Longtime DUers in our gay community are being made to feel

[EFerrari]

unwelcome here. I'm not "concerned" -- I'm pissed. And while that's my problem, I want to know what we can do to change that.

In all honesty, I haven't seen most of what has upset people. This week has been super busy for me and I haven't been paying very close attention -- sorry.

DU is a big board and the Rule of the Unchanging Internet Opinions applies, no doubt. But, seriously, there must be more than one thing we can do to make this situation better so old timers (or anyone) who are gay don't feel driven away from this progressive community.

We need some suggestions here. Let's try to be thoughtful. If you want to go off, please post to one of the 52 other threads. I respectfully ask for this thread to be quiet and constructive, not loud and obnoxious, lol. If all you can do to show your support is kick, great.

We don't need to lose any part of our heart or our spine. We need both. And, we need to remember our solidarity is what sets us apart, what defines us in a very real way.



To our friends who are considering taking a break or leaving, I want to tell you that I love you and that I respect your decision and that this community needs you to make it better, to keep moving it forward.

[MADem]

1. Why? nt

[EFerrari]

3. Could you be a little more specific, MADem? I'm slow today.

lol

:hi:

[MADem]

17. Why are longtime gay DU members being made to feel unwelcome? NT

[EFerrari]

27. I think other posters are answering your question down thread

and they have better information than I do. All I know is, too many people are feeling this way for me to be able to discount it in any way at all.

[MADem]

61. If people are saying inappropriate things, there's that ALERT button.

I haven't seen any inappropriate language, myself. But if I did, that's how I'd handle it.

People who act like assholes can't make others feel "unwelcome" unless the ones who are offended find some validity in their assholey opinions. When people act like dumbasses, they don't deserve any credit or respect. Their views have no WEIGHT, see? Punch that ALERT button and move on.

I think that it's quite acceptable to nail Craig for a bunch of things, to include:

--Incredible hypocrisy: Do as I say, not as I do. Hide in the closet and cast invective and bullshit laws on people just like you. The "Being gay is a crime, unless you're ME--because I'm not gay, I just like to do gay-ISH things every so often."

--Breaking the law: He broke two laws. Hooking up in bathrooms is just "not on." He should go to a bar and pick someone up, like normal people do, if he wants to get his jollies on. Too cheap to buy someone a drink, is that it?

--Cheating on his spouse: So much for family values. Is it "not cheating" if it's not a female, is that it, Larry?

--Being a mean, pompous asshole with a mean, pinched mouth like a cat's asshole. That, in itself, he should do time for!!!

If he were cheating on his wife with a floozy, or hiring prostitutes for blow jobs behind dumpsters, he wouldn't be getting the kid gloves treatment. He certainly doesn't deserve any tip-toeing just because he's a self-loathing, cheating asshole.

[EFerrari]

73. I submit that it would be hard to surf the Craig thread tsunami

objectively. And more to the point, this isn't about Craig at all but about how we hold discussions here.

[MADem]

95. Well, if it isn't about Craig, then why are people upset?

You're always going to have idiots in every crowd. If people are so sensitive that they "feel unwelcome" and are unable to come back at obnoxious assholes with a hearty "Fuck You!" then maybe they need to step away from the keyboard, or go somewhere other than a "discussion forum"--people ARE going to debate, have differing views, and some are gonna be jerks. That's life.

This place is better than some--at least the ALERT option exists. Why not hit ALERT instead of starting "Someone Hurt My FEEEEEELINGS" threads? Threads that, quite likely, the "offenders" never will see? Or better still, respond directly to the asshole, quote what they said, call them an asshole, explain why one is pissed at them, and THEN hit ALERT?

You're also going to have people who are hypersensitive, like that remark about "meat flaunting" downthread. I mean, really...that's a bit OTT, IMO. Eating meat isn't a crime, but "meat flaunting" apparently is....

[EFerrari]

97. Okay. Please reread my OP for the goal of this thread.

Blaming people for how they feel isn't one of the objectives. Thanks.

[MADem]

115. Who's BLAMING? My suggestion is pretty straightforward. Don't put up with shit.

Don't whine, fight back. Call people on inappropriate or prejudiced commentary. Hit the ALERT button.

It's quite plain, really. And it would solve the problem.

[EFerrari]

117. Being active on our own behalf is a good idea.

:thumbsup:

[kenfrequed]

235. Uhm

I read some of the responses to yoru statement, as well as the threads going down and I am still kind of confused about what exactly is going on here.

Is there a way you could explain what the trouble is?

[EFerrari]

248. If you read this thread, the concerns will become clear. n/t

[kenfrequed]

265. I think I get it...

But I did have to wade through dozens of sub threads to get a handle on it. People do seem a bit crazy about this and I wonder how much is actual venom and how much is angry sarchasm against a political party that seems bent on homophobia being a 'family value.' The internet is terrible for how much it decontextualizes our communications and forces many to have to actually write in the word 'sarcasm.' Good thing Jonathan Swift didn't have the internet, of course most of the stupid (intentional or not) homophobic statements were a far cry from anything remotely Swiftian.

As to the incident at the airport itself, I actually feel sorry for Craig. I think it is sad that he felt the need to get his thrills in this fashion. I wonder if there was not a part of him that wanted to get caught, maybe he was tired of it all. I also feel that maybe the police should be putting their efforts elsewhere, personally I feel no safer for having their presence patrolling the potty.

I appreciate the concern you have on this matter. I did drop by the GLBT threads but it seemed for the few 'straight apologies' there was a single 'go home' reply. Of course I figured there had to be reason for this and wanted to trace it all back, but I don't have access to looking back at what individual posters have posted to or about.

I think I will go back to ignoring republican hypocrites, and stick to posting on the issues I usually do.

[Toasterlad]

551. "for the few 'straight apologies' there was a single 'go home' reply"

Could you explain what you mean by this? The "straight apologies" I've read have been met almost universally by grateful acceptance. Is there a thread you could link to?

[kenfrequed]

659. Hmm in retrospect...

I tried to find it but all I could find was a possibly manipulative posting by "lazer47" the whole thread may have been nonsense. I no longer agree with that part of my post and am in error.

[EFerrari]

596. I wasn't trying to avoid your question, rather, I wasn't there for

most of it and thought it would be better to refer to the posts of the folks who were.

[foreigncorrespondent]

356. Where do I begin?

This happens every time some asshole who is hated amongst the DU membership gets caught in some male on male bonding, or the Dem's lose an election, or the countless other reasons, the gay community of DU finds homophobic tones amongst certain members of the larger DU community.

It will first start out (in the case of an asshole being caught out) just pointing out the hypocrisy of it all. Fair enough, the gay community of DU will be involved in that as well. But sue enough it goes from pointing out hypocrisy to rather anti gay, and very disgusting comments being made about gay people, or more to the point, gay males. When we (the gay community) confronts the people involved we are told we are being too sensitive. When we call out the bullshit in threads we make, we get told it isn't happening. How can any person tell another person how to feel?

In the case of Dem's losing election, the gay community even though a much larger number will vote for the Dem's are told it is out fault. It gets tired.

And there are countless other bullshit that shows up like so and so are gay threads etc. It never ends. And I am tired of losing friends on DU because of it. I am tired of being told my community is responsible for crap. I am tired of being told how I should be feeling, by people who wouldn't know the first thing about how to really feel.

I am sure others down thread have said it better than I ever could, but this is my cliff notes version of what is driving many of us away.

Is the gay community of DU not valuable enough to the bigger picture to want to keep us onboard or what? I seriously want to know.

[GMFORD]

381. Something to think about.

When a person says something to another person, the speaker thinks he is sending one message but he can never be sure that the listener is hearing that same message. Neither the speaker nor the listener is able to climb into the head of the other.

But this is especially true when the conversation is on paper rather than in person. I was in technical support when we switched from communicating with customers by phone to communicating by email. That first year we had tons of complaints from customers about our reps being rude to people because our responses were misinterpreted without the addition of body language.

And finally, so MANY people do not understand the concept of semantics. If you say to me 'You're not a complete idiot' would I be wrong to find that offensive? Or how about 'Her hair looks like shit. Oh, I just noticed that's a new suit you are wearing'.

Sorry, didn't mean to give a lecture. What I really wanted to say is don't leave -- the hell with homophobes!

[foreigncorrespondent]

413. GMFORD...

...I so understand where you are coming from, and I will often read a thread and then ask a friend if I am misreading what the person is implying before I jump in on a thread. But when you get people making reference to homosexuality and equating that with being child molesters, perverts, and into bestiality, there really is no denying what the intention behind the post is all about. :)

[GMFORD]

423. Can't argue with that.

I worked with a guy once who was always making negative comments about gays...it's like he'd work it into any conversation. One day I looked at him and said 'You know Carl, you make think you're saying something about so-and-so but you're really saying something about yourself.' That shut him up...finally!

[Huskerchub]

640. foreigncorrespondent

It's too bad you didn't do that last week when I posted agreeing with you and your response to me was simply FUCK YOU! You somehow read my sarcasm as a slam against you and by the time I got the oh so welcome FUCK YOU response the thread was locked so I could not explain what I actually said. But that's ok, your apology is accepted :toast: .

[kenfrequed]

533. Yeah

I really never posted much on repug-nik hypocrits. I suppose I started looking at this thread when I saw the alarming title. I wanted to see what was going on and if any part of it was accomplishing anything positive. I really don't post to many of the GLBT threads so I hadn't noticed the homophobic undercurrent that occasionally cropped up there.

As to that stupid argument about blaming gays somehow for lost elections or whatever, it is a foolish excuse and I have my own beliefs why the democrats lose (usually having something to do with sucking up to the DLC and so-called moderates.) Scapegoating gays plays the republican game and obsessing about conservative wins based on 'values issues' is a BS media game based on conservative commentator hot air. Every relevant poll indicates that the 'values votes' are rather far down the list and yet the media foists a fraud on us all that somehow the conservative religious identity people are actually relevant. It really is a hustle.

As to the meat of the issue I see where you are coming from on this and I agree. Progressives here should be better than to pile on stupid jokes and thoughtless commentary on some of these repug-nik scandals. It serves little real function.

I suppose I was also a little selfish in my questioning what was going on here. When I see sudden division coming seemingly (at least from my foolish perspective) out of nowhere during a time where we should be picking our candidates I had to wonder how it might interfere and distract and divide us. Selfish in this because I presume my interests are everyone elses interests and selfish in that candidates I support will get lost in the shuffle during one of these blow-outs.

[bliss_eternal]

251. Respectfully...

...it didn't solve the problem.

1. No one is whining.

2. People did fight back.

3. I've seen many called on their intolerant comments. I've called a few on it myself.

4. Since when does calling someone on bigotry change anything? Would anyone being called on bigotry fall to their knees saying,"...I'm SO sorry! Yes, I'm a big, huge, bigot!" Sorry--it doesn't happen like this. It's healthy to call people on things, sadly most don't heed that their words are hurtful and insensitive.

5. I've personally alerted on quite a bit. Some things get locked, some didn't. Some got deleted. Some did not. Alerting and moderation doesn't help everything. We only have so many mods. It's a holiday weekend, and there've been an overwhelming deluge of threads of this nature.

6. There've been so many threads I grew exhausted alerting on them and hiding them.

Quote:
It's quite plain, really. And it would solve the problem.

This seems dismissive, in my opinion. It's NOT plain and if it solved any problems why are so many upset and complaining about it?

Just because you don't see something doesn't mean it doesn't exist and isn't problematic.
It just means you lack the ability to see it.

But how is it helpful to make dismissive and condescending comments toward those that do?

It's ok to not agree with others. It just seems more of the same to take the position that people are "whining" and "not helping themselves."

[foreigncorrespondent]

359. Bliss...

...you are another DUer I truly appreciate. :)

[bliss_eternal]

Hi fc...!

:hug::hi:
I've always appreciated you as well.

[MADem]

615. I'm going to answer your 'abandon hope' rhetorical question with two words:

Since when does calling someone on bigotry change anything?

Don Imus.

We DO only have so many mods, but if a post is genuinely offensive, and you or others aren't simply being excessively sensitive, then the posts do get deleted, pretty much. Or the thread gets locked. To suggest that this forum allows repeated bashing of individuals or groups within the forum is simply not true and unfair to the moderators.

Now, if you're the only one who is offended, or YOU take something the wrong way, and no one else sees it the way you do, why, then the post might not be alerted on by anyone save you. And it might not get deleted, even if you and you alone want that to happen.

My comments are not "dismissive and condescending." But you wasted little time dragging out that rather self-righteous assertion, didn't you?

They're plain, declarative statements that state my honest OPINION--something that I have a right to express. The fact that you SEE my opinions thusly indicates to me that you're a bit more 'sensitive' than the average DUer--and that's an opinion, too.

The plain facts are that there are plenty of people here who don't USE the 'alert' button as much as they could, or should. Every other week, it seems, I read a post or two where someone 'educates' someone else on the location and use of said button.

It often seems more gratifying for some, it would seem, to start another new thread to lecture about behavioral lapses, forum netiquette or complain about wrongs, rather than knock them down aggressivelyand decisively in the existing thread. This is not a rare happening here. I find it less than useful, and I find the formula of
1. Complaining thread about another thread
2. Post or five that ask "WTF are you talking about?" and "Can you provide examples?" Followed by
3. Links to offending threads with expressions of outrage and
4. A rehash of the thread or threads that got locked,

frankly, TIRESOME.

If you really have a problem with something that someone says, confront them--don't run to friendlier territory and gripe about it.

Now, this is my personal OPINION, and you don't have to agree with it. But I have a right to express it without being chastised simply for having it.

[bliss_eternal]

631. I've learned so much the last few days...

...like how the self-righteous are constantly projecting that label onto others as a defense, when they're called on their own words.

You're the one that claimed it's "so simple" to just call others on their intolerance. I took your advice and called YOU on yours. Too bad you're apparently unaware of how condescending and dismissive your post reads, and aren't at all open to being held accountable for how others felt reading your words. Thank YOU for proving your own theories WRONG. :applause:

How funny considering all the times I've seen you....oh what was the word you used....oh yes, "whining" in forums when you felt people were mean to you--on DU and on other boards. I seem to also recall that I was one of the people that offered you sincere sympathy and supportive words. Too bad your memory is so short and you have so little to offer others in this regard.

Given this isn't the first time I've witnessed your callous attitude and special brand of intolerance, you've earned a spot on my ignore list. So, no need to respond--I won't be reading anymore of your self-rationalized indifference to other's pain.

But given you seem to be one of those w/gottogetthelastwordin-itis, you probably will anyway. That's certainly your right. Scratch that itch if need be. Just know this, I (thankfully)won't be reading it. :)

Yay for ignore! :bounce:

[MADem]

645. And I disagreed with your assertion, because you didn't back it up with facts.

See, just because "you say so" doesn't make it true. That's what debate is all about.

You must be confusing me with someone else. This is the only board I contribute to. So there's another false statement you've made.

See, just because you SAY it, doesn't make it true.

Knock yourself out with that ignore shit. I don't mind at all. I like vigorous, intelligent debate, reasoned argument, and a mature exchange, not lockstep obedience, refusal to challenge people because they just might cry, and fearful political correctness. So I won't miss you.

I find the DU rules quite sufficient, and I don't need censor nannies on top of the trained moderators--who do a fine job, even though you might not think so. So long and fare thee well.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

299. I'm seriously not understanding why Larry Craig's misdeeds have anything to do with gays.

What does a man peeking into a stall as someone is going to the bathroom, touching a man's foot, running his hand under the stall, and WANTING SEX in that same bathroom have to do with being a gay person? Is that what YOU interpret as an integral part of being gay? I hope to God no. In fact, it FREAKS me out that anyone gay would consider bathroom sex the identity of gay people. Bathroom sex is NOT what identifies a gay man. Bathroom sex is an incredibly stupid, rather whacko thing that some people might engage in like some hets might engage in group sex. I wish some gays would stop trying to identify themselves with bathroom sex. It makes ZERO sense to me, really, why anyone would want to identify themselves with bathroom sex.

[iaviate1]

471. And here's what many DUers don't understand...

anonymous no strings attached sex, including bathroom sex, is largely an effect of homophobia in this country. When people feel forced to lead a certain straight life, they still have needs and they meet those without strings and wherever they can get it. Undoubtedly there are some people who just enjoy bathroom sex - both gay and straight - but I'm rather certain that all these closeted people getting busted are doing so because they don't feel they can be happy living openly.

When people express disgust and pass judgment on the faction of the gay community who does this, it makes me a little uneasy because they are truly victims of society. Craig is an exception because he actively worked to closet people and deserves this humiliation.

[bliss_eternal]

491. You've been a member a bit, but I'll say anyway...

Welcome to DU! :hi:
I appreciate your sharing your feelings on this.

[Toasterlad]

552. That Was Beautifully Summed Up

You said in so few words what I've been trying to say for two days using thousands. VBRY nicely done. :thumbsup:

[nvme]

525. RE: I'm seriously not understanding why Larry Craig's misdeeds have anything to do with gays.

It gets aggravating to constantly be lumped into the groups of
people with pathological behavior. My identity as a gay man is
not that of anyone someone who creeps bathrooms looking to
entice. But since I am gay that is what I am equated with. its
like saying all Muslims are terrorists because a fraction of
1/1000th of a percent have engaged in the same activity. Most
of the men who do the "tea room" thing identify
themselves as straight. Yet catch one enflagrante and boom it
is now a gay thing. I don't Identify myself with that
behavior, but i am lumped in them just the same. Sen. Craig is
sick and needs help not Sen. Craig is Gay and should come out.

[Chipster]

425. On behalf of my cat

I must object to being compared to Craig. My cat is a decent little being who doesn't paw around indiscriminately.

[EFerrari]

614. No cats were intentionally hurt in the making of this thread

or there will be hell to pay. :)

[ourbluenation]

2. I've been super busy too so I've missed much on this. It's a damn shame if true.

I figured most of it was about the hypocrisy of denouncing gay rights while being gay yourself (Craig). The closet - so damaging to so many people and there families. The sooner people can live the lives they were BORN to live, the better.

Sign me,

PROUD sister of the most fabulous lesbian around. :)

[EFerrari]

4. Thank you!

:)

[murielm99]

9. I think some of it was the stupid gay jokes.

And it seemed that people were denouncing Craig for being gay, while failing to make a distinction between his homosexuality and his hypocrisy.

What we should be doing is denouncing republican hypocrisy. If they are going to pressure Craig to resign over an illegal sex act, they should be pressuring Vitter to resign, too. It should make no difference if the sex is homosexual or heterosexual.

If any of our Democratic leaders make statements about this, they should stress the hypocrisy of making only one of these senators give up their seat. The words "republican hypocrisy" should be repeated over and over, as a talking point. Democrats should be shouting for Vitter to resign, too.

And, my daughter is the most fabulous Lesbian around.

[ourbluenation]

20. that's a shame and 10-4 on the talking points. PS) here's to the TWO most fab lesbians around!

[cui bono]

31. You're right. It's about the hypocrisy of both Craig and the R party

And the R party is exploiting the gay theme once again in order to keep that seat R in the future while not demanding Vitter step down since his seat would have been filled with a Dem.

And, if I were homosexual I'd be the most fabulous Lesbian around.

[wellstone dem]

189. You are wrong

my daughter is~ :-)

[Divine Discontent]

363. I'm always late to these hot button threads! crap!

but I lovvved your last comment! bravo!

and I am a gay Christian, so I get BOTH level of attacks, I've endured tons of blasphemy and intentional usage of Jesus' name to try and piss me off, but all I ever do is ask they have some respect for two words (Jesus Christ) that have nothing to do with them by their own choice, and they will typically go off about horrible their church or the Repubs in general have treated them, which has nothing to do with me, but they ignore it - and on the gay side of things people make gay jokes constantly everywhere I go and it gets annoying, and to then come on DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND, a supposed super-liberal peace loving site - you deal with people who have shitty days so they lash out at others and intentionally/unintentionally hurt others feelings and act like, "OH WELL, GET SOME THICKER SKIN!" as if that's a reason to be a jerk, ya know? but I loved reading how you lightly put that beloved comment about your daughter on there at the end! :)

[Cooley Hurd]

5. If only we could ALL keep the Craig scandal in perspective...

...it has NOTHING to do with whether he is Gay or not - it has EVERYTHING to do with the fact that he BROKE the law, and then DIDN'T tell the Senate ethics committee about it.

If he came out and admitted he was Gay, and then atoned for his past anti-Gay stance(s), I'd applaud him until my hands hurt. Unfortunately, he's done no such thing...:(

Great post!:thumbsup:

[EFerrari]

16. Thanks, Cooley Hurd.

It would be too bad if this scofflaw were allowed to erode this community! :hi:

[eleny]

21. Yes, and it's the hypocrisy and his mean spirited public policy towards homosexuals

People are feeling good that he's finally been outed and by his own self.

[Olney Blue]

6. It's true. I caught a very dispirited thread from madspirit this week.

[Wiley50]

82. She's Gone Now. She specificly asked to be TS'd and was n/t

[EFerrari]

91. And that's our loss.

:(

I really hate this. Not a useful reaction but, there it is.

[knitter4democracy]

99. Oh no! I'll miss her.

:cry: She always had great posts.

[Olney Blue]

127. Me too.

:-(

[uppityperson]

136. WHAT! No, no no no no no. damn

Oh Lee, I am so sorry. damn damn damn

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

167. Hmmm. Didn't Know That.

Her impulsiveness finally got the better of her, huh.

Can't say I'll miss her, but I do wish Lee well and hope she doesn't let it get to her too much.

On edit: Changed to impulsiveness due to some taking offense to a different term.

[EFerrari]

173. It's not okay with me for you to call that DUer irrational.

Please post personal attacks to some other thread.

[iverglas]

177. does that make two of us?

I clicked that link, and decided not to waste my time replying to what will, one hopes, soon be empty bandwidth ...

[EFerrari]

181. At least two.

:grr:

I'm trying to stay even and, abusiveness is my absolute limit. Been there, won't go there again or agree to it ever.

[Name removed]

197. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HughMoran]

375. I'm somewhat ambivalent as well

I'm not into folks who's "hello" to me is a veiled threat.

[donheld]

532. "Can't say as i'll miss her"

Would you like it if someone said that about you? would you consider it an attack? You hope she doesn't let it get to her? With friends like you...

[nashville_brook]

549. condsecending, smarmy, and not what DU is about

this isn't the board you're looking for.

[mudesi]

225. Why?

Are you sure she specifically asked for it? I always liked her vehemence.

[Toasterlad]

556. Agreed.

I often disagreed with her, but I loved her passion. She kept things lively. I will miss her.

[BlooInBloo]

258. SONOFABITCH!

:(

[Cabcere]

276. Oh, no!

:cry: I always enjoyed reading Lee's posts...she'll be missed here. :(

[Warren DeMontague]

289. I agree. Our loss.

Always appreciated her contributions.

:hi: Lee

[libnnc]

302. Damn it!

Fuck that pisses me off. We agreed on 99.99% of most everything. I'm really, really going to miss her.

[SayWhatYo]

367. I liked her...

:(

[WritingIsMyReligion]

561. I saw that.

Didn't know she specifically asked, though. I just figured she finally pushed too many buttons at once. Vehement as hell.

Ah well. If she wanted to go, let 'er go.

[Name removed]

385. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[johnnie]

426. MadSpirit threatened to leave here daily

And I know she was complaining about DU at another site. It's too bad she decided to leave, but this place is big and there are a hell of a lot of people and some things will be said and done that might not make you happy 100% of the times. But that is life.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

499. Hmmmm.

"We can't stand this redneck, racist, homophobic place any longer"

Yeah. That's real rational stuff right there.

I'd say her words speak for themselves, as to my point above.

No, DU is not a redneck, racist, homophobic community. If that's the type of warped perception she had of this place then it's probably for the best that she's no longer here.

[EFerrari]

588. What is the difference between MS's judgment of DU

and your judgment of her?

Both are subjective (and somewhat unpleasant) appraisals.


How does either one move this conversation forward?

[WindRavenX]

635. no!!! tell me she wasn't TS'd!!

:cry: :cry:
She was one of my favs!!!

[Lone_Star_Dem]

7. It's all a matter of respect

Being able to stop and think how your words may impact another before you utter them, is a basic premise of respecting others.

[EFerrari]

30. Yes.

:thumbsup:

[Kajsa]

586. Beautifully stated.

Thank you.

:yourock: :hi:

[DFW]

8. How come?

I think the actions of closeted Republican gays who are ashamed of what they are
do not in the slightest reflect on gays, either here, or as a whole. Although straight,
I still can't see any reason why gays might have been made to feel unwlecome here. Don't
tell me it's due to ridicule of Larry Craig, which I willingly and enthusiatically
participate in. It's the hypocrisy that I scorn, not gays. A very good friend of mine,
who just happens to be the treasurer of the DNC, and gay, would vouch for me, but that
shouldn't be necessary. Craig, on the other hand, predictably went out of his way to declare
he wasn't gay, and tried to put being gay in a shameful light to conform to his right-wing
public platform (he probably threw rocks at mirrors at night, but that's his problem).
Apparently (and thank goodness), it didn't do him any good. If he resigns still saying
that being gay is sinful, then to hell with him and all his self-hating gay Republican
colleagues.

