroaded. Hijacked, one might say.

[lumberjack_jeff]

168. Because nothing is more important than alienating more men from the Democratic party.

It's okay though because I'm sure some of them were creeps.

[BainsBane]

208. Alienating women does appear to be more important

As evidenced by the behavior of some.

I love that you think what a few feminists say on this site has an impact on how people vote. Do you really believe those men you mentioned so weak willed? How unfortunate for them and you.

[lumberjack_jeff]

215. I think it would be remarkable that "the behavior of some"

... doesn't convince some men that they aren't welcome in this club.

[seabeyond]

237. when you stop creating our behavior into something it isnt, then i will take you seriously. and jeff

[BainsBane]

187. Would that be like the division around the NSA, Showden, Manning

Hillary Clinton-Warren, ACA, Social Security, etc.... Or is it that women's rights just aren't as important?

[Kurska]

173. But then I'd miss out on the delicious drama of the week n/t

[rrneck]

181. More fun than a barrel of monkeys.

[seabeyond]

190. some of us actually do not see it as a game. and ya, we get it that for some, womens issue is a game

[99Forever]

204. Or Trash your threads?

Like this? Bub Bye.

[BainsBane]

209. that works too

BainsBane is the name for your ignore list.

[99Forever]

214. Yes it did.

If you were important enough to me, I'd put you on ignore. You aren't.

[Silent3]

224. There's way too much that ails DU for anyone or any one group to take full credit.

Besides, who wants to miss out on so much drama?

[BainsBane]

240. I agree, at least with the first part of that

Though there was a recent, quite spectacular attempt at a flameout that cited a few feminists, one in particular by name, as responsible for the downfall of humanity on this site.

[Notafraidtoo]

225. I am a red blooded

100% straight male and i support your rights to not be made to feel unsafe, objectified by creepy assholes, its so weird to me that the party of intellectuals has so many anti intellectuals who can not do 5 minutes of self examination. this is the party of empathy and yet so many on this board seem to have zero.

Its not hard not to stare and objectify guys, treat people like people no one is saying you cant find someone attractive just don't treat them like a object or invade their mind with your creepy stares.

Why is it so hard for people to understand this.

[seabeyond]

230. i am in love. i had to reread a couple times to make sure i was comprehending.

love i tell you.

[BainsBane]

239. Thank you

It is such a simple point. I don't know why some have trouble understanding it.
Happy Holidays!