Do you think that feminists

[boston bean]

hate men?

Do you think that feminists are out to get men?

Do you think that feminists have nothing of value to offer and ought to be relegated to a specific place for them to voice their views.

Do you think that feminists ought not point out when they see something as sexist or misogynistic?

Do you believe women in the US face any institutional oppression?

Do you think they are personally insulting you when speaking of their issues from a feminist perspective?

[Egalitarian Thug]

1. No. No. No. No. Yes. Not at all.

& R

[In_The_Wind]

2. No. No. No! No. Yes! No.

[RC]

3. Do you think that feminists

are a monolithic group? I don't.
I see women as individuals, most with their own opinions and ideas on how to right the wrongs in this society. I am also for Human Rights, for everyone. That "everyone" includes woman's Rights.
To begin with, most of the people here on DU, both men and women, already know what these wrongs are and who is to actually blame for them. The Conservative mind set. The Right-wing. Those who call themselves Republicans. Controllers, often paranoid, often with oppressor and/or persecutor personalities, that think they have the right to tell others how to live.
Not fellow Liberals and Democrats. Especially not here on DU. Just because someone refuses to lock step to the talking points, does not make that person wrong.

[nomorenomore08]

192. But what about those - *not* you personally - who play into right-wing framing RE: gender issues

or other issues for that matter, often without even realizing it? Should others be too polite to point that out when it happens? I certainly don't think "being polite" in that case helps anyone.

[Silent3]

4. Not most, probably some.

Not most, probably some.

Like everyone, plenty have something of value to offer. With regards to forums on DU, I think maybe some feminists might want a "safe haven" forum for themselves, but that shouldn't amount to a restriction on where feminist issues are brought up.

They should of course be free to point out when they see something as sexist or misogynistic, but others must also be free to disagree. Simply calling oneself a feminist does not make one infallible on all matters of gender. Having people argue with you is not a limitation on your freedom.

Yes, certainly.

Usually not, but sometimes yes, even if not intentionally.

Edit: RC had just the right phrase, feminists are "not monolithic".

[Shankapotomus]

5. No. No. No. No. Yes.

and Absolutely not.

I do, however, think confusion happens when a minority of "feminists" (whether women or men) in name only, mistakenly adopt the corrupted masculine ethos of competitiveness and Social Darwinism in an effort to be equal with or surpass men. In other words, "I am capable of being just as violent, cruel and tough as men." I think we're all tired of the posturing, "tough guy" image, whatever gender it's coming from. It's just immature. You don't advance Feminism by mimicking the behavior patterns that originally resulted in the subjugation of an entire gender.

I think the problem with the Men's Rights movement is they are confusing people who are doing "feminism" poorly with actual Feminism and true feminists. And that in turn, confuses the true Feminists who go into defense mode.

Both sides could come to a stable respect for each other if the men's movement would recognize what they are complaining about is not Feminism but a mistaken adoption of the corrupted masculine ethos by a minority of immature "feminists" in name only.

[Kaleva]

8. I think there's alot of debate here amongst feminists as to what a "true" feminist is.

[Shankapotomus]

13. Probably

I imagine it looks something like:

Competing with men (typically, at their own game) vs. getting the culture to abandon all competitiveness.

I'm siding with the latter.

[boston bean]

19. Actually, no there is not.

[Kaleva]

24. Would you say I'm a feminist?

Assuming one defines a feminist as someone who advocates or supports the rights and equality of women.

[boston bean]

25. I would need you to tell me if you consider yourself a feminist?

We are, afterall, discussing the notion that you brought up that feminists need to define who is a true feminist.

There are a lot of people who feel as you do, but will not describe themselves as feminists.

[Kaleva]

29. Going by the description I made in the previous post, I would say I am.

I'm not an ardent one for sure but in how I vote and interact in the real world, I believe I am a feminist.

[boston bean]

30. Then you are a feminist who believes in many of the same things most feminists do.

However, to try and make it seem that because have differences in the way to achieve goals, that they are trying to determine who a true feminist is, is counterproductive, imho

[Kaleva]

41. I think the debate is counter-productive too....

as the ultimate goals are pretty much the same but I'd be dishonest if I didn't say what I observe to sometimes take place here. I recall one person who said she was told she couldn't be a feminist because her priority was gay issues and not feminist issues. In the various porn threads, there is sometimes a debate as to what the feminist view on porn ought to be.

I'm not trying to stir things up. Just stating what I observe and I could be mistaken.

[boston bean]

44. Porn is hotly debated issue within feminism.

I would expect they would be here as well. And to be honest some of the responses to those hotly debated issues were based in sexism, not just about the issue.

So there is that as well. And that is where most of my objection comes into play.

[snooper2]

6. Not sure if anyone here has tried this-

But with it being cold, it's still cool to go outside and use the grill!

This is an awesome rub I tried a month ago and just adds to the flavor. I leave out the tumeric and double up on the garlic powder.



Pork Chops with Coffee Dry Rub


Ingredients

4 teaspoons chili powder
4 teaspoons ground coffee
2 tablespoons dark brown sugar
4 teaspoons salt
6 medium, bone-in pork chops about 1-inch thick
¼ teaspoon turmeric
¼ teaspoon ground coriander
¼–½ teaspoon cayenne
½ teaspoon freshly ground pepper
½ teaspoon garlic powder
½ teaspoon onion powder

Instructions

In a small bowl, combine all the ingredients and stir until well blended. Preheat the grill.
Generously rub both sides of the pork chops with the coffee rub. Grill the pork chops for about 5 to 7 minutes on each side over a medium heat.
Let the chops rest covered with aluminum foil before serving. Discard any unused rub.
Recipe created by world champion pitmaster Chris Lilly, on behalf of Kingsford® charcoal.


http://www.grilling.com/food/recipe/539/Pork_Chops_with_Coffee_Dry_Rub/

[CTyankee]

7. and your point is...

[Nuclear Unicorn]

10. I'm guessing, it's something (something pleasant) other than the fight that is certain to ensue.

[snooper2]

11. Actually I forgot a point

Some people will say snooper NOOOOO,

But I tend to sear one side of the pork chop for about a minute then flip to let cook, then one more flip. Also gives me a good indication how my grill is cooking on that particular day since it can be a little touchy LOL


As an aside, have you seen the greatness that is Pentatonix covering Royals? PERFECT!

[Drew Richards]

220. Wow that was really good!

[Tuesday Afternoon]

35. He saw a word starting with femin(ine) and immediately relates by cooking ...

Bless his heart.

[CTyankee]

54. kinda like little boys who stick their fingers in their ears and scream

"I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"

Then they hold their breaths till they turn purple...

Wow, we must be really threatening...

[snooper2]

65. My daughter did that the other day...

I was trying to get her to pick up her markers and torn paper and she was having mini fits cleaning up..

Then all of a sudden she stops, covers her ears, starts bopping her head from side to side and says---

"Blah Blah Blah, Blah Blah Blah, I know daddy you don't have to keep going Blah Blah Blah"



Hard to keep a straight face when your four year old cracks your shit up LOL

[Tuesday Afternoon]

73. actually, I think the older white male is feeling threatened. Fear of The Unknown.

Their world is changing and they are losing control and it is frightening to those who are not accepting and tolerant.

jmo. mind you. ymmv.

because really what the fuck do I know?

The more I live the more I know that I don't know.

There is so much to know.

I will never learn it all.

[Throd]

74. Grilling is for men. Everyone knows that.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

77. that is why it looks a lot like girlling

[CTyankee]

89. Holding one's own in an argument is SO tiring...what to do?

Too bad...so sad...

[Eleanors38]

241. You'll get some ribbing for that.

[sabrina 1]

309. I'm guessing but on Daily Kos eg, when people didn't like a Diary, they disrupted the thread by

posting recipes. Others would join in until the thread was completely disrupted. I have no idea if that was the intent here.

[CTyankee]

313. what's amazing is how childish it is...you'd think the perpetrators would have a clue

but, lordy, these folks never fail to impress me with their stoopid...

[sabrina 1]

341. Yes, very childish. n/t

[Dash87]

17. Bookmarked for later use. Mmmmm!

[The Straight Story]

23. Mmmm nothing like a good meat rub for a cold day

That sounds weird maybe.

[lumberjack_jeff]

37. Best possible response.

I'm going to have to try that when it dries out and warms up.

[In_The_Wind]

42. Looks yummy! But it's way too cold to grill outside today ...

Do you think a griddle would be ok instead?

[yuiyoshida]

49. Looking at the box.....

I wonder how those pancakes flipped themselves... while being on a timer?

[In_The_Wind]

50. Looks like someone else cooked breakfast in bed.

[yuiyoshida]

52. That would be my guess!

Unless there is some modern Star Trekey transporter device!

[In_The_Wind]

57. Or

used cooking molds

[yuiyoshida]

64. That covers the eggs...

would it work for pancakes?

[In_The_Wind]

70. It should.

[yuiyoshida]

71. YAY!

When do we eat?? Yummy!

[In_The_Wind]

339. Around sunrise east coast time.

I like to watch the birds drinking from the heated birdbath while I sip my coffee.

[snooper2]

58. I think a griddle would work fine

I only use the one we have for making breakfast..

Cook the sausage, then bacon then they eggs get to cook in a little of the bacon goodness.



You probably would want to get it up to temperature first then throw them on scooting them around every minute or so

[In_The_Wind]

68. I could use an indoor rotisserie oven to brown 'em evenly instead of the griddle.

I would double up on the garlic power too.

[Feral Child]

286. Try toasting the bread

on the griddle, too.

I dislike the contrived flavor an electric toaster imparts. Too even and artificial. The griddle provides an authentic "Diner" quality to the toast.

[In_The_Wind]

157. It still means the same thing today.

Edited to Add: No WAY is that thing real.

[HappyMe]

43. That does sound good.

As far as the OP, I don't know and at this point I don't care either.

[Vashta Nerada]

51. I love rubbing my meat on a cold day.

Thanks for the recipe.

[LanternWaste]

94. Petulance is often assisted by banal misdirection

Petulance is often assisted by banal misdirection, regardless of how the petulance is rationalized.

[Warren DeMontague]

163. Flatulence is what?

[opiate69]

167. (Pssst.. you forgot the imbecilic echo)

(Pssst.. you forgot the imbecilic echo)

[Warren DeMontague]

168. I thought maybe it was a browser issue

Or maybe a bowser issue

[opiate69]

170. Goodnight, sweetheart, well, it's time to go....

http://m.

[RiffRandell]

254. Thanks for clearing that up.

I thought it was my new glasses, now I know it's just an odd annoyance but not on my part.

I am a fan of Echo and the Bunnymen though...maybe someone else is as well?

[opiate69]

327. Personally, I prefer these echoes...

[RiffRandell]

338. You and me both.

Much more pleasurable, way more cool and not annoying as fuck.

If one does such a thing, does one copy and paste or just retype it all over again? Enquiring minds want to know.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

97. well honeypie! aren't you just the cutest little ole thing. Now then howsbout rustling us all up

some of that there tasty little ole dish.

you are just a sight for sore eyes.

I tell ya I could just smack you on your cute little ass.

go on now.

You done went and made me hungy

[msanthrope]

102. Quit advocating violence just because you are upset. If a man wrote you

such things, you'd want him ppr'd.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

106. why honey pie I am just talkin' bout a little ole love tap

on that thar cute lil ole butt cheek, yanno ... do please take the post in the manner which it is given ... pure love, darlin'

nuttin but love.

[msanthrope]

107. No...what you are doing is using your status as a female to advocate violence towards

another DUer. It's disgusting, because it encourages a different code of conduct for men and women.

[polly7]

223. Yes, it is disgusting.

Strange how only certain people get away with that shit.

[msanthrope]

228. I'm really disgusted by threats of violence, and the double standard shown

towards women who engage in such demeaning behavior.

[polly7]

230. Yeah, me too. It really puts to rest the claim they believe that women don't deserve violence and

sexist treatment. But people are so brave on the internet, aren't they?

[msanthrope]

249. Hitting men is funny!!! A joke! nt

[polly7]

251. Oops!

I missed that was directed towards a man. D'oh.

But yes, it's just as offensive directed towards a man and I'm still floored it was allowed to remain.

[Feral Child]

287. Sounds like sexual abuse, to me.

Can we, as passive observers, be certain it's mutually consensual?

Is there, perhaps, an unknown economic factor that reduces that "consent" to mere slavery?

HMMM?

[Drew Richards]

250. And this is exactly the crap I cant stand...double standard much? Sense of FEMALE entitlement

Much?

If a man had said this or ANYTHING similar they would have been hidden if not banned from the thread.

Freeking hyprocritical disgusting *&^%^%^

[snooper2]

114. bluehairs scare the shit out of me LOL

bad impression though, you are kind of overdoing it a little

[jeff47]

120. FYI

At Fri Jan 3, 2014, 01:41 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

well honeypie! aren't you just the cutest little ole thing. Now then howsbout rustling us all up
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4271462

REASON FOR ALERT:

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

This is outrageous language considering if anything similar was said by a man to a woman on DU there would be complaints of sexist language. Why is it okay for women to use it? No one should be using it, period.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jan 3, 2014, 02:07 PM, and the Jury voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: tacky
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Sorry, but I'm getting tired of all these alerts and debates (including the sarcasm) unless there is something new. Some of us who grew up in the 60's are sympathetic to gender-based causes, ethnic causes, and "burn your draft card", but folks have to make up their mind - either get in there an argue your point or else skip the thread. It's impossible to hide one post out of a bunch (like recipes?) that are designed to provoke even if it's a pointless post. If you want, hit ignore. Unless it's clearly agains the rules, I have to let similar posts go...leave it.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Seriously? You think the offense is this post, and not the attempt to derail via a recipe?
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: This is in reply to an off-topic trolling post. I think it is okay.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: Though obviously sarcastic I feel the poster could have gotten the point across using a less blatant trolling technique.

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

[polly7]

218. Wow.

This is allowed to remain here?


Pathetic.

[msanthrope]

98. Pork chops are patriarchy. nt

[Violet_Crumble]

279. Carnivore!!

I urge you to read Morrissey's wise and inclusive words on eating meat and to change that pork chop to a tasty tofu something or other

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024274748

[LadyHawkAZ]

280. There is no such thing as a tasty tofu anything n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

281. Point taken. But try explaining that to Morrissey...

He'll likely call you a pedophile!

[NaturalHigh]

322. Maybe not, but I like those microwave veggie burgers.

Don't get me wrong; they're not hamburgers, but they're still tasty.

[LadyHawkAZ]

328. I've heard some very mixed reviews

Personal taste, I suppose. I keep meaning to try them, and the fake cheese, just to see if they taste OK.

[NaturalHigh]

333. Try the Morning Star Farm Spicy Black Bean veggie burgers.

Since I grew up on a cattle ranch, there aren't many vegetarians in my family. My mom bought the veggie burgers mostly just for convenience. They're really good.