Being made ashamed to be gay is like making someone ashamed to be blonde. If you're born
that way, then there should be no reason to feel unwelcome here, or anywhere in the Democratic
Party. Leave that to those in Log Cabins............

[EFerrari]

126. I take that as a post in support, DFW.

:hi:

[DFW]

193. As, indeed, it was meant to be!

[GMFORD]

501. The right-wing's hypocritical stance

against homosexuals is the cause of all this.

To understand why gays might be inadvertently offended by the whole discussion, I decided to replace 'gay' with a group in which I am a member (by birth).

I'm left-handed. So how would I feel if everyone was laughing about, raging about and generally dissing all the Republicans in the news lately who are left-handed and even using negative terms such as wrong-handed? Even if everyone said it's the hypocrisy of them claiming left-handed people are from the devil while being secretly left-handed themselves that is the problem, not their left-handedness...and especially if bashing left-handed people had been going on for decades and even informally sanctioned...would I be feeling uncomfortable? Would I be slightly offended by the entire conversation? I have to say YES, I would.

[DFW]

541. Agreed about the far right's stance

But after centuries of this posturing, as well as a couple of decades of
enlightenment, I would hope (though not be certain) that gays (at least here)
would be enlightened enough to know the difference. Those are shoes I will
never stand in, and therefore never be really in a position to give a
first-person response. I know Andy isn't in the least bothered, but he is
in sort of a special position, too.

Both Bill Clinton and my younger daughter are left-handed. I'll never
know what that's like, either, but you are at least in good company!

[huskerlaw]

10. What happened?

I mean, I know there are some people on this board who simply don't get it.

But I'm assuming that something specific happened to prompt this post...

[Midlodemocrat]

28. A lot of posts about how Craig

'likes show tunes' and tapping is poofy and how people want to be able to go to the restroom without feeling threatened.

You get the idea. Idiocy, plain and simple.

:hi:

[huskerlaw]

Oh jeebus.

Idiocy, indeed. :banghead:

:hi:

[MrMickeysMom]

594. I think I caught that kind of "humor" on Bill Maher Friday night

And, as always, I learn something new here ...

I caught Real Time with BM and think his "monologue" Aug 31st went over the edge. It was the same "likes show tunes" laugh lines that didn't get much of a laugh, in fact. I recall responding, "Oh, Pleeeeze".

I'll try to glean something from this discussion. Maybe I'll reduce my homophobia, which I happen to think about every straight person has (therefore, like racisim, every day you have to stuggle to overcome it).

BTW, did anyone catch the Craig subject and a conversastion on Randi Rhodes' show Friday with a gay caller. It was pretty "back and forth" with their double-entendres, perhaps she knew this caller well, but it could have been considered insulting. One difference, though... There was a clear message re: how self denial caused Craig's behavior to begin with and the hipocracy of the Republicans party in general.

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Midlodemocrat]

232. LOL. You still haven't told me how to keep my son

safe from the gay in the bathrooms.

[SayWhatYo]

372. Anti-Gay Spray?

You know, I bet you could sell a lot of that if you market it to a certain moronic demographic....

[bliss_eternal]

236. Here's a few more...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1707177

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1707056

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1700039

[JohnnyLib2]

11. I've had to take a good look in the mirror this week.

Great post, Sfexpat2000. Recommended.

Child of the 50s, lifelong lib., seem to interact well enough with folks independently of sexual orientation.

BUT--some of my language, or smirks, or innuendos, or sarcastic posts,
carry the basic old scent of homophobia.

Working with adolescents, I frequently stomp on the words gay or fag when used as generic insults (along with "retard," "nig," and more).

And yet--my so-called clever remarks can and no doubt have hurt.

So, suggestion 1 is to look in the mirror and listen carefully to ourselves.

LOL: Can't you hear ol' Limbaugh tearing into me for "liberal guilt?"

[EFerrari]

36. You big COMMIE!

:loveya:

[JohnnyLib2]

50. LOL!

Ol' Rush will luv ya, too. :hi:

[WillyT]

46. To Quote Cenk Juger... I Agree 100%, Disagree 0%

What we need here, is some understanding.

Go back to August 13th and look at all the locked threads. That was the day Rove resigned, and everybody (including me) was having fun with guessing the "real" reason for Rove's departure.

I jumped in with some throw away line about Rove being escorted out in Jeff Gannon's handcuffs, and boy, did I get my ass chewed. And although I have always supported gay rights, have protested with the gay community, and vote accordingly, I was called a bigot and a homophobe.

Now me being me, I didn't respond well to that. My back got WAY up.

But... after I calmed down and got off the snark train, I started reading threads in the GLBT Forum. And that actually helped a lot. Being straight, I can NEVER know what it is like to be gay in the straight world, but I can try and understand. And accusing\joking about somebody being gay when there is no proof, and using it as an insult, ain't cool.

So I apologize to those who I offended, and will continue to be open to information that will help my on my evolutionary path to enlightenment.

This really could end up being a valuable teaching\learning moment for some of us older "straights", and I hope that it continues in a positive, constructive, manner.

Ya get more flys with honey, than ya do with vinegar.

:shrug:

K & R !!!

:kick::grouphug::kick:

[peacetalksforall]

101. I'm in the same position - I laughed at what I thought were some of the 'cleverest quips'

that were flying around super fast on DU. Some of the best I can remember. But, I didn't stop to analyze them and I don't have a good grounding in how to analyze them. I've realized for awhile I have to do some reading or get some tutoring since I am one who is normally sensitive and I want to be.

I am always saying that PNAC can be credited with teaching us. I've learned tons about law, balance of power, our Constitution, Bill of Rights, torture and who used rendition in their vocabulary before PNAC?

Every time I write something about foundation of our nation - I immediatedly analyze or revise it to recognize that it was really an invasion.

I am probably most ignorant of what is proper - perhaps someone can share a link with some basics.

Yes, in all instances we should stay to the core and for Craig it was HHD - Hypocrisy, Hiding (after getting in trouble - or before, but I don't know enough to say), and Denial, if what is said is true.

Stay with the facts - the political facts. Stay with the office they hold - and in every instance - someone remind the world - they promised to bring honor and dignity to the White House and wear suits and ties in the Oval Office.

[EFerrari]

120. Redirecting our attention to the real issue of oppression and hypocrisy

-- yes, that seems like a good strategy to me, anyway, instead of letting it tear US apart. For once.

[BlackVelvet04]

215. I'm sure this is going to be an upopular thought..........

Since the advent of the DUzy awards I think more people make comments to be witty and don't think before they do it. When there is a competition to see who can come up with the best witticism I think it leads to people not thinking about the fine line between funny and hurtful.

Just my two cents worth.

[EFerrari]

245. Hey, BlackVelvet04. I spent a decade as a comedy writer

and, it is a negotiation to point at stuff without offending people. That's very true in my experience.

Maybe we can do a little self correcting for our audience.

[BlackVelvet04]

320. I come from a very long line

of smart asses and I have to be very careful because it is a family trait to see who can outdo who.

[EFerrari]

329. See, if we had a union, we'd be cool.

:)

[spag68]

502. Aug. 13

was my 65 birthday, and I missed all the things you are referring to. That day, with rove resigning, will always be one of my fav. birthdays. as a straight guy, all I can say is we as dems. need to be sensitive to the glb and any others who hold our basic progressive values, after all what I have done in my life disqualify me from judgment except on basic decency issues. I hope here at du we can all get past this and keep the heat on those that try to use divisive topics to split us dems. and have done so for longer than any of us here have been alive. The issues now are too important to let them do this to us again.

[EFerrari]

603. Happy belated birthday, spag!

I hope a criminal resigns on my birthday!

:hi:

[MrMickeysMom]

598. Yep, as long as we're confessing here, I commented about Rove and was served-

So, when I thought I'd do stand up for a laugh when someone asked what would be found in Karl's office, ONLY THEN, did I realize...

So, this is life... Doesn't this episode follow suite from what we got from our parents as kids when we stepped out on the curb and didn't look?

Ow!.... x(

[EFerrari]

607. Comedy is a dangerous business.

My ex used to horrify some people in his audience when he did bits about mental illness or homelessness. And it was in part because he forgot to point out, he'd been / was both.

Thanks for posting. :hi:

[swimboy]

616. Thanks for that, man.

I really appreciate it.

:grouphug:

[baby_mouse]

542. Go, johnny, go!

Props to you, big guy!

:toast:

[alfredo]

12. Sometimes our partisanship overshadows our compassion.

[EFerrari]

178. I think that's right. One interest sort of makes us stupid

when we talk, how we talk and where we talk. I've been guilty.

[alfredo]

247. For decades we have had these assholes beating us over the head

with their holier than thou bullshit. They've done their best to paint us as immoral. It's good to see them being hoisted by their own petard.

There's that old saying the hard times are a gift, good times are a test.


Will we pass the test?

[EFerrari]

255. We can, certainly, if we lift each other up.

If we do that, there's no way they can beat us. Sorry to repeat what must be obvious to so many.

[alfredo]

259. We've got to keep the moral high ground.

We have to insist that our representatives do the same.

[EFerrari]

282. Yes and it needs to start HERE.

I believe we can do that.

:kick:

[alfredo]

287. This is a community. We can bring each other down, or we

raise the consciousness of all.

[EFerrari]

292. Exactly, hermanito. That's what family is for.

lol

:toast:

[alfredo]

322. I can think of other things, but that is between me and my shrink.

[EFerrari]

325. LOL!

:rofl:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

13. The Advice Would Be For Them Not To Let Small Percents Of Our Community Define It.

There are always statements and topics here of which anyone could at times take offense. If someone seeks those out, fixates on them, and chooses to define the whole community by them, then I can understand why they'd feel 'unwelcome'. But in reality, there are countless other topics, countless other replies and countless other posters who do not partake in that which was offensive. If one keeps a level head and an objective eye, then they'd be able to continue enjoying the community and feeling welcomed within it, in spite of the small overall percentage of topics or comments in which they take offense or feel slighted by.

So my advice to them would be to just open their eyes and take a look around, and then see how much else there is here than that which they are fixating on. If they choose to leave and feel unwelcomed then that is a product of their own doing in my opinion. If you counted up all the offensive comments and took a count of all the offending posters, you'd find they'd be in such a small minority of all things found here. So if a poster is going to choose to let a magnificently small minority define our community and their experience here, then so be it. But my advice to them would be to reconsider and broaden their perception.

[EFerrari]

19. Good point, OMC. The few and the loud shouldn't overwhelm

the many and the thoughtful.

[Stinky The Clown]

14. A change of clothes is in order

I've worn a similar avatar before as a sign of solidarity. I wear one again.

[EFerrari]

32. I love mine.

:hi:

[Midlodemocrat]

45. That's why I sport mine as well.

Good on you. :hi:

[TahitiNut]

69. Anyone who cares to examine my signature graphic should know ...

... that it steadfastly proclaims solidarity. That's what it's all about - and has been for far, far longer than DU has existed. I'm a proud owner of a "Straight But Not Narrow" button awarded me by close friends in the GLBT community with whom I've worked, both on the job and off. The TahitiNut 'rainbow' symbolizes diversity in every sense ... embracing and celebrating, NOT 'tolerating.'

[hootinholler]

250. Ok, but just until I pry my wallet open and get my star back. n/t

[Gregorian]

15. Thoughtless trivialization of sexual orientation.

I cringed at the posts. I also participated. But I emphasized the hypocrisy rather than the sexual orientation. Which I realize also makes me a hypocrite.

To me it's about thinking first. Remembering that life includes a multitude of colors and arrangements.

I'm pretty poor at saying it because I can't speak for the gay community. And I don't want to even try. But I feel the need to say something, because I also saw the insensitivity.

Edit- You know, there's something else on my mind. I actually feel deep sadness for Mr. Craig, and his wife. So even though I've pranced around his "grave", I have empathy for his frustration and loss. No one deserves that. Especially publicly.

[ourbluenation]

29. Andrew Sullivan often writes about the damage of The Closet to the families

of these people who live double lives like Haggard, Craig, McGreevy, etc...I feel sadness, deep sadness for their wives.

[gateley]

44. I'm new to this website and I'm still finding my way around, and what I've seen thus

far has been most impressive -- I feel fortunate to have stumbled across such a forum of like-minded individuals. I haven't seen the posts referred to, but I can say I don't want the gay community to leave! My glee at Craig's situation is a result of his hypocrisy, and a good dose of schadenfreude because of all his steps and votes to deny gays and lesbians their rights. Please, those of you who have been offended, realize that you are loved and cherished and (I'm assuming) the hurtful posts were from a minority of posters or just those who weren't thinking before they typed. Don't Go!

[WillyT]

62. Welcome To DU gateley !!!

:bounce::hi::bounce:

Glad ta have ya aboard!!!

:toast:

[Gregorian]

74. This is great. How glad you found this group.

It's a privilege. And we all have something to contribute.

:)

[EFerrari]

92. Welcome to DU, gateley.

:hi:

[Zookeeper]

516. Welcome to DU, Gateley!

'Hope to hear more from you!

:hi:

[TheDoorbellRang]

18. I think a lot of the posters who are offending

perhaps don't even realize that they are offending; some things are just so firmly entrenched in our national psyche that we don't even see the discrepancies in how different groups are treated, and I'm grateful that the GLBT DUers do point out these discrepancies to the rest of us. They don't deserve some of the flip responses I've seen that they need to "lighten up."

I remember having a discussion about calling women "girls" with a friend of mine back in the day. He couldn't understand why I found it offensive; rather he thought I should feel complimented for being called a girl. I said let's turn it around: do men like to be called boys? Oh yes, they always refer to themselves as the boys. Then I said, "So if I said 'I'll send my (thirty something old) boy over with that paperwork,' that'd sound o.k. to you?" He got it, then. It's all in connotation, sometimes.

Maybe if we'd all try substituting a different group into what seems an inoffensive post re GLBT remarks, we might all be a little more sensitive.

[EFerrari]

38. DU Sensitive Training! Not a bad idea at all.

Whatever works. :)

[LostinVA]

139. And, many of them knew (know) they were offending, and taking great glee in it

Including many long time posters in the threads WillyT is talking about... including posts allowed to stand saying the only reason we gay DUers who are offended by this garbage are actually offended is because we are ashamed of being gay, and then making personal comments about my relationship with Haruka. WillyT and others laughed at these posts. And, even though I appreciate his stating he's been educated, that doesn't erase the anger and hurt we felt and still feel by these nasty posts on a progressive board ny longtime posters.

I appreciate your post.

[EFerrari]

623. Several things. If people are just antisocial in their behavior,

it's difficult if at all possible to engage them, we know that.

If people are just reacting where they should be thinking and RESPONDING, that's a different situation. This group of people can be engaged, imho, and usefully. That doesn't mean it will be easy or even at times, pleasant or immediately rewarding.

Identifying which order is up is a challenge, especially in GD where things move so fast. :shrug:

Thank you for your work on this thread. I really appreciate it.

[cui bono]

180. Good idea, substitute a group you yourself belong to and then try it on for size.

I like it!

:applause:

[BlackVelvet04]

214. post in the wrong place.....n/t

[tbyg52]

277. I think that's the absolute best cure

If one has the requisite empathy to do it, which I think the vast majority of those posting here do. It's what my mom taught me, anyway... ;)

[treestar]

308. I agree, people can be nice about it and change the behavior

But immediately lighting into them with accusations does not work.

Being called a "racist" etc. is unpleasant too. It can be offensive in itself. I don't think much of jumping right on it when someone says something. The first time, it should be assumed to be an innocent mistake, unintended "offense" or something showing how ingrained some of this is - if it's that ingrained, the person needs greater awareness, not insults that they are racist, homophobic, etc. Many people would understand more if they had more information. I hate the snobbish view that nonmembers of a group "can't understand." They wouldn't let someone who has an identification with any of the advantaged groups say that.

[TheDoorbellRang]

318. We're making some progress on threads like these

where there's reasoned discourse and some genuine attempts to have dialogue to bridge the gaps in our understanding.

I agree on the kneejerk name-calling. I've never been able to change someone else by calling them names, but so long as people are human they'll probably keep succumbing to that temptation now and then. It takes a while to figure out name-calling does more harm than good, then hopefully one changes one's modus operandi in addressing personal differences, and progress is made. That's why we're progressives, eh?

[spoony]

510. Great post(s)

Really good analysis of what's going on, I think.

[mod mom]

22. SF Expat-I truly believe this is about hypocrisy not sexual preference.

These Republicans are making life difficult for gays to live their lives. It's time to expose the bigotry and hypocrisy. Perhaps if these closeted individuals were forced to face the truth instead of spewing their self hatred at others we could have a more civilized society.

Crazy Example. Let's pretend that a couple of the SCOTUS justices were closeted and were placed on the bench. WHAT IF they were being blackmailed for past actions, and voting in such a way as to keep their backgrounds secret. If outing them forced them to come to terms with their true identity, wouldn't it be good for the entire country to release them from their ability to be blackmailed? I know this example is crazy, but do you understand why I do not think it is anything against sexual preference?

[EFerrari]

35. Sure it is, but not here at DU.

Looks like we need to learn how to talk about these issues more constructively and respectfully among ourselves. :shrug:

I believe we can do that.

[mitchtv]

56. If it only was just about hypocrisy...

She wouldn't be posting the OP.and I don't think many of this community would be looking for friendlier shores. We have been awash in name calling, shock ,and Faux horror and lewd remarks that don't always refer to GOP hypocrisy. tho top it off a thread yeaterday accused DU'rs od knee jerk defense of anyone who is gay ...What a fantasy! Fortunately , I have a thick skin and grew up gay before most of these kids were even a gleam in their father's eyes, so I've seen it all, and brush it off like dandruff (which it kind of , is).

[mod mom]

67. I'm sure you are correct, but as in any forum so large

there will always be folks to ignore-not to mention individuals sent here to divide.

[foreigncorrespondent]

374. Please refrain from saying...

...sexual preference, unless you truly believe what ever side of the fence you swing on has been a choice you made.

And it hasn't been about the hypocrisy at all. It has gone beyond that into some disgusting bullshit and personal attacks against gay mmebers of DU.

[MADem]

617. I don't think that example is crazy at all, FWIW. NT

[Cha]

23. Sorry, I would think hypocrites and bigots

would be the ones feelin' the heat now cause that's what these repukes are. I don't even think in terms of gay or not gay. Gay is good ..hypocritical, lyin' goperverts are bad.

[EFerrari]

41. Agreed. But the way we talk about it seems to need improvement.

So, my OP.

[Cha]

107. I know..I just wanted to

state how I felt about it. Thank you~sfexpat!

[EFerrari]

116. Thank you for checking in.

:hi:

[Cha]

128. Anytime!~

:hi:

[Midlodemocrat]

24. Beth, you absolutely rock.

:loveya:

Thanks for saying this so much better than I could ever have.

[EFerrari]

37. I actually have a very selfish agenda. I need my friends!

:loveya:

[smoogatz]

25. K and R

I'm not exactly the King of Sensitivity, but it does seem to me that some of the chortling over Craig's arrest has been thoughtless and juvenile, at best. And is it just me, or have the protestations of horror (!) over "bathroom sex" frankly been a bit bizarre? (Yes, I admit it--I've had bathroom sex. It was 1982, in a crowded bar in Chapel Hill, NC. I was snorting coke off my girlfriend's tits in a men's room stall and one thing led to another. I'm not proud of it--oh, wait. I am proud of it. Never mind...). On the other hand, I hope that those in DU's gay community who are inclined to take real offense will take a deep breath first, and remember that most of us here (trolls excepted, as always) support their struggle for equality and equal rights unreservedly. Try (again) to give us the benefit of the doubt. If you need to take a break for a while, that's okay, too. We'll miss you. This, too, shall pass.

[Withywindle]

26. Recommended.

Something about the pleasure of schadenfreude, and the conflation of Republican sex scandal with ample opportunities for toilet humor, brings out a lot of people's inner 9-year-old, I think. This isn't always a bad thing, but that bratty kid isn't always paying much attention to other people's feelings. I don't think I've said anything hurtful, but if I have, I apologize sincerely.

[ruggerson]

33. I don't think it will change

But bigots don't make me feel unwelcome. They just strengthen my convictions. The only way to educate them is to engage them.

Gay people have just as much right to be here as anyone else.

[Midlodemocrat]

40. I hope you are wrong. I hope it will change.

In fact, a lot of DUers have actually begun to realize that the 'gay jokes' are no funnier nor any more appropriate than racial or sexist jokes.

It's a start, anyway.

It bothers me as a straight, married woman because I see people I deeply care about being routinely wounded here. I wish I had the power to make it stop.

[EFerrari]

49. One of my dear DU friends expressed the same idea --

that it won't change. And as this set of issues affect that DUer more directly than they affect me, I have to respect that opinion. That DUer knows this stuff in a way I don't think I can ever know it.

Maybe I'm an idiot but I HAVE seen DU become more really progressive over time. It's a slow process. It involves learning -- which takes place over time. It requires the investment of time and thought and energy -- all limited resources that we have to apportion carefully because they are limited.

Thanks, ruggerson.

[kenny blankenship]

34. "What can we do to change that?" You can't change homophobes and CT junkies

It's up to the ADMINISTRATORS and moderators of DU to clean this sty up.
They have a real problem on their hands and it will be interesting to see how they decide to handle it.

If they cede this place to gay haters, there's nothing you can do about it.

[madrchsod]

48. yes it`s really up to them

i`ve noticed a lot of personal flame wars that are not stopped. we can point out what`s happening or who is doing something questionable- that`s what the alert is for.

[EFerrari]

51. I tend to think that if we as a community put our heads together

we can make some progress here. The admins and mods aren't our nannies. We're adults with brains, with friendships and with values.

In a very real way, it's up to us to decide what kind of community we want/need here. :)

[LostinVA]

146. A brave post, a correct one, and I applaud you for it

[Toasterlad]

576. Actually, I Disagree.

I am personally acquainted with about 6 guys who have changed their attitudes about homosexuality just from interacting with me. These men were homophobic to varying degrees before I came out to them, but have all turned around on the subject (also to varying degrees) through conversations with me and my gay friends.

Homophobia is generally a function of ignorance. If you educate people, you can remove it. In other words, people CAN change the attitudes of bigots, if they've got the patience and the conviction to do so.

Personally, I HATE when threads are deleted and/or locked, no matter how hateful. Stifling discourse does not serve to solve problems; it only hides them. I would rather risk the feelings of everyone in this forum by allowing some asshole to spew his ignorant, hate-filled message if it means that one elegant poster can respond to it with a well-written, thoughtful post that will get others thinking. You may NEVER change the attitudes of some, but you can certainly help some people struggling with the issue to see why your point of view is valid.

I understand why moderation is necessary, and I respect the mods for the tough job they have, but moderating the homophobia on this board will NOT make it go away; it will only drive it underground, where it spreads. Only by confronting ignorance with reason can you eliminate it.

[EFerrari]

593. Oh, no. You want us to be REASONABLE, too?!

lol

I agree with much of what you're saying here but some threads are so painful, it's a relief when they go.

[Toasterlad]

629. Fraid So.

I know that a lot of people feel as you do, SF, about deleted posts. I can see the rationale for it, but I really do believe stifling conversation is never good.

I've been involved in more than one thread since I came to DU where it was obvious that neither side was listening to the other; both were talking past the other in a effort to "score". Threads like that presumably serve no purpose, so why not lock them? It stops the nonsense and saves bandwith. But someone else READING that thread might be able to take what was said and draw valuable conclusions from it. According to the numbers on the home page, DU has over 100,000 members, but no where NEAR that many participate in posting frequently. Some of them may actually be long gone, but the number still indicates that there are a LOT of lurkers out there. They could be getting something from the dialogue too, even if they never say a word.

Despite my disagreement with you on how to fight this, however, and for what it's worth, I think you're incredibly sweet, and I very much appreciate you taking up this cause for us. I honestly wish there were more people like you in the world.

[swimboy]

618. Exactly. That's why I seldom alert and my Ignore list is usually empty.

I try to address the issue when I see it, trying to offer a reasonable response with an explanation as to why I objected. For the most part, I'll alert only when someone has made a personal attack on someone. I think some of the ugly issue-based stuff needs to stay up. If it vanishes, we end up with more people asking what we were upset about because they can't find it. (Although I imagine in this case, a tour of locked threads would yield plenty of examples.

I often hear people declaim that no-one has the right to go through life unoffended. I'm not sure I've seen anyone claim that as a right. But you can count on many of us speaking up to address the occurences.

I've seen so much on this thread to encourage me.

Good to see you, too, Toasterlad.



;)

[Toasterlad]

628. Thanks, Swimboy!

:hi:

[Toasterlad]

627. D'oh! Posted In the Wrong Place.

[Solly Mack]

39. K/R

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. I Don't Think Most Of Them Are Being Deliberately Insensitive

But the jokes are rather puerile...

