Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Bjorn Against

(12,041 posts)
Mon Feb 24, 2014, 10:50 PM Feb 2014

It is not about the swimsuit issue it is about basic respect for women

I am a man and I must admit that I really don't understand women very well. I hear a lot of men say they understand women, but the reality is that none of us really understand women because none of us have ever walked a day in their shoes.

When I first saw the swimsuit issue posted here I was not upset about it at all, in fact I fully admit I found the women on the cover attractive. I did not necessarily think it belonged in GD, but I was certainly not bothered by it. I looked at it found it attractive, but still had to shake my head a bit at the oogling over it downthread. I was not upset about about the image at all, these sorts of images are everywhere and I did not think much of it.

But then something happened; I saw women trying to express their views on the photo and I saw the way they were treated for expressing those views. I may not understand women, but I am not completely ignorant either, I know that this country does have an ugly history of misogyny and I saw far too many misogynistic comments posted in response to the swimsuit photo.

I may not understand women and it is difficult to put myself in their shoes. It is difficult for me to imagine that my Great Grandmother would not have even been legally able to vote when she turned of age. I can not imagine what it would be like to be a women with an unwanted pregnancy in the 1950's where the only option for an abortion was a guy with a coat hanger in a back alley. I can not imagine what it would be like to be a housewife living with an abusive husband who controlled her with violence. I can not understand any of this, all I can understand is what it is like to be a man.

As much as some people try to tell me that misandry is just as big of a problem as misogyny, I am looking over my entire life and I just can't think of a time that I faced any sort of oppression because I am male. I may have been called a gendered insult like "Dick" before, but I can't say it really damaged me in any way. I suspect the women who had "Bitch!!!" screamed at her right before she was beaten and raped suffered far worse than I did when I was called a dick.

My fellow men, we may not understand women but we need to try harder to do so. We need to understand that a number of the women objecting to these photos being posted are likely rape victims. I don't know which DUers are victims of rape, I don't know which ones have a mother or daughter who was raped, but I do know that they are here because the stats show us just how many women have been victims of sexual assault. Victims of sexual violence are a part of our community and we need to respect them.

We need to understand that someone who was the victim of a sexual assault may have a very different reaction to a sexualized photo than you or I, they may have been raped by someone who shoved pictures like that in their face. Now you may say that the picture did not cause the rape, and maybe you are right but that does not mean that the woman does not have a valid reason to be seriously bothered by the image.

You may try and dismiss this as a "personal issue", but the fact is when millions of rape victims across the nation have these "personal issues" it is not really a personal issue it is an issue with our society.

If you want to go look at the swimsuit issue go ahead, but when you do so do it in a way that is respectful to others. If others tell you they don't want to see it there is absolutely no reason to show it to them, be respectful of others and recognize that women may have valid reasons for being upset that us men are really unable to fully comprehend.

Do what you want in the privacy of your home, but let's have some basic respect for the women of this site.