I can't do the fake cheese, though.

[Marr]

282. Nice! I'll try that.

Thank you.

[NaturalHigh]

323. The temperature is dropping, and my back hurts.

No way I'm grilling tonight, but it's still my night to cook. I'm going to make a chicken, potato, and carrot dish with dry onion soup mix and condensed cream of mushroom soup.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

9. What if the question is reversed?

Do feminist hate men? I'm of the opinion those self-identifying as feminists would answer they do not, myself included. But is it not fair to recognize that those who believe they operate in a hostile environment could react with hostility?

Of all the statements made about the DU gender wars is the fact that DU has a gender war on its hands. Wars, regardless of who started them, only end once one side capitulates under the burden of outright conquest or both sides decide to stop shooting. Personally, I'm not keen on seeking the title of "Conqueror" but to assume I would endure the station of conquered would be naive. I prefer peace and community.

[tkmorris]

14. Good post

I sincerely hope that peace and community you mention come to pass.

[ZombieHorde]

12. "Do you think that feminists hate men?"

A tiny, tiny percentage seem to, but the rest don't seem to.

Do you think that feminists are out to get men?

Not according to my interpretation of the question.

Do you think that feminists have nothing of value to offer and ought to be relegated to a specific place for them to voice their views.

Value comes from the perceiver of stimuli, as opposed to the people, objects, situations being perceived, and no, I don't agree with a social construct of relegating specific places for them to voice their views.

Do you think that feminists ought not point out when they see something as sexist or misogynistic?

I think people should point out whatever they feel moved to point out. Obvious exceptions are at funerals, etc.

Do you believe women in the US face any institutional oppression?

According to my interpretation of the question, yes. I also believe men and children face institutional oppression in the US.

Do you think they are personally insulting you when speaking of their issues from a feminist perspective?

No.

[bonzaga]

15. Some women do hate men

Some women are out to get men, some women don't have anything of value to offer and ought to be relegated to a specific place, some women point out things as misogynistic or sexist when they are anything but, and some women are personally insulting men.

None of these women are feminists, though.

[Major Nikon]

276. One of the footsoldiers in the DU Gender Wars used to link to this site in their sig line

http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/patriarchy-blaming-the-twisty-way/scum-manifesto/

This same site was a big hit for a while among certain circles of DUers, and evidently still is.

Now I'm not convinced it means they hate men, but it certainly means they are indifferent to those who do and it's not as if those people are all that hard to find within the feminist community. I'm quite sure if the gender roles were reversed and some guy linked to a site that contined the worst sort of women hating claptrap the outrage would be apocalyptic.

[seaglass]

291. Kind of like this?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11145354

[Major Nikon]

293. I don't see the similarities

Life in this society being, at best, an utter bore and no aspect of society being at all relevant to women, there remains to civic-minded, responsible, thrill-seeking females only to overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation and destroy the male sex.

It is now technically feasible to reproduce without the aid of males (or, for that matter, females) and to produce only females. We must begin immediately to do so. Retaining the male has not even the dubious purpose of reproduction. The male is a biological accident: the Y (male) gene is an incomplete X (female) gene, that is, it has an incomplete set of chromosomes. In other words, the male is an incomplete female, a walking abortion, aborted at the gene stage. To be male is to be deficient, emotionally limited; maleness is a deficiency disease and males are emotional cripples.

The male is completely egocentric, trapped inside himself, incapable of empathizing or identifying with others, or love, friendship, affection of tenderness. He is a completely isolated unit, incapable of rapport with anyone. His responses are entirely visceral, not cerebral; his intelligence is a mere tool in the services of his drives and needs; he is incapable of mental passion, mental interaction; he can’t relate to anything other than his own physical sensations. He is a half-dead, unresponsive lump, incapable of giving or receiving pleasure or happiness; consequently, he is at best an utter bore, an inoffensive blob, since only those capable of absorption in others can be charming. He is trapped in a twilight zone halfway between humans and apes, and is far worse off than the apes because, unlike the apes, he is capable of a large array of negative feelings — hate, jealousy, contempt, disgust, guilt, shame, doubt — and moreover, he is aware of what he is and what he isn’t.

...

http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/patriarchy-blaming-the-twisty-way/scum-manifesto/

[Lost_Count]

298. No true Scotsman (feminist) right?

[pipi_k]

16. There can't be

any black/white, either/or answers here.

IMO, anyway



Do you think that feminists
hate men?

As a group? I don't know. I don't think so, but whatever. Although I would imagine that SOME of them do hate men.


Do you think that feminists are out to get men?

See answer above.



Do you think that feminists have nothing of value to offer and ought to be relegated to a specific place for them to voice their views.

In RL, or here at DU? IMO, there are some who always seem to be involved in conflict. Constantly and repeatedly. This leads me to believe that it would be better for everyone involved for them to have their own special place here at DU. As for RL...again...who knows.



Do you think that feminists ought not point out when they see something as sexist or misogynistic?

Not a problem. The problem comes when they insist that THEIR viewpoint is the ONLY viewpoint, and anyone who doesn't see THEIR viewpoint is a misogynist...even other women.



Do you believe women in the US face any institutional oppression?

Some. But I don't believe it lurks around every corner.



Do you think they are personally insulting you when speaking of their issues from a feminist perspective?

Only when, as I pointed out above, they are INSISTING that their viewpoints are the only ones that matter, and that even women who don't see things the way they do are part of The Problem.

[kdmorris]

141. This was the post that I was still trying to form in my head

but you posted it first and so I just have to bow to your quickness in saying these things first.



edit: because I also can't quickly come up with the smilies, either!

[HappyMe]

147. I agree.

I thought about this for a bit and you have pretty much nailed it.

[badtoworse]

18. I believe they have a unique problem in making their case

Many, if not most, adult people in the country have a long-standing relationship relationship with a person of the opposite sex - typically marriage. There is no need to detail how men and women drive each other crazy in such a relationship and there is also no need to say that sometimes your spouse just doesn't want to hear about it and isn't listening.

Logically, at least some of the social issues that feminists are seeking to address are different than the issues that occur in a marriage. In both cases, however, the basic issue involves relationships between men and women. For that reason, I think it's likely the feminists sometimes have to deal with the same problem a wife has - the men aren't listening. I also think most wives would agree that when their husband isn't receptive, pushing harder generally doesn't accomplish much. IMO, feminists have to deal with that in pressing their case - sometimes the men just don't want to hear it. I'm not saying that's right, it's just my opinion about why feminists struggle to get attention.

I think it's hard to draw a bright line between issues between men and women on a personal level and issues that exist on a larger social level. There is no analogy for this that applies to racial or LGBT issues which is why I think the feminist situation is unique.

ETA: Answers as follows - No, No, No, but I think sometimes they have difficulty accepting that men and women really are fundamentally different, Yes, but I disagree with the term "Institutional Oppression", No.

[CreekDog]

315. TS; DR

[Seeking Serenity]

20. My answers:

Do you think that feminists hate men?

I do not know all feminists, so I couldn't presume to speak for them all. I also know that people that call themselves "feminist" are hardly a single-minded collective. There are as many different views and opinions as there are people.

Of the self-described feminists that I know personally, the majority do not (most of them being married to men), but a couple of them do (maybe not hate, but really, really don't like dealing with).

Do you think that feminists are out to get men?

See my answer above, except that none of my friends would claim to be "out to get men" (except for one who is single and very much wants to "get a man&quot .

Do you think that feminists have nothing of value to offer and ought to be relegated to a specific place for them to voice their views.

No. However, if anyone chooses to express an opinion in a public forum, outside of a "safe space," especially an opinion on which there can be reasonable disagreement, one should not be surprised or offended when that disagreement comes. And no, as my "kaffe klatch" can attest, I do not believe, when a feminist speaks on a particular issue, that her word and opinion should be just accepted uncritically, as if it was "holy writ" that cannot be challenged in any way.

Do you think that feminists ought not point out when they see something as sexist or misogynistic?

Of course they should. However, apart from the patently obvious cases where no reasonable person could disagree, they should not believe that their pronouncements of something being sexist or misogynistic cannot or should not ever be challenged or subject to critical analysis and debate. And such challenge or debate is NOT the same as telling the feminist "how she should feel" about a thing. It is a mere difference of opinion.

Do you believe women in the US face any institutional oppression?

I'd have to ask you to define "institutional oppression." I do not believe there is some evil cabal of men holding the reins of power plotting and planning ways to keep women down. And in the first world (the world where I live and I presume most everyone else here lives), women are nowhere near as oppressed as women are in the second and third worlds.

Do you think they are personally insulting you when speaking of their issues from a feminist perspective?

Me personally? No. But I can see how others might, depending on the language (words) used. And I would not presume to tell them how they should feel about a thing.

How's that?

[TroglodyteScholar]

81. I probably should have just seconded your post rather than putting up my own response. n/t

[Seeking Serenity]

88. Thank you.

[nomorenomore08]

197. IMO disagreement on a discussion board is fine, so long as it's not of the disingenuous variety.

You know, the whole "I'd agree with you if you were just a little nicer" routine. Problem with that is in most cases, the person saying such things has no intention of agreeing with or supporting the other person in the first place.

And I'm a man, who's never felt he has any particular "rights" being threatened, so I really have no dog in this fight. Just sharing my own observations of threads.

[Seeking Serenity]

292. I've perused a lot of these "gender war" threads

without commenting. And it is my opinion, for what that's worth, is that there is plenty of disingenuousness to go around from certain members on all sides.

And people's styles are what there're gonna be. And if one's style is to be (blunt/harsh/straight-talking/off-putting/"telling it like it is"/what have you), one shouldn't be terribly surprised or offended if another suggests they dial it back a bit. In the same way, I'd imagine, that if one was too obsequious/euphamistic/what have you in his tenor that he might be suggested to say what he means.

I'd very much be interested in discussing the subject. I have absolutely no desire to get into the battle of personalities.

[Greybnk48]

21. I am a feminist and no to 1--5, absolutely yes and no.

Institutional oppression of women, including in the U.S., has barely budged. It's mostly been masked. One example, we have never passed an equal rights amendment in this country; something we've tried to get through for about 40 years.

[cherokeeprogressive]

22. Nnnnnnope.

[el_bryanto]

26. No, no, no, no, no and depends. nt

[Glassunion]

27. Your questions are absolutes.

[treestar]

28. No. That feminists "hate men" is a right wing stupidity

or of MRA types who can't seem to get that they don't have to take it personally.

There may be some irritation at some men who may have actually done something to that feminist in particular, but most of us have the brains to know one man's conduct shouldn't be attributed to all men. But it may be reminiscent. Condescension from men in the date can be annoying, as it reminds me of men who boss me around just because, or treat me as their secretary just because. They may not even be conscious of it.

[Drew Richards]

31. Here is my response from someone that hardly ever posts but reads the boards daily

Not all of them

Not all of them

No

No

Yes

Some obviously are since they can find fault in a word like the word "someone"...and then instantly go on the attack and post walls of text throwing the book of misogyny at a poster insinuating that since that poster doesn't agree totally with them they must be a misogynistic pig and a member of a non-existent group on DU called MRA...

Perhaps if they didn't act just like the bullies they are rallying about... conversation could flow but I and others on this board are done listening to, and taking crap from people acting like bullies just because we voice a view, opinion or comment that is not a duplication of someone Else's view of life the universe and 42...

And the unasked question:

Should Feminists concerns and discussions be posted in GD?

Absolutely! They only way to improve equality is to shine the light of day on injustices but that doesnt mean beat down on your enemy...at least Ghandi, MLK, Rosika Swimmer, Vera Brittan, and many more too numerous to count... didnt think so, but they are/were greats among humans.

[nomorenomore08]

199. That's valid, but it's only one side of the problem. Because along with possibly overzealous

feminists you have men who, for whatever reason, seem to take things way too personally whenever gender issues come up. To which I would say the same thing as to white people taking discussions of racism too personally - namely that It's not necessarily about you.

[Drew Richards]

206. And that is a valid point as well, nothing is one side and there are people from both sides that

For a better word are agitating and destructive to the discussion rather than actually contributing to the discussion and viable solutions. I am at a loss on what to do about it except call out what I see as agitators or stay silent

[nomorenomore08]

208. I try to ignore personal beefs as much as possible, and focus on the real issues.

That's what we're (ideally) here for anyway. And trying to make the world a less dangerous, less violent, less unequal place is a far more noble goal in my mind than petty squabbling.

[CFLDem]

32. Depends on the individual feminist.

Are all feminists a monolithic block?

[boston bean]

34. No they are not monolithic, they disagree on how to achieve goals, but not usually the issues.

[CFLDem]

38. Sounds like another no true Scotsman fallacy to me.

And OP is just more witch/warlock hunting, IMO.

I'll simplify the issue:

Do you believe that all individuals should have equal opportunities to pursue their goals in life?

If the answer is no, then I suggest the user moves to freeperland.

[nomorenomore08]

200. Can't we also discuss cultural attitudes which complicate the drive for legal and social equality?

Because whenever a topic like that comes up on DU, certain posters seem to just flat-out lose their shit.

[CFLDem]

217. Sure we can

just make sure to bring along plenty of popcorn for the show.

[nomorenomore08]

222. Now see, I feel like comments like that tend to trivialize the issue.

And it also suggests that the defensiveness exhibited by certain people is only natural and to be expected, when I (and others) see that defensiveness as a disingenuous overreaction.

[LadyHawkAZ]

33. Do you think that feminists are a homogeneous group?

1) Some fringe elements do, certainly. The majority, no.

2) See #1

3) I assume you're talking about DU here: No, I reserve that thought for shit stirrers and bullies, who do need to be relegated to a specific place to voice their views for the sake of the rest of us.

4) No.

5) Yes.

6) See #1

Here's a few back atcha:

Do you think feminist viewpoints ought to be debated like any other viewpoint?

Do you think that someone simply saying that they are expressing a woman's or feminists viewpoint ought to be allowed to do so unchallenged, no matter what that individual point might be?

Do you think transphobia is a feminist viewpoint? Do you think it ought to be welcomed or respected at DU?

Do you think that, say for example, a self-identified online feminist expressing homophobia or transphobia ought to have their views treated with the same respect as one who is inclusive of all people, simply because of the identifying label they have chosen?

Do you think that women who do not identify as feminists, women who do not identify with a particular type of feminism, or men ought to be allowed in feminist discussions outside of protected groups?

[boston bean]

36. Of course there are separatist feminists, but many of their issues are still feminist issues.

I wonder why you assume I am talking specifically about DU, many of these thoughts about feminists are universal, in both conservative and liberal circles to some extent.

Of course I feel feminist viewpoints ought to be debated like any other view point? why do you ask? Thought that would be imminently clear by my OP.