I guess there's a thin line between making fun of Craig and disrespecting gay folk ....


But Craig's not gay anyway...He's a man in search of himself...

[EFerrari]

53. As someone said up thread, this is about respect.

And it would be a shame if someone who doesn't seem to respect himself or anyone else led to an exodus of fine DUers.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

58. I Start From The Premise That Most Of Craig's Behavior Is Indicative Of Him...

And I never discussed his behavior as being part of his orientation or identification because I don't think he even knows what it is...

[EFerrari]

70. You're likely right. I agree with that.

The problem here has been a little different, though. This @sshole Craig flap has generated comments that have made people very upset here. People who aren't known for their dramatic skills or moodiness or their tendency to drunken posts at 3 a.m.

Maybe we need an emergency brake on our keyboards. Or a "count to ten before posting" tool. I'm looking for suggestions.

[cui bono]

54. Probably not, but ignorance is one of the biggest problems.

When I was in college, a long, long time ago, in one of my classes we were asked to alternate the usage of the word "he" with "she" every other person when reading aloud. Now the book only used "he", of course, but we were asked to use "she" so as to be inclusive of women. How much you want to bet what the reaction would be on this board if I suggested something like that? I don't think it would be pretty.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

43. I Hate Double Posts

grrrrr

[cui bono]

47. And unfortunately it's not just an attitude towards gays and lesbians.

I've seen many misogynistic posts, I just saw someone posting about how they don't care what happens to the Iraqi citizens, I've seen posts in PETA/vegetarian threads where people flaunt their meat eating in a mean manner. It's pretty rampant.

Honestly, I don't consider this board progressive. It's pretty middle of the road imho and I'm quite surprised by a lot of what I see going on here.

[yurbud]

52. two things: take advantage of the opportunity to see people uninhibited and not all are who they

claim to be and know how to make their presence felt far outsize of their numbers.

[EFerrari]

55. So, how do we make it better?

Not disagreeing with you at all.

[cui bono]

81. I guess all one can do is try to show people why something can be hurtful

or discriminatory. But it doesn't always work. I tried me darnedest on a women's issue with someone. Even though I told this person that I had had almost the same situation as the one we were discussing happen to me and I felt insulted they still wouldn't budge. So I don't know. Just keep trying I guess.

And although I can be guilty of this myself, I think it's important not to come back with anger and comments that put the person on the defensive. That can make them react negatively to a valid claim rather than realize something they just weren't aware of before. I think it's best to try to explain it calmly, point out how it made you feel to "hear" them say that. It's not always going to work of course. Especially on a message board.

So just keep on keepin' on I guess... :grouphug:

[EFerrari]

100. It doesn't always work but works better in the long run

than the alternative. That's right, imho.

:grouphug:

[smoogatz]

59. Damn those meat flaunters!

Constantly shoving their cold cuts in our faces...

[cui bono]

65. What's your intention with that post? eom

[smoogatz]

72. I was teasing you.

And gently making fun of the part of your post in which you suggest that the disruption of PETA/vegetarian threads by dastardly meat flaunters was a sign of DU's non-progressiveness. As if, you know, in order to be a True Progressive you have to be a vegetarian/PETA-supporter. Also, your use of the word "flaunt" in that context was kind of funny.

[cui bono]

90. I'm not saying you have to be vegetarian or a PETA supporter, but a true progressive

wouldn't flaunt their meat eating to someone who cares about animal rights, imho. It's one thing to say they eat meat, it's another to say it in a mean and taunting way while not attempting to add anything constructive to the dicussion.

And actually, considering the detrimental environmental impact of meat eating I think progressives ought to try to go the vegetarian route. It's not just about torturing animals, though that should be taken into consideration if one is really progressive, imho.

[smoogatz]

135. And there you have it.

Meat flaunters. Not real progressives. Damn them!

[cui bono]

143. And there you have it.

Rather than have a discussion, you simply attempt to ridicule.

That's why I asked your intention the first time. This time you've made it perfectly clear.

[smoogatz]

148. I don't want to turn this into a meat thread.

But I do think that much of the dietary-restriction proselytizing that goes on here is ridiculous, yes. As is the insufferable earnestness of the dietary-restriction proselytizers. And now I think I'll ignore you.

[cui bono]

Gee, why am I not surprised.

Discussion not your forte eh?

It wasn't ever about meat. It was about respecting others' feelings.

[BlooInBloo]

206. MEATMEATMEATMEAT!

[cui bono]

242. And you posted that why? eom

[baby_mouse]

582. You don't sound at all unreasonable to me.

I eat meat, but try to make sure it's organic, at least, and don't stuff myself on it. It's particularly difficult to change what people eat, eating is actually quite a fundamental process that gives a great deal of people a great deal of pleasure. I would
miss meat terribly if I gave it up, I hope you don't find that offensive. I was working on a permaculture farm recently with a mostly vegetarian staff and was going crazy for a bacon sandwich...

I think the reaction to you on this thread is mostly through a sense that you're hijacking the thread. Your points aren't unreasonable, but I think some people feel that they're in the wrong thread...

[MADem]

66. I found that comment incredibly funny, myself!! nt

[JVS]

68. She said "flaunt their meat", heh heh heh

[Gregorian]

77. Damn you! We were trying to be serious. :)

I'll flaunt this!

[EFerrari]

93. My EYES!

LOL

[TahitiNut]

111. Well, let's not forget the repeated "people in the military are war criminals and baby killers!"

I guess it's all about whose ox gets gored, huh?

Funny how that works.

[cui bono]

161. Yep. Some people just don't get the connection.

They don't seem to understand that everyone has feelings, and how nice it would be if those feelings were taken into account, regardless of whether one fully understands them.

[Warren DeMontague]

210. So if a crazy fundy has "feelings" that being gay is evil, any gay people he or she comes across

should remain closeted, not "flaunt" the fact that they are gay, to 'take into account' the 'feelings' of the homophobe?

What about people who think abortion or birth control are evil? Should women hide the fact that they have reproductive choice or that they may take the pill to respect the 'feelings' of anti-choice kooks who think oral contraceptives are morally equivalent to murder?

Here's an alternate strategy: How about this- if you're not gay, don't have sex with people of the same gender. If you don't like abortion, don't have one. If you don't want to eat meat, you don't think eating meat is a good choice for you,, then don't eat fucking meat. FLAUNT the fact that you don't eat meat. But maybe draw the line at telling everyone else what to do with THEIR bodies, how to live THEIR lives, what to put on THEIR plate.

Maybe people should worry about running their own lives instead of everyone else's... wow! what a concept!

[cui bono]

240. So do you think it's okay for people to do business or live in a way that

is discriminatory and in a way that ruins the environment?

I think when it comes to a point where the life choices, and I emphasize choices because of the thread this is in - I'm not talking about sexual orientation or skin color etc..., you make can and are ruining the world and lives of others then it's fine to suggest that maybe they should make other choices.

[Warren DeMontague]

281. Well, YOU are not talking about those things. But some people think being gay is "sinful" just as

others think eating meat is "sinful".

Eating meat is "discriminatory"? Sure- if you think chickens deserve rights under the 14th amendment, then eating meat might be "discriminatory" in the way that using the birth control pill is "discriminatory" to the folks who think embryos deserve rights under the 14th amendment.

As for ruining the environment, since no doubt you are living in a mud yurt, bicycling to work every day and logging on to DU from a wind-powered laptop, certainly you are well situated to play environmental meal nanny to the rest of the human race.

As for me, I think people should concentrate on who is in bed with them, what choices they make with their own bodies, and what is on the end of their own fork.

I tend to think finger-waggers who lecture other consenting adults about their personal lifestyle choices are full of shit, as are would-be "liberals" who claim to be "pro-choice" but then trot out a laundry list of choices that they consider acceptable.

[cui bono]

340. You steered the conversation away from my original point.

I was responding to your post, which was in response to one of my own, where I was talking about respecting people's feelings. I don't know why you seem determined to fight with me.

This isn't about "meat", it's about posting in a way that is respectful of others' feelings/opinions. That word seems to have really hit a nerve with you. Please see my other reply to you for the full explanation. Perhaps we can contain our discussion to that subthread, it would be easier I think.

[Zookeeper]

517. Then we have the recent Porn threads....

where Feminist women who have issues with the way women are portrayed, and frequently exploited, were shouted down and called "prudes," or worse. (And some of the ardent porn defenders were gay men who really didn't seem to understand why some women are troubled by it.)

I don't think I've ever see a thread on a controversial subject where no one ends up feeling, or being, insulted.

[LostinVA]

553. No -- there weren't a lot of gay men defending it -- I saw ONE

No one was shouting down the feminists. Most of the people defending porn in the threads were STRAIGHT women and gay women. All feminists, who were being told they weren't feminists, because they don't believe all porn is misogynistic.

Then, these "Feminists" blogged about it, calling anyone not against porn, "a frat boy's wet dream," etc.

So before you post something like that, get your facts straight.

[Zookeeper]

591. I didn't say, " a lot."

I said, "some."

I'm a Feminist who has issues with porn, and I wasn't rude or insulting toward the porn-defenders.

(I also spent many years of my life living almost exclusively with the Gay and Lesbian community, so why don't YOU get your facts straight before being rude to people you don't even know.)

On edit: I was just marginally involved with the Porn threads, but I stand by my "shouted down" comment. It looked to me like the threads attracted the posters who are prone to being rude and insulting.

[LostinVA]

604. I wasn't being rude to you

And, the porn threads were hateful and insulting to WOMEN, both straight and gay, who do not make a blanket condemnation of all porn.I myself was ripped apart for no reason, lied about on other websites, and lied about on here... as were many other posters. Including being called "pro rape," and wanting to be a "frat boy's wet dream." I'm a 42-year-old gay woman getting married in two weeks and a feminist. The threads were often irrational and mean-spirited, and NOT by women who are "pro porn." And, I do have the facts straight: there was one gay man who was consistently in those threads. One. Although there were many gay women who were "pro porn.


And, porn has nothing to do with this thread, anyway. Mentioning it does nothing but perpetuates the stereotype of gay men as sexual, sicko creatures.

[Zookeeper]

611. I brought up the porn thread in response to....

Tahiti Nut, who, I believe, was making the point that there are mean-spirited attacks on, and generalizations made about, about other groups on DU, as well. (Please correct me, TN, if I read you wrong.)

Bringing up the Porn threads was to illustrate a recent example of some DUers (including, at least, one Gay man) dismissing the pain and concern of those of us who object to the way women are portrayed in heterosexual porn.

I'm sure we could find many examples every day of someone on DU dismissing someone else's concerns and opinions, in a rude and hostile way.

I still think you are being rude and reading things into my post that aren't there.

[cgrindley]

121. Flaunting their meat eating? If a person finds eating meat offensive

that's their problem. Meat is a right. PETA does not count as a progressive cause.

[WillyT]

124. LOL !!! - Meat Is A Right ???

I must have missed that amendment in school.

:evilgrin:

[Warren DeMontague]

188. I think being able to run your own fucking life and make your own damn decisions SHOULD BE a right.

Gay people should have the RIGHT to get married, and they should have the RIGHT to serve chicken at the reception, too.

[Critters2]

315. I think cows and chickens should have the right

to run their own fucking lives and make their own damn decisions. Or at least enough room to spread their wings or turn around.

[Warren DeMontague]

323. And pro-lifers think that a fertilized egg deserves rights under the 14th amendment.

If you think anyone who eats a chicken should be prosecuted for murder, go ahead and make that argument. But stop bullshitting and trying to soft-pedal the agenda, like the anti-choicers focus on so-called partial birth abortion when what they really want is to outlaw all fucking for non-procreative purposes.

I'm against factory farming, too. But I think the PETA crowd needs to make up its mind whether it's factory farming- or meat eating itself- that it wants to argue against.

[Critters2]

327. With the population what it is, meat-eating is impossible

without factory farming. It isn't an either or. For everyone to eat meat often, that meat must be industrially produced. If you eat meat, you support factory farming.

[Warren DeMontague]

403. You didn't answer the question. Is it factory farming that PETA is against

or is it ALL meat eating?

If there was some idyllic fantasyland where somehow we could sustain current levels of meat production yet have it all be done free range and organic, would PETA support that?

If what you say is true, then shouldn't PETA be helping free range, organic farmers, because once factory farming is eliminated, won't meat eating be pretty much impossible anyway?

I'll tell you what I think - and it's the same reason pro-lifers don't support contraception availability, even though that's the one thing which can and DOES reduce rates of abortion- I think it's because the agenda is paramount, particularly when the agenda involves a small minority feeling morally superior over behavior that most other people engage in- in once case, it's fucking for pleasure, in the other, eating meat.

PETA would make a lot more headway if they were about factory farming and improving conditions; they're not, they're about stopping people from eating meat. Period.

[cui bono]

150. You're missing the point entirely. Flaunting it and simply doing it are entirely different.

I think people should attempt to understand others, and if someone or a group of people find something offensive then people should try to understand why, and try not to offend. When someone flaunts their meat eating at a PETA sympathizer, or tells gay jokes in front of homosexuals or whatever it may be, they are disregarding the feelings of the other person. I would think a progressive society would see that. But so many posts on this board, such as the one you just made here, are all about "me" and fuck what other people think or care about.

Not to mention the fact that eating meat in large quantities is extremely detrimental to the environment in many ways.

[Warren DeMontague]

185. I cannot believe you're seriously telling meat eaters not to "flaunt" their lifestyle.

Fucking Irony Alert!!!

[smoogatz]

196. Trust me.

It won't even register. Meat flaunter.

[Warren DeMontague]

208. I was always taught, "if you've got it, flaunt it!"

:shrug:

[smoogatz]

209. Even if you don't.

Nice sticker, BTW. Think he'll run?

[Warren DeMontague]

212. Ah, unfortunately, I give shorter odds each day. If he doesn't do something in the next month or so

I'd suspect it's unlikely.

:(

[smoogatz]

216. Yeah--end of October at the latest.

Otherwise not enough time before the primaries. C'mon, Al. You're killing me.

[cui bono]

244. What are you talking about? How about posting the entire quote in its context?

And what irony are you referring to?

[Warren DeMontague]

279. What you said is still there. I have absolutely no inclination to repeat your gibberish FOR you.

What's ironic about hectoring meat eaters not to "flaunt" their lifestyle... in a thread about homophobia?

Gee, whiz, I dunno.

Simple idea- here it is: RUN YOUR OWN DAMN LIFE. DON'T TELL OTHER PEOPLE HOW TO RUN THEIRS.

[cui bono]

324. Well you are misunderstanding and misinterpreting what I said.

I am not telling anyone how to run their lives. Reading my entire post on that should make it clear. The point was not even about whether or not someone eats meat, it was that when someone knows that another person is a vegetarian or if the thread is about PETA, I think it's insensitive for someone to make a post about eating meat where they are doing so in such a way as to upset the other person. So the point is about respecting someone else's feelings.

I don't know why you and that other person are so focused on the "meat" part. It was one of three examples I used to illustrate the point of choosing your words and how you post them so as they don't disrespect someone else's feelings/opinions. I did respond to the "meat" part to some degree since it was the issue being addressed in these replies.

I'm sorry the "meat" thing has bothered you so much. I hope you can see now what the intention of my post was. And for the most part I think we agree, except that for some reason you seem to feel a need to yell at me. I do still think though, that when your choices hurt society as a whole you should rethink them. Isn't that why there are laws and regulations? Isn't that what being ethical is about? But that's really another topic for another thread.

btw... I bet you think I'm a vegan. Would you be surprised if I told you I'm not even a vegetarian? Like I said, it was never about "meat".

[Warren DeMontague]

400. And the religious right thinks that gay peoples' lifestyles "hurt" society as a whole.

I think "hurting society as a whole" is generally a cover for control freaks to tell consenting adults what they can and can't do in their own lives.

Laws and regulations come into play when one person's choices directly harm or endanger someone else. Now if one wants to argue that a chicken is "someone else" and thus we should use our laws and regulations to have meat police (the way the pro-lifers argue that a zygote is "someone else" and thus we should use our laws and regulations to have uterus police) that is one thing.. but, frankly, "such-and-such hurts society as a whole" is the kind of blanket justification that has been used to back up discrimination against gays, censorship, laws against interracial marriage, our idiotic drug war, etc. etc.

A corporation pumping toxic waste into the river? Yes, that is a quantifiable harm to the public and the environment and we have environmental laws for just that reason.

Arguing that letting gay people get married "harms society" or "harms the institution of marriage", or arguing that pictures of consenting adults having sex somehow "oppress people", for instance, to my mind is bogus.

I didn't assume anything about your diet (for the record, I eat very little meat, and what I do eat is generally free range & organic) but upthread you imply that "true progressives" wouldn't eat meat. I realize I use a different yardstick for progressivism than many, but I think true progressives would concentrate on improving their own relationship with the world around them, and trust in their neighbors' ability to come to their own answers about how to run their lives.

Part of the reason I thought your use of that as an example was strange was because if anything, often it's the converse- you have self righteous people whose quasi-religious belief in not eating meat causes them to try to tell other people (meat eaters) how to live their lives, just as you have members of the religious right basing their homophobia on anti-gay religious beliefs and likewise telling other people (gay people) how to live their lives.

People should run their own lives, mind their own proverbial store, that's all I'm saying. Too many people of all ideological stripes want to micro-manage other people's business. It gets old.

[cui bono]

600. No one was ever trying to micro-manage anyone else's life.

That's not what this thread is about and that's not what my original post was about. I think you get that by now though.

And regarding my saying progressives wouldn't eat meat, here's what I actually said:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1713051&mesg_id=1713414
"I'm not saying you have to be vegetarian or a PETA supporter, but a true progressive wouldn't flaunt their meat eating to someone who cares about animal rights, imho. <this is referring back to my original post about posting in a respectful manner in which I stated that this was being done in a "mean manner"m the mean manner being the point of the whole thing.>

And actually, considering the detrimental environmental impact of meat eating I think progressives ought to try to go the vegetarian route. It's not just about torturing animals, though that should be taken into consideration if one is really progressive, imho."

Perhaps I should have said "might/would want to think about cutting back on meat consumption" but that was never the issue until a couple of you jumped on the meat part of it all when the point was the way people post, so I wasn't really in that mindset.

And that addresses your other issue as to it having a direct impact on others' lives. I think hurting the environment, especially the rain forests, does that. Your chicken story does not represent the entire scope of the issues of mass consumption of meat. But again, that's not what this thread is about.

Other than that I agree with you. Now can we put this one to bed?

[cgrindley]

195. Who gives a shit what a PETA sympathizer thinks?

I'll flaunt my meat eating whenever I want. My meat eating, by the way, involves locally raised, organic, grass fed beef only. I eat meat sparingly, and I enjoy the bejeepers out of it.

Plus, anthrogenic climate change is irreversible. The environment is utterly cooked as it is. There's really no point caring about it.

[cui bono]

249. You make my point. So you think it's okay to purposely hurt someone's feelings

just because you disagree with them?

[cgrindley]

271. Well, sometimes, yeah

PETA is no friend to progressives. We have to be as polite to them as we are to Republicans.

[Warren DeMontague]

283. If someone's feelings are hurt because I say "I eat meat", too fucking bad.

Just like if someone's feelings are hurt because the gay folks down the street want to get married. Too fucking bad.

The minute meat eaters start forcing vegetarians to eat meat or the gay wedding crowd starts forcing straights to have gay weddings, then I will agree there's a problem there.

[yewberry]

295. That's not what we're talking about.

It can be difficult to have a discussion here sometimes. If we're talking about animal cruelty or factory farms or environmental impacts of meat or some such, there is a small but dedicated group of people on DU who think it's fucking hilarious to post pictures of their venison dinner or start opining about their delicious fois gras, HAR HAR HAR.

It's done specifically to be dismissive and mocking.

And no, it doesn't fucking hurt my feelings, but it does indicate the level of disrespect that DUers sometimes show for each other.

[Warren DeMontague]

300. Funny enough, I'm happy to discuss my diet, which includes very little meat.

I've also been known to share my views on factory farming (I'm against it) animal cruelty (I'm against it)...

And no one has ever assaulted me with pictures of venison.

I'm an enthusiastic supporter of organic farming, free range animal raising, low impact animal use, etc.

And no one has ever told me about their delicious fois gras. :shrug:

What I am not, however, is a knee-jerk PETA defender or someone who is inclined to lecture other people -meat eaters OR vegetarians- about their dietary choices.

Why, why, WHY do so many members of the party that is supposedly the home of us "pro choice" people have so much trouble with the simple fucking concept of CHOICE? Free choice. Personal choice. EVEN choices that you wouldn't make, even choices you don't LIKE, even choices that bug the crap out of you. Man, stand up for that and you get called all kinds of shit, like a 'loonytarian' :eyes:. (Which is, of course, just a Republican that smokes pot).

I just don't get it. I don't understand the fucking OBSESSION with telling other people what to do.

[yewberry]

311. Well, that's the 'flaunting' that is meant upthread.

It's not infrequent.

I do wish DUers were more respectful of others' choices and positions of all kinds.

[Warren DeMontague]

317. I'll second that.

Peace.

[cui bono]

333. That's all I was saying all along. eom

[baby_mouse]

573. I do think some of us carnivores over-react, sometimes.

I would hope it's usually because they feel insulted, on occasion certain DU PETA members have really got me riled just by being phenomenally rude after I've tried to be polite and understand their position. It's not okay, but I can understand why a lot of carnivores start posting silly pictures.

I can't apologise for them and I can't honestly apologise for eating meat, but I acknowledge that it's often a very badly handled subject on this board.

[cui bono]

332. Exactly. Well said. eom

[cui bono]

331. That wasn't my point. See my reply to your other post. eom

[JVS]

If they're in your own fucking business, hell yes!

[iverglas]

here's the expression you're looking for

But so many posts on this board, such as the one you just made here, are all about "me" and fuck what other people think or care about.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=I'm+all+right+Jack!

1. I'm all right Jack!

(originally: "Fuck you, Jack, I'm all right!!" - described the bitter dismay of sailors ("jacks") returning home after wartime in the Navy to find themselves not treated as patriots or heroes, but ignored / sneered at by a selfish, complacent, get-ahead society - phrase was subsequently toned down for acceptable general use.)

Attitude of "every man for himself, survival of the fittest, devil take the hindmost", ... but also, that all the possible advantages (however gained), success (however won) and satisfaction (whatever the cost to others) belong to me first!" Narrow-focus, narrow-gauge pseudo-Darwinian selfishness glorified as a sensible philosophy of society and life.

I find it is about the only response I can think of to many of the things I see in this place.

You're all right, Jack!

Of course, the first time I said it, I was informed that the person I was addressing was not named Jack ...

[Rhiannon12866]

402. Vegetarians are also bashed on this board, though I have no idea why.

But I've seen it. :-(

[Warren DeMontague]

537. I've seen it too, and my response to both sides is the same when they do that:

"Why do you think it's your business what OTHER people eat?

Monitor what's on the end of your fork, genius."

[Rhiannon12866]

656. LOL. Well said...

And I am always telling my friend who is new to politics that it's the conservatives who want to tell other people what to do...:shrug:

[iverglas]

155. as good a place as any to say it

And it's worth saying again:

Honestly, I don't consider this board progressive. It's pretty middle of the road at fucking best.

Thank you for mentioning the misogyny. I'm one of the bad feminists, and I make a point of supporting my GLBT colleagues when they need it, e.g. when Madspirit was dancing on Falwell's grave in her head. I believe in solidarity, and I believe in defending the victimized and exploited. I also believe in civil discourse among reasonable people of goodwill who disagree on the details.

And all of those are damned rare things to see hereabouts. It wasn't quite this bad in the earlier days; there was less right-wing filth; and there was much, much more intelligent and even respectful discussion. But it wasn't ever what I'd expect from a progressive community. (I use progressive in the genuine, time-honoured sense, not the US 2008 election campaign sense.) One of my first forays here was in a thread in which people were vigorously arguing that if landlords didn't want to rent to people of whose sexual orientation they didn't approve, that was their right as property owners. Lord have mercy.

This current crisis is just symptomatic of the broader ick. There is loonytarian ick, victim-blaming ick, vindictive self-satisfied ick, ugly self-interested ick, dishonest ick, flat out too stupid to believe ick, every kind of ick imaginable.

Things contain the seeds of their own destruction within them, things are sometimes destroyed by their own success. But surely, surely, even a big tent isn't infinitely stretchy.



(Okay, I had to fix it because it hurt my eyes. "Best place as any to say it"?? I didn't know such gibberish could be produced by my brain ...)

[cui bono]

170. Thank you for your response and I agree completely.

You can see the evidence in some of the other responses I got to that post.

[TahitiNut]

207. Yes ... and that mirrors the migration of the 'big tent' to the right, too.

As an independent LIBERAL, I've noted that when anyone in the 'big tent' farts, EVERYONE in that tent has to breathe it - in and out, in and out. (And I'm again reminded of Carlos. :puke:)

[Chovexani]

476. Oh good lord I remember Carlos

He wasn't just a wanker, he was like a Sith Lord of Wankery.