510 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
It is not about the swimsuit issue it is about basic respect for women (Original Post) Bjorn Against Feb 2014 OP
Thank you. I appreciate this OP very much. yardwork Feb 2014 #1
Hi yardwork! myrna minx Feb 2014 #187
Thank you. TDale313 Feb 2014 #2
DU Rec Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #3
thank you. (nt) noamnety Feb 2014 #4
I urge you to recall that it was posted by a woman. Bonobo Feb 2014 #5
+1000. Odd this little fact keeps being overlooked or unmentioned quinnox Feb 2014 #7
... Kali Feb 2014 #86
It matters very much, because we keep having a few duers imply it was all the men's fault quinnox Feb 2014 #91
so if some asshole of any group does something that is offensive to a large number people, Kali Feb 2014 #100
No, it doesn't make it ok. But it does make those who are implying this is all the work of quinnox Feb 2014 #104
Carport? DURHAM D Feb 2014 #105
true, a carport doesn't even have 4 walls Kali Feb 2014 #117
and I always picture a basement ... lol ... Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #272
Men don't deserve a "cave" per se... maybe just a roof. Maybe. lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #275
It means all the men who have insisted that the views BainsBane Feb 2014 #169
"Asshole" My Good Babushka Feb 2014 #171
who am I disrespecting? Kali Feb 2014 #213
It sounds like you were calling the woman who posted the SI pics an "asshole" ConservativeDemocrat Feb 2014 #326
Are you going to claim you haven't posted in defense of objectification? BainsBane Feb 2014 #168
I believe the point of the OP was whopis01 Feb 2014 #175
On phone so couldn't check all links but Bonobo Feb 2014 #92
I wasn't posting any offending photo. Kali Feb 2014 #103
Oh I see... Bonobo Feb 2014 #125
the point Kali Feb 2014 #134
I don't recall 1/100th of this amount of disdain for the polly7 Feb 2014 #240
heh Kali Feb 2014 #247
Odd there wasn't day after day of outraged posts over those pictures polly7 Feb 2014 #250
well I see you are taking the opportunity to do so now Kali Feb 2014 #253
Only because I'm sick and tired of seeing one person painted as polly7 Feb 2014 #254
You are very committed to taking things out of context R B Garr Feb 2014 #248
And you are very committed to talking shit about people and things you polly7 Feb 2014 #251
The posts leading back to your post are about a female posting the SI pictures R B Garr Feb 2014 #258
I'm not 'bashing' anyone. polly7 Feb 2014 #260
I wouldn't trust your interpretations of double standards and hypocrisy R B Garr Feb 2014 #270
I suggest you check out a mirror. polly7 Feb 2014 #271
Now you're equating FEMEN with Sports Illustrated Swimsuit addition pictures? R B Garr Feb 2014 #280
No. polly7 Feb 2014 #281
No. You are taking things out of context deliberately to push your own agenda. R B Garr Feb 2014 #295
LOL. polly7 Feb 2014 #298
Context, polly. Get some. This is your little corner of Fox News/Benghazi R B Garr Feb 2014 #327
I did point out the context. polly7 Feb 2014 #330
The two are not equal, polly. You are very transparent. Have you even read this OP? R B Garr Feb 2014 #332
Oh, you're so right. They're definitely not equal. polly7 Feb 2014 #337
This is exactly how you wanted this to go. Now you're back to bashing posters R B Garr Feb 2014 #340
I have no interest in getting anyone's posts hidden. polly7 Feb 2014 #342
I actually agree with you here... one_voice Feb 2014 #364
Thank you! polly7 Feb 2014 #365
Thanks for agreeing they aren't equal. We disagree as to the reasons why they don't equate. R B Garr Feb 2014 #473
And here you go again. polly7 Feb 2014 #487
Who are you, the DU Hall Monitor? RiffRandell Feb 2014 #422
Gee, the very first thread I opened in the Men's Group, there you were R B Garr Feb 2014 #424
She didn't 'mock' anyone, so shove your boring, repetitious bs. polly7 Feb 2014 #490
That's all it ever was pintobean Feb 2014 #301
I take it from your comment you didn't even read the OP R B Garr Feb 2014 #329
We're pretty far removed from the OP pintobean Feb 2014 #333
"We"? Nice try. If you follow the posts back, "we" started discussing polly bashing seabeyond R B Garr Feb 2014 #338
'Bashing seabeyond'. polly7 Feb 2014 #341
You're just spamming now. Riff solicited insults in a recent thread, R B Garr Feb 2014 #345
Blah, blah ........ zzzzz. nt. polly7 Feb 2014 #346
Exactly. Despite the fact the guys threw her under the bus BainsBane Feb 2014 #368