No, Feminists challenge each other all the time. That doesn't mean they hate one another nor should it give reason for some to try use those differences to diminish feminism or derail feminist discussion. Many thoughts of feminism are quite mainstream and agreed upon by almost all types of feminists.

No, I do not think that feminists who express homophobia or transphobia ought to have their views treated with the same respect we afford others, just as I do not think misogynists and sexists ought to have their views tolerated.

Of course people should be allowed to in feminist discussions, but if they are spouting sexist or misogynist things, see my answer right above.

[LadyHawkAZ]

139. Because your questions #3, 4 and 6 are directed at the forum

not feminism in general. Also because many if not most of the complaints lately have been about how poorly feminists are treated at DU, and attacks on feminists at DU, and silencing feminists at DU, etc. I'm pretty sure you've taken part in those discussions, as have I.

Of course I feel feminist viewpoints ought to be debated like any other view point? why do you ask?

This is why:

That doesn't mean they hate one another nor should it give reason for some to try use those differences to diminish feminism or derail feminist discussion.

Exactly what are the definitions of "diminish" and "derail"? They seem to have become a catchall for anything other than a K&R. If every disagreeing viewpoint is going to be reduced to "diminishing" or "derailing", then your claim that you welcome discussion is well nigh worthless.
How many times have some of the women here been referred to as patriarchal collaborators, or enablers, or misogynists, or most recently dogs being patted on the head, because we disagreed? Is that not hatred, diminishing of our viewpoint, derailing of the subject? Silencing, even?

Of course people should be allowed to in feminist discussions, but if they are spouting sexist or misogynist things, see my answer right above.

Again, what is the definition here? because it pretty much negates your statement. Sexist and misogynist have specific meanings, and they are not eye-of-the-beholder; however, that is pretty much how the words are used any time someone expresses a dissenting viewpoint or just downright doesn't like the specific poster. Bam! instant sexist!

How, specifically, do you feel that feminist discussions in GD ought to go? given that some of the topics brought here for discussion do not have broad agreement in the ranks, and that a lot of the people involved simply don't like each other, never will like each other, and will get contentious?
Which reminds me:

No, I do not think that feminists who express homophobia or transphobia ought to have their views treated with the same respect we afford others, just as I do not think misogynists and sexists ought to have their views tolerated.

VERY good to know.
If we're reallyquiet I'm sure we can hear the spike in blog traffic as they try to inveigle their unremorseful way back into the discussions. I didn't respect them already, but validation's always nice.

Many thoughts of feminism are quite mainstream and agreed upon by almost all types of feminists.

This is the problem: While some core views are agreed upon, many others are not (see above on transphobia), and who wants to be associated with the viewpoints of bigots, even on a basic issue with broad agreement? Even when it's an area all feminists agree on, I've generally felt it best to disassociate myself from the nastier elements on the fringe. There's a whole host of issues that have been presented as "feminist" that I've felt are nothing more than exclusionary crap. I find some of these ideas appalling and contrary to the ideals of both liberation and equality, and won't associate with people who hold them, no matter what their views are on equal pay or reproductive freedom etc. I don't think I'm unique in this. As my earlier post said, it's about personalities not issues here nowadays. Some of the personalities are pretty repellent. I prefer not to wade around in their mud. I don't think others do either.

If you have a solution to that, you're way ahead of me. I don't have one, I doubt you do either. Ideas?

[boston bean]

151. Normal everyday feminism, like the patriarchy

rape, fair pay, abortion, not being street harassed.

Since you want to make it about DU, those are what I am speaking about. As well as the more contentious issues of porn and prostitution, where feminists, and yes there are feminists who see the patriarchy in those issues, where prude is tossed around like a good mj doobie and personal insults abound and feminists are told they need to keep out of GD..


Iverglas, iverglas, iverglas is what I seem to be reading. Someone who was banned well over a year ago, going on two years.. you show to me where transphobia has been accepted by feminists on DU. Separatist feminists can be transphobic by demaning born woman spaces only, and also can be quite disgusting in their views toward the transgender community. But NO, that isn't what I had in mind here. If you feel real caught up on it, write an OP and lets see how many transphobic feminists there are on DU.

[LadyHawkAZ]

166. 1) you made it about DU in your OP. Three times.

I responded.

2) No, I don't think I'm going to continue solely on that one point. Our transphobic trio have all been back with socks. One was just RE-banned yesterday. They had supporters. Yes, I have links. And screenshots. Some of which are pretty... interesting. Exactly the kind of people I want no association with whatsoever. But I'm going to sit on that, and see if you:

3) Care to address anything else I said, or are you going to stay stuck on the ducks? Definitions? Solutions? You addressed none of the points I made on those.

[boston bean]

177. I'm not ducking anything.

Post away! If you have something that shows me being transphobic, I'll gladly take a licking and I will apologize. However, I don't think anything like that will be forthcoming.

I did address what you said. I suggest you go back and look. Do, I need to repeat myself over and over again?

You want to define what my OP was about, fine do that. I purposely made it more encompassing to avoid the inevitable flames that it seems you are trying to make it to be. But go ahead and continue on if you must.

[LadyHawkAZ]

183. Yes, you can repeat the part where you defined

what you meant by derailing, diminishing, and sexist and misogynistic responses, because they seem to have accidentally gotten deleted from your response. So did the part where you addressed the repeated attacks on women who disagree, your thoughts on how the discussions ought to proceed given current conditions, and what your possible solutions are for finding one's self in agreement with people known to have nasty, misogynistic or bigoted viewpoints.

Be careful with that delete key. It's a killer.

No, I'm not going to proceed with the links, see above post. Interesting that it's suddenly about you, personally, though. I don't believe I said anything at all about you, personally. What's up with the sudden personalization?

ETA take your time, I'm going out to dinner.

[boston bean]

207. What delete key are you discussing. If you have something to say, say it.

calling people prudes, attacking feminists personally instead of agreeing with issues you know we agree upon. If you don't agree, and just personally attack, I don't know how to read that. That would go a long way. Instead of flaming old flame wars, that most on this board seem to have gotten over, except a few stragglers. Most feminists know our cause is better united and understand that. As I assume you know this as well.

Those are a couple that I have already mentioned. Sorry you missed them.

[LadyHawkAZ]

268. The delete key that deleted all your answers.

Last edited Sat Jan 4, 2014, 12:29 AM - Edit history (1)

I did have something to say, and said it. I asked for definitions of diminishing and derailing, as well as your definition of "spouting sexist and misogynist things", to which you appear to have replied

Normal everyday feminism, like the patriarchy
rape, fair pay, abortion, not being street harassed.

which makes no sense at all- discussing abortion is derailing or sexist? I also made the point that women who have disagreed in the feminist threads have been hounded and namecalled:

"You deserve it.
that you can continue to laugh at simple old jokes and enjoy being petted by these men.
sort of like their old pet dog, reminds me.
the picture I have of you in my mind when I see you posting.
a good old hunting dog. loyal. pet. pet. good doggie. here let me throw you another morsel ... "

Remember that? How was that welcoming discussion, again? Better, or worse, than being called a

Prude
: a person who is easily shocked or offended by things that do not shock or offend other people
a person who is excessively or priggishly attentive to propriety or decorum; especially : a woman who shows or affects extreme modesty

do you think? Prudes at least are people, but for some reason that seems to be the only insult that matters.

And I asked you what your solutions might be, which has given me this gem to treasure for all time:

attacking feminists personally instead of agreeing with issues you know we agree upon. If you don't agree, and just personally attack, I don't know how to read that. That would go a long way. Instead of flaming old flame wars, that most on this board seem to have gotten over, except a few stragglers. Most feminists know our cause is better united and understand that. As I assume you know this as well.

Orly? Your solution to all the problems is "If you'd just agree with us and stop arguing, and never again mention all that awful stuff wink wink, everything would be just groovy!"

Well yes, if you'd just agree with me and quit arguing, things would be pretty groovy too.

Except that I covered the reasons why your solution isn't workable earlier- there are some attitudes that I cannot and will never support, and people who hold those attitudes that I will not associate myself with. There is no unity worth giving my support to an exclusionary, sex-negative and separatist view of feminism, or to people that support homophobia, transphobia or anti-woman viewpoints. I will not place myself in a position where I might have to explain- to anyone else or to myself- why I'm supporting (or appearing to support) either distinctly anti-equality policy or outright bigotry. No one in their right mind wants to be in that position. I am this way in real life, and don't plan to change for DU.

For some reason, you seem to have taken that personally. It's not. It's ethics. It has nothing to do with "attacking feminists" or "attacking feminism" and never has, nor is it about an "old flame war", and I think you are well aware of that by now; it's certainly been explained enough times.

Other people's reasons for not wanting to associate themselves with certain elements on this board will vary, but I suspect a lot of their reasons are a variation on mine; the desire not to support, or appear to support, noxious people or views.

I came up with a couple solutions over dinner, but somehow I don't see them being well received.

Have a nice night.

[polly7]

269. So well said.

I know I got attacked with the "Goodness, you remember everything!!! Why do bring up old stuff from YEARS ago?!", when actually, it was something that happened around a week ago. So many of these claims are disingenuous and just outright lies, that I pay very little heed to those who try so hard to use them anymore. They aren't talking to me, they're posting to try to demean me as a person to anyone who doesn't know exactly what happened. It's got nothing to do with feminism, humanism or any other ism that claims to care about the rights and dignity of others ...... it's all some strange power trip dripping with contempt and derision for anyone who disagrees.

And that 'old dog' thing pretty much sealed it for me. I have no use in real life for people who are so contemptuous of others, and I certainly don't admire it here.

[LadyHawkAZ]

270. Yeah, I got "Wow, that was a whole two weeks ago!"

to the "women don't rape men" comment. A whole two weeks!

[opiate69]

271. You....

Are amazing.

[The Straight Story]

273. Don't expect much of a reply to this fine reply of yours

What they cannot defend/argue against they will ignore (which generally seems to be why they ignore me most the time).

Reading through HOF and seeing how they view the males here on DU and any females who are not riding their bandwagon is eye opening indeed.

I post a few stories in a week that have something to do with women and I am waging a war against them

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125533487 Which bled into a thread of mine http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024270074

Notice an interesting pic in that first link? Post one like that out in GD with similar replies and the wagon will come a rolling It is ok for folks there to hound others, post mostly about one issue (while accusing others of being the ones who have an agenda - and expecting that I and others will be benevolently sexist and give women a pass on issues) and to degrade women (as you noted above and as I have elsewhere). But disagree with one iota of their self written bible and you are a sinner who hates the goddess of womyn.

It is amusing watching how it all gets twisted, or in cases like your post just simply passed by/ignored. A nice break from some of the video games I enjoy (of which one must be sexist because the company behind it is named the 'fun pimps', quick call the meta word police!).

Alas, much to their chagrin, there is no DU gender war. There is war being waged by some who want to make everything about gender though and divide folks.

[LadyHawkAZ]

277. I don't read much in there if I can help it. I have it trashed.

People send me links from time to time.

The duckies board was much more...enlightening reading. As someone said to me earlier, "They say integrity is what people do when they think no one is looking..."

[boston bean]

285. Attitudes is something you attach to persons on this website.

If you think that helps with the discussion of feminist issues, as I say continue on.

As you state, you don't disagree with the issues. You see something wrong with the peoples attitudes about it.

And no I don't think your example moved the conversation forward, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist the other way around either nor does lowering oneself to the same tactics it make it right.

[LadyHawkAZ]

340. No, that wasn't what I stated.

Last edited Sun Jan 5, 2014, 01:03 AM - Edit history (1)

What I actually said was: there are a few core values that are agreed on by most if not all of the different feminist groups, like this:

Equal rights and protections under the law.
Equal opportunities and equal pay for equal work.
Reproductive rights (although there are some that are anti-abortion, readily available birth control and family planning services have broad consensus across the feminist spectrum).
Opposition to rape and rape culture.
Opposition to domestic violence.

there are also many that do NOT have broad agreement, like this:

Porn
Sex work
Marriage
Parenting and stay-at-home motherhood
The role of fathers
Sexual expression
Clothing, make-up and other appearance issues
Intersectionality with people of color, LGBT and other civil rights areas.
Transgender acceptance

When people's "attitudes about it" include denying the same respect, rights and choices to other women that they demand for themselves, you're goddamn straight I want nothing to do with the ideas in question and will argue against them, "unity" be damned (eta and in that case I will also question their real commitment to women's equality). When their "attitudes about it" include outright bigotry toward transgender people, they officially qualify as bigots in my book and I want nothing to do with them. Nothing.

Here's a block of text from elsewhere on the internet. I will put it to our readers to decide if this is feminism or bigotry, and if such a person is someone they would want to be seen supporting in any capacity.

"trans men" -- i.e. women who have become men (the opposite of the "transwomen" demanding access to lesbians' private parts).
They are men with uteruses, you see, so they can get pregnant.
Can you imagine what normal people, the teachers at your kids' schools and the cashier at the grocery store and the letter carrier and the dentist, would think if they read this nonsense?
Get the wimmin's libbers to start spouting it, and you'll have knocked women's lib off the political map for the next two generations.
Because it would be too fooking obvious that we're all insane.

Here is another.

they don't see their bodies as male, so that makes it so~!
Transmagical thinking!
If a transwoman says, "My penis is female!" Then that is IT! Female penis!
See how easy that is?
(I am not making this up, there are people saying this shiz. For real.)

Do you think ^that^ moves the discussion of feminist issues forward, or backward? Is it something we ought to embrace, or eradicate? Should we welcome someone who could give voice to thoughts like that, or should we shun them? I obviously feel this is transphobia; what do you feel is the place for the above in the feminist movement? Inquiring minds want to know. Because as far as I'm concerned, it's a big fat load of unwelcome horseshit.

And yes, such thinkers exist at DU. One just got banned- again.

Among my RL friends are a couple of non op transgender. Their rights are more important to me than some people's desire for online dominance or validation.

"Attitudes" can be pretty goddamn important, ma'am.

[boston bean]

343. There are people on the internet as well as DU who

Feel that Equal rights and protections under the law are discriminatory towards men.
Feel that that there is no inequity for women regarding Equal opportunities and equal pay for equal work.
Feel that Reproductive rights ought to be limited, ie are anti abortion.
Take great offense to the discussing Opposition of rape and rape culture.
Say that women are the perpetrators of domestic violence and that almost all of it is reciprocal violence.

Many of those issues are discussed over and over again here on DU and many feminists find such opinions to be quite offensive, yet they are the ones who are told have a problem with their tone, which is just quite sexist itself or HoF is trolling, or those feminists suck, those feminists are damaged. It is away to avoid the issue, and make it personal against feminists one does not like on DU. That is where I am asking for a bit more consideration from some, instead of re-living the past and attacking people because they might hold some different opinions than them about prostitution, sex, porn. And I feel the same vice versa.