That fart analogy's a great one. I'll have to borrow it. (Really, it's long past time to spray some Oust in the Big Tent!)

[2rth2pwr]

229. I can't stand the veggie flaunting ick

Always coming up to you with that big smile, pretending they didn't leave that piece of broccoli in their teeth on purpose. Ick!

[KoKo]

360. I think I understand what you say....because it's probably very insightful...if

one has been here a long enough time to think about it seriously. Thanks...

[Warren DeMontague]

182. So you think that meat eaters shouldn't "flaunt" their lifestyle?

If they have to engage in that behavior you find morally repugnant, they should keep it in the closet, so to speak? :eyes:

How about an across the board principle that people MIND THEIR OWN FUCKING BUSINESS when it comes to the lifestyles of others- gays, straights, parents, breastfeeders, porn-watchers, meat eaters, pot smokers, vegetarians, etc?

Wow, what a concept.

I had Thanksgiving (you know, the "turkey holocaust") with some gay relatives a couple years back, and they didn't eat tofurkey, either. Perhaps you can compile a list of which aspects of their lifestyle they are permitted to "flaunt" and which ones they should hide and be wracked with shame over.

[JVS]

399. This will someday lead to people getting caught eating chicken wings in the bathroom

[cgrindley]

524. Excellent point

and you made it better than I could have.

[yewberry]

530. Actually, it's an extraordinarily bad analogy.

Meaters who who attempt to draw any kind of comparison between themselves and LGBTT people are doing the same thing that the "persecuted Christians" are doing, and it's pretty disrespectful.

GLBTT people and families face real discrimination. Meat-eaters, on the other hand, are the vast majority and face no such discrimination. While we (veg*ns) don't face anything near that level of suffering, we are marginalized, mocked, and tracked as potential terrorists by DHS if we ally ourselves with any kind of action group.

I think impeachdubya should get a pass here, because s/he apparently wasn't aware of the kind of crap that cui bono was referring to (ie the anti-veg *n crusaders) here on DU.

But really, the 'persecuted majority' thing is just silly.

[Warren DeMontague]

536. Fair enough. I never would have brought it up if she hadn't used the word "flaunt".

As in, "flaunt their meat-eating". I live near San Francisco, I know all about how right-wingers bitch that gay people "flaunt" during the pride parade weekend. She chose an unfortunately silly word, there, which lent itself to what I readily admit is a silly comparison.

Nevertheless, I would love to see a day when people run their own lives and don't try to tell their neighbors what to do- be that what they eat, who they screw, what kind of movies they rent, what kinds of plants they smoke- as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult and no one is harming or endangering anyone else.

I wouldn't dream of telling someone else what to eat, what to watch on tv, what music to listen to, what books or magazines to read, who to screw or who to marry. Like I said- if everyone involved is a consenting adult; why the fuck should I care? Why should it even be my business?

Why it's so difficult for so many on all sides to refrain from trying to micro-manage other people's lives is :shrug: beyond me.

[cui bono]

590. Well why not look at why "flaunt" automatically took you to a certain place?

It's a normal English word. Is that really to blame for the hostility in your posts? I think you're eating too much red meat! ;)

Also, you didn't quote the full context in which I used it. What I actually said is "flaunt their meat eating in a mean manner", and that was merely being used to illustrate how this disrespect is given to other groups of people as well as gays and lesbians. It was never about vegetarians vs. meat eaters. It was about the manner in which people post that can be disrespectful. Speaking of irony. ;)

[Warren DeMontague]

650. I know exactly why it took me to a certain place.

Because it reminded me of the language preachy homophobes- that I can't stand- use.

Anyway, I'm not hostile (and I haven't eaten ANY red meat in about, oh, eight years or so) I'm just tired of people telling other people how to live their lives. That goes for meat eaters lecturing vegans on their diet just as it goes for the vegans who, sadly, can't resist doing the same to meat eaters here. Just as it goes for straights who lecture gays.

[cui bono]

655. But what you just won't let sink in is that

no one was telling anyone how to live their lives.

You may not be a hostile person, but I felt your posts were, at the very least they were angry and combative. But that was a joke anyway, did you not see the little winky dinks?

Like this ----> ;)

Peace out.

[JVS]

595. Meaters?

[yewberry]

651. You don't like?

I thought it was kind of cute timesaver.

If you think it's ugly, I'll certainly avoid using it.

[JVS]

652. I think I'll just put you on ignore instead. I don't need any future cute bullshit you might invent

[yewberry]

654. Beg your pardon? I offered to avoid the term if it offended.

Meat-eater conflated to meater isn't exactly an insult, JVS.

It's a lot like using veg*n for vegan/vegetarian.

But sure, whatever. Saying that meat-eaters are meat-eaters is bullshit that you shouldn't have to put up with.

[hfojvt]

186. probably it has become more middle of the road

as it has gotten larger. Old-timers remember it as being more progressive. Perhaps some of the more progressive members have also shown too much intolerance and have been kicked out.

I am not sure, however, why either alerting, engaging, or ignore features will not work in these cases. Then again, as the group gets bigger, people become harder to track. I guess, with alerting the mods do the tracking.

There probably are many misogynistic posts, but are there misgynistic threads which get put on the greatest page? I think alot of crap can be gotten away with in a post because it is hidden in a thread. With a thread of this size, it seems likely that only you and maybe two or three others will ever read this post. It might as well be a PM.

[iverglas]

227. I did!

With a thread of this size, it seems likely that only you and maybe two or three others will ever read this post.

And it gives me an opportunity for my own whine, on the subject of what's wrong.

People aren't here for discussion -- to learn what someone else thinks, and respond to it, and possibly try to persuade, or maybe just plain learn another view or a fact or an analysis and think about it. If they were, they would read what people have already said in threads where they post. They don't, as is glaringly obvious most of the time. They flit from thread to thread, pooping out a little prefab opinion in each one and moving on.

The overwhelming majority of posts in this place these days are quite simply pointless. They contain no novel ideas, no exploration of an idea, no consideration of an idea, no expression of interest in anyone else's ideas -- or experience, or feelings. Just pooped-out opinions. After which the poster will sometimes take great umbrage if someone responds to the opinions with something other than the standard Jerry Springer Show round of applause for the fact that they had an opinion and pooped it out in public.

Meanwhile, trust me. There are many misogynistic posts. And threads. And a large number of people absolutely devoted to spreading their misogynistic poop around this place whenever they see an opportunity.

[cui bono]

254. This is very true. And they like to spread other poop as well. eom

[hfojvt]

278. not sure if it is poop, but it is quite often dogmatic

My opinion is not just my opinion or POV it is 'the truth'! Then it becomes a personal challenge to win every argument, even if 'win' means 'finding a clever way to tell somebody to fu$% off'. Most people would probably rather hear applause than criticism, and often the worst sorts of writings generate the most applause.

[nashville_brook]

550. and don't forget the religion-baiting! (great post)

this board does not behave progressively. people come here as "democrats," and that's no guarantee of enlightened behavior. apparently it's no guarantee of compassion or thoughtfulness, either.


thank you for mentioning the misogyny, btw.

[xchrom]

57. i don't pay attention to them any more.

du can give pat robertson a run for his money any time the topic of sex comes up.

gay or otherwise -- larry craig gives some ''liberals'' to let some homophobic steam off -- just like a lot of hypocrisy threads do.

liberal straights can suddenly say fag -- whatever with impunity if the topic is skewed just so.

[EFerrari]

60. Letting it "go" works sometimes. It's less stress and less hassle.

And sometimes, letting go seems to me like complicity. It's a hard call, for me anyway. :hi:

[xchrom]

80. hi -- good to see you! -- bigotry is as american as apple pie.

and even our frineds will indulge in it -- or refuse to see it when it's pointed out --

and sometimes i do lose my mind and decide to get into it.

but i always figure it really won't change.

but by the same token -- it won't change me.

[EFerrari]

83. Shhh! Don't tell the children about that pie!

lol

:hug: to you, neighbor.

[xchrom]

112. lol -- ya know what?

i just love you!

:loveya: :hug:

[EFerrari]

129. My schedule is wide open.

lol

:hug:

[xchrom]

147. bring the dog to that big dog park in albany

right on the bay -- and we'll walk together -- while the dog takes a bath in the bay.

it's a big dog park -- though you probably know of it.

or we can have coffee sometime.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

63. A DU without our GLBTI brothers and sisters...

Would be no DU at all. Full stop.

Key on the hypocrisy of repukes in general and Craig in particular, when it comes to all the colors in the gay rainbow. But remember that when you attack him on the basis of his gayness, people are gonna be hurt.

Correct me if I am wrong, Beth, but a sitting US senator indulging in, or attempting, anonymous sex with a putative stranger in an airport tearoom certainly warrants some comment, if only on the basis of gross and mind-roasting stupidity? Many, if not all, of the gays I know would not be caught dead, or wearing stripes and plaids(a far worse crime) carrying on like that.

[EFerrari]

78. Sure, Craig's behavior was awful. And it looks like the way we talk

about that behavior needs, um, retooling. :)

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

84. Well, that is gonna be the hard part.

Because sometimes people post, and the subtle inflections and body language of conversation are not apparent in this medium.

Oh, and dahhhling? Please, I would love to be a fly on the wall this Sunday afternoon, in any of the Castro bars, when L'affaire Craig is discussed amongst the lads. Oh, the wit! Oh, the shredding! ;-)

[NashVegas]

246. It's Impossible to Attack Craig By Completely Excluding His Sexuality

Because his sexuality is at the very heart of his hypocrisy. It's the foundation of his hypocrisy.

That one would attempt to separate his sexuality from his hypocrisy is as compartmentalized a notion as he probably is, in person.

[EFerrari]

252. I have to disagree. His crime wasn't his sexuality, it was his

anti social behavior. But, that's not at issue on this thread.

[NashVegas]

266. We Agree On One Thing

That it's really not the issue of this thread. It is, however, the foundation of this thread.

And no matter how much we may disagree, I would thank you for starting the first fully reasoned thread on the matter, that I've seen.

[EFerrari]

284. It's good to dig down to the real thing, isn't it?

Thank you.

[knitter4democracy]

64. I've been shocked by some posts, too.

The "jokes" aren't funny. When a man who says he's not gay gets caught in a scandal, that doesn't make it open season on gay people, for crying out loud. I know that the vast majority here doesn't want to hurt anyone, but some of those posts got mean.

I feel similarly sometimes as a woman. The mysogyny here gets a bit much. Calling women or anyone at all all sorts of names in an effort to dehumanize the enemy dehumanizes us all.

I may not be a lesbian, but I can see the pain of being in the closet and I can feel the outrage of being reduced to an insult or the punchline of a joke. It's wrong, and it shouldn't be happening here. Period.

:hug: For those thinking of leaving, please stay and know that you are loved as you are and celebrated for who you are by most of us. :)

[EFerrari]

79. Thank you, knitter. Exactly so.

:hug:
:grouphug:

[LostinVA]

153. Great post -- thank you

[mntleo2]

293. What Knitter Said!

...whatever the reason someone does not feel welcome, please know that this would not apply to all of us. The few who have made you feel that way are not representing anyone but themselves, not most of us. I believe most of us think that diversity is what gives the world beauty. As a straight person, I know my world would be a dull place without my gay brothers and sisters. DU would be dull without you.

Love
Cat In Seattle

[knitter4democracy]

388. A dull place indeed.

We need all of us to be beautiful and strong. All of us.

[Vinca]

71. Why on earth is the gay community on DU upset?

Those of us cranked up about the Craig story are mad because Craig is such a hypocrite. He sneaks around hiding his true sexual orientation, all the while denying gays and lesbians the rights the rest of us enjoy. Are the gays on DU upset because some of us are upset that they're being screwed? Call me confused.

[EFerrari]

75. It was the tenor of the remarks made here, I believe. Other posters

have described them up thread.

[ruggerson]

85. That's the argument many of us are trying to make

But there is a more than healthy amount of people here who see this solely as a story about a "pervert" violating people's bathroom stall privacy.

They don't see the larger picture.

[Terran]

89. For one thing, he's consistently being referred to...

as a "pervert" and a "sicko" and a "sexual predator"...some or all of which could be true, but there's nothing in the known facts of the case to suggest that he is any of this. Especially considering how widespread this kind of behavior is, millions of American men would have be perverts too.

So, the tendency is to lump his behavior in with all gay men, and you see where that goes.

[LostinVA]

166. Exactly -- he's a hypocrite and a adulterer

[AntiFascist]

625. I think "fetish" might be the appropriate term...

of the few people I've known that ever talked about anonymous sex it seemed to be much more of a fetish than anything else.

[LostinVA]

163. We are upset because of the homophobic glee on display by many posters

This, the Rove is gay threads from a few weeks ago, etc. We are angry because the words and ideas in these are disgusting, but not as disgusting as the phobic baying for blood "hidden" beneath a very thin and obvious veneer of "Craig's a hypocrite."

And, I thank all of the great straight allies we have on here -- many showing up in this thread. :hug:

[debbierlus]

566. I made a joke in a post about reasons Rove left

One of them was stating he was going to spend more time with Jeff Gannon. It was pulled as being 'anti-gay'.

It had no anti-gay intent, but I apologize if I hurt anyone with the comment. I showed it to my best male friend (who is gay)
& he didn't see the offense, he thought it was pretty funny too. But, he knows me and realizes that I was attacking the hypocrisy and character of Rove & Gannon (gay or not, Gannon has been a shill for this administration & that is what makes him loathesome in my book). I wonder if Bush resigned & I put he left to spend more time with his wife, Condoleeza, it would be pulled for being anti-black.

This is a difficult area. Tough sometimes to distinguish intent.

Again, I don't ever want to hurt anybody. Advocating for gay rights is among one of the causes for which I have spoken out & fought.

[Toasterlad]

570. Let's Break That Down.

The humor in your joke is based on the premise that Rove is gay, implied by the assertion that he will be "spending time" (i.e. presuming a romantic relationship with) Jeff Gannon, an outed, public gay figure. The joke is "funny" because is presumes that the concept of two men in a romantic relationship is humorous - that is, abnormal or strange. That's homophobic. The insult is compounded by the fact that both Rove and Gannon are reviled people, and that their implied gay behavior is a natural result of their being "bad" men.

An equivalent joke substituting Condi Rice for Jeff Gannon would lack that "funny" premise, since Rice is a woman and Rove is a man, and while same-sex marriage is largely illegal (and considered immoral) over the majority of the country, interracial marriage between men and women has been perfectly legal and fairly non-remarkable for nearly half a century. There is no joke there. The only way to pull off a joke like that is if you're intended audience found the concept of interracial marriage abnormal or strange, which I'd like to believe would be unlikely on DU.

I'm sure your intention wasn't to insult the gay community, but I hope you can understand how some people might have found your joke insulting. More importantly, when one is awash in a sea of gay joke and homophobic contents, as one has been over the last few days here on DU, jokes cease to be judged on their own (questionable) merits, but are regarded as part of a disheartening, monolithic whole. Your gay friend might very well have found your joke funny, but I doubt he would feel the same way if he'd read it as just one more post in the hundreds the Craig situation has spawned.

[debbierlus]

601. I don't think the joke is funny because of Rove being homosexual

I think it is funny because they are such a awful group of hypocrites & it goes right to the heart of that hypocrisy.

And, the Condoleza joke is a swipe at the hypocrisy again. Of a party that perpetrates family values (THEIR definition of family values, not mine btw) while living none of it. It speaks to the absurdity of what they try to portray themselves as versus what they are...They are the ones that create & live the shame, the humor points it out.

However, given the context of a larger sea of deragotory jokes, I can see why people might be upset. I love all my DU breathen whatever creed, color, or sexual orientation. Again, I would never want to hurt anyone. Mea culpa.

:)

[Toasterlad]

630. With All Due Respect....

...while I would have to see your joke in its original context to be completely sure, I think it's very unlikely that anyone interpreted it the way you say you intended it. The common assumption would be to take it as I explained above. I hope you can understand why it was removed for being "anti-gay".

You apology is, I feel, unnecessary, but appreciated nonetheless.

[Midlodemocrat]

234. Mainly because not everyone is referring to the hypocrisy.

When a person starts a thread asking for input on how 'not to get propositioned in the men's room' as if it occurs as often as mosquito bites, people get upset.

It's disparaging to our GLBT friends. They deserve much more.

[bliss_eternal]

256. "The gay community" aren't the only one's upset...

There are members w/out rainbows in their avatars that are pissed, too. It's not "us vs. them." These are members of our community. Members that donate money to keep our board running efficiently, who support friends, and vote Democratic/progressive. But at the slightest provocation they are reduced to merely "the gay community." A nameless, faceless group who's opinions and feelings don't seem to matter. I'm sorry I don't understand that.

I'm upset to see so many people being vulgar and cruel to other human beings. People that have said over and over that these comments are hurtful, insensitive and nasty--yet no one is paying attention. Instead of honoring their feelings, they've been dismissed, argued with and told that their "definition of bigotry" doesn't count.

:wtf:

It's beyond disgusting.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

472. because we are clearly oversensitive fools who dont recognize homophobia and need heterosexuals to

tell us what we can and cannot be upset over

[nadine_mn]

546. I disagree

let me stick a toe into the foray....

there is a difference IMHO between being gay and hooking up w/ strangers in public restrooms. I think ... I know I will get slammed for this opinion.... that even if we lived in a world where being gay was acceptable and w/out stigma, there would still be the Larry Craig's in the bathrooms.

I have heard the argument that the far-right anti-gay agenda "forces" men like Bob Allen and Larry Craig to have sex in bathrooms - but I don't believe it. I think its a perversion (not because its gay sex - but because its risky, meaningless sex, I would say it was a perversion if he was hooking up with women in bathrooms in airports). Maybe addiction is a better word.

I am glad he is denying he is gay - he is not the poster child for what it means to be gay. He is the poster child for being a sad, conflicted man full of self hatred.

[anniebelle]

76. I'm sick of these pompous assholes standing up there

stating "I'm so sorry I got caught". I would have liked to have seen Matthew Shepherd's (not sure of spelling, the young fellow that was hung up on the barbed-wire fence because he was gay) parents there telling how the repuke's policies, which this lying piece of vomit touts in every speech he makes on the floor, affects the lives of innocent people in this country every day. I have gay friends that had their house burned down because our wonderful 'christian' neighbors didn't approve of their union.

[knitter4democracy]

98. Burned down? How awful!

I can't even begin to imagine how they feel. I'm so sorry. What an awful thing to go through, what a loss. :(

[Tsiyu]

86. Nobody is going to be happy here all the time

Try being a trailer-dwelling poor hillbilly. The poor are shit on here more than anybody. Still, the only thing that ever made me want to take my ball and go home was a racial slur someone uttered in a thread about labor protests. I realize there is ignorance here and I refuse to define DU by the ignorant.

Sensitivity is good, but my objections to bathroom sex have NADA to do with anybody's orientation. If that is too difficult to understand, don't chalk it up to homophobia. Chalk it up to: YOU don't try to understand.

Sorry, but if that's all it takes to qualify as a homophobe (not wanting my 13-year-old son to walk in on ANYBODY's sexual acts in a public bathroom) then that bar is pretty damned low.

My best friend is gay. He's visiting this weekend. I think he would disagree that I'm a homophobe for my beliefs. And if anyone else thinks I'm one for that belief THAT is THEIR problem.

[EFerrari]

88. Actually, all I asked is how we can improve this situation.

:hi:

[Tsiyu]

109. I know . Sorry to go off like that

:hi:

I guess we just keep talking, keep expressing ourselves. As Molly Ivins said, the only cure for too much free speech is more free speech.

It's the same in many threads about women or women's issues. A lot of BS and immature strereotypes and vitriole.

I love all DUers (cept trolls.) I would fight to the death to defend anyone here. NO ONE should feel unwelcome.

And for the record, I do not view homosexuals as deviants, perverts or criminals. I support marriage for all consenting adults. It angers me when Family Values types live their double lives while trying to turn society against homosexuals. It's wrong.

Rather than viewing this as bad turning point, view this as a good turning point at DU because it gives us an opportunity to discuss why certain attitudes might be wrong or cruel or hurtful. Use the opportunity to educate others, and slowly people will see the light.

We are all works in progress :)

[EFerrari]

114. Yes, we are works in progress.

That would be us. lol

:)

[Bluebear]

94. Why don't you actually find out why people are upset before determining it for them?

It's not about your 13-year old in the least.

It was the "Craig likes showtunes!" and "here is a list of songs for Craig: Dancing Queen! Girls Just Want to Have Fun! Hahahahaha!" bullshit. OK?

[Tsiyu]

118. Bathroom sex was mentioned by the OP

And I've seen plenty of snarky "what about the children" reactions, as if that somehow makes ME a prude because i give a shit about my kid.

"What about the children" indeed...If some don't give a shit, fine, but don't think you can shame me because I do.

As for what you are talking about, I did not see those threads.

As a female, I see threads all the time denigrating women. I refuse to let it make me feel unwelcome.

I do not define DU by the lowest common denominator. Call these people on their idiocy, explain to them why this is offensive, but don't be so quick to leave these forums because of a few idiots.

If i left every time I was offended i would have left the first day i joined.

[Bluebear]

122. Some posts mentioned gays as bathroom predators/pedophiles.

In the same breath. My favorite was someone who said they happened to know that "Business people only "pee" and hold the rest until they get to their destination" because they might get attacked by a gay. :rofl:


I love kids, bhg, we are on the same page, believe me.

[BlooInBloo]

149. Teh gay? NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

:rofl:

[Tsiyu]

156. I must have missed the worst of it

thankfully and I hate to think that people would post that crap.

I did comment on the now infamous Lego thread but I was not even thinking in terms of comparing anything to anything. i was just laughing at how ridiculous fundies are.


I appreciate those who are trying to enlighten the idiots, I promise.

I guess it just really offended me that someone might think i was homophobic!


:)

[bliss_eternal]

263. If I may...

...there's also been a lot of, "...well I haven't seen that, so..." Is it necessary to experience something firsthand to give credence to another's pain?

I'm seeing so many posts say "I didn't see this" and to be honest, that is another form of being dismissive and discounting another's feelings and experience.

I'm not saying that's what YOU'VE done at all. You seem to have an understanding and are open to what people are saying here. I just keep seeing these kinds of comments and know it contributes to making people feel bad and discounted.

It's a sense of when do the people that the comments actually AFFECT, get to decide how THEY feel about those comments. Instead of others TELLING them how they SHOULD feel.

We never would have had a civil rights movement if whites in America continued to insist, "well...I don't see it" or "it's not that bad" or "they shouldn't feel bad about that." Instead, many were OPEN to seeing the injustice and took it from there. Those that fought alongside blacks, didn't try to define their pain for them.

[iverglas]

307. interesting

I'm seeing so many posts say "I didn't see this" and to be honest, that is another form of being dismissive and discounting another's feelings and experience.

To be honest, I hadn't seen any of it either. That would be because I just don't waste time clicking on threads that are too obviously going to be wastes of time, for me.

But what I assumed was that they'd been there. Otherwise, somebody wouldn't be talking about them.

When I try to ask a neighbour, politely, to shut their fucking 24/7 yapping dog up so I can get some work done, the usual response, in 30 years of such polite requests, has been that you can't hear the dog, and it isn't bothering you, and you're just making shit up to cause problems. Yeah. I just made up that I can hear that dog barking behind you there, when I'm working in my office, or sleeping in my bedroom, or watching TV in my living room. And then I decided I'd pick your house at random and go complain about something I can't hear.

That's how people expressing disappointment about the things they've been subjected to hear must feel. Yeah, we're just crazy people imagining things so we can complain about them and get insulted for our trouble. The lack of respect starts with the behaviour complained of, and continues with the dismissal of the complaint.

Now. I actually think the same thing happened to buddyhollysghost. I saw her post expressing concern about the effect on children who might happen upon someone engaged in the activities Craig was apparently hoping to engage in, or be accosted by someone engaged in the activities he was engaging in. I can't think of any reason why she'd feel different about her kid happening upon a heterosexual couple engaging in equivalent activities on the beach, say. I think she was reasonably concerned about children's well-being. I share her concern. I couldn't imagine why all the many people expressing concern about their own privacy in that situation wouldn't share someone's concern for children's well-being in the same situation. And I shoulda said so ...

Right now, the post in which someone said she was obviously a bigot (I'm pretty sure it was her post that was referred to, although *it* was deleted) for expressing this concern is still sitting there, in a thread linked to from this one.

Really, what is that but someone else dismissing another member's concerns that s/he doesn't happen to share and doesn't think worthy of respect?

I'm not asking you personally. Just felt the need to get that out. ;)

[Tsiyu]

312. I completely agree with you

:hug:

Like I noted, I didn't see the threads but I hate that such things were said.

I pretty much stayed away from all but a few posts about Craig because hell there were so many it became overkill. But hearing what was said on some of them pisses me off as well. Some folks appear to have just used this event to spew some ugly ignorant shit.