who "threw her under the bus"? Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #429
You did, in the thread to which I responded this morning BainsBane Feb 2014 #440
Uh huh. Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #445
I could care less about her relationship with you BainsBane Feb 2014 #451
I think you're seriously overthinking DU, honestly. Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #452
Just to reiterate... opiate69 Feb 2014 #461
Let's reiterate BainsBane Feb 2014 #464
I hardly consider them verifying a woman made the post "throwing me under the bus" RiffRandell Feb 2014 #447
!! opiate69 Feb 2014 #449
Thank you so much. RiffRandell Feb 2014 #503
That's a great game. Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #450
It is a reflection of the views of hundreds of members of this site BainsBane Feb 2014 #455
Well, then. I guess we can surmise that the community here also opiate69 Feb 2014 #458
Wow... opiate69 Feb 2014 #448
I must have missed the posts attacking her for posting the cover BainsBane Feb 2014 #367
If you think this is about disdain for one member BainsBane Feb 2014 #370
I don't know what world you live in if you think polly7 Feb 2014 #372
You mean the way you treat women? BainsBane Feb 2014 #377
Sorry, I got tired of reading your long screeds a while ago. polly7 Feb 2014 #378
It's the same ole, same ole. pintobean Feb 2014 #390
I don't think this situation will EVER be resolved to some peoples' satisfaction. Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #462
LOL! polly7 Feb 2014 #489
It wasn't ABOUT the pictures themselves....it is just the reason it occurred... VanillaRhapsody Feb 2014 #153
But does it really matter Dorian Gray Feb 2014 #180
It is like a real legend now. the facts don't matter, just the greater truth it supposedly arely staircase Feb 2014 #196
well then why don't we talk about how it was posted by a woman but almost constantly defended by men CreekDog Feb 2014 #227
And she was compared to a dog for posting it. Jetboy Feb 2014 #9
My how the stories get more and more distorted with each retelling BainsBane Feb 2014 #25
thank you, Baines. Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #34
Hey, rrneck Feb 2014 #35
It is wrong to compare a woman to a dog. How did the people in that thread not understand Jetboy Feb 2014 #39
So you did see the comment? BainsBane Feb 2014 #42
I read the entire thread and it was horrific the way she was treated. Jetboy Feb 2014 #45
you are very sadly mistaken if you think I have not been condemned for that comment. Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #57
The poster below is specifically not condemning it for whatever reason. n/t Jetboy Feb 2014 #69
good lord. never mind. Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #71
Why is it my responsibility to condemn it? BainsBane Feb 2014 #135
I was simply pointing that fact out. Jetboy Feb 2014 #141
In that case BainsBane Feb 2014 #163
I did not read the thread BainsBane Feb 2014 #62
Can you at least admit it created a hostile environment for women? RiffRandell Feb 2014 #426
For women? BainsBane Feb 2014 #436
Only one woman, with only one account. RiffRandell Feb 2014 #439
What hypocrisy is that? BainsBane Feb 2014 #441
I was on the jury for that very post. sheshe2 Feb 2014 #99
Perhaps, Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #268
The flip side of the white knight? pintobean Feb 2014 #277
possibly ... I am not well versed enough or knowledgeable about all the Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #283
Could you give specific examples? polly7 Feb 2014 #286
I was not talking to you and, I asked no questions of you. In Fact, I was ANSWERING a question Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #292
Yeah, I pretty much thought it was just blowing smoke. No worries. polly7 Feb 2014 #293
thank you, pintobean. It was nice talking to you. I am sorry our subthread was derailed. Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #303
You can't just go around insulting other women here without expecting to get asked polly7 Feb 2014 #305
I wasn't insulting anyone. I have asked and answered and I am done here. You have a problem with me? Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #309
Yes, you WERE. polly7 Feb 2014 #311
There was a long thread about it last week. pintobean Feb 2014 #314
Yes, but that term is usually in reference to men. Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #468
interesting how few can see that Kali Feb 2014 #339