I will agree, although I am not to sure why you insist on continually bringing it transphobia up to me, but it is a very small minority of feminists who are. Most will agree with you. And YES, I agree that should be called out wherever it is seen.

I was in two very recent threads about it on DU where there were a few men who were being quite transphobic and got banned. I was posting in those threads against that as were many feminists. If I see it, I call it out. Maybe you were off DU that day. But it wasn't in feminist threads where you see this or in HoF.

Now, does that make my positions more clear and help to move this discussion forward? Can feminists disagree on certain issues, most definitely. I've never denied that and nor am I absolutely consistent between my positions one hundred percent of the time, because I can see both sides of the issue dependent upon the variables. But damn, both sides of those controversial positions, ie prostitution, porn, sex work, within feminism do deserve to be discussed here on DU and elsewhere without continual personal attacks. Will I see you joining in support with the issues we agree on, which are the core values of feminism? I hope to see more feminists speaking out about the things we do agree on, and wish we could all just drop the personal animosity and discuss our differences (except bigotry) in a more calm and friendly manner. It's got to start somewhere. I'm willing to do that. I hope that those feminists who are more stuck on personality and tone, will join as well. We just might see less of our core values being attacked on this website.

[LadyHawkAZ]

347. I think we'll start at the bottom and go up:

Will I see you joining in support with the issues we agree on, which are the core values of feminism?

Had you been looking, you'd have seen it already. Let's open up the My Posts tab. Look, here's me getting outraged at a sexist phrase!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024160236#post33
Here's me having a polite (both ways) conversation with two HoFers on an important issue!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024181014#post6
Here's me disagreeing with a man, in a women's issue thread, about the "all men" thing!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024193962#post73
Here's me in a discussion on birth control:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024186374#post7
Here's me on the student suspended for "hugging" the teacher:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024191946#post6

Oh my, I do that! I just don't validate flamebait vanity posts anymore. There is a difference, and it's not that difficult to spot. What you're asking me to do, I already do. If what you're trying to say is "please start supporting people who have only posted on this important issue because they just got spanked on another subject yesterday and today they want to play better-than-you on social issues with the people they lost the debate to" or any of the similar reasons so many of these threads get posted, then the answer is no. I don't like feeding egos.

I was in two very recent threads about it on DU where there were a few men who were being quite transphobic and got banned. I was posting in those threads against that as were many feminists. If I see it, I call it out. Maybe you were off DU that day.

Possible; my grandson was born Xmas week and I wasn't here much. I also trashed quite a few threads on sight the last couple weeks.

But it wasn't in feminist threads where you see this or in HoF.

Partially true. No, please don't insult both of us by pretending you didn't know who it was and what her views were. I am pathetically bad at spotting posting patterns in returning zombies, and even I knew to within 2 who her previous incarnation was by the time she left.

I will agree, although I am not to sure why you insist on continually bringing it transphobia up to me

Yes, you are, but since you seem to want it spelled out for everyone to see I'll do so. I posted two blocks of transphobic sicko in the post above. One was written offsite by iverglas after the banning of the iverglas account. The other was written offsite by a person who is still a member in good standing at DU, and at HoF. There were two more people at that offsite board as well, both of whom are still members here, and at HoF. All are going to remain unnamed as I'm sure at least two are hovering over the alert button.

I don't tell grown men and women who to pick as friends. You're all welcome to hang around with and support them if you choose to do so. I am likewise free to not think that's OK and that such people are a hindrance rather than a help, and not want to associate with the crowd.

Many of those issues are discussed over and over again here on DU and many feminists find such opinions to be quite offensive, yet they are the ones who are told have a problem with their tone, which is just quite sexist itself or HoF is trolling, or those feminists suck, those feminists are damaged.

I've found over the years that when I've posted rationally and in good faith on most other issues, most people respond in kind, even when I've said something completely dumb or rambled while drunk. I've also found that when I go into threads on most other issues and behave like a complete asshole, the same thing happens- most people respond in kind. I am smart enough to recognize who is at fault there, and it's not people who just don't like feminists.

"Tone" tends to be a polite euphemism. No one likes to get a post hid.

There are people on the internet as well as DU who etc.

There are also people on the internet as well as DU who will see such arguments where they don't actually exist and start a massive flame war insisting that those attitudes are where they really are not, which doesn't help when they really do turn up, because by then everyone's stopped responding to people crying wolf. This is euphemistically known as "tone".

Those "people on the internet and at DU who...etc" also rarely try to hide behind me when they have been "using tone" and are catching fallout for it, by lumping themselves under the same label as me and trying to pretend it's all about us. You know all those other feminists who keep showing up in these threads to tell you that it's not about feminism, and that you really need to stop making it about all feminists? Yeah. That's what we've been trying to say. It's not about feminism and it's annoying to the rest of us. If people want to "tone". they're on their own.

[kdmorris]

296. I bow to your writing skills and your patience

I just gave up and started playing around about sitting on couches and stfu and booze.

BUT - this is exactly it:

"Other people's reasons for not wanting to associate themselves with certain elements on this board will vary, but I suspect a lot of their reasons are a variation on mine; the desire not to support, or appear to support, noxious people or views."

And a desire not to allow those noxious people to define feminism/feminist for me or anyone else on this board. By using terms like "feminists on DU" and "women on DU", they make it sound like we ARE all united and stand behind their poisonous views.

[one_voice]

302. Awesome!

You took the time to write this excellent response and I've no doubt you'll get nothing by a snide snotty response. <<<< This is why I defer to your writing skills and patience.

[RainDog]

310. This is all about personal conduct on this board

Last edited Sat Jan 4, 2014, 01:59 PM - Edit history (1)

There are people here I disagree with on various issues, or subsets of issues. I don't think that grants me the right to call them names, etc.

When I choose to participate in a discussion with them, I think I have to talk to them about the issue. Otherwise I don't bother.

Some people here who id as feminist think they're fighting the feminist fight to insult others who disagree. They don't want to hear any other pov. That's why people have said... keep the discussion in HoF if you don't want another pov, not because people want to stop others from discussing feminist issues, but because GD is not a protected group, and anytime someone posts something, others can participate.

BUT, because of this long habit of insults rather than issues, there are hostilities between different people here and some of those people are friends with others who "stick up" for them, etc. These attacks come from people on both sides of an issue.

and this is where the problems occur.

take the example of the post/thread where Riff was called a dog. That post was making fun of religious conservatism and its attitude toward porn - and making fun of religious conservatism in general.

but because it was about the way people "view" porn, it was offensive to some, or just an opportunity to attack. Mostly the thread is people laughing about the video, going off on tangents about memories about magazines, hiking, concerts, songs... but one person thought it was somehow appropriate to jump into the thread and accuse WarrenD of somehow destroying humanity by looking at a Sears catalog. To wit, BB said: "It must be rough to believe your biology is inexorably linked to profit for the few." Was this a joke, or was this an extension of other arguments related to porn? WD handled it well, even when BB tried to insult him. Then, when someone noted she came in and did just that.. it was poor her, "What you really mean to say is: "shut the fuck up because I don't like your opinion."

Well, if your opinion is an insult to someone, then, on this board, why are you insulting that person, then pretending people won't think you're a jerk for doing so on a thread that was for humor?

If it's not your kind of humor, ignore it. No one even insulted BB, even in replies. It all came from her.

Then TA came in later with the "I see you as a dog" remark. That stunned me, frankly. I don't know what history happened between her and the other woman she said this to beforehand. Others don't know either. It just looks like a nasty personal attack. Nastier than BB's.

Then SB comes into the thread claiming WD is always "attacking women's sexuality." Okay. I've never seen that, but maybe it's taking place in some far corner of DU.

Then is devolved further, and included links to WTF sorts of claims by BB in HoF that, in GD, if you don't like rape you're a prude.

Yes, that's exactly what that whole issue was about.

That thread went all over the place, from funny stuff to attacks. Just like this one. It's the people, not the issue, and certainly not feminism, that is at issue because feminism doesn't consist of twisting issues to defame an entire discussion board.

[RainDog]

329. It's a pattern, it seems to me

here, again, TA goes off on women who don't think they need to be outraged about a steak rub/marinade thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024276345#post81

after the above attack on some guy whose personal situation makes him feel vulnerable, not privileged.

I cannot see how anyone who is doing this thinks they're educating anyone. Most people are aware of these issues of institutional racism, sexism, etc. It's a joke to think such rude, insulting people will "enlighten" anyone.

But, over and over, I've seen, too, that people have been told that it's not the issue, it's the way they treat people on this board that's the problem, and then I've seen those same entirely deny they're the problem.

So, yeah, the only way to avoid all of the b.s. is to ignore the few who are doing this - and some of it comes from guys who know they'll get a freak out just by making a remark, so someone's entire indignation is probably just someone else's laughing at someone who can't handle themselves in a diverse social situation.

[RiffRandell]

344. Thank you, LadyHawkAZ.

That post was awesome, and not even because of you pointing out the hypocrisy in the attack post directed at me.

The last several paragraphs explain what I believe a lot of the DU community feels (definitely me) and you stated it so poignantly...and reading the posts below it, you have several fans....including me.

[In_The_Wind]

345. ^^^ this ^^^

[one_voice]

154. This...

Exactly what are the definitions of "diminish" and "derail"? They seem to have become a catchall for anything other than a K&R. If every disagreeing viewpoint is going to be reduced to "diminishing" or "derailing", then your claim that you welcome discussion is well nigh worthless.
How many times have some of the women here been referred to as patriarchal collaborators, or enablers, or misogynists, or most recently dogs being patted on the head, because we disagreed? Is that not hatred, diminishing of our viewpoint, derailing of the subject? Silencing, even

Just read this thread. A man would never get away with things said in this thread, they'd be excoriated.

[HappyMe]

156. That's true.

[LadyHawkAZ]

184. .

[RiffRandell]

262. Excellent post one_voice.

The last part highlighted referred to me (female) as I laughed at men's jokes and I also find it hilarious and very telling that you did not get a response from the person you replied to. Oh, but if a certain group of women were called a dog here, ATA would have been blown UP. Thanks, and Happy New Year!

For anyone that missed it: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4120434

[polly7]

266. That linked post was just plain disgusting. nt.

[Drew Richards]

272. And Yet that DUer seems to be getting passes on alerts no matter what she says.

[In_The_Wind]

346. I still don't understand that.

[stevenleser]

275. Still blown away by that one. nt

[one_voice]

39. I think the questions are too...

broad...but my answers...

Do you think that feminists hate men?

Overwhelmingly no, but yes, there are women--who call themselves feminist--that have a definite ax to grind with men. In their view men are the enemy and are there to be ridiculed and blamed for everything . They don't want to be equal to men they want to control men.

Do you think that feminists are out to get men?

Same as the answer to the first question.

Do you think that feminists have nothing of value to offer and ought to be relegated to a specific place for them to voice their views.

This is silly, of course they have something of value to offer. I don't think they should be relegated to a specific place--I'm going to guess this is about DU and answer accordingly--though I will say as much as I'd like to further the cause of women, it's not easy to have discussions here.

Do you think that feminists ought not point out when they see something as sexist or misogynistic?

If you think something is wrong point it out. What I do have a problem with is the nastiness that's directed toward other women that might not agree. I believe they were called dogs in a post by 'feminist'. If a man did that there would have been no less than 10 threads a flaming. Feminist do not share one mind we have different thoughts, views and feelings and everyone should be respected.

Do you believe women in the US face any institutional oppression?

yes.

Do you think they are personally insulting you when speaking of their issues from a feminist perspective?

No, but I think individuals can be insulting, dismissive, rude, and condescending. Again, you want people to treat you (collective you) with respect you must first give it.


Since I don't know all feminist I cannot answer 1,2 & 5 with certainty.

[Bonobo]

40. No, not from their position as feminists

But people are complex. I think it is entirely possible for a woman or a man to identify as a feminist and ALSO on a personal level be so filled up with a generalized hatred of men that it bleeds into their entire personality and world view.

[Gormy Cuss]

87. And you have encountered this phenomenon how often?

You stated that you think it's possible. Have you ever actually encountered it? What constitutes a generalized hatred of men in your definition? I'm curious.

[nomorenomore08]

204. Twisty Faster might be an illustrative (if aberrant) example. But given she basically presents

herself as a human cartoon character in some ways, it's hard to take her very seriously.

Of course I realize that the vast majority of feminists don't "hate" men in any meaningful way. And I deplore the use of "man hating" as a giant strawman to try to silence discussions that make some people uncomfortable.

[Bonobo]

242. I think that if you get to the point

where you are advocating Separatist philosophy, penis-free zones, or talk about how mtf only say they are women so they can invade cis female space, you PROBABLY have some issues regarding hating men. I am not a mind-reader so I cannot say 100%, but that is my opinion.

Similarly, saying that men cannot be feminists is another clue for me.

A term like "mansplaining" is pretty clearly a red light too.

[Gormy Cuss]

258. Wow, that's a pretty broad range of attitudes that you think are attributes of man haters.

Ignoring the handful of people who would fit the description in your first line because I'm guessing that you do not intend to suggest that those are commonly held opinions, just the most extreme examples of notions that are threatening to men.

The other two do not express a hatred for men. The first, saying that men can not be feminists comes from a fear that men will take over and frame the debate. There are historical reasons for this fear. That said, among feminists it's view as a difference of opinion. Some of us accept men who self-identify as feminist. Others prefer that sympathetic men use the term 'ally' instead. In neither case is there man hatred the undercurrent.

As for "mansplaining," the term may be off-putting but the phenomenon is very real. The presumption of one group that they are inherently smarter and better educated than members of another group because of an immutable trait like gender, race, etc. is a common form of bigotry.

[Bonobo]

259. I wouldn't use the word attributes in all cases.

As for the Separatist thing, I know it is not common. But I have seen it talked about.

For the other points, I don't see them as attributes. More as "red flags".

[Pretzel_Warrior]

45. A couple of those are impossible to answer as worded

What feminists do and don't believe are all over the spectrum. I'm not about to stereotype all feminists.

That is all I will say in YET another very specific and narrow topic that has gotten plenty of air time on GD of late.

[pipi_k]

85. Pretty much what I thought, and...

in addition, I'm often hesitant about replying to questions that seem to beg yes or no answers.

I often wonder if people are being "baited" into being honest about their thoughts so they can be categorized for an assortment of reasons.

Same with polls.

There does appear to be a gender war at DU. There do appear (to me, anyway) to be attempts to keep the war going.

I guess if people keep fighting all the time, they must feel like they're actually doing something constructive.

I mean, if one feels pretty much powerless out in the larger world, what better way to get a sense of control (however fleeting it may actually be) by waging war in a smaller community.

[bluesbassman]

142. A very perceptive post pipi.

While I would not speculate as to the motive behind this OP, I can speculate that some of the responses will be linked to at some future date.

[Eleanors38]

253. So much of this can be applied to another topic:

Guns.