I hope that no one leaves due to idiots.

We have so much to learn from each other, so to anyone who was offended I apologize for any part I may have unwittinmgly played and I hope you will continue to stay here and confront ignorance and enlighten those here.

We have a long way to go as a nation and here on DU and there are legitimate concerns expressed in this thread.

I hope this is a step in the right direction for everyone....

[bliss_eternal]

316. .....!

:hi::hug:

[LostinVA]

326. Good post -- thanks

[bliss_eternal]

376. ......!

No need. :hug: You really shouldn't be treated this way.
Those of us that see it for what it is have a responsibility to speak out against it.

Then no one can say, "...it's just those sensitive gay people." :eyes: ;)

[Lost-in-FL]

361. Yup!

:applause:

[ruggerson]

125. My reaction to the "what about the kids" angle

is what about all the gay kids?

What about all the gay kids in "reorientation" Christian concentration camps throughout the South RIGHT THIS MINUTE? Suffering emotional and psychological child abuse at the hands of these evil, self righteous morons.

I started a thread about that the other day, and three people were interested in dicussing it.

So what other reaction can I possibly have but to think that people who bring up "the kids" are full of shit? (Not you, just in general.)

[knitter4democracy]

398. I agree.

I went to an evangelical college and saw what they did to my friends. Most never graduated, forced out either by parents kicking them out of the family entirely when they came out or by horrible abuse at the college or both. It was awful. I didn't see your thread, or I would've posted there.

As for kids in bathrooms, I watch my kids carefully because of the predators out there. They're not gay or straight--they're another kind of sexuality that only gets turned on by kids. That's not any kind of gay or straight I know.

[Zookeeper]

521. It isn't an "either/or"

I would hope we're concerned about ALL kids.

IMHO, kids (gay and straight) shouldn't be exposed to people (gay or straight) having sex in a public restroom. (Actually, I don't want people (gay or straight) having sex in a public restroom I'm using, either.) The evidence strongly suggests that Larry Craig was intending to have sex in the main restroom of the Mpls. airport, if he had found a willing partner.

In addition, not to dismiss the terrible harm Fundies do to gay kids, Fundies do a pretty good job of messing up a lot of straight kids, as well. I'd like to see all kids protected from abuse.

It's inexcusable to use "the kids" as an excuse to equate homosexuality with pedophilia, but it's also wrong to assume that anyone who wants to shield children (again, gay and straight) from experiences that they aren't developmentally ready to understand, is a homophobe.

My sense has been that a few trolls have been visiting these threads. That combined with the general immaturity on the subject of sex, has made for some bizarre posts.

[EFerrari]

145. This is what I think so take it with a pillar of salt.

We're all of us never going to agree on everything BECAUSE unlike the Thuggery, we think for ourselves most of the time. So, there will be disagreement, conflict, etc.

Okay.

But / and, there are issues that come up in GD (especially), that people really haven't thought through all the way. Let alone, thought through to the extent that they can post about these issues in a way that is appropriate for public consumption. These are the internets, after all. Typing is quick and easy. Thinking, not so much.

I don't either define DU by the LCD and imo, when a significant number of our members are speaking out about how we talk here, listening to their concerns is the right move to make. Whether they are part of our gay community, the feminist community, posters whose concern is poverty or "race" -- any one of the number of contingents that enrich this place and make it the unbelievably rich and cool joint it can be at its best.

Because these are our people. These are the people who make us who we are and who infuse our community with the qualities that we treasure. Why in the world would we ever allow our treasure to be so shoddily cared for?

Part of this negotiation is on every poster, of course. But, what can we do to move our conversation forward, in a productive and respectful way -- on any of these issues but in particular, in the area of supporting our gay community and right NOW?

I'm sorry to be testy but my willingness to agree with disrespect is at an all time low. I know you understand, buddyhollysghost.

[Tsiyu]

183. I completely understand

I missed the worst threads, obviously. And I am glad of that but sorry anyone had to put up with ignorance.

We have these jams from time to time here. Sometimes i get a charge out of it when a particular poster has been a real thoughtless jerk about other people's problems but then THEY have a problem.

Suddenly those who were completely unsympathetic want sympathy. But suppose we just try to show empathy all the time here instead of when it's convenient to our own particular cause? I am not referring to any one group or poster here, just in a general sense.

There are enough people here who support all things GLBT to make this place worth hanging around.

How do we make this place more welcoming? Just keep standing up for what we believe. Like I said earlier, take the opportunity to say why something is offensive.

With the Lego thread, I had no idea what made that so off-limits until it was explained to me that Righties equate homosexuality with bestiality. I did not realize this at all. But then I vaguely remembered seeing some sigline about a man and a man and a turtle here and i guessed it must have been some rightwing talking point somewhere.

So I was ignorant to that unfair comparison by others, but it does not follow that I was making that same comparison myself. Still, once someone explained it i understood. I will not laugh at the same again, not because my attitude has changed concerning any comparison of the two but because I realize someone else might take my laughter to mean that i DO equate the two.

Sensitivity, yeah, that's the ticket.

I have been accused of being overly "sensitive" about some issues so yes, i understand reaching the limit.

[EFerrari]

243. Do you think Skinner's head would explode if we asked him for

a Sensitivity Forum? :)

Oh, us wacky, nuanced progressives with our values. Can't live with us, can't live without us.

I can't live without us. :)

[Tsiyu]

321. Me either

Thanks for having the courage to start this thread.

:hug:

[BlooInBloo]

157. Don't bother - another member of the "they're oversensitive" crowd.

[Tsiyu]

203. It's amazing that you know so much about me

All I know about you?





















































oh, yeah, you post one or two lines of text only.
























and that's about all....































but I'm glad you know all about me! I must be very important to you! Thanks!























































:)

[BlooInBloo]

222. I'm here for you, tiger.

[Bluebear]

96. Love you, Bethy

:loveya:

[EFerrari]

103. Y yo te adoro.

:loveya:

[BlooInBloo]

102. Pffft. Just because people comparing being gay to bestiality are allowed here....

.... is clearly no reason for anyone to be upset.

I can't for the life of me imagine why gay folks would be uncomfortable at such a website.

[Mutineer]

104. Or the continued jokes that make it seem

that there is something sinful or wrong in being gay. Nope, nothing to see here, let's move along shall we? And by all means, let's keep those hate-filled posts flying!:sarcasm:

[EFerrari]

113. Or maybe we could notice what's going on here, see what is here

and make a decision to do better. :shrug:

[EFerrari]

105. Who could ever imagine that..

:(

[salin]

110. and folks laughed, and chortled at the joke... and couldn't understand

why others were offended.... that's no reason to find the place somewhat hostile...

The dismissiveness gets thick in here, at times.

[EFerrari]

119. Hiya, salin.

:)

[salin]

144. hiya back attcha, sfexpat!

thanks for the thread - the preponderance of the gay as an insult sentiments being expressed in a variety of ways, for days on end - or worse ... are tiresome - and in somecases I suspect a wee bit intentionally cruel.

[EFerrari]

154. We can do better than that.

Thank you. :)

[Tsiyu]

142. folks laugh and chortle at all sorts of offensive stuff here

You just now noticed this?

I noticed it my first day here.

To be fair the thread you reference and that Booinbloo referenced was a humorous look at old testament passages. I have never equated crossdressing, ejaculating sperm or crushed testicles with bestiality. Nor have I ever equated homosexuality with bestiality.

I found humor in the childish illustrations of ridiculous bible verses, not in any comparison of any of the biblical prohibitions illustrated.

nor do i believe the OP of that thread intended it that way.

Now, looking back i can see where some might take offense becasue the Rwing has equated the two, but I do not think that those laughing were even thinking such things and nobody asked me if that was what I was thinking.

So I'll state for the record that the humor was not at anyone's expense - except the Fundies - for me.

And I do not believe that anyone who laughed at that thread was trying to equate the two either. In this case I think someone was LOOKING to be offended.

yes, I know it was locked. Good thing I'm sure.

[salin]

152. intentional or not...

the order of the references/pics - did leave that impression. I am not gay, nor was I looking to be offended... and my jaw dropped. But when the implication was raised - rather than acquiescing to those who found it offensive the OPer and others were dismissive to the concern. That is some of the stuff that gets so tiresome. And geez, it is now day five of this being THE topic of the day? I can understand why some are finding the forum a bit hostile right now.

[bliss_eternal]

241. Do you mean like this?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1709707

I just LOVE how someone thinks they're better able to recognize what constitutes bigotry and intolerance, than a lesbian. :eyes: Oh and it's so because "they say so." I thought THAT went out with puberty.

[salin]

407. on the 'net... I am not sure that puberty as a stage that everyone goes through,

is uniform. Arrested development - seems a more familiar state of being, the longer I spend on the 'net.

[bliss_eternal]

415. LOL--good point.

:hi::rofl: So true.

[salin]

429. I was sorry this morning,

that I only saw your response to a post of mine... after the lock of the thread. Just as it was time to log off - with barely enough time to know I could get to work without being late. I appreciated that post - as I appreciate this exchange. :hi:

[gollygee]

132. What amazed me about that Lego Bible thing

is that someone started a thread complaining about how it was discriminatory toward Christians and didn't notice that it equated homosexuality to bestiality. Like totally passed that by and didn't even notice that, but was horrified that someone would make fun of Christians by showing Bible verses illustrated by Legos.

[BlooInBloo]

134. They're prevaricating. They understand perfectly well. It's no different from blackface...

... and white folks claiming to not understand what all the hubbub is about.

[salin]

160. the mask of ignorance falls off...

when it is pointed out ... and dismisses or defends it. The ignorance claim works exactly one time. (and allowing for ignorance excuse is, at times, just being generous.)

[BlooInBloo]

165. If only. When the majority is on their side, the ignorance claim works over and over...

... with a wink and a nod of respect for a perfectly pulled off "plausible deniability". Those calling bullshit are "oversensitive" etc.

[salin]

174. in terms of dominant discussion, you are correct...

in terms of how savvy readers interpret and come to view others once that single ignorance claim has been filed - I think a lot of folks, this week, have rather dropped their mask for others to see.

[BlooInBloo]

179. May it be so.

[Tsiyu]

217. And its no different

than when you say you do not agree with censorship but that you have issues with the way porn is produced or even if you just want to discuss porn here.

OHMYGAWD!!!!!!!You Censor you! YOU WANT CENSORSHIP!!!!!!!YOU ARE GOING TO TAKE AWAY MY PORRRRRN!!!!!!!!!


No matter how often and how strenuously you say you are not out for censorship, just a discussion of what you might find wrong about the industry, you are accused of being a censorship advocate.

Some people refuse to understand any one else's point of view. They try to ascribe all sorts of evil to people who are just exploring a certain topic.

Other people claim to know all about people they never even met!

There is plenty of ignorance to go around. You start with you. I'll start with me.

Umless you've reached the state of sublime perfection yourself....in which case, disregard this post.

[BlooInBloo]

223. Consider it disregarded.

[Tsiyu]

230. Okie Dokie Dubya n/t

[WritingIsMyReligion]

106. Craig is a bloody hypocrite, which should be pointed out time and time again.

He's a monstrous, bloody, foolish hypocrite.

I don't think people are being intentionally rude--in my opinion, a lot of rudeness everywhere in society comes from being stupid/ignorant/lazy and not from actual malice. The same goes for these so-clled ofensive threads. Most people are eager to jump on Craig for being a hypocrite, and in doing so, they convolute the homosexuality of his (attempted) actions with their glee at seeing a hypocrite caught, so that it appears to some of the more sensitive individuals on DU that these threads are veiled gaybashing. In making fun of Craig for being a silly hypocritical bastard caught (almost literally) with his pants down, they also appear to make fun of the inherent homosexual factor in all this, which is that Craig was trying to hook up with another man.

I guess there are two things to say. The first is that GLBT DUers need to realize that most if not all of the "homophobia" in some of the Craig threads is 1)unintended and 2)not even particularly homophobic or anti-gay. That doesn't necessarily excuse the behavior, which can be rather snarky at the least, but it does mean that GLBT DUers need to approach things from a different angle. Rather than blasting into these threads with "OMG HOMOPHOBIA!" or "I CAN'T BELIEVE I'M READING THIS ON DU," (two statements sometimes as counter-productive as any homophobia) perhaps they should first ask (as politely as possible) if the OP and participants are aware that this thread appears to have some homophobic tendencies. More than likely the participants are not fully aware how things are being interpreted.

That said, people posting threads (and more threads and more threads and more...) about Craig should probably stop first to consider what they're posting. First, is it really needed? Yet ANOTHER thread questioning the legality of the arrest, for instance, would probably be tedious. (In other words, don't beat a dead horse.) Also, are you posting something of a satirical/joking manner--while still attempting to give us something new, of course--that could be deemed offensive? You don't need to go completely PC on the post and make it so full of disclaimers and/or vague, happy-happy statements that the thing would sink were it placed in water, but going over it with at least a somewhat sensitive eye couldn't hurt. And if you know the thread has the potential to be controversial, don't post it right before you go out to dinner or go take the dog for a walk. The least you can do is be there for a while, ready to answer the questions/attacks that you suspect might come, as nothing is more suspicious and annoying than an inflammatory hit-and-run, even if you didn't intend it to turn out as such.

[Irishonly]

108. Lack of Understanding

I have not said much about Craig's resignation although I believe he gives new meaning to hypocrisy. I have made comments about sex in public restrooms and didn't realize my prudishness could be seen as offensive. I do not believe you need to avoid public restrooms. My only point is I would be offended if I realized sex was going on between anyone.

[LeftCoast]

123. I'd like to thank you for posting this.

I'd almost gotten through this week without getting too severely pissed off. Mostly through self-imposed censoring of which threads I read. That lasted until today. So your post comes at a most timely moment.

Thanks again.

[EFerrari]

130. Gulp.

You don't know where I live, do you? :)

[LeftCoast]

133. I hope you didn't misread what I meant

I meant to say that your thread was a wonderful counterpoint to several threads posted today that truly offended me.

And I promise not to stalk you or anything. :)

[EFerrari]

151. Ohthankgod.

I'm lousy at being a stalkee. :)

[Name removed]

354. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BlooInBloo]

141. heh!

[uppityperson]

131. Thank you. Me too, best wishes.

[mitchum]

137. I would also keep in mind the dispirit when so many of these fascists are revealed to be "family"...

but also keep in my mind, I'm a cynic

[EFerrari]

158. No one can make people as upset as family. Good point.

:thumbsup:

[shadowknows69]

138. Some level of hate speech is going to emerge no matter what the situation

Just let it slide off you. Make it less important. It's really only about the hypocrisy anyway. Some people just express that less than tactfully. Some people are assholes and reveal their true colors. File that info away and rejoice that you have been enlightened.




<edit to add> It's official, that was the 10,000th time I've spelled the word hypocrisy wrong

[EFerrari]

159. I'll join you in requesting a Spelling Foroom.

:silly:

[LostinVA]

172. It has ZERO place on a progressive boatd -- no wriggle room on this issue

[Philosoraptor]

140. Heads will be knocked together, hearts broken, friendships strained.

[EFerrari]

164. And that's where the duct tape and applying the seat of your brain

comes into play.

Maybe we need an alarm like fire departments have. Not for censorship but for a heads up.

[cally]

162. I woke up wondering about that

and my own glee at the Craig hypocrisy. I was careful about what I posted because I knew that there is a very fine line between outright joy at Craig being caught as a hypocrite and homophobia. I've been wondering if my laughing at the Olberman jokes and innuendos doesn't cross the line. I offer heartfelt support for all my liberal friends who are GLBT.

[EFerrari]

168. Thank you, Cally.

:)

[zippy890]

169. in solidarity with my gay & lesbian friends

in my life & especially here at DU right now.

I got mightily sick of the bathroom jokes not just here but everywhere last week. Hard to resist from a snark point of view but a lot of people didn't take into consideration the gay community and how it makes them feel.

big kick of support and love to all.

:dem:

[EFerrari]

184. Thank you, zippy. I wish we were all as fast as you are.

lol

:kick:

[goodgd_yall]

171. My own reaction reflects a not very healthy situation

I haven't been up on what has gone on in the Craig incident threads because I have been avoiding the posts on the topic. One more time reading thinly veiled gay-bashing is just too much sometimes, so out of self-protection, I've avoided mostly what people on DU have been saying. I have read some insightful posts, but I've also seen plenty that use the term "pervert," and I just don't want to go there.

[EFerrari]

187. Our conversation needs a big fat tune up, imho.

Thanks for your comments.

[LostinVA]

175. Nice OP

[Chovexani]

176. I'm going to make a gay sex scandal bingo card

Like the anti-PC bingo someone posted a few weeks ago. Center square is going to be, "It's not about teh gay, it's the hypocrisy!"

Thank you for posting this. It seems like with every story that breaks out, the homophobia gets worse. The Snickers ad controversy opened the floodgates. :(

[BlooInBloo]

190. That's an AWESOME bingo card! Paging Katherine Brengle!!!!!

[Chovexani]

218. "My best friend/son/cat is gay" should be on there too

Along with one of my personal favorites "But gay people call us breeders".

You know, if I actually knew something about web design, I'd cook up something like the queer version of Black People Love Us. Lord knows it's needed.

[BlooInBloo]

221. There's gotta be a spot for "But they call each other 'fag'" - no card is complete without that.

[EFerrari]

192. Why not a "hypocrisy bingo" card?

Let's focus up on the real problem here and starve the homophobia? Just a thought. :)

[Chovexani]

220. You know, someone linked me to a site that makes bingo cards

I'll dig up the link and try to cook something up. :)

[EFerrari]

238. That would be excellent!

lol

[SoCalDem]

440. Bingo card generator...here's the link

http://teach-nology.com/web_tools/materials/bingo/

[bridgit]

191. I remain profoundly thankful for my many G&L friends IRL...

Having expressed on previous occasions, here in GD, what are imo their seasoned & valued views & opinions on a host of issues; not the least of which being 'the community', I have been roundly jumped & sullied by "Longtime DUers in our gay community" and viciously cyber-so with nary a comer to any notion of agreement, or defense so...

What does it all mean? We are either all on the same side, the same page, singing & humming the same tune...or we are not.

[EFerrari]

199. Imho, there is more than one thing going on here.

The only goal of this thread is to ask, how can we do better when we talk about this set of issues?

We're going to disagree, we're going to post hastily, we're going to make mistakes. This is GD, after all. lol

The careless postings that have upset a number of our gay DUers is something we need to attend to. If it was me and you or me and merh or me and Oedi, we'd know that the problem was me.

But, judging from the number of pms in my inbox, we have a problem, Houston. I don't claim to speak for anyone or anything.

I'm just asking, how can we make this better?

[bridgit]

211. As a practical matter? De-escalation is vital...

These matters flash across these screens nearly as quickly as others form their opinions.

imfo (i keyed 'imfo' some time back, as a for instance and someone accused me of cursing at them as in: In My Fucking Opinion!!, though i use it here & there simply as: in my *further* opinion :shrug:); but imfo many, too many are not absorbing the exchanges properly.

Yes, there are a host of opinions & ways in which to both express them...and express them poorly, that seems a given.

Still, perhaps even sadly, or amazingly so: even a careless posting may be the way someone feels so that I suggest de-escalation on all sides. The image may well be of the olden days, wild west after all the shooting stops as grizzled gun slinger' step back & away warily guns still drawn & smoking but no longer firing as some frontier preacher; perhaps yourself, sfexpat2000, perhaps even me :) or a tribunal of wise, philosopher queens (no pun intended) suggesting the upside to calmer thoughts, shared values, and common dreams...

Here's hoping we're not gunned down in the process ;)

[EFerrari]

606. I like that metaphor, lol!

It's much more elegant than my "handbrake for my keyboard". :)

[tularetom]

194. Does amybody here listen to Stephanie Miller?

They have been hitting the craig story pretty heavy all week and from what I'm reading here some of the comments made by Stephanie and the mooks would be considered borderline offensive. And that is generally considered a "progressive" radio show. I've also heard a couple of "morning zoo" type fart joke DJ's make comments that were a lot worse.

[bridgit]

201. We're out every morning early and Stephanie is a treat...

:)

[EFerrari]

202. It's not just DU but the culture at large.

Let's be the change, Tom.

[LWolf]

198. I'm sorry to hear this.

I'm sorrier that I'm not surprised. :(

I'm not sorry I missed it, except to offer this to any GLBT DUers who have felt less than welcome:

:hug:

[EFerrari]

200. Thank you, LWolf.

:toast:

[RestoreGore]

204. I can understand their feelings..

I'm actually sick and tired of seeing Craig threads on the whole. I find it sickening how sexual preference is used as a political wedge without regard for those it hurts.

[peacetalksforall]

205. To follow up on my HHD - Hypocrisy, Hiding, Denying - IT IS

their declaration of MORAL SUPERIORITY and what they say in their defense.

Republicans claim that Democrats are morally inferior.
Republicans claim homosexuality is immoral.
Republicans can't handle it when we find that there are homosexual Republicans and Republican politicians.
Republicans raise money on their anti-homosexual positions and votes.

Therefore, it is ALL A SHAM.

And we have fun learning about the SHAM.

And when a Republican politician says something that raises a question of credibility...there is just more fodder.

Supposedly, there is more to come with the thread this morning related to the murder-suicide in FL. But, there might not be so much to laugh at. And it may not involve toilet-stranger sex, undercover cops, guilty pleas, and reruns of "I am not a crook" statements (or even homosexuality this time around).

So it's time for someone to lay it out - what is OK/Not OK to say or joke about? I haven't read all the complaints or hurts.

[jumptheshadow]

231. I might have missed something...

but I read a few of the Craig threads and I wasn't offended. My radar is pretty sensitive, too. I get angry at the NY Post gay-themed cartoons that always have images of sheep in them. My 16-year partner and I play in a video game and we have helped to make our server free of homophobic slurs. I am active in the gay community and took a year off a while back to do volunteer work with AIDS organizations.

That Legos bible was hilarious. My own personal interpretation was that the original poster was making fun of Republicans who link homosexuality to bestiality and was nailing Craig for hypocrisy. Perhaps some people won't consider me a good "lesbian" because my reaction differed from theirs. Whatever. I am concerned that more than one perspective from a gay person be aired here.

Furthermore, although I feel sorry for Craig's family, I think he deserves every bit of derision he is getting. I hope all the closeted bigots are outed and are made the objects of ridicule. I want to see the jokes fly. He and his fellow travelers, both closeted and "straight," are reaping the payback of years worth of shameful cynicism, amorality and hypocrisy. They have been personally responsible for unhappiness and limited opportunities in hundreds of thousands of lives. I want the Republican party to be the laughing stock of America. I want it to lose its credibility with the mainstream population -- hopefully forever.

Do my partner and I share gay jokes with gay friends? Yes, and on rare occasions, with non-gay friends who are "cool." Do we joke about straight people? Of course we do! They are such easy targets sometimes....

[intheflow]

213. K&R n/t

[blayne]

219. I haven't been offended yet.

:shrug:

[Bluebear]

224. Well, lah de dah de dah dah dah!

:hi:

[EFerrari]

239. Good. Glad to hear that. My OP asks for us to deal with the fact that

some of our DUers have been upset. How can we do better than this? :)

[LostinVA]

330. I have -- a zillion times

[lumberjack_jeff]

226. My 2¢

I can't speak for anyone's hurt feelings. If those of you are hurt by something you read here, it is not up to me to say that you shouldn't have been offended. If it's something I've said, I apologize for giving offense.

I will say what bothers me is when my fellow DU'ers circle the wagons round a politician who has a ZERO rating from the human rights campaign because he's suddenly being persecuted. A ZERO RATING ferchristsake! This guy is not worth one second of handwringing, and nor is the party to which he's aligned himself. He plead guilty to a crime hoping to keep his lawbreaking quiet.

Once we win power, we can change the tone of the national debate. We gotta win first.

[EFerrari]

237. Right on, Jeff. And in order to win -- or, even to enjoy that victory

we need to figure out how to talk about these issues in concert, as a community that cares about ALL of its members.

We can do that.

[AZBlue]

228. Thank you for this post!! It really has been awful lately.

I've been offended and I'm not part of the GLBT community!

The Craig/sex in the bathroom jokes and humor has gone over the edge. But, when called on it, the offenders just say that they are making fun of the hypocrisy, not being gay. Yet, their comments, jokes and put-downs never mention hypocrisy or the Republican anti-gay agenda. The only instead pick on a person who's too scared to come out of the closet, they look down on bisexuality and bathroom sex, they pass judgment on things that they don't experience themselves. In a word, they act Republican.

I'm very concerned that we've lost a couple of my favorite DU'ers - I haven't seen them around in a few days. I'm hoping that they are just taking a break until this blows over (something I too considered).

What can be done? Well, immediately stopping all but factual discussions about Craig would help. No more jokes and crude puns. Also, we should all remember the Alert button at this time - those who are determined to offend will quit after their posts keep getting deleted by mods. And, we need to speak up when we see something offensive - but politely. Perhaps the person who posted it didn't even realize it would be offensive to someone else.