Sorry for the confussion...I was talking about this post sheshe2 Feb 2014 #465
Whoa! I didn't make that connection about a female dog or that slur at all. R B Garr Feb 2014 #469
+1 one_voice Feb 2014 #302
-1 Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #304
+1 In_The_Wind Feb 2014 #353
-1 Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #418
+10000000000000000000000000 nt. polly7 Feb 2014 #420
Ditto! In_The_Wind Feb 2014 #427
It's funny how that keeps being brought up by sufrommich Feb 2014 #184
The story becomes rrneck Feb 2014 #41
The poster said something to the effect that they had a dog pictured in their Jetboy Feb 2014 #44
Nah. rrneck Feb 2014 #46
I don't even know how to dig for it but that was it to the best of my recollection. n/t Jetboy Feb 2014 #47
It's cool. rrneck Feb 2014 #49
Yes, and more about being a good little lap dog wanted to be petted. Jetboy Feb 2014 #50
good lord. Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #54
I didn't pay attention to who posted it but since you are the one you can feel free Jetboy Feb 2014 #63
TA, it's because it has nothing to do with you BainsBane Feb 2014 #130
I am trying to not take it personally and, to leave personalities out of all this... Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #273
It's hardly a mortal sin. rrneck Feb 2014 #75
I didn't know that happened so long ago. I just can't fathom how that flew but Jetboy Feb 2014 #79
Because this is a political message board. rrneck Feb 2014 #102
And bless it's existence! Jetboy Feb 2014 #112
I try to set my sights a little higher. rrneck Feb 2014 #113
What I love aoubt DU is that your worst enemy on one issue is your best friend Jetboy Feb 2014 #120
Stick around. rrneck Feb 2014 #123
LOL, this is great, especially for the intended poster R B Garr Feb 2014 #84
You pretty much covered it. RC Feb 2014 #129
Ideology is a consumer product. rrneck Feb 2014 #142
And there you are BainsBane Feb 2014 #282
Well, lets see if we can find a crouton in this word salad... rrneck Feb 2014 #312
Why don't you tell us what Skinner meant? BainsBane Feb 2014 #324
And in stampedes the Gish at a full gallop. rrneck Feb 2014 #343
Here you go--- msanthrope Feb 2014 #230
I take it Riff is a personal, in real life, friend of yours. Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #58
Never had a single exchange with her that I recall but that doesn't matter. Jetboy Feb 2014 #72
I don't know what your specific issue is with me Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #77
I am sorry as I wasn't doing it to offend you. I won't mention it again. n/t Jetboy Feb 2014 #81
Have you not been here since DU2 made the change over to DU3? Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #85
No I don't remember the change. What is different about DU now? n/t Jetboy Feb 2014 #87
Jetboy, This is no longer a moderated site. There is jury system in place and Hosts determine if Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #89
That's interesting. Thanks for the information. I really enjoy DU but normally Jetboy Feb 2014 #95
The worst thing? BainsBane Feb 2014 #128
I believe in treating all people with respect and do my best to live by the Jetboy Feb 2014 #136
If you have't been around much BainsBane Feb 2014 #139
Anyone can make a mistake but only a quality person can own up to it. Jetboy Feb 2014 #146
I urge you to recall all the posts you made which were dismissive of women's concerns Bjorn Against Feb 2014 #10
Exactly right. TDale313 Feb 2014 #18
Actually the way I responded was to agree Bonobo Feb 2014 #51
I have seen enough of your posting history to know how dismissive you have been of women Bjorn Against Feb 2014 #55
Bjorn, think whatever you like Bonobo Feb 2014 #67
The Noble Journey of *The White Knight* Bjorn you mean - RBStevens Feb 2014 #97
Yes the pattern betsuni Feb 2014 #144
Interesting comment. nt Democracyinkind Feb 2014 #183
That explains a lot. n/t demmiblue Feb 2014 #189
See? Just like you said. This has nothing to do with bikinis. lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #259
You're right. It's not about the swimsuit issue. lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #256
And that you actually have to click on the thread to see the stuff that so offends you. Comrade Grumpy Feb 2014 #11
Ah, but to these extremists, just like religious right fundies, a women showing quinnox Feb 2014 #13
And just who exactly are those extremist religious-right-fundie-like folk RBStevens Feb 2014 #106