[LittleBlue]

46. Some do, some don't

Last edited Fri Jan 3, 2014, 04:20 PM - Edit history (1)

You might as well ask if Democrats hate guns.

Some have obviously had bad experiences with men in the past and it's colored their perception of men as a whole.

Edit: As I thought about this issue more, I wanted to add that the anger isn't directed solely at men. One (cannot remember who) actually called another female DUer a dog. To that point I'd never seen a woman called a dog on DU before. I felt bad for her because she is still a DUer in good standing and her attacker was not a Freeper troll.

[boston bean]

48. See, this is where things start to go off the rails.

Many women have had bad experiences with men, and you are just dismissing their issues. These are huge percentages we are speaking of. Women who experience things does not mean their experience clouds their judgment. They may just see things a bit more clearly, and are not man hating at all. Maybe that is a perception one holds, versus looking at the issues and what women are telling you.

2010 Summary Key Findings
IPV, SV, and stalking are widespread in the United States. The findings in the 2010 survey underscore the pervasiveness of this violence, the immediate impacts of victimization, and the lifelong health consequences. Women are disproportionately impacted. They experienced high rates of severe IPV, rape, and stalking, and long-term chronic disease and other negative health impacts, such as post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms.
Women are disproportionately affected by IPV, SV, and stalking.
• Nearly 1 in 5 women (18%) and 1 in 71 men (1%) have been raped in their lifetime.
• Approximately 1.3 million women were raped during the year preceding the survey.
• One in 4 women have been the victim of severe physical violence by an intimate partner, while 1 in 7 men have experienced the same.
• One in 6 women (16%) have been stalked during their lifetime, compared to 1 in 19 men (5%).
IPV, SV, and stalking victims experience short- and long-term chronic disease and other health impacts.
• Eighty-one percent of women who experienced rape, stalking, or physical violence by an intimate partner reported significant short- or long-term impacts, such as post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms and injury. Thirty-five percent of men report such impacts of their experiences.

• Women who experienced rape or stalking by any perpetrator or physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime were more likely than women who did not experience these forms of violence to report having asthma, diabetes, and irritable bowel syndrome.

• Men and women who experienced these forms of violence were more likely to report frequent headaches, chronic pain, difficulty with sleeping, activity limitations, poor physical health, and poor mental health than men and women who did not experience these forms of violence.

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc_nisvs_overview_insert_final-a.pdf

[LittleBlue]

62. I'm not dismissing their issues

People find solace in many things after bad relationships.

I'll just say that in many cases it isn't subtle that they've had bad luck in that department. It isn't particular to women either as there are plenty of men who do the same, they just find solace in different things.

[boston bean]

66. So your post was about women who were in a bad relationship?

And that they are just bitter toward men? I'm not trying to put words into your mouth, I am looking for clarification so I can have a conversation with you.

You weren't talking about rape, domestic abuse, stalking?

[LittleBlue]

79. You can read what I've said

I shouldn't have to expound on such easily understandable statements. This isn't an issue which I find controversial enough to sift through word salads, anyone knows that large groups are hardly ever monolithic.

[nomorenomore08]

209. "Bad relationship" seems an awfully mild choice of words for what we're talking about. Just saying.

[nomorenomore08]

211. And that right there is what's really important. People's delicate feelings be damned.

I can't tell you how much it irritates me to see the complaints of "But you're stereotyping all men!" and so forth considering the gravity of what's at issue here.

[ananda]

47. no no no no yes no

..

[Squinch]

53. So here is one of those threads. Now, all, note the posts in which someone is throwing barbs.

Are those posts from members of the group that everyone loves to hate, or are they from members of the group that loves to hate them?

[boston bean]

59. and men marking their territory letting one and all know this is to be a male space

I'm speaking specifically about the "rubbing meat" "on a cold day" posts.

[sufrommich]

75. Yeah,that was a real "is this

the YouTube comments section?"post.Next up "you suck!"

[Squinch]

96. That is definitely there but here's what I find most amusing:

"Yeah, yeah, yeah, sure, sure, sure. We're all feminists here. We all agree about feminism...

... but we must not allow these conversations to take place! If someone wants to talk about this, I must get in there and stop it! There is no question of just walking past, I must get into the conversation and put a stop to it! Must make it stop... can't let it happen ....

... But I think you are absolutely crazy when you say we are not all supportive of feminist issues here..."


That is some good shit, right there!

[snooper2]

101. I've had my Mother in Law staying with us since the week before Thanksgiving

Then she decided to come with us on vacation to Vegas to see her mom, my daughters great-grandma--

Four generations -

Then we get back and the ice storm is gone but her heater is out in her hoarded house. The one she is supposed to be selling and finding something smaller to rent which is a process like watching moss grow. Now I have to go out there after work on a fucking Friday and take care of the half acre front yard because the city left a note.

At least tomorrow it will be around 60 so I can take our daughter to the park to ride her four-wheeler around feed the ducks. Wonder if the ducks are even out?


Only man space I have is throwing meat on the grill out back Well, not even that really because her 55 pound Cujo looking dog is anchored in our back yard and we had to take our Bichon to the emergency vet on Sunday because the thing bit his ear.



What were we complaining about again? LOL

[Squinch]

104. .

...Must not let the conversation take place! Can't walk away. Must make it stop...


LOL

[sufrommich]

61. So much this. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

76. and Squinch please note the women that are feeding into the male ego.

this is not a gender war. the patriarchy is being questioned and there is fear and humor being used to deflect the fear by those who have benefited from a benevolent patriarchy therefore do not want to rock the boat for fear of losing their status.

[redqueen]

86. Exactly.

Internalized patriarchy.

This is why it isn't at all ironic that a woman would use the term "tramp stamp", or agree that women sometimes deserve to be blamed for men's misogynist behavior, or any other of a thousand different manifestations of internalized patriarchy, if not outright misogyny. We all grow up surrounded by the same messages and we all absorb them to one extent or another.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

90. yes

[polly7]

234. Speak for yourself. nt.

[cinnabonbon]

214. It's very easy to internalize

stuff like that, yes.

[polly7]

233. Which women?

You keep saying that, followed by the never-ending bullshit insults.

Prove it or stop with the lies.

Some of us are capable of disagreeing with you and yours simply because we do have minds of our own, and men never even enter into the equation.

Does it make you feel superior to keep implying some of us here are brainless, pathetic men-pleasers?

[Sheldon Cooper]

82. Yep - throwing barbs, derailing, ridiculing,and even inserting their own little penis jokes as well.

To the surprise of absolutely no one.

[lumberjack_jeff]

152. So the reason for firing this particular arrow was to criticize those who fire back? n/t

[opiate69]

158. Apparently...

[Eleanors38]

257. I saw "penis." Thought a gun fight broke out.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

267. This subthread reveals all, really

"See! I told you so!!!" and all that.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

55. Why are these questions even asked on a Democratic Message Board?

the fuck. the flippant. the obtuse. the deliberately stupid. the intolerance. the fuck.

[sufrommich]

56. Calling feminists man haters,shrews,humorless,

overly sensitive,radicals,and every other term meant to shame and quiet has been around as long as feminism.Same as it ever was.

[boston bean]

60. True that is said all the time and they are dog whistles, that will get every feminist I know

to perk up and take a look and say WTF?

[hfojvt]

63. clearly they seem to hate some men

those they identify as either MRAs or misogynists.

As for being "out to get men". Well, if the perspective is that "women are an oppressed class", then doesn't there logically have to be an "oppressing class" which would have to include a lot of men, and probably some enabling women.

Finally, yes, as I have said before, I find some feminist/liberal concepts to be personally insulting. The concept of "male privilege" being one. Since I quit my good-paying job with the military industrial complex in 1986, my income has been in the bottom 20%.

I simply DO find it insulting to be told I am "privileged" when I am in the bottom 20% working as a part-time janitor, or working as a no-benefits temp. Oh, but the privilege doesn't mean you will "win" it just means you are playing the game on the easiest possible setting.

Which is again, very insulting. There you are, playing life on the easiest possible setting and you STILL are at the bottom. What a loser you are. What a horrible player of this game.

But the truth doesn't have to be nice, it just has to be true.

And I also think it is false to say that the 4 million single men with less than zero in net worth (in 2002) are privileged while the 1.14 million single women and the 3.66 million married women with over $500,000 in net worth are part of an "oppressed class".

I just don't think oppression and privilege work that way.

[sufrommich]

69. Thats basically the same argument as

"We have a black president,therefore there are no racists".

[hfojvt]

84. I don't think so

to say that "Obama is not oppressed" is NOT the same thing as saying "there are no racists".

But the mere existence of racists, or even institutional racism, does not make Obama part of an "oppressed class" and me part of a "privileged class". Because it is simply absurd to include Obama as part of an oppressed class.

[redqueen]

95. Do you honestly believe that throughout his life, he's faced no extra hurdles,

nor been subjected to any unfairness at all, strictly due to the fact that his skin isn't white?

[hfojvt]

113. extra hurdles compared to what?

We happen to be about the same age. Whatever hurdles he has faced, the fact remains there he is, being elected state senator, US Senator, and President, giving speeches and writing books and making $400,000 a year and a multi-millionaire.

That is, not oppressed.

And whatever advantages I had, at some point, or extra hurdles that I did not face. There I am, working as a factory temp on the night shift, or working as a part time janitor. Making less than $20,000 a year.

That is, not privileged.

And yet I am told that I am a member of a "privileged class" and he is a member of an "oppressed class".

Hard to compare hurdles. He's growing up in Hawaii, where I have never been. I am growing up in ice cold South Dakota. He's going to prep school on a scholarship. I am going to regular high school. In mid 1988 he is going on a three week trip to Europe while I am living in a trailer in Wisconsin with no electricity or running water.

It does sound like he had it rough. Three weeks in Europe. I feel bad for him.

And look at the hurdle he faced here because of the color of his skin "Obama's election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review gained national media attention[32][39] and led to a publishing contract and advance for a book about race relations," http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

Ironically we both went to graduate school at about the same time. He went to Harvard Law School. I went to the University of Nebraska to study economics. Even if I had gone to say, Yale law school and become president of the Yale Law Review would I have gotten national media attention and a book contract. Maybe I could have written my own memoir in 1995 instead of getting laid off on my 33rd birthday from my part-time job at the satelitte dish factory.

But probably that's a hurdle I would not want to face.

[redqueen]

119. Could you stop feeling sorry for yourself long enough to see the big picture?

The simple fact is that if you had been switched at birth, and lived each others' lives, he would have faced more obstacles than you did, and you would have faced fewer than he did.

It is truly sad to see that someone could be so focused on their own dissatisfaction with their job history that they have no awareness - let alone empathy - for those who face many more hardships based solely on their skin color, hardships which are compounded on top of any other kind of hardship which might befall them, such as those you faced yourself.

[hfojvt]

128. it just so happens that the big picture includes

me facing the hardship of living in a trailer with no facilities while his life included the "hardship" of a trip to Europe.

How about YOU having some empathy for people whose lives have been so sh*tty that they cannot help but feel sorry for themselves?

The point is that some white people face a hell of a lot of hardships. And it is NOT a privilege to face all those hardships. And some black people face fewer hardships than some white people.

Sure if you took the white person who is between a rock and a hard place and whose life was beating the crap out of him, MAYBE he'd have a slightly worse time of it if he was black, or female, or LGBTQ. But it is STILL the height of absurdity to tell somebody between a rock and a hard place whose life is beating the crap out of them, that they are "privileged". That they need to feel some empathy towards poor, poor Levar Burton (caveat, he may have really faced some severe hardships).

You are asking un-privileged people to NOT look up, to just IGNORE, all the people above them who have more money and more wealth. Like those people don't count. You say to them "sure, your life is sh*ttier than 80% of the population, but if you were black or female in the same crappy circumstances, your life would be even sh*ttier."

Well, THAT's certainly one hell of a consolation prize.

Or not.

As I said, I find it both insulting, and untrue. Why should only people in the same or worse circumstances count, instead of the big picture where so many other people are seemingly in better circumstances?

[redqueen]

131. I won't bore you with details about my underprivileged life.

Unlike you, I recognize the difference between individual circumstances and class based oppression, and have no interest in denying the existence of privilege.

I have nothing more to say to you.

[nomorenomore08]

216. He does have a point in that people sometimes neglect social class as a significant factor.

But otherwise I agree with you, i.e. individual circumstances versus "big picture."

[redqueen]

264. Was that the point he was making?

Somehow I missed that. It seemed more to me that he was claiming that it is impossible for Barack Obama to experience any race-based oppression, and there's no such thing as white privilege.

[nomorenomore08]

265. Well, that point was admittedly kind of swallowed up by all the other bullshit.

And yes, I agree the posts about Obama supposedly having it easy in life were pretty laughable. Using one exceptional example to try to refute something is never a very sound idea, logically speaking.

[hfojvt]

349. yes I was making the latter claim

but the former claim is not something I ever made.

It's more like this

Bad things have happened to Obama in life, good things have also happened to Obama in life. Some of those bad things in his life may have been "race-based oppression". In the net sum of it, Obama seems to have experienced far more good things than bad things.

Compared to SOME white people, such as, say, myself, somebody whose life experiences I know fairly well. Bad things have also happened in my life. Very few of them had anything to do with race, or gender.

Still, and all, the bad things that have happened in my life seem, to me, to be far far greater than whatever hardships Obama faced because of his race. In the final analysis, Obama is very privileged - he has power, and status and money. Whereas I have far far less of those three.

Ergo, it is somewhat ridiculous to put Obama into an "oppressed class" and me into a "privileged class" when it is pretty clear that he is privileged and I am not. Making $400,000 a year is a privilege. Making $13,000 a year is not.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

125. I've alwas looked askance at those shouting down others with cries of "You're privileged!"

What a wholly contradictory thing to tell someone they are privilege and as such they are not allowed to participate in society and its debates with equal credit. That's not privilege, that's a de facto state of ostracism.

Not only is it contradictory it also promotes the insularity it presumes to challenge. If a group is repeatedly told they are to sit idle and silent as others decide their fate and the fate of society those individuals will see themselves as outsiders and they will naturally cling to the company of similarly situated persons for community and protection.

I fear we are only making segregation worse and destroying any hope for an inclusive society.

[redqueen]

132. "shouting down"

"tell someone they are privilege and as such they are not allowed to participate in society and its debates with equal credit"

Uh huh.

Yeah, you're right. It's so definitely the people who understand oppression who are "making segregation worse and destroying any hope for an inclusive society."

[Nuclear Unicorn]

134. *sigh*

Yes, all people are capable of being racist, misogynist, homophobic, etc. so even those who experience oppression -- however it is defined -- are capable of inflicting oppression. To say otherwise is to lie.

I defy you to actually say something constructive. I don't know what kind of society you're fighting for but you seem so possessed with the idea of fighting in and of itself you would never know if/when you had actually won.

