If I hadn't bothered to start an OP from the progressive point of view,

[redqueen]

we wouldn't be seeing so many other threads.

The message is clear. As long as we shut up and don't call out sexism, there's not a problem.

Talk back, and it's a problem.

[ismnotwasm]

1. Yeah the sports Illustrated one is funny as hell (the men are objectified one)

At least DU never ceases to amuse. Boy they get defensive fast

[cinnabonbon]

2. It amused me too.

But the guy wasn't nearly objectified as much as the women were in the other one! They should have used a picture from the Hawkeye Initiative, then they would have understood what objectification means.

[redqueen]

7. They don't understand and they don't care to understand.

I made the mistake of attempting to actually engage with one of the most frequently dismissive people on these issues. Wasted at least a dozen posts trying to explain something he had no intention of understanding.

Done beating my head against that wall.

[cinnabonbon]

8. It's sad that it's come to this.

I thought it was considerate of you to make another thread rather than talk more in the SI one they made. It let them have their space while we had ours. But no ,they needed to come and screw up the other place too, instead of letting us have some real discussions about it.

[redqueen]

9. That's the thing, they don't WANT any real discussions about it.

They want to obfuscate, and use dishonest framing, and do anything and everything they can to ensure there IS NO real discussion about it.

Because male privilege.

[cinnabonbon]

10. They've got to protect it at all cost, I get that.

I just wonder if they know, deep down in their terrified selves, what they're actually doing. All the moving of goal posts and straw men... are they doing it on purpose, or do they actually think they're being logical when they come up with this stuff?

[redqueen]

13. I can only hope so.

This stuff isn't new. Feminists and sociologists have been discussing it for decades.

[rock]

14. Sometimes a forum for freedom of speech

induces one to over-exercise that freedom.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

3. talk back ,,, is another turn of phrase with which I want to take issue

fuck a bunch of talk back.

not children here.

some of us (you included redqueen, not about you) are trying to have adult conversation.

the rest is just background noise.

[redqueen]

6. Yes, I used those words intentionally.

Because that's the dynamic involved here.

Look how anyone who disagrees with bro-approved feminism is treated.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

11. yes, those words used intentionally ... their condescending *tone*

[BainsBane]

4. One admitted that first thread was retaliation

It was planned purposefully to insult and offend, to claim DU as male space. I'm all for creating your own threads. I would suggest that is a better option than feeding theirs, when it's clear their expressed purpose is to incite and inflame.

[redqueen]

5. Thanks. I just wanted feminists to have a pro-active space to discuss the issue,

where the OP was presented with an actual awareness of objectification.

Rather than a reactive thread, where the OP was ... well, what it was.

[seabeyond]

12. no. cause they had no battle going on, they started with a couple threads, and then SI

thread to start a battle. you pulling out the OP only create the ten threads to attack your one.

[geek tragedy]

15. the SI swimsuit issue is softcore porn, like Maxim but with more pretense

really an anachronism if you think about it