Thank you for this post, pointing this situation out! Hopefully it will awaken some who didn't mean to be offensive.

:hug:

[EFerrari]

253. DU has made me smarter. If that can happen to me,

it can happen to anyone.

LOOK OUT! INCOMING!

:hug:

/oops

[kenfrequed]

233. Huh

I guess I don't usually post to the republican-hypocrit stories, nor do I usually read them. Personally I really don't care about a persons sexual preference and could give a rip less about Craig one way or the other. It amuses me that he was caught doing in public what he condemns others for doing in the privacy of their own homes, but that is as far as it goes with me.

I don't really understand what the concern being expressed here is? The trafficking of gay stereotypes in jokes about the guy? I recognize there must be some kind of offence beign taken here but I have no context.

[EFerrari]

280. The thread runs it down better than I can.

We need to stand up for our people, imho. Can you do that?

[LostinVA]

306. "sexual preference?"

That pretty much sums up what you think about gays.

There's no such thing as sexual "preference." There is such a thing as sexual orientation, however. Preference denotes choice and there is no choice.

[kenfrequed]

313. A fair point

I agree that for some people there is no choice and they are oriented as they are. I do not know how you can discern what I think about gays by my use of a fairly common term that has been used frequently by everyone. I would say that is not fair.

I also think that despite the undeniable fact that for some people their sexual orientations are absolute and set, there are probably also some percentage of people (however small) whose sexual desires are not so set. Which makes your correction of me as damning as my faux pas.

Perhaps you should have said that for some gay people it is an orientation. Saying that there is "no such thing as sexual preference" might be an overstatement, albeit from your perspective a completely understandable one.

[LostinVA]

335. No, for all gay people it's an orientation

If someones truly "changes," they didn't change: they never were.

"Preference" is RW framing.

[kenfrequed]

343. ah

So Bi people don't exist?

[LostinVA]

347. Where the hell did you get that strawman -- Oz?

Bisexuality is an orientation. As is being gay or straight. Your orientation is your orientation, period. Only behavior can change, not who you are.

Good try, though.Oh wait, it wasn't.

[kenfrequed]

527. ok sure

But people have varying shades of Bi, levels at which they prefer one gender to the other, or even more specifically one type of person to another. I presume that might mean that some small percentage of these people have what we might be able to refer to as a 'preference.'

Having conceded almost all of your points you seem to be unable to acknowledge the remote possibility that there exists for some small percentage of the population something that might be referred to as a preference. That somewhere out there might be a guy that is a bit sexually ambiguous and happy with sex with either, but maybe somewhere in their genes or wiring might just prefer men a bit more than women. What difference does it make whether it is orientation or preference?

Is playing gay-gotcha so important that somehow I have to be a part of some right wing conspiracy to finangle language into some kind of assault on all things not-straight in nature? You are doing more than putting words into my mouth, you are straw-manning me up in a corn field and foisting an ideology upon me all for using a word that you do not approve of and that I have long since apologized for using.

[Toasterlad]

583. The Word You Prefer is Loaded.

You are well-meaning, but misguided. As LiV stated, "prefence" implies choice, and it is commonly used by the RW to discredit homosexuality as a natural, normal state of being. It is considered deeply offensive to many in the gay community.

Whether a bisexual man leans about 75% towards men and 25% towards women or the reverse, his basic nature is his bisexual orientation. He can "choose" to exclusively date men, or he can "choose" to exclusively date woman, or he can date both, but he cannot change his basic orientation. He will ALWAYS be attracted to both men and women, as I (being 100% gay) will ALWAYS be attracted to men only. There is no "preference" there; it is the way things are.

[LostinVA]

646. Thank you -- excellent post

[Toasterlad]

657. ...

:hi:

[kenfrequed]

658. I really don't have an attachment

To either word as an absolute. I'm really not a big fan of it. I already apologized for my use of it.

It frustrates me when people cannot see another point of view on it and decide to merely demonize me as being some kind of right winger. Personally I think that sexuality can be a very complex part of the human condition and really shouldn't be coached or simplified in this manner. I strongly suspect that for a good percentage of the population that sexual attraction is far more involved and situational than most of us are probably willing to admit.

I must confess some gratitude in that at least you are willing to allow me to be misguided rather than a part of some right wing propeganda machine.

I wonder had the question been posed to me as to "Do you think that people have a choice over their sexuality or not" I think a more constructive dialouge would have been reached. I somehow do not think that latching onto a single word and going into militant-mode (a sin I have committed myself albeit rarely) is terribly useful to anyone.

[Chovexani]

509. We didn't choose our orientation any more than you did

Thanks for playing, though! :hi:

[bridgit]

341. I understand what you're saying, and find being tagged for the utilization...

of one word, to be less than helpful.

[kenfrequed]

Hmm

It could be embittering to some people I suppose.

I manage though. This sort of semantical argument has its own perils and pitfalls. I really hope this absolute and immutable orientation argument isn't so absolute and immutable, or some damned right wing nut job with a degree in genetic engineering might try to suggest that the 'gay gene' could be excised. Of course I doubt it would work and we would wind up with a generation of homosexuals being bombarded with a new brand of pseudo-science telling them 'but we removed the gene, it is impossible for you to be gay.'

I think I have an idea for a book now.

[LostinVA]

554. HBO already made that movie ten years ago -- It's called "Twilight of the Golds"

It's a pretty good movie. I wouldn't want to see some hack rip it off.

[kenfrequed]

577. yeah

You know I assume nothing about your talent, worth, or skill based on your argument. It is sad that you cannot see me past your own fixation on one word and my own self acknowledged ignorance.

[EFerrari]

257. We need 7 more votes to top the Greatest page.

Show your support, DU.

:kick:

[Bluebear]

261. I tried changing the subject...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1714013&mesg_id=1714013

i can't win today! :dunce:

[EFerrari]

262. I'll be right there.

:party:

[EFerrari]

260. Kick

[and-justice-for-all]

264. I do not feel unwelcomed...

I guess I missed something or I am just a bit more hard shelled then most.

[EFerrari]

267. That's good to hear. Your imput on this problem is welcomed. nt

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

272. I haven't felt unwelcome either,

and I have found many of the posts very funny. Enjoyed the Toons. Felt embarrassed by some "revelations of Water Closet etiquette". But hey, this is "One Big Family" huh? We learn from each other and try to move ahead.

Best Wishes,
ADW

[EFerrari]

273. That's good to hear, ADW.

:hi:

[cboy4]

268. K&R. Thank you.

:kick:

[TankLV]

269. I've been gone for a week on a trip...so I haven't noticed it typically bad

except for the usual couple so-called "feminists" and their man-hating...usually in the nifong threads...

[gollygee]

270. I'm sorry you feel that way

I have seem some really ugly threads. But I hope you stay.

:hug:

[flvegan]

274. I'm pissed too. Here's Rec 37.

[EFerrari]

275. Thank you.

:mad:

[BrklynLiberal]

285. Great post sfexpat. One of the vital things that distinguishes us from the Repukes is supposed to be

our ability to accept people as they are...whatever they are. Everyone is welcome into the Democratic fold.
If DU does not reflect those values, it has lost one of its greatest advantages and most positive attributes.

[EFerrari]

288. Our lives are very stressed out and busy.

Good for DU, for taking a moment to figure out what is really important.

And on a holiday weekend, no less. Go, DU!

[Prism]

286. I'm a little tired of the hypocrisy justification

I don't mean that Senator Craig's hypocrisy shouldn't be highlighted. It absolutely should. He should be hammered to hell and back for his past positions given what he was doing under everyone's radar.

What I mean is people who use the "We're not making fun of gays, we're making fun of the hypocrisy!" and use that as their get out of jail free card to get their homophobic freak on.

The Jeff Gannon incident was egregious in this regard. I remember reading thread after thread full of denigrating commentary about gay men. But it was ok because "He's a Republican hypocrite."

No, that stuff is never ok.

And it reminds me that while people might speak the right words, it doesn't take much for true feelings to surface. Even here, I often see threads where people basically label every political opponent as gay and use gay as a negative. "It's not the gay! It's the hypocrisy!" All the while using homosexuality in a completely negative context. We've a long way to go towards creating a society tolerant and accepting of us whenever even our progressive element is full of this stuff.

Anyway, sorry for the rant. I usually lurk and don't like to argue too much, but the homophobia gets to me sometimes. I'm tired of seeing sentiment after anti-gay sentiment excused away because that sentiment is wrapped up in the correct politics. It's horseshit, IMO. Homophobia is homophobia no matter what anyone's opinion of the target.

[EFerrari]

290. Hey, Prism. Thanks for weighing in.

:)

[Prism]

294. Halloes

:hi:

[LostinVA]

339. Bingo

[onewholaughsatfools]

291. LISTEN UP!!!!!!

Some times we all feel out of the loop for one reason or another. Get over it I accept people for who they are for what they contribute to our DU lives, So do me a favor and smile, you are an American and we at DU love you and do not post things negative to be point at you personally we just like what is so condescending from the Republican party. Of course you understand this?

[EFerrari]

314. I don't find "listen up" to be very helpful as a response

to people who feel trampled on.

:shrug:

[onewholaughsatfools]

348. it's clear i got your attention

and that's about all, you missed the message, now I feel trampled on....

[EFerrari]

610. See how easy it is?!

I'm sorry!

[LostinVA]

342. Please don't tell me to "get over" homophobic posts

I would NEVER tell a black person to "get over" Michael Richards' rant, or tell a Native American that the "tomahawk chop" thing is all in good fun.

[onewholaughsatfools]

351. thank you for your comment

Maybe I am confused here, I have always thought that if one is out and gay, they understand that life is a up and down issue ...now poking fun at a conservative who votes against the rights of a human being and then is exposed as one who will go to a mens room and want to suck a dick before he heads home to the family value state should be made fun of and exposed of, because of who he is, not whom he pretends to be.....Power to the Constitution

[foreigncorrespondent]

428. But...

...being gay and out doesn't mean we have to face being called perverts, child molesters, into bestiality, etc, by anyone. Let alone people on a progressive board.

[LostinVA]

492. There's a HUGE difference between talking about the hypocrisy and making "f*ggot" jokes

You must be really confused, if you can't tell the difference.

[Terran]

511. Hoo boy! "Get over it!"

Now there's a phrase that sinks like a lead balloon here at DU. NOT a good choice, friend.

[Link93]

296. This type of reaction really should make people ashamed to call themselves open or tolerant.

And to be honest, I really don't think those terms mean much of anything anyway.

[bridgit]

310. welcome to du, Link93...

:)

[EFerrari]

297. Still kicking for suggestions. We're not done yet.

:kick:

[bridgit]

303. What have some of the suggestions been so far, perhaps a round is in order...

may help people focus that have drifted away

[EFerrari]

305. I don't want to disrespect the posters to this thread.

Will read it in full and be back.

:hi:

[NashVegas]

298. I Have Such Very Mixed Thoughts On This

For starters, I believe there is an extreme minority of DUers who are posting material that most of both gay and straight DUers would find offensive, and even more of a minority who are purposely offensive. And there are about 2-3 people who are showing more homophobic than I think they realize.

Likewise, I believe there is an extreme minority of DUers who are gay and taking offense, even more a minority who are purposely going on the offense, themselves, in retaliation.

All in all, I'd say there are about 15 or fewer people making GD very unpleasant. One of those people, I myself got into an exchange with, until she decided to put me on the ignore button. Whatever. As far as I'm concerned, it's up to the Mods and Admin to rule on what's inappropriate and what's not.

I've probably offended - if not horrified a couple - people of both genders and all sexual preferences in this matter without having cracked even one joke, and if someone has a problem, they're free to alert on me.

We've been through this before, over a freaking candy bar commercial. Some gay DUers were offended, some weren't. Some straight DUers were offended because they felt they were being censored, some weren't. Just as it is right now.

[EFerrari]

309. I admit I tend to drama myself. And I tend to respond to drama

so, it becomes a self-perpetuating drama snowball.

But the posts I've read and the mail I've gotten just today indicates to me that far cooler heads than mine have been upset this last week. (Please don't use this against me in the future.)

Yes, there is always drama in GD. But, there are also real problems that are raised here.

I just want to ask for help for this one today.

[jumptheshadow]

328. Pretty solid assessment of the situation (nt)

[Time for change]

301. Kicking for solidarity

But I'm sorry, I don't have any suggestions because I don't know what the offending posts were.

After reading through portions of this thread it appears that the Larry Craig thing had something to do with it -- I can see how scathing criticism of him could be taken to be anti-gay, but not having read those posts I shouldn't comment any further.

I do believe that the vast majority of DUers would not want to make their fellow gay DUers feel unwelcome.

[EFerrari]

304. I knew DU would come through.

:loveya:

[mentalsolstice]

319. Too much giggling & snickering!

I can't judge Sen. Craig's actions, as I don't know him as a person. However, his behavior goes against the behavioral standards of the gay community, as I know it. My gay friends are all about dignity, commitment, care for children, community involvement, and equal rights for all (based on sexual orientation, race, (non) religion, gender, and disability).

His actions were crude and hypocritical, yet, not worthy of attention they have gained.

[KoKo]

334. Yes...well I got trashed by Long Time Gay DU Community Member

who said I'd trashed Gays, Blacks and Asians and he was "hoping to teach me better but I never learned" ...because of the Craig Thing.

So...who am I to say that I want to defend long time DU'ers who are feeling unwelcome when a long time DU'er Pen Pal/Internet Pal of mine threw out vitriol at me accusing me of things that are so offensive to me that I can't even imagine where his hate for me came from.

Hey...yet...if this is a "Gay Support Thead" you all tell me here where KoKo01 has spewed hate towards Blacks, Gays and Asians. And, that the "Gay Block Voting Donating Community" (according to one Gay DU'er as the major support here at DU) needs to go trashing the rest of the DU Community because of Craig.

I'm pissed because I got hit with stuff at me that was so hurtful and cruel...I'm still stinging from it. Because who would expect someone you were a DU Friend with would say that to you? :shrug:

So...let loose with more diatribes about how I'm a Gay Bashing, Black Hating, Asian Hating idiot that you guys thought you could teach me. Who are You to go after Other DU'ers...and TRASH your Friends who just don't happen to be Gay ...but who thought we were traveling on the same road as you for human rights and dignity that the Repugs don't even know the meaning of. :shrug:

[EFerrari]

338. KoKo01

I hate this for us.

:hug:

What can we do to make it better?

[KoKo]

345. If you are seriously asking...

and not trying to do more damage to my psyche...it might be to not be nitpicking every post and looking for insinuations that aren't there because one has an agenda to catalog every slight from a past life of slights. At least that's what thinking about this over the past two days has gotten me to a point of thinking. That a long time DU'er (and I've been here a long time..but missed by a few months this poster's log on date) would accuse me of stuff that came out of some long time subliminal resentment to me for who knows what post I might have made on the fly that they read stuff into is very painful to me.

To spew venom about a person they had corresponded with...and that person trusted them...and to attack like that over a thread (that got locked by mods, btw) without really reading the post or even PM'ing me about it...was just so hurtful...

I posted a couple of posts that said where I stood...but on the Craig issue it seemed that many DU Gays/Lesbians assumed that this was an attack on them that they had to stand up for because it was one more example of many attacks. I think they missed the forest for the trees.

I could send you my locked post and I could send you the posts I made on another thread, that I think would make a difference as to what hetero's thought of the Craig thing...but I'm sick of the issue and don't think anyone wants to hear what I say when I'm looked on by the DU Community as a "Black, Gay, Asian hater who just "can't learn." How demeaning besides being hurtful. :-( But then, I guess I just missed all my posts that folks were reading the meaning into "what I REALLY THINK!" :sarcasm:

[EFerrari]

349. I don't ask fake questions -- or I try not to.

What can we do about this hurt? Because I promise you, dear KoKo, it really does go in both directions.

I will never pretend to know what you are "really thinking". But I am asking for your help, tonight.

:hug:

[The Straight Story]

357. A classy reply

Good on you my friend.

[KoKo]

364. huh?

[The Straight Story]

370. I felt the reply was well worded and non-flaming

non-emotional and honest, classy :)

[KoKo]

384. It sounds good reading a thread....if one doesn't address post content...

so yeah...it was a classy reply. DUH? :shrug:

On edit: I'm tired...I just took your post as snarky...when it probably wasn't.

.

[The Straight Story]

390. Let's kinda recap

It seems you had/have issues (as others have) with being called something you don't think you are and it is offending that you were labeled such based on a post (instead of someone trying to understand your point, they attacked/labeled).

I see sfexpat as recognizing this and wanting to know what can be done about - ie, wanting your input here and now and not jumping on the bandwagon of beat downs :)

an open disucssion without the flames and labels is presented, which one does no often see here (and I have experienced similar to what you have in this regards).

[KoKo]

392. On Edit...

As I said on edit to my post...I'm tired...and took your reply as snarky. I'm just tired and don't think discussion works well on DU anymore. Just because I'm tired... Too Much CRAIG!

peace.

[The Straight Story]

395. Tis but a scratch!

:rofl: - peace my friend.

[bicentennial_baby]

366. Your thread was locked for a damn good reason...

And, apparently, you did not take the locking message to heart. And that's all I'm going to say about that.

[KoKo]

394. Would you explain why you took offense to the post?

Have you seen me bashing Gays, Blacks and Asians here on DU since 2001? Did you read the whole post? What in particular did you find offensive or was it a subject line? :shrug:

[bicentennial_baby]

396. Your entire post was offensive...

And again, re-read what the Mod who locked it said. Wise words...

[KoKo]

397. I have 45542 posts on DU.....

What was it about this one that you found offensive?

[BlooInBloo]

404. Congratulations.

[KoKo]

405. Thanks...I appreciate that...

Imagine Bicentennial is looking up the original post so she can critique what she didn't like about it.

Maybe you will come back and read, too?

[BlooInBloo]

408. Pfft. I tried agreeing with you once... Not falling for *that* again.

[uppityperson]

622. How DARE you reply to just agree? (yup)

and you didn't add ANYTHING to the conversation. (yup, I remember too)

[swimboy]

620. I read her say that was all she was going to say.

Did you re-read the locking message and consider what was said there? She indicated that was a key to understanding the issue. And she said that that was all she was going to say.

[foreigncorrespondent]

406. Bi-baby isn't the only one...

...to find that thread of yours offensive.

If you cannot see what in your words just might offend, then you are not worth us pointing it out to, because you will never get it.

[bicentennial_baby]

416. Ding! Ding!

Give this lovely woman a prize!! :bounce:

:*

[foreigncorrespondent]

424. Woooo hoooo!!!

What kind of prize am I gonna get? ;)

On edit: just a silly little typo

[bicentennial_baby]

446. Well, I assume you already have your toaster oven, so...

:rofl:

:loveya:

;)

[foreigncorrespondent]

453. Well I do...

...but because I am currently ill, I have been slack in the recruitment process and in need of a lovely electric knife. ;)

[bicentennial_baby]

461. d00d, totally...

We love ours....comes in handy. We should come down and cook you dinnah. How much to fly to Oz? :D

[foreigncorrespondent]

463. LOL

Lots of money! Ask a mutual friend of ours, I am sure she can give you the heads up. :)

[bicentennial_baby]

468. Eh, I know...My lil brother

went to Oz and NZ as a Student Ambassador for People to People back in...'95-6, I think? Mucho dinero.

Still, it's a dream...You never know :)

[foreigncorrespondent]

480. Well...

...one day, if I ever see a couple of cute yanks walking down my driveway I know who it will be. :)

[KoKo]

421. If you can't defend your attack then what's the purpose of this?

You'd rather just dismiss a Freeper Troll who comes on here bashing and yet a long time DU'er get's attacked and asks why and you just go at the attacks once again? Why?

You don't understand why someone would sincerely ask what it was that offended you? You say "I'm not Worth" pointing it out? Does that mean that I'm less worthy than you?

Do you see or understand what you said? Where is your compassion for a fellow DU'er who honestly asked what it was that you found offensive? It's easier to attack and belittle ME...rather than answer? Is that what this is about?

[foreigncorrespondent]

441. Excuse me...

...but I do not dismiss anyone for blatant homophobia, freeper troll, or long time DUer. There is no pass where bigotry is concerned.

Tell me, were is your compassion for DU's gay members when we come under fire? I have never seen you step up to the ball in our court, and I doubt I ever will.

[KoKo]

448. I can't help your anger...

but shoving it on me...doesn't help either you or me with constant attacking without explaining your attacks.

I'm done with this. Asked for what you found offensive and neither you nor Bicentennial want to discuss.

I sincerely asked ....not asking again. Done with it.

[foreigncorrespondent]

455. FYI...

...I always direct my "anger" where it is deserved.

And as I said earlier, if you cannot find in your words what people might find offensive, then you are not worth us pointing it out to, because you will never get it.

[swimboy]

621. Did you re-read the locking message as suggested?

Did you? Did anything register? I haven't seen you address that and that was suggested as being helpful. It might help answer your question.

Are you willing to re-read it?

[Bluebear]

447. "I know businessmen don't take a shit in public anymore because of the gay!!!"

OK, ring any bells?

[bicentennial_baby]

449. Double snap!

:loveya:

[KoKo]

454. Where's your answer as to what you found offensive in the post...

Was waiting...but enjoy your snarking. How can you be taken seriously when you can't reply in a serious fashion to a serious question?

Done with it...on this end.

[Bluebear]

456. THAT IS WHAT **WAS** OFFENSIVE!!!

That and "What about the Mom's who are afraid to let their Son's in restrooms because they will be PREY!"

Good gravy.

By the way, which "businessman" actually worked into a conversation that he holds his bowel movements? How on EARTH did you get into that 'conversation'?

[nadine_mn]

547. shut up - someone actually posted that on DU?

oh fer fucks sake - as you can see I am still a newbie, but there have been posts by DUers about kids not being safe because of gays and businessmen afraid of gays - and these arent freepers in disguise?????

:banghead:

I thought DUers were better "edumacated" than that - that's up there with Bill O's lesbian gang theory.


on edit - my "shut-up" was not meant to be disrespectful - its the Elaine from Seinfeld shut-up type of reaction

[Bluebear]

642. i got yer "shut up"!

:hug:

And yeah, that little gem was posted!

[bliss_eternal]

445. ...how many of that great number were locked as flame-bait?

:eyes: ...or is your denial so great that you choose not to even note that?
No need to respond. I'm aware of your stance.

[bliss_eternal]

438. In a word, yes.

Yes, I have seen you bashing. Whether this was your intention or not, it seems you frequently create threads and ask baiting questions throughout those threads. Your responses are frequently insensitive to many of the people you've mentioned.

For example, when Schwarzennegger was caught in a meeting making racist, sexist statements YOU started thread after thread after thread asking Californians, blacks, latinas and women if he was going to get a pass. :eyes: People answered your question, but that wasn't enough for you. You kept starting threads, asking the same baiting questions. You made comments that were insensitive to those communities and eventually your threads were locked as the flame-bait they were.

Maybe you are as clueless as you claim. But your persistence to dig away at issues in ways that people tell you is insensitive seems obtuse at best.

To continue to argue FOR that which others have told you is hurtful--is generally going to be viewed by people of such groups as insensitive and bigoted. You can call it whatever YOU like. That's generally known as "denial." Just know that the people involved see exactly what you do, when you do it and how you do it--whether you take responsibility for it or not.

You wanted justification of the claims. Hope this helps.

[bicentennial_baby]

451. Well now...

:applause:

[Bluebear]

462. A: Hi, how are you?

B: Oh I'm fine thanks, but this Larry Craig thing!!

A: I know what you mean! When i am traveling on business, I just urinate in the men's room.

B: Why is that:

A: Because of the gay! They might try to touch my foot so I hold my bowel movements until I get home.

B: Mm-hmm. Also, what about the "mother's" whose "son's" might be prey?

A: That too.

===

yeah, that conversation could happen.

[bicentennial_baby]

464. What about the children?!!1!

Indeed.

:*

[KoKo]

460. Thank You...

I see it's a personal thing you have about me...about reading my posts that you think you know me. Who I am and what I think and that you've judged me on posts that you thought were "baiting and insensitive." Interesting.

[sniffa]

469. you are such a brave, nobLe souL

constantLy the innocent victim, yet constantLy persevere to have over 45,000 posts. :patriot:

[bliss_eternal]

477. Maybe you should cease asking questions....

...when you're so obviously ill-prepared for the response. How else would anyone in this community "know" others here, but by their posts? A post features a person's opinion. Their posting patterns show somethings about them, too.

You consistently "bait" minorities on this board. I can't tell you how many of your threads I attempted to hide from the world during the Kramer incident. Thread after thread, after thread, after thread you created seemingly convinced it was your place in life to tell blacks how they should feel about that incident. You did the same damn thing during one of the immigration fall-outs. Now you do the same with gays?

Again, deny it if you like--but some of us see exactly who you are and what you do.

[sniffa]

437. "don't ever post something Like this again"

[La Lioness Priyanka]

466. you equated gay sex with pedophilia. you deserve every ounce of criticism and then some.

