Why is it acceptable for DUers to make blanket accusations of racism against GLBTQ DUers?

[yardwork]

This comes up over and over again. Skinner apologizes and then it happens again. Thread in point:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=782616&mesg_id=782616

I alerted on it. My alert was ignored but my post in the thread was deleted. The double standard over and over and over again. It makes me and other GLBTQ posters feel very unwelcome here on DU. Maybe that is the intention. We'd have to be blind not to recognize that that is the intention. I guess that the Democrats really don't want our votes.

[EarlG]

1. Your alert was ignored because

the moderators concluded that the post did not contain any blanket accusations of racism against GLBTQ DUers.

[yardwork]

2. Can you explain why an OP I posted a few months ago was locked as hate speech?

In my OP I pointed out that GLBTQ people vote Democratic at a higher rate than straight people. My thread was locked with a reference to the rule against hate speech. When I asked about it here, you explained that calling out *any* group of DUers - even ones in the privileged majority, such as all straight voters - is against rules.

So I'm wondering why this OP is allowed to call out LGBTQ posters as racists.

edit typo

[EarlG]

3. This again?

Your locked thread twice contained this line: "What's wrong with straight people?" Last time you asked about it, I told you "any thread which is started for the purpose of specifically going after a group of other DUers runs the risk of getting shut down."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=437x3259

Your OP was sardonic in tone. It was four paragraphs long. All four of those paragraphs were focused on the issue of "what's wrong with straight people."

vaberella's thread is fifteen paragraphs long. There are about four or five sentences in there about relations between DU's African-American and LGBT communities. The thread was quite clearly not started "for the purpose of specifically going after another group of DUers."

[yardwork]

4. I'm just trying to understand. So, if I were to start a thread about my experience as a lesbian

and the discrimination that I face, and my feelings about that discrimination, and if I included 4-5 sentences about relations between DU's African-American and LGBT communities in which I referenced feeling very hurt about things that were said 3 years ago when Prop 8 passed, in a 15 paragraph OP, it would not be shut down?

Edited to add - I would not do this because I would feel that I was calling out African Americans in a very unfair way, so I would never post such an OP. The reason being that relations between LGBTQ and African American DUers is not particularly relevant to my experience as a lesbian. My inclusion of these sentences would seem to be a very clear call-out. However, according to your response to me, it would be within the rules to do so?

edit typo

[yardwork]

5. Oh, and the purpose of my earlier OP was not to go after straight people. That would be silly.

The purpose of that earlier OP was to post data showing that GLBTQ voters are among the most loyal Democrats of all constituents. The sardonic tone was in response to a series of threads that day picking on GLBTQ people for being "ungrateful" to Obama. (Those threads, whose purpose was entirely to pick on GLBTQ posters, were of course not locked.)

I have nothing against straight people. Many of the people I love best in the world are straight - my parents, my children, my sister, my former husband, almost all my co-workers, my partner's parents, you get the drift. It's a very rare gay person who dislikes straight people. If you think about it you'll see why that's true.