Right. There just isn't the slightest difference between cheesecake stuck on your eridani Feb 2014 #170
Agree, we have fanatics on DU that no one wishes to acknowledge Katashi_itto Feb 2014 #179
I feel badly for the sub-literacy of idiots and dolts who are unable to make the distinction... LanternWaste Feb 2014 #323
oh, right, we wouldn't want to add melodrama to any shallow premises, here, now, would we? Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #431
I didn't know that. NaturalHigh Feb 2014 #12
you wouldn't, too many duers glossing over it quinnox Feb 2014 #15
"Doesn't fit their agenda." NaturalHigh Feb 2014 #182
Haha. Thanks. 840high Feb 2014 #31
So? I don't know what motivated her. But she is just one woman who apparently doesn't care. pnwmom Feb 2014 #52
Yeah and Clarence Thomas says a lot of things treestar Feb 2014 #166
once again, Bonobo entirely misses the point Pretzel_Warrior Feb 2014 #249
it is about not behaving like internet adolescents. Warren Stupidity Feb 2014 #6
Thank you Tumbulu Feb 2014 #8
I'm not sure I understand. rrneck Feb 2014 #14
Yeah, and you can trash this one, Einstein... MrMickeysMom Feb 2014 #16
But I don't find it or upsetting rrneck Feb 2014 #21
Yes, it is quite "cut" MrMickeysMom Feb 2014 #23
"Cut". I get it. Very good. nt rrneck Feb 2014 #26
just out of curiosity, what kind pf post would make you.... BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2014 #80
Birthday posts. rrneck Feb 2014 #94
ok. so now, more thought experiment here. .... BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2014 #98
Sure. rrneck Feb 2014 #107
but say you could not get away from the conversations, and that there were so many people BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2014 #116
No. rrneck Feb 2014 #121
ok. i tried my best to elicit empathy. BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2014 #126
Standard prodedure. rrneck Feb 2014 #132
It was a valiant try... TDale313 Feb 2014 #165
yep, they like it. BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2014 #267
isn't it part and parcel of the way Men have been told how to deal with Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #279
It's the internet alright and what usually happens is that women RBStevens Feb 2014 #133
Only if you can't read. rrneck Feb 2014 #138
What I'm saying is - bottom line - is that it is women RBStevens Feb 2014 #143
No, actually, they aren't. rrneck Feb 2014 #148
Yeah, I saw that from Skinner - RBStevens Feb 2014 #149
Wait a minute. rrneck Feb 2014 #150
Okay. I'm gathering that you think the internet is something so different or alien RBStevens Feb 2014 #151
Everybody. rrneck Feb 2014 #156
Solution - respect for other people. RBStevens Feb 2014 #160
Yes. rrneck Feb 2014 #162
15 replies? A-Schwarzenegger Feb 2014 #17
dead to you but, I refuse to make them dead to me. but, yeah I can understand why. Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #37
Thank you, Bjorn nt UtahLib Feb 2014 #19
Thank you. myrna minx Feb 2014 #20
Bjorn Against, thanks again. I grew up in the era when 'the rule of thumb' was legal in some states. freshwest Feb 2014 #22
godDAMN, that's a sickening comment from your fellow worker. BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2014 #96
Ah, ha, you should have heard my comeback to that one. I was kicking ass and taking no prisoners. freshwest Feb 2014 #137
Oh my god JustAnotherGen Feb 2014 #202
Thank you for trying to understand. senseandsensibility Feb 2014 #24
The comments that were made in post after post were abusive. sheshe2 Feb 2014 #27
Couldn't agree more. TDale313 Feb 2014 #29
yes. abuse. And sexism trolls obtusely insist it's about taking their BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2014 #111
Noooo, Blanche sheshe2 Feb 2014 #119
"idiots" My Good Babushka Feb 2014 #174
"DISRESPECTED. ONCE" Oh, please. Orrex Feb 2014 #210
not calling all men those things. just those who behave that way. BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2014 #264
You know who Skinner is, right? Orrex Feb 2014 #288
+ a metric fuckton opiate69 Feb 2014 #296
+100 n/t lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #313
Orrex--this is a pretty dense post. I want to reply when I have some time BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2014 #498
+1 RBStevens Feb 2014 #118
how do you do this leftyohiolib Feb 2014 #28
You can read a magazine in a way that is respectful to others by not shoving it in their faces Bjorn Against Feb 2014 #36