:puke:

[bicentennial_baby]

470. Yet another!

Another prize to another winnah! :bounce:

[yardwork]

336. For a long time, many gay people have felt disrespected on DU

If one looks at any one issue, such as Craig, the feelings among many in the gay community here may well look trivial. However, if one looks at the longtime pattern, the reasons for our anger become clear.

After every election there are numerous threads and posts blaming gay people for "unreasonably" demanding rights that turn conservative voters against Democrats. Well, excuse me for living. Literally. I am well aware that the Republican Party has used gay rights as a wedge issue to get their base stirred up - it's discouraging when supposed Democrats on a progressive board go along with it.

The Snickers ad during the Super Bowl was perceived as hateful and reinforcing of stereotypes toward gay people by many posters here. Others vehemently disagreed. There are lingering bad feelings about things that were posted during that time.

For many straight posters, questions about sensitivity toward gay people are an intellectual exercise. To those of us who live openly gay lives these issues are a struggle with which we contend every single day. We tend to get offended when people make dismissive comments about our concerns. There are similarly dismissive posts in this thread. For those who get irritated with gay people's concerns, ask yourself - would you ask your black friends to "just get over it?"

There is also a tendency here on DU to lump all LGBTQ people into one "gay community" (we use the term ourselves, we're partly contributing to the problem, I know) that thinks and acts as a bloc. Again, remember other minorities. Not all gay people think alike. Just because some gay posters weren't offended by the Snickers ad is NOT a reason to dismiss the offense expressed by others. Do we look to Condileeza Rice as the last word on how "the black community" feels?

Some LGBTQ posters sometimes behave badly on DU. Some of them get banned for their behavior. There's a tendency among some straight DUers to view these individuals as representative of every GLBTQ person posting and reading on DU. This is hurtful. I read a comment here about the "gay mafia" once. It hurt.

I feel sometimes that the choice here on DU is to shut up about my "sensitivities" and go with the flow or express my concerns and get hammered by dozens of straight posters, most of them insisting that they "have lots of friends who are gay."

At the same time, there are many many DUers who are consistently and bravely supportive of gay rights. You know who you are! I deeply appreciate you.

I'm sick that Lee left the board. DU is important to me and I don't want to leave. However, I know for a fact that many LGBTQ posters here on DU feel unwelcome. There is a problem here.

[KoKo]

353. I've been on DU since 2001...Spring. I 've seen Attack Nader Posts

and Attack Chomsky posts but I missed all the "blame it on Gays" posts. Maybe there were posts like that...but I've been here every day give or take a few vacations...where even then I log on ..and read. But, after every failed election I've been here mourning and grousing with everyone.

I just didn't see it. It might have been some Troll post...or something that I read and knew the person was an idiot and would be banned in a few hours...that DU Gays took seriously. But, I don't take one or two troll or idiot posts on here to be the MAJORITY Opinion...and so why should you?

Those of us here for awhile should know the flow...and realize the disrupters and ops and know they will post outrageous RW TP's and that their "peeps and sock puppets" might echo on a thread...ut those folks don't last long unless they have enough backers and funding to stay. There are very few of those who've lasted, IMHO ...but there are lots of serious DU'ers who aren't in a block vote...they are who they are or new trying to find their way in Bush Criminal America. When you see things in posts that you attack that might not be what you think...then it's time to re-think about being overly -sensitive looking for demons and devils that just might not really be there. :shrug:

[yardwork]

355. Thank you for illustrating my point.

I feel so much better now that you've told me that it's all in my mind. /sarcasm

[KoKo]

371. You see, that's the problem. You took offense to my post without telling me why...

If you can't discuss anything here...then what the hell's the point. The OP asked for suggestions...and instead you want to belittle my post with a one liner reply...like my opinion is a throw away to be answered with a "one line snark."

It's not worth the effort here on DU to take anything seriously. I'm brushing up on my "one line snark etiquette" and if that doesn't work...it's Sayonara. Who needs this crap.

[yardwork]

634. What are you talking about?

I posted my thoughts on the OP, and you responded by telling me that you've never seen a disrespectful post here on DU about gay people, therefore they don't exist. In effect, you told me that the problem was all in my head, therefore all my problem.

And now you are taking offense? Sheesh.

[Name removed]

488. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JerseygirlCT]

362. I'm sad that people are feeling unwelcome

And I'm sad if there's any sort of divide here - perceived, real, whatever. Bottom line is that there isn't a practical difference.

I think there's something of a careful dance between education and defensiveness. Between letting people know you've been hurt and letting that hurt continue to cause ripples of hurt. Sometimes people who say hurtful things are just... well being less than smart, let's say. I don't think there's intention there, just the need for some educating.

OTOH, that lesson isn't likely to be accepted well if it's offered in a chastising way, you know? If a divide is created, it's so much better long-term, to start from a position that it wasn't intentional on the one hand, and on the other that openess to being corrected is a very good thing. People who don't want to learn stop being very interesting.

I feel myself as a straight person feeling VERY strongly about gay rights issues. Sometimes I wonder at the force of my feelings myself. I suspect it's tied to the passion I feel for women's rights -- I see so many similarities in those fights.

The Craig thing is complex in this way. There's a ton of glee at seeing yet another self-righteous jerk being taken down. There's a lot of concern at seeing the REASON he's going down being assumed to be his sexual orientation, or at least sexual activity. As others have said, it's the hypocrisy that riles, and makes the getting caught so sweet for us. But if the message to the greater world out there is that once again, being gay is something one should be ashamed of... what an awful thing, and frankly, it's just another victory for jerks like Craig.

Maybe the best thing is to try to assume we're all coming at this with good intentions. And if I go off the rails, someone gently guide me back, ok?

[EFerrari]

619. Thoughtfulness really is a habit,isn't it, Jerseygirl?

It's not "goodness" or "rightness" but more like the deliberate slowing down of your mouth (or keyboard) while your brain kicks in.

[JerseygirlCT]

637. Yeah. I'm naturally a fairly cautious and deliberate person

(not always, of course!) But the times I have let my mouth run away with me, I've often regretted it. And once something's out, you can't really take it back.

OTOH, sometimes it also means I'm a chicken weenie, I suppose.

Maybe I just have to learn to think faster!

[Spazito]

337. Thanks for posting this, sfexpat2000

I know I have learned a great deal from our GLBT DUers and it would be a big loss if were to lose members due to a lack of sensitivity on the part of other DUers. I did read the Craig threads but did not post in them, I certainly read some posts that I could see clearly would be hurtful to some.

The only suggestion I have that might help is for us to think twice before hitting post message when the topic is one where sensitivity to language, tone, might be wise. I can't count how many times I have hit reply, typed a response and, after reading it either deleted it or changed the phrasing because the "draft" was unduly harsh or insensitive.

[EFerrari]

346. Thank you, Spazito.

:)

[foreigncorrespondent]

344. I haven't read any replies yet...

...but wanted to firstly say thank you for your support, and for this thread.

Secondly, I know of one long time DUer who was driven away by th crap yesterday, and that is Sapphocrat. And even though Sapph and I are no longer a couple, this still manages to piss me off to no end, why? Because she was a valuable member of DU. Not only did she offer sound advice to many out there in the wide DU community, when needed, or add valuable information to a lot of different threads over the years, but she was also busy creating her often hard hitting, but mostly heart rendering flash movies to YouTube. That gave every left voting person in this world, but especially the United States, a stronger voice, to a much wider audience.

People who have been busy driving not just Sapph, but the countless other gay DUers away from the DU community over the years should be ashamed themselves. I hate (yes hate) every last one of you, who have ever said anything out of line concerning any minority of this world. You are not progressive thinkers and you never will be, so who is i that you think you are fooling? Certainly not any of the true progressive thinkers of the DU community.

I don't know if Sapph will ever be back to DU. She wrote me yesterday after coming to back me up in a thread I had begun (which thanks to one person turned into a cesspool of what is bad about DU) and told me that she would be leaving DU, and that this would be permanent. The last thing she said to me was, she would not be missed. That is how these sick individuals who think they are being stealth and funny, have left one long time DUer feeling. Sad isn't it?

Right now, I don't know if I am going to stay or go as well. If the sick anti gay bullshit is allowed to continue, then yeah, I will be the next queer to leave and not return. It won't be that the sick individuals have won, it will be, that I am sick and tired of singing the same tune to a bunch of moronic idiots (those who do the shit the in the first place, is what I mean here) who are too fucking stupid to learn anything, let alone how to respect other people.

[EFerrari]

350. Then we agree that name calling and insulting other posters

is not a commuity builder.

[foreigncorrespondent]

358. Absolutely we agree.

I am just as tired of it as every other gay member of DU is. I don't feel like a part of the larger DU community at all. And this is exactly why other boards are set up. It is so us gay members can feel like part of a community for a change. Rather than being spit on for everything that goes wrong in life. Don't we get enough of that in the real world?

This isn't directed at you, sfexpat. You know I would never do that, because you are one of our big supporters, and I for one appreciate everything you do and say in our defence. :)

[EFerrari]

540. I know very little about the real world. I live in San Francisco.

:hug:

[ToolTex]

459. Thanks for this thread, dear sweet b.

Dear sweet b,

Thanks for this thread and taking up the torch once again. You are indeed a staunch and loved friend. I haven't read the latest to fall from the craig crap, because I just got tired of dried blood and stitches from bashing my head on walls. In fact, I haven't kept up much with DU since it became obvious last Spring that most of our Congress has been co-opted, bought and paid for, and will never stop the Fascists in power.

I have waged this struggle vocally for 29 years and I am just f#@king tired of it. (And I waged it subversively for 20 years before that). I used to be an optimist and think that within a reasonable time things would get better. But they haven't. Life is just as physically dangerous for me and my ilk as ever.

I will say that I have felt reasonable safe in DU, not because of a prevailing accepting attitude, but because of a contingent of solid old, (and some new), friends that I have known would come to my defense if ever necessary.

I have finally reached the conclusion that the American majority, with a few wonderful exceptions, is just not comprised of very nice people. I guess I'll always walk on eggs shells, and watch over my shoulder, but I do as always appreciate your support and encouragement, as well as your tenacity and love.

x ~ p

[EFerrari]

538. It's always so very good to read you, my dear friend.

:hug:

[Olney Blue]

373. Not Sapphrocrat! I don't want her to go too.

:-(

[foreigncorrespondent]

378. I know Olney...

...if I decide to remain, perhaps we can begin the Sapph fan club. ;)

[bicentennial_baby]

383. In!

:bounce:

:loveya:

[ruggerson]

380. she had better come back

because her brain matter is about eighty times that of many of the, uh, people that remain here.

Sorry, SFexpat, don't mean to be negative in your mostly positive thread, but Sapphocrat should not be made to abandon ship because of these useless homophobic fuckwads.

[Toasterlad]

567. FC, It's Important That You and Sapph STAY.

Take a break, relax, enjoy other pursuits for awhile. But come back to us. But we need you both here; we need Madspirit here: we need ALL of our GLBT sisters and brothers here.

We have got to believe that the disrespect we've seen is UNINTENTIONAL, that really, the vast majority of DUers are good people who are sometimes thoughtless, sometimes misguided, and, rarely, deliberately cruel. In other words, they're JUST LIKE US. Are any of us perfect? Are we ALWAYS on the right side of every issue? Do we ALWAYS act in a thoughtful, logical manner?

We can condemn what these people are saying, but it's wrong of us to condemn the people themselves. We are no better than they are. More importantly, even at their worst (perhaps, ESPECIALLY at their worst) they have things to teach us, as we have things to teach them.

I can understand getting disheartened when you are subjected to unthinking homophobia, ESPECIALLY in a supposedly "enlightened" and "progressive" forum as DU. But that's why it's especially important to STAY here and help people understand WHY a statement might be offensive to us. If we abandon the fight HERE, where people are genuinely sympathetic to our causes, if a tad ignorant of what we're all about, how can we POSSIBLY succeed in the world at large, which is full of people who hate us already for just being who we are? We NEED these allies, and we need them to KNOW who they are supporting. We can't do that if we leave in droves every time we get insulted.

The vast majority of people on DU are good people who are sympathetic to the gay community. If we believe in ourselves, and really want change in this country, we have an obligation to these people to be ambassadors. Our presence here is important, and serves a purpose. Don't give up the opportunity to make a difference here: it's too important.

Please pass this on to Sapphocrat; I LOVE her posts, and I would SINCERELY miss her if she left. I am definitely not alone. Her voice is NECESSARY.

[Name removed]

352. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Philosoraptor]

365. I hear ya.

[Name removed]

368. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bicentennial_baby]

369. She is a 'she', and...

alerted.

[onewholaughsatfools]

379. noted

thanks

[LostinVA]

386. As did I

[bicentennial_baby]

391. ...

:toast:

:D

[billyoc]

377. From all of the laughing at Craig getting caught in the bathroom?

Tough shit.

Futhermore, I'd be laughing just as hard if any "Longtime DUers in our gay community" got
caught doing the same thing, because it's fucking stupid and Craig is a stupid motherfucker
for doing it.

[KoKo]

382. Short, Sweet and to the point.....n/t

[Bluebear]

410. You like that, huh?

[foreigncorrespondent]

401. With all due respect...

...(and mind you, I am giving you the respect you just failed to DU's gay community) it has been a cesspool of insults directed at gay people. We are NOT perverts. We are NOT child molesters. We are NOT into bestiality. We ARE human beings just like you, and if you don't like it, or cannot accept it, then that problems lays with you, not me or any other gay person on DU.

[billyoc]

409. You're also NOT listening.

Craig is a stupid fucker who got caught doing something stupid.

He's not stupid because he's gay.
He's not stupid because he's a Republican.
He's not stupid because he's from Idaho.

He's stupid because he's stupid.

Get over yourself.

[Name removed]

412. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[billyoc]

417. Insensitive for calling Craig stupid? Ok, I'll admit it. I feel no sympathy

for Larry Craig.

[Bluebear]

422. Insensitive to gay people here who have been through the mill this week

But obviously you don't give a shit.

[billyoc]

427. You're right, I don't give a shit. Nobody's been through any "mill", some

right-wing jerkoff got laughed at. Anybody who identifies with that dumb fuck
deserves their manufactured feelings of persecution.

What a load of shit.

[Bluebear]

430. You eat with that mouth? What a smug unfeeling piece of work.

[billyoc]

434. I consider myself quite in touch with my feelings, as a matter of fact,

and when someone does something as stupid as what Larry Craig did, I feel like laughing.

[Bluebear]

435. This thread wasn't about Larry Craig.

[billyoc]

439. Every single post of mine that you responded to was about Larry Craig,

and clearly said so. You're argument is falling apart, and claiming "that's not what this thread is about"
is as old a tactic as the internet itself.

[foreigncorrespondent]

419. And...

...if you think the gay community of DU has a problem with pointing out hypocrisy of the Craig situation, then you really aren't as smart as I give you credit for.

[billyoc]

431. This had nothing to do with ANY community anywhere.

It was one asshole in the bathroom.

[Bluebear]

433. Know thyself.

[billyoc]

436. Excellent point. I set myself on fire at work the other day, 200 construction

workers stopped working to laugh at me. Many of them are still laughing.

Why? Because I did something extremely stupid and worthy of ridicule.

Should they have been more sensitive to the feelings of all the Ironworkers
who didn't set themselves on fire that day? Should all the other
Ironworkers protest being painted with the same brush as I was?

You haven't got a leg to stand on with this argument, this has nothing to
do with the gay community OR ANY OTHER COMMUNITY.

[Bluebear]

442. You ought to be fucking ashamed of yourself.

An industrial accident after which you were laughed at = a history of gay people being denigrated by society.

And the original poster here TRIED to do a little bit of healing before you had to pour your two cents worth of shit on it.

Don't bother answering, we won't be running into each other here again.

[billyoc]

443. No problem. Here to help. n/t

[foreigncorrespondent]

444. Yeah?

Well why are you not in any of the threads saying queers are perverts, child molesters, into bestiality, and all the other right wing talking points saying this then?

On edit: typo

[billyoc]

452. Why on earth would I be saying those ridiculous things?

Did I strike you as some kind of gay basher? :shrug:

[foreigncorrespondent]

457. Stop trying to be a smart ass!

You know damn well what I meant, but if you really need it, I will spell it out for you.

Why are you not in any threads calling gay people perverts, child molesters, into bestiality and every other right wing talking point, that the Craig issue has nothing to do with being gay? Why aren't you doing this? Don't fucking come here and tell it to me, I am not the one who needs to hear it. It is the ones making these threads who need to hear it.

[billyoc]

465. Oops, I did need it.

I wasn't trying to be a smartass, it really did go right over my head. :blush:

To tell you the truth, I've avoided arguing with the DU homophobe squad because it's
like arguing with a bowling ball. :banghead:

[foreigncorrespondent]

483. No problems, mate...

:thumbsup: :hi:

[lumberjack_jeff]

565. "We" is the issue.

Larry Craig is not "we".

Thanks are in order to the OP. I've done some soul-searching as well. I want to destroy Larry Craig and his ideology, but I realize that we have to do it without collateral damage to those who don't deserve it. (e.g. members of DU... "we").

The challenge is that attack politics works and we can't afford to continue losing.

[EFerrari]

535. Thank you for illustrating the OP. n/t

[Ravy]

387. As the author of one of the threads ...

I went back and re-read every post in the thread. I did see one questionable post out of a couple of dozen, but the rest were clearly either about the act that Larry Craig performed, his feeble explainations, or his hypocracy.

I am sorry if the thread offended some, and I suppose it did since it was mentioned in an earlier post. It was certainly not my intent when I created the thread.

[onewholaughsatfools]

393. Ravy you did good

not an issue with me and I have posted on this issue 4 or 5 times.... I say thank you, however there are people who will twist, bend, change, alter for their own needs.......I say enough is enough.......already

[Maven]

450. You're right. Enough is enough.

Find something better to do.

[Rhiannon12866]

389. K&R. I wasn't aware of that, Beth.

But then I was shocked the other day to read a thread that said that he was uncomfortable with the numerous posts that supported Larry Craig and bashed the police officer who arrested him. My first thought was WTF, since I didn't think that even the Republicans were getting behind Larry Craig (sorry for the pun).:shrug:

What exactly is happening here is totally beyond me. I do know that we are heavily Freeped, since I have read FR (actually am a member) and CU and know that they are pretty obsessed with us, but that many trolls is beyond even my imagination. DU has always been extremely welcoming to progressives of any stripe. As you know, Andy was one of my first friends here and I miss him a lot.;(

Maybe we need to have a talk with the mods, or Skinner, about what to do, if this is that prevalent. As a former mod, I would have been on the lookout for any sort of inappropriate bashing and I still am, but I haven't been on all that much, either. But I believe what you're saying and am right behind you.:-)

Rhiannon:hi:

[valerief]

411. Can we still make fun of Vitter and his diaper fetish? Or would that

offend diaper fetish people?

I think the diaper stuff is a hoot.

[Bluebear]

414. Are you equating gay people with diaper fetishists?

Do we have diaper fetishists at DU who have complained about those jokes?

[Name removed]

418. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bluebear]

420. Mister Sensitive.

[JackBeck]

432. Care to elaborate?

Or are you just in need of some attention?

[BattyDem]

458. Thank you for this post.

I think this is a discussion we should all have in order to clear the air. You asked for suggestions to improve the situation. My suggestion would be ... communication. Communication leads to education and understanding. I know that sounds really corny, but let me try to explain what I mean:

When we talk about Craig, we walk a very fine line because we're disgusted by his hypocrisy and his hypocrisy stems from the fact that he's a "family values" adulterer and an anti-gay homosexual ... but sometimes the comments sound like the poster is disgusted simply because he's gay. There have also been comments that are blatantly offensive and homophobic. I'm heterosexual and even I have been offended by some of the comments because they had nothing to do with Craig's situation. They were about homosexuality in general and many of them reinforced stereotypes. Unfortunately, there are a few bigots wandering our vast halls. :-( They hurt DU's entire GLBT community and we all need to be aware of that. But we also have to recognize that being amused by the bizarre circumstances of Craig's downfall and/or the fact that RW outings seem to be occurring rather frequently these days does not mean a person is homophobic.

Larry Craig is a conservative, married US Senator ... and he got caught soliciting sex in a public restroom. Who cares if he was soliciting a man or a woman? Either way, the circumstances are both laughable and repugnant - not because of the homosexuality, but because of the hypocrisy! Finding humor is the situation and/or being disgusted by it does not make a person homophobic. Let's face it - the situation is sad and infuriating and ridiculous all at the same time and occasionally, you can't help but laugh at the ridiculous part of it. However, we all have to realize that our words, as innocent as they may seem to us, can sometimes hurt a person who's hearing them from a different perspective. Ignorance is no excuse for repeatedly offending someone ... especially when we can learn from the DU community. We probably can't change the people who truly want to hurt others with their words, but by keeping the lines of communication open and continuing to educate each other, we can certainly avoid the unintentional pain. :-)

To DU's GLBT community:
There was one thread the other day where I posted a comment and someone responded to it - but it was deleted by a Mod before I ever saw it. I don't know what was said, but that fact that it was deleted tells me it was nasty and the person was probably pissed off at me. I'll be honest ... I still don't understand why the person took offense, but that's irrelevant. The point is that I hurt someone and I didn't mean to. Quite frankly, it's bothered me for the past couple of days. DU's GLBT community has had to put up with a lot of shit this past week and the last thing I ever wanted to do was add to it. So ... if I offended anyone, I am truly sorry. That was NEVER my intention.

I hope that no one leaves DU because of what's been happening this week. I've learned so much from all of you. I've always supported gay rights and before joining DU, I naively thought that I knew all there was to know about the issues ... but I was wrong. You have educated me and I'm very grateful. I hope we can all continue to educate each other about gay issues, straight issues and every other kind of issue because DU needs all of us. It's our different perspectives and diverse experiences that make us strong.

:hug:






edited: typo :blush:

[EFerrari]

612. What a lovely, instructive post, BattyDem.

Thank you.

:hug:

[LeftyMom]

467. And the DUers who say this bothers them are many of our best.

That says a lot to me.

K&R

[Ravy]

475. "our best"?

Thanks for making those they are scapegoating feel so welcome.

[LeftyMom]

481. I don't know you to know if you're misreading me or not, so I'll be clear as I can

Many of the most thoughtful, activist DUers I know of are GLBT. Certainly a large share of the small few I would trust IRL are, and most of the rest are very strong allies.

DUers who aren't loud and passionate in the defense of our oppressed brethren and sistren need to get their act together because this is nothing less than the civil rights issue of our time.

Those who have attacked and alienated GLBT people can go fuck themselves, because they have enough shit to deal with IRL without all the piling on.

[Ravy]

489. It was posted with a bit of sarcasm,

but not entirely.

Clearly many posts here are confrontational, but I can read posts about Ted Haggard or Jerry Fallwell being a Christian and did, or said XXXXXXXXX, without taking offense as a Christian.

On this particular issue, some have named threads as "offensive" that I think you would have to stretch to take offense at. Those threads are divisive as well.

[LeftyMom]

490. But it's not really comparable- as a Christian you're hardly oppressed, so you have a thicker skin.

If most of the country didn't let Christians get married and Christian sex was only decriminalized a few years ago and within your lifetime Christianity was considered a mental illness, you'd likely be a bit touchier.

[Ravy]

503. Fair point.

But I have no control over how touchy someone is. Which gets to the sarcasm part of my original "the best?" post in this sub-thread.

It is easy to take offense if you look for it. I really wasn't looking for it, and I did not take any offense. I am fairly confident that you didn't mean any particular offense to me personally.

These, "I am leaving because X posted Y" threads have a tendency to force people to take sides, and to divide us further. If threads are overtly offensive, we have moderators that have a good job of deleting them, and of course, people have the right not to read them if they seem that way.

[bliss_eternal]

484. Why do you feel "scapegoated"....?

:shrug:

[Ravy]

497. Because I authored a thread that some that left complained about....

... and I think it is a stretch to say it was homophobic in nature.

I guess I object to people judging my intent, without basis for doing so. Both in listing my thread as an example of homophobia, when it was clearly about Larry Craig's actions, statements, or hypocracy.. and also with the OP saying that people were "made" to feel unwelcome by other DUers.

Some people may feel unwelcome, but saying that they were "made" to feel unwelcome insinuates intent that may not have been there.

[bliss_eternal]

500. Question for you...

If you are not gay, how is it you feel you can deem what is or is not homophobia to those that are?

I didn't see your thread, (I'm usually not even in GD)so I can't comment on that. But if gay members took offense to it, why not ask them why and learn from that? As opposed to jumping on the defensive and feeling the need to define homophobia for them?

It seems your comments are a bit contradictory. You don't want people speaking of yours or other's intent--yet you seem to want to speak to how gay members should think or feel about statements made on this board over the last few days.

How do you feel when people tell you how to think and/or feel about something?