[boston bean]

155. Someone's individual life experience does not make privilege or negate privilege.

We are talking about an institutional oppression. Where even if this guy is way more underprivileged than a black male who can't get a job because of the color of his skin, does not negate the privilege a group holds in society.

[hfojvt]

350. but if the "group" holds the privileges

and he is PART of that group, then, logically, he should also have those privileges.

And the clear FACT that he does NOT, kinda negates this whole idea of "group" privileges. Or at least the groups need to be better defined.

[redqueen]

93. How many rich Black people are there? Does that mean people of color aren't oppressed

based on nothing but skin color?

Before you answer, here's a clue. See if you can think of how this might be analogous to the kinds of oppression women have to deal with. It will require empathy.

http://www.cbc.ca/newsblogs/yourcommunity/2013/07/levar-burton-explains-his-driving-while-black-traffic-stop-ritual.html

I'm super sorry you're not rich. That you aren't doesn't erase your privilege.

[hfojvt]

122. he just sounds paranoid

he does not say that he actually did get stopped (like I have many times for "driving while poor&quot

"It will require empathy."

Does it require empathy for all these people waving around this "white privilege" concept? Do THEY perhaps need some empathy for white people who happen to be poor?

And not just "not-rich". I could be at the 60th percentile and be "not rich". What I am is poor. I wasn't at the 60th percentile, I was at the 16th (or less).

Being poor is NOT a privilege. And yes that does erase the privilege. It means that white privilege is worth about 15 cents in the open market. About all it is worth is that it allows the (usually rich and college educated) white people who believe in it to feel intellectually and morally superior to the (usually poor) white people who for some reason, don't believe in it.

How many rich black people are there? That's not really the question, but in 2002 there were 1.78 million black households with net worth more than $100,000.

At the same time, there were 16.6 million privileged white households with less than $5,000 in net worth.

[redqueen]

124. Shameless disingenuousness.

What percentages of each type of households do your unilluminating numbers represent?

Furthermore, do poor white people and poor black people receive similar sentences for similar crimes? Do you believe that the functioning of the "justice" system bears out your apparent belief that race matters not, because it's all about class?

[nomorenomore08]

219. "Do you believe that the functioning of the 'justice' system bears out your apparent belief that

race matters not?" And that's where the "There's no white privilege!" argument falls apart completely. Just look at the percentage on death row who happen to be black.

[nomorenomore08]

213. Social class is a very important distinction as well. Some people seem to forget that.

Though on the other hand, class should not be used - as it sometimes is - to minimize racism or sexism.

[quinnox]

67. no comment

alert on that!

[leeroysphitz]

72. lol. n/t

[TroglodyteScholar]

78. Glad you asked

Do you think that feminists hate men?

No, not as a rule. But some do.

Do you think that feminists are out to get men?

No, not as a rule. But some are.

Do you think that feminists have nothing of value to offer and ought to be relegated to a specific place for them to voice their views.

No, absolutely not. But some are misguided or struggling with trauma that can make relating difficult.

Do you think that feminists ought not point out when they see something as sexist or misogynistic?

No, absolutely not. But they also should be open to the fact that differing perspectives exist, and that differences in those perspectives do not necessarily constitute broad-brush nor personal attacks.

Do you believe women in the US face any institutional oppression?

Yes, and it is unconscionable that this is still the case.

Do you think they are personally insulting you when speaking of their issues from a feminist perspective?

No, not as a rule. But some are spoiling for a fight, for whatever reason, and will attack until they draw a response in kind...at which point they cry foul over being attacked. This is not acceptable from any group in any forum.

I hope my answers are taken literally and with goodwill.

[nomorenomore08]

225. All valid points. But it's important to realize that they all apply to both "sides" here.

[TroglodyteScholar]

256. Yep

As many sides as there are people (stated eloquently upthread by Seeking Serenity ).

We'd do well to bear that in mind as we interact with people here, especially considering that we all do share more values than your average random group.

So many chips need to come off of so many otherwise strong shoulders....

[Seeking Serenity]

294. Aww, you mentioned me, an infrequent poster, by name.

Thank you.

[TreasonousBastard]

80. Here we go again...

You ask what we think about "feminists" but don't define the term, knowing full well that each of us out here has a slightly different understanding of the term. Sometimes a wildly different understanding.

And while you later admit there are differences in whatever your world of feminism is, you don't allow for those in your questions and simply amass them all in one term.

You don't define "sexist" or "misogynistic" either but still ask the question. Extremes like "women should know their place" are obvious, but then there's the porn thing...

To answer the question that might better have been asked, I think all women should be treated as individuals and rights and opportunities should be universal without regard to gender (among other things). However, I don't appreciate it when anyone gets in my face with arguing for the sake of arguing, bringing up false arguments, and stretching the case. I do appreciate it when someone brings up something I may have missed.

All that, of course, is in real life, where it counts and where we're under some pressure to get along and solve problems. Anonymous discussion boards generally don't help people get along. Quite the opposite, in fact.

[pipi_k]

91. Yep...there are some things

that aren't so clearcut...

Extremes like "women should know their place" are obvious, but then there's the porn thing...

Last year sometime there was a rather strange situation going on with respects to a certain TV commercial being called misogynistic.

It was for Dr Pepper 10 calorie soda and showed a bunch of men doing manly man stuff along with their Dr Pepper 10 calorie soda, which implied that it was a soda made only for men.

Some individuals thought it was misogynistic.

Some (like myself) thought it was just a sort of humorous bit of guys being able to laugh at themselves.

OK, so some people thought it was misogynistic. That wasn't a problem. The problem was that anyone who didn't agree was subject to insults, some subtle, some not.

We all have the right to judge for ourselves what is, or isn't offensive. What I find rather outrageous is when the offended ones think they are the experts on what is or is not offensive. Or misogynistic.

[badtoworse]

92. How many women claim it's sexist (racist too) when commercials portray white males as idiots?

[TreasonousBastard]

126. White men are always fair game...

Pretty much every other group out there, self-proclaimed or not, is guaranteed to raise a stink when "insulted" so white men are the last resort when you need a dumbass. If we raise a stink, we're privileged, white, MRA assholes.

Personally, I've never been insulted when portrayed as part of the idiot class-- it's all in good fun.

[badtoworse]

138. So it goes with being at the top of the food chain?

[TreasonousBastard]

303. We're only "at the top of the food chain" in...

North America and Europe.

[muriel_volestrangler]

202. Jury results:

At Fri Jan 3, 2014, 02:42 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

White men are always fair game...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4271996

REASON FOR ALERT:

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

No comments added by alerter

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jan 3, 2014, 02:51 PM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: "No comments were provided by the alerter" - perhaps the alerter will help us by posting in the thread what they thought was wrong. If they don't, I will assume this was part of an effort to attack TreasonousBastard without good reason, and, if I am ever on a jury for TreasonousBastard again, I will bear in mind that they are persecuted on DU.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explaination of why the alerter finds this offensive?
Then, no hide. I really don't see anything wrong with this post, no personal insults to anyone.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I can't see anything here to be offended about.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Wish the alerter had taken some time to explain why they thought "This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate." As a white male, I don't find it any of those. We are often shown as the buffoons....art imitating life or some such. But over all, we have had it pretty good for a looooong time.

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

[TreasonousBastard]

304. Interesting. I know I have my fans, but I never...

thought they would stoop to this level.

And, no, I don't really think I'm being alert stalked, but I do remember a jury last year where someone said something to the effect of "I'm voting to hide just because I don't like TreasonousBastard."

Maybe I should have alerted on that.

[Mopar151]

232. Hmmmm? n/t

[TreasonousBastard]

127. At least twice that I can remember I posted something...

that I thought was pertinent, and sympathetic, to aggrieved groups here and was swarmed not for the post or the thought or the links, but for one or two common words that were secretly verboten in certain contexts. Near as I could tell, they entirely missed the point of my posts and had their own definition of those words. But then there were others thanking me for the references... Go figure...

I really couldn't believe the hatred, and was reminded of a few people I know who are filled with rage and occasionally turn red screaming, even spewing spittle. And then there are the drunks, who just like to argue when the juice kicks in.

The thing is that just like strangers we meet, we can't tell if anyone here is going a little OTT because of a personal trauma or is just batshit crazy. Or drunk.

[redqueen]

159. You were posting about children conceived during rape.

So I can certainly understand your genuine befuddlement regarding whether those who didn't greet your post with sweet gratitude were "a little OTT because of a personal trauma".

I can totally understand why you'd be here now trashing them as possibly "just batshit crazy. Or drunk."

[TreasonousBastard]

306. If it's the post about the book partly about women who conceive...

children from their rapes, I wasn't discussing anything but recommending it after hearing the author in an NPR interview. I bought the book and it is a beautiful set of studies and interviews about that and other things.

Several women thanked me for bringing the book to their attention, but I was slammed for saying it was "ironic" that such a book would be written by a gay black man. Not about the book, or the author, just my use of the word "ironic". I ended up pulling my OP just to shut them up.

Is that the one that disgusts you so much, or was there another I don't remember?

If that's the one, you should be disgusted, but not about me.

[Shandris]

83. Here is the biggest 'problem' with Feminism (answers within)

And that problem is simple: there are far too many flavors to ever know which one someone represents in a general, out-in-the-world example. We see the same thing with many other movements, groups, organizations, and religions also. And until that problem is taken care of, the worst feminists will be the ones that get the most attention. It's an uphill struggle to try to get people to understand that what -we- talk about when we mean feminist, and what -they- are talking about, is usually two completely different things. One is real, and the other is largely a cultural Frankenstein made up of partial individual examples placed to either generate readers/sales or as a hobgoblin of change to the uneducated.

Not to mention the areas where waves work cross-purpose, that's a whole 'nother can of worms. Guh. So, with that in mind...

"...hate men?"
Of course not...generally speaking. However, some very vocal radicals have stated that they do with absolutely no ambiguity, so the answer to most people will be 'some do, some dont'.

"out to get men?"
See the previous answer.

"...nothing of value and ought to be..."
HELL no. At one time in the recent past, I thought that -maybe- certain feminist arguments should have their own forum on DU only but I would never say they should be relegated anywhere.

"...ought not point out when they..."
Hrm. This is a tricky question in a way (not intentionally). Typically speaking, no. No, no, no, no, no. But I also think you -- and this is a very general statement as mine often are, and is using the word 'you' in the strictly generic sense (as in, not directed to Boston Bean or any poster in particualr) -- have to pick your battles.

"...face institutional oppression?"
I challenge any woman to give a categorical 'no' to this question! Of course there is. Do I think it's as prevalent as some of these theories make it out to be? No. But to claim there isn't -any- is, to me, the height of idiocy.

"...personally insulting you?"
Why would I? Nor do I think they're personally insulting men as a general rule, but as in the first two answers individual exceptions will always exist (referring to in the populace at large, not necessarily at DU).

For clarity (since this seems to be a place I bother other posters at time), I give my answers in broad-view terms. They are in no way a reflection on current posters, other threads, DU specifically, or necessarily even -this- thread. I'm happy to clarify anything that doesn't make sense or seems off.

[FreeJoe]

99. Unique

Every feminist I know is a unique person with her or his unique views. The one thing that they have in common is support for women, but even that manifests itself in different ways.

[Harmony Blue]

100. Feminists did help bring awareness

when it comes to deadly cancers towards women.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

103. Sorry, I don't do broad brush statements nt

[closeupready]

105. Some do, some don't.

[1000words]

108. Trash thread!

[ismnotwasm]

109. You're asking this questions at DU?

Last edited Fri Jan 3, 2014, 04:05 PM - Edit history (1)

A sizable proportion can't even define the word, much less come up with a Reasonable opinion

(Although I appreciate the ones at do)

And cooking? Recipes? Hell, straight from a feminist because we do it ALL son,

I am Alice. I am 24 and would rather cook than sleep. The patriarchy is a dish best served not at all, but a good meal makes anything go down easier, so I decided to start a blog where I can publish recipes and write about food (and other pop culture) with a feminist slant. After all, the only thing worse than reading the awful things people say, write, and think about women is not having any cupcakes to eat about it.

http://hangryfeminist.tumblr.com/about

[Sheldon Cooper]

110. Hey, thanks for the new Tumblr!

I'm building up my list of feminist tumblrs - I really like some of them, and some not so much.

[ismnotwasm]

129. Fun right?

[Vashta Nerada]

111. Trash thread.

[Sheldon Cooper]

115. Highlighted response.

[Vashta Nerada]

116. Stalker.

[Sheldon Cooper]

117. lol!

[Vashta Nerada]

118. Ignored.

Go bother someone else.

[Sheldon Cooper]

130. ..

[Waiting For Everyman]

112. Do I think this is flamebait?

(Oh my, do I think a feminist would post flamebait? How farfetched is that? Hmmm, let me ask myself and see what I think... Nevermind, as Scarlett O'Hara said, "I'll think about that tomorrow".)
'Scuse me, it's time to jump on the furniture.

[Squinch]

133. So, if true, I guess you should consider yourself caught.

[Waiting For Everyman]

135. Are you telling me -- a woman -- how to FEEL, Squinch?

OMG,

[Squinch]

137. If you think it's flame bait, as you say, by definition you have fallen for the bait.

[Waiting For Everyman]

140. Nope, the definition says no. (but nice try)

Still telling me how to feel, Squinch? Are you ACCUSING ME now, too? I think I'm beginning to feel repressed by you, come to think of it.

[Squinch]

143. Have a great night, Waiting. And yes, that's me telling you what to do!

[Waiting For Everyman]

146. Lol, thanks Squinch!

A great one to you too.

[11 Bravo]

121. A very few, A very few, no, no, yes, a very few.

[AverageJoe90]

123. No. No. No. Depends. Yes, sadly. No(with exceptions).

In terms of the last one, I have come across a small number of more radical feminists who do, sadly, do get quite nasty with their rhetoric and some actually DO personally insult people personally; one particular radfem by the name of Diana Boston was absolutely *nasty* to a Chicana feminist I happen to really like a couple of years back(Diana even went so far as to call her a "chola" and other bigoted things).

But overall, most of my experiences have actually been good and I've learned a fair bit from people on YouTube in particular(I try to stay away from tumblr, though: way too many of the "all white people are racist" and "all men are potential rapists" crazies on there).

[redqueen]

136. 'White privilege doesn't exist.' 'Male privilege doesn't exist.'

'White men are the only people who are portrayed as fools on teevee.'


The shit that flies in here without getting called out ... unfuckingreal.

[kdmorris]

144. So... rather than engage in an actual discussion

You just start shooting again (see Nuclear Unicorn's post about stopping shooting)...pathetic... just pathetic.

No interest in a real discussion, huh? Next time I see you say that THE MEN are to blame for this, I'm just going to point you right back to this post. The war stops if both sides stop shooting...

[redqueen]

149. I don't "discuss" right wing talking points.

This part is funny:

"Next time I see you say that THE MEN are to blame for this,..."

Why don't you find ONE TIME I've ever said that.

What a nice spin job that was. Implying I said it before. Or that right wing talking points need to be debated as if they have any merit.

[kdmorris]

162. So, why is this being posted if they are all right wing talking points?

It sure SEEMED like an attempt at discussion. And just about everyone else answered as if it were truly an attempt at discussion. But you... you approached it as another chapter of the on-going "war".

As to the other item:

I'll rescind my statement that you said it was the men's fault (main;y because it's impossible to search easily with one hand). I'll back up the statement I was trying to make: you see this entire "war" as someone else's fault. Never yours. And you do nothing at all to try to stop this madness.

[redqueen]

169. Saying that PoC are not oppressed because of the color of their skin is a right wing talking point.

Saying that women and girls are not oppressed because of their sex is a right wing talking point.

What are you even talking about, claiming I actually do "blame men for this"? What are you even imagining "this" to be) ... What am I supposedly blaming men for?

There are plenty of men who aren't in denial about the fact that we live in a patriarchal society. There are many women who definitely are. It's bizarre that you're somehow fixated on some vague notions of someone "blaming the men".

[kdmorris]

172. OH for fuck's sake redqueen

I made myself perfectly clear. I'm talking about his on-going bullshit thread after thread after thread where we all tear each other apart.

I rescinded the statement because I could not back it up at that moment. I still stand by my statement that YOU are fanning the flames of these tensions willfully to keep the fires going. This thread was not about anything you posted about. It was asking a series of questions that you stated you had no intention of discussing.

Since you had no intention of discussing this topic, I can only assume that you came in here and posted that bullshit just to keep the "war" going. (I use "war" in quotes for lack of a better term for it right now).

Just completely fucking skip the use of the word men in my post. The point I was trying to make and am still trying to make is that YOU are personally responsible for keeping this going. You do nothing to stop the fight and instead just post things like your first post there to keep it going. You are part of the problem redqueen.

That is, was and continues to be my point.

[redqueen]

174. I didn't force anyone to deny white privilege exists.

When I see posts like that, I call it out.

Someone else posted that only the poor, oppressed white men are portrayed as fools on teevee. It's fucking ludicrous. It's the kind of bullshit you see on free republic. But here it is in this thread.

Apparently you consider that it would be helpful to let these kinds of talking points stand unchallenged. I disagree.

If you're so pained by these discussions, hide them. It really is that simple.

[kdmorris]

227. No one said they were oppressed

You read that into it. That's totally your right, but don't expect the rest of us to just sit her and let you define what was said for us. I can read just fine. And no one said there was no male privilege or white privilege.

The fact of the matter is that men in general are often portrayed as idiots in commercials and on sitcoms. And no one says anything about it because men have been the oppressors for so long. But I still think it's worthy of discussion. I have two Caucausian sons. I don't want them growing up to feel like they are seen as utter morons any more than I want them to grow up to be sexist jerks.

Sometimes - unfairness goes both ways. Saying that doesn't mean that anyone is saying men are oppressed. Just - sometimes they are not portrayed fairly either and it's worthy of discussion to say so.

[redqueen]

263. They said it's racist and sexist to portray white men that way.

Do you think racism and sexism aren't forms of oppression?

(Hint: They are. (Of course, they have to be backed by power systems that are stacked against the oppressed groups, in order to be considered racism and sexism, but you can't tell white men that.))

[kdmorris]

300. Typical

Ask me a question and then tell me how I should answer. Quite frankly, except for my ex-husband, no man has ever told me how I'm supposed to think as my as you and your friends has.

To answer your question (though I don't see the point when you've already told me what the right answer is):

Racism and sexism are definitely tools that are used to oppress people. All racism and all sexism are not oppression.

For example, I see the statement

but you can't tell white men that.

to be both sexist and racist but not to be oppression.

op·pres·sion noun \ə-ˈpre-shən\
Definition of OPPRESSION
1
a : unjust or cruel exercise of authority or power
b : something that oppresses especially in being an unjust or excessive exercise of power

sex·ism noun \ˈsek-ˌsi-zəm\
: unfair treatment of people because of their sex;

rac·ism noun \ˈrā-ˌsi-zəm also -ˌshi-\
: poor treatment of or violence against people because of their race
: the belief that some races of people are better than others
Full Definition of RACISM
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

[redqueen]

305. LOL, you seriously interpreted a sarcastic "hint" as me "tell(ing) you how to answer"?

You sure are working hard to work yourself up into a froth of righteous indignation, aren't you?

I'm not surprised to see the dictionary come out. Typical.

White men aren't being portrayed as idiots on teevee cause of their race or sex it's because it's fucking comedy. Which is (shock of shocks) the exact same reason women and people of color are also portrayed as idiots on teevee.

The fact that a few people work so very hard to try to pretend that's an issue of racism and sexism against white men on this board says a lot about how pervasive right-wing thinking is.

[kdmorris]

308. See, now, I didn't say white men

I said men in general. Just as women are usually portrayed in the media as sex objects. Both are equally wrong and I can say that without saying that this means there is no privilege. I didn't say that it was racist or sexist for men to be portrayed that way. That it the opinion of others. While I might not agree with them, I'm not going to rip their head off and act like they said something that they did not. I said that no one said they were oppressed and you asked me a question, which I answered.

"working myself into a froth of righteous indignation"... ROFL no. That's just not me. In fact, I barely give a shit about you and your views. The last couple of days, I've just found myself with a little more time on my hands than usual and I've gotten the chance to spend a little more time on DU. Nothing you say makes me indigent or upset at all. I've been down this road with you before and I know that there is absolutely no point. You and I will never see eye to eye or agree on anything. Just because you keep changing the subject and then acting like something was said that wasn't doesn't make you right.

Speaking of free time... one of my sons just woke up.

Have a GREAT day, redqueen. I wish you the best of luck at slaying all those dragons you imagine.

[redqueen]

312. I can tell you don't give a shit cause you can't even follow the conversation.

Go here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4273711

That's the last post where you seem to remember what you're (halfassedly) attempting to discuss.

No, you didn't specify "white men" (though you did whip out "caucasion" re: your sons), but the posts you're trying to defend did.

And you say I'm the one changing the subject, FFS. If you could manage to focus on the subject you're trying to discuss you might actually start to understand it.

You say you "barely give a shit about (me) and (my) views", but the truth is you just don't give a shit about these issues. If you did, you'd pay at least a modicum of attention to what you're trying to talk about.

[seaglass]

235. How can you say "almost everyone else answered as if..." when snooper2 hijacks this thread with a

recipe at post 6 and 10-12 more DUers totally ignore the topic of discussion and follow snooper2. All of those people are part of these disagreements - why aren't you calling them out? Why aren't you placing blame on them?

It is ALWAYS picking sides and selective viewing about who is stirring the shit, isn't it?

[kdmorris]

244. Apparently so

It's not like you are ever going to call out redqueen, eh?

[seaglass]

252. Why would I accuse rq of disrupting a discussion that "just about everyone" was having when

it's not true?

[tkmorris]

261. It's not true... if you select to see it that way

[seaglass]

288. Well let's look at the facts - rq's first post in this thread was 86

Posts not a discussion of the OP:
6
7
10
11
17
23
35
37
42
43
49
50
51
52
54
57
58
64
65
68
70
71
73
74
77
So 25 posts before rq posted that are not "just about everyone else having a discussion". I think it's pretty clear that I am looking at the facts. It is also clear that snooper2 disrupted the discussion before anyone else.

So ask yourself/your wife why redqueen is held to a different standard than snooper2 is.

And btw your wife did not accuse rq until post 136 but I am not going to get nit-picky here - lol - you are welcome to.

[RainDog]

321. I've been reading a lot of these threads

over the holiday. I haven't seen a lot of them because I have people on ignore who have been rude to me in the past, but I took them off to read the threads.

I agree that there are guys who join the threads and say things that are meant to be humorous that are also trolling sorts of humor - because of the long-standing grudges between people that have to do with how others respond here.

Because, again, it's about feuds over a long period, not just this thread - and the same is true for the one I noted that had the opposite issue - the one Riff linked to here.

To get upset about this, however, just does what you don't want to do - which is distract from the discussion. If the people this is intended to annoy ignored it - or ignored that poster, even, so they didn't see these subthreads - they could talk about the issue.

That's not the ideal, but in terms of how to deal with a situation when someone is derailing a thread - that's one way to do it.

The guy who posted about not seeing his "white male privilege." He was saying he feels as put upon by the current economic system as anyone. But because he disagreed - it's all "hair on fire!" he said something that didn't confirm the issue of privilege. Well, he's not seeing that privilege. He sees economic issues as the great divide, no matter the gender or race. But, you know, he was talking about his frustration.

"Privilege" is abstract and applies in a lot of different ways. His issue was concrete.

"Privilege" does happen in different ways and white women are privileged over black males and females in many job situations. To know that, however, doesn't mean it's necessary to lose my shit over that reality because someone said white females deal with male privilege.

Others insult the board that no one understands what feminism is, etc. etc. but I think the reality is that people just get tired of all the fighting directed toward members of this board - on both sides of the issue - and will also make fun of those who are involved in it as a way to defuse it. Doesn't work, either.

If you don't want to have to deal with what someone says, however, put that person on ignore.

If someone else has to read through a bunch of off-topic posts - well, that happens on a lot of threads, and not in the way it was done on this one. If the subthreads don't get the expected outrage, they might stop. If not, those who aren't ignoring that person will see them and read on through.

ETA: here's the compassion shown for someone who dared to say he felt like a loser after his job situation changed:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4276388

maybe you can see why some of us here think some others are more of a problem than the person they castigate.

[seaglass]

331. RainDog - I'm not ignoring you - have had a rough day today having to tell my brothers

something that I know hurt them (and me). So I am decompressing with some wine tonight. Not a good idea to PUI so I will try to respond to your post tomorrow.

[RainDog]

332. you don't have to reply

Last edited Sun Jan 5, 2014, 05:00 AM - Edit history (1)

I just wanted to tell you that, yes, I see two sides. Having been on the side that was insulted by one group, I'm less sympathetic to that group. I'm also less sympathetic because I don't think what's happening is good for the issues.

what also bothers me is the way those attitudes make people turn away from feminist issues, but this is just a message board.

[redqueen]

246. "Caucasian" men are being portrayed as idiots in commercials!

And no one cares!




In actuality all kinds of people are portrayed as idiots in commercials but apparently only one group is so offended by it.

And in actuality its pretty hard to miss the constant whining about how horrible it is that white men are so very disparaged by this practice (which everyone else is subjected to as well)

[snooper2]

299. Hey that was way more than 10 or 12 DU'ers, I made this thread ROCK..

Kind of like the opening band being better than the mainliners



This thread has been "done" what 168 times over the past year. Time to spice it up a little!

I'm SERIAL!

[seaglass]

301. .

[cinnabonbon]

221. I know, right?

[tkmorris]

145. Feminists are comprised of such a varied group of individuals...

Such that answering the questions posed is completely impossible without some measure of equivocation. I am absolutely certain that you know this BB, since you didn't fall off the hay truck yesterday. So why ask at all?

I will say this: I don't form an opinion of anyone, either on this board or in real life, based solely or even primarily on their views as a Feminist. Having Feminist views is an excellent start to being someone I would enjoy speaking to or spending time with, but by no means does it end (or even start) there. It so happens that the vast majority of women I care for, and many of the men, self identify as Feminists but I know of at least one female Feminist for whom I would not shed a single tear if she were eaten by badgers.

I hope this helps.

[Rex]

148. I hope not! I am a feminist and I am a man.

And I would be very depressed if I hated myself. I think ANYONE that sees an injustice in the world, should point it out as a matter of bringing it to the attention of others. ANYONE, means all people with empathy and compassion toward their fellow human.

I think feminists face the same hurtles as most minority groups, since sadly I think feminists are in the minority in America.

[kdmorris]

150. I'll take a stab at it

Do you think that feminists hate men?

As a group, no, we do not. Do I think that individual women who identify as feminists hate men? - oh yeah, I certainly do

Do you think that feminists are out to get men?

See above - as a group, no, we Feminists are not out to get men. Do I think that individual people who identify as Feminist are out to get men? Yep, I believe that there are some people who identify as Feminist who would like to get rid of men all together. But most of us do not.

Do you think that feminists have nothing of value to offer and ought to be relegated to a specific place for them to voice their views.

Nope, I think we have lots to offer. I don't think we should be relegated to a specific place to speak about our views. Nor do I think that if I post something in public that I get the right to tell others how they are supposed to feel about it just because I identify it as a feminist viewpoint. If I post it in public, I expect to get honest opinions from people from all walks of life. If I want to talk about my c-section, I'll probably not put it in a public forum since all men and many women have not had one and cannot relate.

Do you think that feminists ought not point out when they see something as sexist or misogynistic?

I think that we do fine pointing out things we see as sexist or misogynistic. That being said, I believe that some of the Feminists here see things as being sexist or misogynistic quite differently than I do. I would expect (but usually don't get) that any disagreement with what we see as sexist or misogynistic would be met with a respectful disagreement - rather than the divide and conquer, burn down the house discussions I've had with a few of the members of DU - especially when I've thought something was sexist toward men. I was told that you CANNOT be sexist toward men... but whatever.

Do you believe women in the US face any institutional oppression?

Yes, definitely, as well as other parts of the world. And I say that we put our energies into fighting that rather than fighting with people on a message board. Frankly, I think that we have it better in the US than women in other countries do. I'm super grateful I wasn't born in Afghanistan, for example. I think that you and I disagree on how prevalent institutional oppression is, given some of the discussions we've had. I, for example, see Maternity Leave, Pregnancy Care and Equal Pay as being top of my list of things to fight for... you seem more considered with rape, sexual harassment and the way that men look at women. Just my observation and I am willing to admit before hand that I could be wrong. I've never seen you mention the former.

Do you think they are personally insulting you when speaking of their issues from a feminist perspective?

No, I don't feel personally insulted by my feminist colleagues as a group. Yes, I do think individual people who identify as women are personally insulting me.

[Nye Bevan]

160. Most DU men *are* feminists, myself included.

I have a wife, two daughters, and two sisters, so of course this applies to me.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022161014

[redqueen]

171. lol

[tkmorris]

173. LOL?

That was helpful.

[HappyMe]

187. Let me translate -

male = not a feminist, stfu.

I myself am a woman who is "pathetic", an "eager female cohort", a "dog", and am operating out of some sort of "fear" of blahglarb whosits what the fuck ever. I too, must stfu.

I don't think any discussion is wanted.