[Ravy]

508. Because homophobic describes intent of the person being accused.

They can say it was offensive to them, but to classify other people as homophobes for posting a comment they feel is offensive is speaking to the original poster's state of mind. For instance, if I posted a negative comment about Hillary Clinton, it would not necessarily mean that I was a sexist. However, some might consider me a sexist for posting it. They really have no basis for that.

No one told me personally, in that thread, or in a mail that they took offense. In fact, it might not have been my posts in the thread that they said were homophobic. I only saw reference to it in a list in another thread on the subject which characterized it so.

[bliss_eternal]

515. Intolerance isn't defined based on intent...

...that is your perception of the definition, but not how it's defined.

http://www.answers.com/topic/bigotry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobia

It's quite possible for people to be unintentionally bigoted, homophobic, intolerant, sexist and racist. Not all bigoted intend to be that way. Various forms of intolerance are based in what people don't know, and frequently what they refuse to open themselves up to about others thoughts, feelings, ideas, experiences, histories, etc.

Members attempting to point out to other members that their words are hurtful, aren't saying,"...you meant to hurt me." It's saying,"...clearly you don't understand, but I find this hurtful and wanted to let you know how and why."

It's a choice. To see corrections as accusations or as opportunities to learn about another member, and be more senstive to them in the future.

[Ravy]

519. Like I said, my posts were not singled out (that I saw)...

but for someone to say I had a fear of, aversion to, or was discriminatory against homosexuality or homosexuals... or that I had a hatred of, hostility towards, disapproval of or prejudice towards homosexuals (the definition) either intentional or unintentional (your statement) based on a post is judging me.

Your quote:
"Members attempting to point out to other members that their words are hurtful, aren't saying,"...you meant to hurt me." It's saying,"...clearly you don't understand, but I find this hurtful and wanted to let you know how and why."

That is not what happened. No one said anything to me. There was no attempt to educate me, if indeed it was my posts they were talking about. Like I said.. no mail, no posts in my thread saying why they thought it was offensive, no chance for me or any poster who they were offended by to explain or to rebut.

And now THIS long thread which begins with someone who is pissed because threads (such as mine) made them feel this way is at the top of the discussion list. To be clear, SFExPat2000 did not refer to my thread, but it was listed in one of the others as being one that was making some people upset.

And I think that many people here are making a big mistake. They want to take a sub-section of our population and treat them as a homogenous group. I tend to think of people as individuals.

There are some people who took offense to comments and jokes about Michael Vick. And then, there are people that take offense to comments and jokes about Michael Vick by purporting that such comments were made "just because he is a black man". By the same note, to me, some took offense to comments and jokes about Larry Craig. And then a few took offense to comments and jokes about Larry Craig, by purporting that such comments were made "just because he is gay." I don't even know enough about Larry Craig to label him as "gay". For the record, I may have had in the back of my mind to post " just because he is Republican", but that is my cross to bear and a different subject.

People can take offense. If they tell me about it, I try to be more sensitive towards them in the future. If people try to stick a label on me that I feel is unfair, based on a few posts, then it is my turn to take offense.

[bliss_eternal]

520. I tried...

...but you continually contradict yourself, and you refuse to see things from anyone else's perspective. You see yourself as judged. That is your choice to do so.

I'm done.

[Ravy]

522. I don't see the contradictions you are referring to...

except that it could be construed a contradiction when I said my posts weren't singled out - yet I used "I" in my examples trying to show you why intent should be considered before labelling someone. My thread was singled out - in the context that you could say there were "four singled out from hundreds". Not specifically my posts in it, but they were all about the same tone as mine.

I saw one that might have been borderline (to me). I assign no particular motivation for them posting it.

Done too.

[Danger Mouse]

473. If I see anyone picking on my gay friends here, I will fucking wreck them.

If you want to be a homophobe, take it to freeperville. they'll welcome you with open arms.

[The Count]

474. The only people who want the Craig story to be about "being gay" are the GOP-ers

Anyone playing into this is inadvertently advancing their bait and switch trick.
I haven't read many threads on the subject, but I can say off hand that harping on the subject not only it's insulting to our fellow DUers, but it's self defeating in every way.

[Link93]

478. I have to admit that reading through this thread

I am amazed at some of the attitudes I am seeing on this board.

[Bluebear]

479. Welcome to DU, feel free to chime in!

[Link93]

482. Thank you. I have read the site for some time for the valuable information.

I am a little shocked at the firestorm that the Larry Craig situation has stirred up. Makes me a little hesitant to even comment.

[Harper_is_Bush]

485. Why? What happened? n/t

[Bitwit1234]

486. I don't think the people are talking bad about gays.

And I don't think they are bad mouthing Craig for that. What they are upset about is the hypocrisy. The face he talks one thing and does another. Correct folks.

[Bluebear]

487. Well, they certainly are, actually. nt

[bliss_eternal]

496. Yes. They are "talking bad about gays."

Sorry to be the one to break it to you. It's unfortunate but true. Some would like others to "think" it's about the hypocrisy. They may backpedal after making an insensitive comment and say it's about the children, bathroom sex, hypocrisy of the republican party, etc.--but by then it's too late.

Btw, this is NOT the first time gays have been under attack on DU, and been told how they should feel about other's comments. I wish I could say it will be the last, but somehow I doubt that.

[GMFORD]

513. Insensitivity

is a tough habit to break.

And for the record, Polish people never thought Polish jokes were funny.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

514. yes we are all over sensitive asses.

[pingzing58]

493. Please brothers and sisters keep the cause we are fighting for in the forefront equal rights for all

most and right now our Gay and Lesbian family. My gay and lesbian friends are making fun of Craig. Sure, they can call him a "fag" just like Carlos Mencias can call hispanics "beaners." Turning the tables on those who use hate language by using it on them is a sort of indirect justice. So Craig, how do you like it now, are you feeling yet like apologizing to the many GLBT people you have oppressed and hurt over the years? My friends are proud of who they are (and how God made them), but you Craig, "go and learn the meaning of these words, It is Mercy I want and not sacrifice (Gospel of Matthew)."

[nadinbrzezinski]

494. You are right and I blame that

partly to the ever so popular confusion in many people's minds, and I do not meant the GLBT community

As I posted in a thread... look folks, cruising is not putting the wee ones at risk (one of the major under currents)... and that is one of the major problems

Even among progressives the image of GLBT folks at somehow desiring kids is still present

I've tried to educate folks, but in many cases to no avail...

Like the Israeli Palestinian issue, this is like picking my lance and charging a windmill or two

For the record I will continue to try to educate people... and lets try to get over this ... and yes GLBTers, you are welcome, at least in my book

[Mythsaje]

495. I had one thing to say about the whole Craig thing...

"Craig IS a mental defective.

He's a Republican."



And then I steadfastly avoided every other Craig thread.




And, no, this doesn't mean I'm back from my break from posting. I just thought this was something that required a response.


I don't mean to post another original essay until I have something important to say.

[Bluebear]

498. ENTR'ACTE: Gay DU bingo....enjoy!

[Maven]

504. That about covers it.

B-39!

[sniffa]

505. i'd say k&r but the recommend Link isn't there

is it just me? :shrug:

oh, and :rofl: and :thumbsup: and :loveya:

[Smarmie Doofus]

506. I'll take "There's more important fish to fry" for 50. nt

[sniffa]

507. i'LL take "get over it and Lighten up" for 100

[Bluebear]

528. Thanks for your input.

[WindRavenX]

649. Are you a GLBT? If not, then STFU.

I hate it when people say "there are bigger things then..." when it's not YOUR rights being denied.

[Smarmie Doofus]

653. I am. That's the point.

>>I hate it when people say "there are bigger things then..." when it's not YOUR rights being denied.>>

It's a common throwaway line of those on the other side of the issue.

You're young; I'll ignore the rudeness. You might want to read-up on the psychology of attitude change. No offense.

[idgiehkt]

526. very nice

Good job on that. :thumbsup:

edited because I just re-read the OP and it said 'be nice' lol, which I missed the first time.

I don't have much hope for it improving because of the super deep hetero male psyche taboo stuff that gets a pressure release when these stories come out in the news; it certainly could improve but in this locus it almost certainly won't. It's boring to me...is anyone else just freaking bored as all hell with the nudge-nudge wink wink giggle giggle...'as the head goes, so goes the body', this being the internet, a demographic, and also here a demographic within a demographic and all...

Gutta cavat lapidem, non vi sed saepe cadendo - The drop excavates the stone, not with force but by falling often. (Ovid)

[LeftCoast]

531. Perfect!

Incredible job on that Bluebear!

:thumbsup:

[EFerrari]

534. LOL!

:applause::applause::applause:

[baby_mouse]

543. :D

:yourock:

[nadine_mn]

548. what about

"I'm not gay but...."

"I have gay friends"

[LostinVA]

555. You forgot the Jackpot Mega Millions bingo square

"You're only offended, because you hate that you're gay."

[WindRavenX]

644. OH MY GOD I LOVE YOU

:thumbsup: :woohoo: :applause: :applause:

[bonito]

512. Great post sfexpat2000

It shouldn't be an issue at all!!
And it tears my heart that it is, and no I'm not gay, in itself a statement I shouldn't have to say.
God love you all.:grouphug:

[Canuckistanian]

518. You guys are all nuts

You Americans, I mean.

Now, normally, I wouldn't say something like that. I normally see vanishingly little difference between my Canadian self and 97% of American posters on this board.

Except when it comes to attitudes on sex.

It's not that I have a different basic attitude, it's just the VAST amounts of time spent and the endless need to make tasteless jokes about sexuality, especially where it concerns homosexuality.

To me, it just doesn't matter who's attracted to whom or what their individual preferences are. But I see long-time posters who SEEM to be progressive, but make the very same wink-wink, nudge-nudge jokes about gay people that other, more ignorant (read:RWer) people do.

Honest to God, I've seen serious threads about "separate bathrooms for gays" and endless joke threads that are genuinely insulting to the whole gay movement.

Now, I'm not exempting myself in any way. I enjoy a good dirty joke every now and then. But you make it and you move on. But this has gone on for nearly four solid days of dozens of posts per day.

This obsession with mockery of gays has got to stop. It's not funny any more. There are jokes that gays can laugh along with and there are some that cross the line. I haven't seen many of the the former lately.

And as for my nationality argument, we Canadians DON'T react this way. If this ever happened to one of our politicians, it probably wouldn't even rate more than a fourth-page mention in a major newspaper, except for the fact that the person broke the law and would have to answer to an ethics committee.

And yes, there is the hypocrisy factor. That still doesn't excuse all the thoughtless comments and endless juvenile posts that are proving that gays still have a long road ahead of them before true acceptance can come about.

I'm not expressing myself very well here, but I just wanted to say that I think we could all do a bit better than the past week's performance.

[nadinbrzezinski]

523. Actually in Canada this would not rate even a mention

but because of the attitudes in Canada I doubt you'd have the situation happen to begin with... hell you just had an MP marry his significant other what last week? And the whose who of Canadian politics showed up... there you have it... an MP marries and nobody bats an eye.. here he lies over his sexuality and is a basic hypocrite and it looks like the 1960s scandal that brought a British PM down. (you know the affair, the Profumo affair)

In the UK, you have a better chance, but only because they are a tad more puritan... but in the US... why you see this obsession are the damn puritans...

Serious

Those of us who emigrated to this country at times shake our heads as well...

Trust me on this one

And no, I didn't come from a freer society than the US... hell where I came from the unofficial attitudes are just as bad.

Yet, we had an easier time starting things like AIDs education... go figure.

[jumptheshadow]

545. I am married in your country

Good post.

While there may be unofficial attitudes Canadians don't have a political juggernaut built on bigotry and hypocrisy that is oppressing millions of its citizens. That's one of the reasons we are seeing days of schadenfreude threads with reactions and counter-reactions.

You are right about the Puritans, too. It shows up everywhere

[EFerrari]

539. I think you expressed yourself very well.

:)

[LostinVA]

602. VERY nice post -- thank you

[AntiFascist]

529. Thanks sfexpat2000!

Actually I didn't notice the negative threads myself, most of the Larry Craig stuff can probably be skipped over anyway. Amazing that only a few threads are devoted to Gonzales resigning, but so much more effort is put into making fun of the hypocrisy. Speaking for the gay community at large, we do have a long way to go if anonymous bathroom sex is considered typical homosexual behavior.

[EFerrari]

605. To my mind (that's a big caveat, lol), these challenges we have

are about finding out who we are, more than anything else, instead of who we think we are or assume the other guy is. Give me the real person any day. Real is good. :)

[panzerfaust]

544. hypocrisy, not orientation

Is, I think, what leads to any 'bashing' taking place over Craig in the liberal world.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

558. i love how heterosexuals feel entitled to tell us whether or not we can find something offensive

clearly you have lived as a queer person and are very familiar with they ways gays are insulted.

[frustrated_lefty]

557. The lesson I have learned is never, ever even attempt

to participate in a thread which is associated with homosexuality. Attempts to do so will not be greeted with equanimity. So, to hell with it. If I'm only going to be kicked in the teeth for not being pc enough and won't be spoken with as a person attempting to find common ground, it is one hell of a lot easier to ignore the threads entirely. Have a nice day.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

559. ohh puhlease many many straight du'er participate in these threads without being

'kicked in the teeth'

[Toasterlad]

562. Yes, You're Definitely Better Off Staying Out of GLBT Issues.

You obviously do not possess the empathy necessary to speak with others rationally about these issues. It's a wise person who knows his limitations. Good for you.

[baby_mouse]

568. Participate as much as you wish, dear.

It's not a "PC" contest. Just be aware that if you say things obviously arising from baseless assumptions people will call you on it.

[EFerrari]

571. That might be a good solution if it works for you. n/t

[ulysses]

624. and yet here you are,

participating in a thread which is associated with homosexuality.

:eyes:

[lonestarnot]

560. OK

Now sp2000, nobody can make anybody feel.

[EFerrari]

572. Maybe it's magic.

:)

[Terri S]

563. I've avoided the Craig threads

When I saw what seemed like thousands of Craig threads (ok, so sometimes I'm prone to exaggerate a bit :) --hundreds? ) I thought..hmm...time to take a DU break. I'm really sorry to read that DU'ers have been made to feel badly, and one of my favorites has left, because of some comments.

Communication will always have its challenges. This is a great thread (thank you sfexpat!) in that it helps people to become more conscious of how they communicate. Even huge disagreements can be a very positive learning experience if it results in more understanding of ourselves and our relationship with everyone else. The ability to put ourselves in someone else's shoes results in a world less apt to destroy what it does not understand.

One day my boss, a white man, was busy doing something and another white male barged up and asked him a question and he almost absentmindedly answered his question. I was coming out from the back room and saw it. An African/American woman became very angry that she'd been standing there for a long time and he had just ignored her, yet a white guy comes in and is taken care of immediately. I tried to explain it had nothing to do with race, but said, 'Look, I'm sure you're a good person, but I just don't believe you. I've been around a long time and this is hardly the first time'. Exasperated and nearly in tears she said, well, at least for awhile after 9/11 it was different (this was in NY). I smiled sadly and said, yeah, for about a week. What was so sad about the encounter was not that she may have misunderstood the situation (or not, who knows), but how she'd had to live for so long being treated as less-than. No matter how you try to understand another, you never truly do unless you've lived it yourself. The same thing happens with gay issues. For some it may seem like thin-skin or being overly sensitive, but unless you've lived that kind of day in and day out discrimination, you can never really fully understand.

No one should ever be made to feel 'less-than'. The more we can treat each other the way we'd like to be treated, the better people we are. Don't know about you, but I'm still working at it.

[EFerrari]

574. That's a great illustration. And I agree. It's an ongoing process.

:hi:

[debbierlus]

564. I didn't know this was an issue on DU - could you elaborate

I am just trying to understand.

Thanks

[EFerrari]

575. Hi Debbie. If you take a few minutes to scan up thread

people describe their direct experiences pretty clearly -- and much better than I could. :)

[jobycom]

569. Look at it as a chance to educate folk, maybe.

What Craig attempted to do was a really minor crime, in itself. He got a small fine, and that's about all he should have gotten. Like a speeding ticket. The reaction to that small crime was unwarranted. Al Gore's son was caught driving under the influence--risking plenty of lives--and was treated with compassion. At most he got a stern "You better straighten up, man" response, for a much more serious crime. Heck, Vitter's crimes mostly amused us, except for the hypocrisy.

But people reacted as though Craig had done something truly horrible. It would have been one thing to say "Wow, Craig's voting record is at odds with that action, he should be ashamed of his voting record." Many people did stop there. But many, many people went way overboard. "Craig's actions were disgusting, he should be ashamed of his actions, Craig is piece of shit for what he did, Craig's actions, Craig's actions, Craig's actions!" Where with Vitter people picked on his crimes, with Craig people crucified.

It was a minor crime. There was a major backlash to it. That backlash is hard to write off as simply about the hypocrisy. The hypocrisy should have been the focus, but too often it seemed the footnote.

But, most of the people obsessing about Craig had good intentions, just bad instincts. It seemed to me that most did not even recognize that their disgust was related to biases they weren't fully aware they had. They missed the bigger picture--why were they so disgusted with his actions, why were they so bad, why was the media obsessing, why was he being attacked for this minor indiscretion rather than for his voting record on gay rights issues?

Maybe pointing out the problem is the solution. We all get sideways on an issue from time to time, where we have the best intentions but still wind up with an intolerant bias, or an off-key perception. Face it, if someone is on DU, they are already on the right side of the issues. But preconceptions are hard to overcome--they are part of our operating system, they are part of our decision-making process. You can't even spot them unless someone points them out, because they are part of how we even go about seeing ourselves. Everyone has them, and everyone has many that are bigoted, biased, bad in some way. We've all had to overcome our basic preconceptions at some point to become as enlightened as we all hope we are.

[EFerrari]

578. "they are part of our operating system"

Yep. That's a useful way to think about preconcenptions. And it seems true to me that most of the time, someone else winds up pointing them out to us -- so, we might as well figure out how to do that without bloodletting. :)

[jobycom]

580. Bloodletting

I wish there was less of it on DU, over every topic. I guess most of us would rather bleed than realize we are wrong. I certainly would! A wise nameless president named Bill Clinton once said "Change is hard." Maybe that should be the DU moto!

[EFerrari]

581. Maybe Skinner can put it on a marquee over the front door.

lol

[jobycom]

584. He makes me use the kitchen entrance...

You know, so I don't give the place a bad name. :rofl:

[EFerrari]

589. Maybe he just told me that was the "front door".

lol

[DemocratSinceBirth]

579. I Think Folks Tried To Reach "Global" Conclusions From Craig's Behavior

I try to evalauate behavior from an individual perspective and then put it in a historical context.

[EFerrari]

599. TahitiNut disagrees with me but I really do see DU as an opportunity

for people to learn how to argue. Learning how and when and how much to generalize is one of those "lessons" to my mind. :)

[Sapphire Blue]

585. From the DU Rules: "A thick skin is necessary to participate on this or any other discussion forum."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html (#4)


Something I posted a while back...

'A thick skin'
Posted by Sapphire Blue in General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)
Wed Dec 27th 2006, 11:20 AM

It's often suggested, that to post here, one should have 'a thick skin'.

It's even mentioned in the rules.

Sometimes I feel like a titanium skin is needed to post here.

I don't have that.

The skin on my hands has been thick... calloused, as a matter of fact... from work that I've done throughout my life.

The skin on my feet has also been calloused.

The skin over my heart, however, remains thin... very thin. It allows for much love to flow in and out. I wouldn't want it to be calloused... even though, at times, it allows hurt to enter also.


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Sapphire%20Blue/129

I'm sad that members of our community are feeling unwelcome here. I can understand their feelings, given the tone of discussions at times. I spend less & less time here for those very reasons.

Skimming through this thread, I've seen 'Alerting' suggested as a way to deal w/offensive posts. 'Alerting' is not always effective; often the offensive posts remain... which, IMO, alienates those who feel offended or attacked... and empowers those posting offensive remarks.

Some DUers see DU as a community, while others see it as nothing more than an internet message board. IMO, therein lies the problem... and I have no answer. I can only say that I care about my fellow community members... and I don't want them to be driven away.

[EFerrari]

592. "Some DUers see DU as a community,

while others see it as nothing more than an internet message board."

Excellent observation. I hadn't considered it and it seems true. :hi:

[bliss_eternal]

632. Sapphire Blue....

...quite simpy...

:yourock:

Fantastic post!
:hug:

[bridgit]

633. There it is...

imo of course :thumbsup: i've been called "insane" no-less, sometimes it's all about 'get tough creme puff' &/or 'you got an issue here's a tissue' :wow:

edited for the 'tough' :woohoo:

[sendero]

587. I agree with what you are saying..

... in principle. I don't want anyone to leave over anything that offended them, and I don't believe in bashing people for their sexual orientation or even practices among consenting adults.

But on a practical level, what is the solution? Trying to have the mods draw some kind of line in the sand? Trying to have mods make objective judgements about things that are inherently subjective?

When Republicans say "the antidote to speech is more speech", I'm not entirely on board because they control way more than their share of the speech via the MSM. But here on DU, we all can add our 2 cents to the discussion.

If you see someone post something that looks like intentional gay bashing, why not respond? I really don't see any thing else that can reasonably be done, except to people who are just blatant hate-mongers, and I'd tombstone them in a second.

[EFerrari]

597. On a practical level (that's the one I keep trying to get to

and that's hard!), what I tried to do in this thread is find points of agreement and the boundaries of our disagreement and in as civil a way as possible. Not sure how well I did and it isn't easy.

But, sitting on a reaction and intentionally walking through a conflict as mindfully as possible is a habit and one I personally want to develop.

[Zookeeper]

608. I didn't see all of the Craig threads, so it sounds like I missed...

some of the more objectionable comments.

I appreciate what you are trying to achieve in this thread, Expat. After thinking about it, I believe race and gender could easily replace "gay" in this thread. Lately on DU, there is an epidemic of rudeness and an unwillingness to thoughtfully and objectively consider opposing views. I also suspect an unpleasant tendency for people to form alliances behind the scenes to shout down people who disagree with them.

I'm so sorry that anyone from the GBLT community feels unwelcome here as a result of the Craig threads. I would hope that those with hurt feelings will recognize that any news story that includes sex, brings out the inner thirteen-year-old in some DUers. (I still haven't quite recovered from the revelation that there is apparently now a beauty standard for labia, for cryin' out loud, and it's OK to trash women who don't meet it, courtesy of the Brittney threads.)

Maybe I'm just feeling a bit pessimistic this morning, but I don't see a way to police the people who take advantage of the anonymity of DU, to vent their anger, resentment, hostility, fear and frustrations in a manner that they likely wouldn't use in RL.

All of us who are capable of, and willing to be, civil, can make a commitment to do so. Duers who feel unwelcome based on their sexual orientation, race or gender, are stuck with the job of standing up for themselves. Hopefully, with the support of the vast majority of posters here.

:hi:

[EFerrari]

609. What is it that Ava says, peace takes courage?

She's right. :hi:

[AnnieBW]

613. Larry Craig actively worked to shove gays back into the closet

While I don't really understand the concept of being "on the down low", I feel bad for the people that feel that they have to do that rather than be open and honest about their sexuality. But the fact is that Larry Craig was actively working to shove gays back into the closet. Not only that, when caught, he lied to the officer, tried to use his position as a Senator to make it go away, lied by omission to his wife and the Republican leaders of the Senate.

[ulysses]

626. we don't always do gay discussions well here.

Most of us who are het are well-intentioned, but often have little lurking bits of either misunderstanding or idiocy. dsc had to patiently explain to me, a couple of years ago, how the Limbaugh/Jeff Christie thing was hurtful, and I learned. I'm fairly certain that I have other niches of stupidity somewhere, waiting to be found. Hopefully, I'll learn then, too.

Many of us could stand to shut the fuck up and just listen once in a while.

:loveya:, expat!

[EFerrari]

647. That's one of the best suggestions in this whole thread!

:rofl:

:toast:

[WindRavenX]

636. mostly it's heteros telling the GLBTQ community to "get over it" or "stop getting offended"

I saw it during the Snickers incident firsthand, and it pissed me off then and it pisses me off today.

People need to be aware of heterosexual priveledges and why even though YOU as an ally may not understand why it's offensive, allies need to understand that if the queer community feels hurt, it DOES hurt. Period.

[EFerrari]

648. Agreed. "Get over it" isn't really a response when someone

shares their experience with you. It's an invalidation.

[bobbolink]

638. Many people, groups have been made to feel unwecome.

We're just told to "grow a skin".

I've seen that said to people of color, women, poor folk.

Progressivism ain't what it used to be.

[illinoisprogressive]

639. don't know what is happening but, I hope they know many of us welcome them wholeheartedly

[Popol Vuh]

641. Seems to be a lot of that going around

The other group is us Mexicans...

[Bryn]

643. I think gay community is too good to be lumped with likes of Craig

Larry Craig is a jerk and a hypocrite. He is very much against rights of gay people. That's what many of us is trying to make this point. Craig could be just obsessed with sex and would screw anything that moved. He may not be gay at all. Whatever he is, gay community shouldn't touch someone like him with a 10 ft pole.