[msanthrope]

190. We've internalized our patriarchy. nt

[HappyMe]

198. Tastes like vodka.

[tkmorris]

205. Now THAT is LOL-worthy

[kdmorris]

236. ROFL!!

Do we still have DUzys?

[polly7]

247. LOL!

[maddezmom]

193. Perfect translation

Now I will just wait to have my head patted like a good dog. Maybe I will get thrown a bone or two to nibble on as well.

[redqueen]

194. lol, you're both so busy stirring shit

you didn't even notice that I cleared up the mix up with Nye.

[maddezmom]

195. Whatever...you seem to do your share as well

[HappyMe]

196. I've got got some chicken and broccoli

stir fry with Thai peanut sauce instead of the bone.

[polly7]

203. Scoot over!

We're gonna need a bigger couch, but I'm right there with you as one of all those things. Except maybe I don't even deserve a couch, as a DU rape-enabler who aids all that rape that's occurring right here on DU. Probably just a dog house.

[msanthrope]

224. Shove over! nt

[polly7]

226. We're gonna need a longer couch!

[kdmorris]

237. Not to mention a FOREIGNER

I need a space on that couch too... I'm not sure you (or Violet Crumble) is allowed on the couch... You can't possibly be a feminist if you aren't...you know... American!!!

[polly7]

240. I know:(

We'll probably just have to settle for the ottoman. But that's ok, cause the lid opens and that's where all the booze is stashed!

[kdmorris]

243. Damn... I like booze

OK...OK... maybe you can just sit at one end of the couch together... but you have to bring the booze with!

And it better not be Labatte's and Foster's or any crap like that. (it sucks the Violet is sleeping right now!)

[polly7]

245. Yay!, we'll happily share (I'll speak for sleepy-head Violet here too).

All I have left right now is some Crown Royal and a couple cases of Kokanee, Violet's going to have to supply the rest.

[kdmorris]

255. Well, the Crown Royal just makes it worth it now, doesn't it!

Bottoms up!

[Violet_Crumble]

278. How dare you tell an Australian or Canadian woman how it feels to have to bring the booze!

Shame on you! Shame!!

btw, clearly it's going to have to be an L-shaped couch. Polly and me can sit segregated on one bit and have some great New Zealand wine, Monkey Bay Sav Blanc. It's cheap, but soooo nice!



And, yes, Fosters is crap. When it comes to beer, I'll only drink Carlton Cold...

[kdmorris]

284. Well, you can't possibly understand how hard it is to be American

I just don't know why you have feelings or talk about anything at all. It's so obvious to ANYONE that we have it so much worse than any women in the world here in American and NO ONE can understand.

L-shape couch will work. We can all just sit there and stfu. Of course, you will need to stfu more than us American rape-enablers because you just can't have an opinion about anything unless you live through it with the rest of us.

Damn - what if the booze makes us talkative? What a conundrum...I'll have to think on this.

(P.S. That is the COOLEST name for a wine ever LOL)

[polly7]

289. I do admit that we haven't had to face recently the horrible things your GOP is trying to do there

to women regarding women's rights to their own bodies per the vaginal probes, mandatory ultrasounds pre-abortion, etc, etc., and that aspirin thing between the legs just floored me, but trust me .... we are with you on fighting backward ideas like this, I've voted in every poll in articles I've seen and signed anything I could find against it adding my own (often not-so-nice) comments. We can't do much at all to help, but we're there with you in spirit and would desperately like to help!! Otherwise, we face the same challenges as far as assault, rape, harassment, etc. Personally I've been very, very lucky and can't say I've worked in one job that I haven't been paid as much as any man - and I've worked in many. I've also never been discriminated against for being a woman. In that sense, possibly we do have it better - I don't know about Australia, however. But fighting for women's rights and the rights of all human beings is something I'm very concerned about, as well as is Violet, as I know from reading her posts over the years.

If the booze makes us too talkative about things we just can't possibly understand, we could always just discuss other things ... like what the hell are we gonna do when we run out of wine, whiskey and beer!

[kdmorris]

295. Oh, I know, polly

I was just having a laugh at the poster that said you couldn't know about how hard it is for us. Yes, in many cases, the USA is backwards as hell - the crap that the GOP does is worth fighting against. I was only able to take off 8 weeks after the birth of my twins because that was all my short term disability paid for. We don't have paid leave here and I've heard of so many women who have to go back to work at 1 or 2 weeks postpartum because they can't afford to be out (no STD) or the Family Medical Leave Act doesn't apply to them (small businesses). I could have stayed out for 12 weeks and just taken 4 unpaid except that I had already used all my FMLA due to being on bed rest for 5 weeks before their birth (and I can't really afford that).

I have personally never been paid less than a man at any of my jobs, but I know it happens. And I work in a male dominated field (Information Technology). In one of my jobs, the women made of less than 10% of our department. They were actively seeking to hire more women.

All of the things you mention are worth fighting against. Like you, I think that we should fight the politicians and not each other.

And, when all is said and done, I realize with 100% clarity that, though we don't have Northern Europe style equality here and we don't have universal health care or paid maternity leave or equal pay, the USA is still not the most awful place ever to have been born a woman. We have a lot of work to do, but we have more work to do in Afghanistan, the Sudan, India, Pakistan and larges parts of Africa and Asia. I was not born there and ethnically, I am not from any of those cultures, but I can identify with the suffering of the people (the vulnerable - children, women, the elderly always suffer more, but many people do suffer) in those countries and want to change it.

When we run out of wine, whiskey and beer... we can always play with our (tkmorris and I) 6 month old twins. I'm sure I'm biased, but I happen to think they are the most awesome, cutest babies in the whole wide world! And they can't talk yet, so they won't say anything wrong. They don't do really well at stfu, but at least you can't understand them!

hmmmmm maybe we should play with them first and save the booze for later! A bunch of drunken men and women playing with babies is a recipe for disaster

[polly7]

307. I couldn't agree with you more, every word of it.

A big congratulations to you and tkmorris on your twins!!!!! That is so fantastic! They're absolutely adorable at that age, I bet you spend a lot of time just laughing as they take everything in and try to figure it all out. How wonderful for you all! Yes, if they're around, scratch that booze.... I'd play with babies 24/7 if I had the chance!



on edit: Oops, forgot to add .... I realize you were having a laugh over it and that was funny as hell, just didn't want those people who really do believe that some of us should have no voice that we too really do care about women everywhere, including the U.S.

[Nye Bevan]

178. Interesting. This is the kind of post that makes some DUers suspect a motive of flamebait,

or of picking a fight, in threads such as these. Someone who truly wanted to engage in a thoughtful discussion of the issue would probably do something other than post "lol" in reply to a post such as the one you just replied to.

Thanks for the illuminating response.

[sufrommich]

181. What's even more interesting are the DUers who

constantly scold feminists for being impolite while conveniently ignoring the constant barrage of insulting carp thrown at those feminists. Crickets,every single time.

[Nye Bevan]

186. Not "scolding". Simply making an observation (nt)

[kdmorris]

238. Yeah... it just sucks to have fish thrown at you

I much prefer having octopus thrown at me.

[opiate69]

311. These guys seem to enjoy it, though.

[kdmorris]

316. "GUYS"????

You can just find something more gender-neutral there, buddy. Otherwise, you will be guilty of throwing carp and we'll have to get all indignant and stuff:

l|

[opiate69]

319. Ack!! My bad!! Please forgive me, Mistress!!

Last edited Sat Jan 4, 2014, 05:20 PM - Edit history (1)

I am but a manta, after all! Please, don't break out the "stinging" instruments...



(Edited because I finally caught the theme.. hey, even us mantas can get hung over lol)

[kdmorris]

334. OK, good

Now that you have been "ray"-educated, I will thank you, in the future, to be more careful with your "barbed" remarks!

[opiate69]

335. ...

I will make it my sole porpoise!

[kdmorris]

336. You win

I tried to think of a response all through dinner. I am sure I need to get more sleep (infant twins tend to limit the amount of actual sleep you get!)

I would bow to your quicker wit, but I'm pretty sure that bowing to a manta would make me a dog that likes to be petted by "the dumb". So I will just say "well played, sir, well played"

[opiate69]

342. lol

Well played by you as well!
(Infant twins? Yikes! That's a whole heap of work! But, should be a whole heap of joy and love as well. Get some rest, friend!)

[FatBuddy]

182. it is rather curious

it smells of dishonesty.

the "lol" bit was offensive.

[redqueen]

189. welcome to DU

[redqueen]

185. What is there in your post which we could have a thiughtful discussuon about?

I agree that most men on DU share feminist goals.

Maybe I'm getting you mixed up with someone else who has been posting snarky, flamey replies in threads about feminism lately. The contrast between the posts I somehow associated with you and the claim of being a feminist made it an amusing post.

Mea culpa.

[Nye Bevan]

188. No biggie. Apology accepted (nt)

[whistler162]

161. Someone notify the NTSB..... we have a train wreck here!

[Major Nikon]

274. Boxer briefs

http://www.cafepress.com/+gender_not_found_boxer_brief,584892474

[HappyMe]

165. They won't come anymore.

They said that they have had to come out to this location too many times. We're on our own.

[etherealtruth]

175. I am a feminist

hate men? I love men

Do you think that feminists are out to get men? I want equal rights and opportunity for all, this is largely the feminist goal

Do you think that feminists have nothing of value to offer and ought to be relegated to a specific place for them to voice their views. I love hearing many feminist viewpoints

Do you think that feminists ought not point out when they see something as sexist or misogynistic? No one should sit down and shut up in the face of prejudice or bias

Do you believe women in the US face any institutional oppression? Of course

Do you think they are personally insulting you when speaking of their issues from a feminist perspective? As a feminist, I do not believe I or anyone else is offensive/ insulting when speaking from a feminist perspective (if I am a feminist, isn't everything I say coming from a feminist perspective?)

[redqueen]

176. re: your last sentence...

Not to be argumentative, and this is way off topic, but not necessarily.

For instance, as a big movie buff, I can say that I love Blade Runner. It is my favorite movie ever. From a feminist perspective, though, it is seriously not great. It is far from great. From a feminist perspective, I'd say it is pretty bad, actually.

[boston bean]

179. No matter how nice you tell someone that you find what they have SAID to be sexist

they will turn it around to you attacking them.

Most people don't like to examine those things and they do take it as a personal affront.. Sad, but true.

I'm not sure if I could come up with a way that was so nice they wouldn't take offense in asking them to look at the issue.

[etherealtruth]

180. (I don't know the movie and am taking your word for it) ... As a feminist ...

... you recognize that the movie is (sexist?). Fiction (movies, novels, television shows) etc. are not necessarily acceptable to be played out in life ... I view your enjoyment of the movie as an escapist fantasy (again I plead ignorance regarding the movie ... and my comment could be ridiculous in context)

[zappaman]

260. I'd love to know the problem as well since I've never heard of anyone raising that issue...

[rrneck]

201. It depends

on what they say and what they mean when they say it.

[Zorra]

210. Women's Equality: You never really get it until you really get it.

A double entendre, where both meanings always universally apply.

[rug]

212. Wait, is this a trick question?

[whatchamacallit]

215. Who gives a shit?

Haha kidding

As an ideological group, no. But statistically in a sample that large there's bound to be some members that hate men.

[ancianita]

229. No. No. No. No. Yes. No. I mostly think feminists hurt their cause by running loyalist, purist and

other 'tests' on other women, by not helping them institutionally, not sharing power and expertise and not schooling their daughters and sons thoroughly on the history of patriarchy, women and feminism.

[nadinbrzezinski]

231. Trash thread is my friend

[d_b]

351. so sick of these fucking threads

and all this woo bullshit. i'm shit canning everyone and everything now.

[nadinbrzezinski]

352. This is the new DU

I go other places for actual discussion now

[justiceischeap]

239. Just participating so I don't have to participate in a future jury.

I think the bigger question(s) that should be asked is this:

Is there an immovable communication barrier between women and men that will never allow them to talk about feminism effectively?
Is there a way to talk about feminism that doesn't set-off gender wars when someone disagrees on one point but agrees on all others?
Does anyone like being "educated" by being told their opinion isn't worthwhile?

[last1standing]

248. Interesting laundry list of questions but I'll kick in my two cents.

"Do you think that feminists hate men?" Not as a rule. A very few do hate men just as a very few men hate women. On the other hand, I find that most "men's rights advocates' do hate women.

"Do you think that feminists are out to get men?" Same answer as above.

"Do you think that feminists out not point out when they see something as sexist or misogynistic?" No. Sexism, like racism, should be pointed out and eradicated when possible. On the other hand, on occasion sexism, like racism, is seen where it doesn't really exist. At those times it would be better to step back and reassess rather than to try to bully the majority into submission. If you still see it as sexist after taking a step back, say so and explain why. If people don't get it, they're not ready for it and bullying won't help.

"Do you believe women in the US face any institutional oppression?" Of course. And they will for many years to come, unfortunately. That doesn't mean we shouldn't fight to change this as much as possible.

"Do you think they are personally insulting you when speaking of their issues from a feminist perspective?" Not at all. Women have a reason for claiming discrimination and should do so. On the other hand, when a someone claims that "all" men are potential rapists then that is personally insulting because the comment is directed at me as well as every other man. That kind of rhetoric only serves to stir anger which rarely changes minds.

[Marr]

283. Divide, divide, divide. /nt

[Feral Child]

290. Seriously?

1. Some.
2. Some.
3. No.
4. Depends.
5. Yes.
6. Only when they're personally insulting me.


This post is B-Grade Flamebait.

[NaturalHigh]

324. +1

[Lost_Count]

297. 1) Some yes.. Some no...

2) Some yes.. Some No

3) Some have something to offer.. others are idiots...

4) If it actually is...

5) Some

6) Be specific...

Easy peasy...

[CreekDog]

314. i've been around feminists all my life, if they ran the world

it would be a better and kinder place to men than it is with mostly men running things.

not all feminists are perfect, and of course, some have their prejudices.

but feminists in general tend to be progressive, civil rights advocates.

men's righters however tend to be the opposite. much less progressive and much more in favor of preserving men's advantages in the status quo.

men's righters tend to ask, how will men do if we take all children out of poverty?

men's righters tend to ask, how will men do if we treat immigrants better in this country?

[athena]

318. One-step thinking.

People who ask, "How will men do if we do this good thing for that minority?" don't consider that in the long run, everyone benefits from a just and egalitarian society.

[TransitJohn]

317. I think that

a few drama-addicted posters here try every day to force the DU to pay attention to them. Both genders.

[NaturalHigh]

325. Don't be ridiculous.

I don't know all feminists.

[Mira]

337. These are trick questions, right?

Seriously, the last time I assessed feminism, for myself, and maybe for my son and grandson, is to say that it is to not only lighten the load for women but for men as well. Men are as oppressed by gender specific type casting as women are.
So your questions in that light all rate a NO except for the next to last one. Women are definitely embattled and that's what feminism is fighting against.