They don't need one. rrneck Feb 2014 #64
Read my OP, I gave a very good reason. Bjorn Against Feb 2014 #73
Yes, rrneck Feb 2014 #76
I simply asked that women be treated with respect, is that really so difficult to do? Bjorn Against Feb 2014 #78
Respect is fine. rrneck Feb 2014 #83
"Demanding that certain things not be posted thucythucy Feb 2014 #234
Of course DU has standards. rrneck Feb 2014 #255
Did I ever say anything about juries not agreeing with me? thucythucy Feb 2014 #362
Well, rrneck Feb 2014 #376
"This place doesn't belong to you...." thucythucy Feb 2014 #410
It's because the debate is not about the image on DU or images in the media. rrneck Feb 2014 #428
Are you even interested in any answers? KitSileya Feb 2014 #475
Of course I'm interested in answers. rrneck Feb 2014 #494
How respectful you are. KitSileya Feb 2014 #496
Of course we can change the world for the better. rrneck Feb 2014 #497
You've made some very pertinent points in this post. Couldn't have said it better. nt Democracyinkind Feb 2014 #477
Apparently so. TDale313 Feb 2014 #88
Yeah, unfortunately they can't resist proving my point that there is a lack of respect for women Bjorn Against Feb 2014 #93
They'll never admit that's what's going on TDale313 Feb 2014 #108
that's what i dont get nobody SHOVED their faces anywhere they walked in, stayed and bitched the leftyohiolib Feb 2014 #195
Something else you don't get..... Bobbie Jo Feb 2014 #217
i get that,explain to me how someone who enters a post stays there is so offended yet they leftyohiolib Feb 2014 #231
Wut? Bobbie Jo Feb 2014 #232
Rec. And thank you. Squinch Feb 2014 #30
That's what I said... Triana Feb 2014 #32
nice. Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #40
Not through with causing an uproar I see. zeemike Feb 2014 #33
Calling for basic respect to be shown is not anger Bjorn Against Feb 2014 #38
How about basic respect for those that like to look at pretty men or women? zeemike Feb 2014 #82
I never said you can't look at pretty men or women Bjorn Against Feb 2014 #90
Well if it were plastered on the front page i would agree with you. zeemike Feb 2014 #127
Here, I'll bold this for you theHandpuppet Feb 2014 #176
Well does a meta post like this belong in GD? zeemike Feb 2014 #197
If you really didn't understand my post theHandpuppet Feb 2014 #211
Well I call your OP flame bate. zeemike Feb 2014 #221
As you wish. theHandpuppet Feb 2014 #223
Excellent! RC Feb 2014 #504
But calling people "twits"? My Good Babushka Feb 2014 #245
current events pintobean Feb 2014 #204
The cover of World Weekly News might be an event, too theHandpuppet Feb 2014 #212
Never heard of it pintobean Feb 2014 #222
I have. theHandpuppet Feb 2014 #224
Holy crap that is one of the funniest things I've ever seen here!! Sheldon Cooper Feb 2014 #203
Funny why? zeemike Feb 2014 #207
Sorry, I haven't stopped laughing yet. Sheldon Cooper Feb 2014 #208
Ridicule is what is used when you don't have an argument. zeemike Feb 2014 #209
OR AtheistCrusader Feb 2014 #375
Oh if it were only real laughter. zeemike Feb 2014 #386
Thanks again, for trying to understand and for showing support. MadrasT Feb 2014 #43
You have no idea how much your expessing an understanding of the issues and caring about it... hlthe2b Feb 2014 #48
re: question about this part -"I am a man and I must admit that I really don't understand women quinnox Feb 2014 #53
No they can't understand men, a person can only truly understand their own life Bjorn Against Feb 2014 #59
thanks for answering quinnox Feb 2014 #61
I don't know why you would think I would not be consistent Bjorn Against Feb 2014 #68
Hmmm... rrneck Feb 2014 #60
interesting answer quinnox Feb 2014 #65
One could argue that since men dominate our society jeff47 Feb 2014 #70
That is certainly an argument that could be made, agreed quinnox Feb 2014 #74
The reverse does not apply in general. KitSileya Feb 2014 #167
great post n/t zazen Feb 2014 #188
Doumo Arigatou gozaimasu. yuiyoshida Feb 2014 #56
Bjorn Against---that is the clearest, most geniune explanation BlancheSplanchnik Feb 2014 #66
K & R SunSeeker Feb 2014 #101
Thank you for stepping up. nt DURHAM D Feb 2014 #109
K&R Starry Messenger Feb 2014 #110
I used to play World of Warcraft not too long ago LostOne4Ever Feb 2014 #114
I am a gamer too and I know exactly what you are talking about Bjorn Against Feb 2014 #122
I am also a gamer- it's carried over from the days when there were very few women playing Marrah_G Feb 2014 #181
Beautifully put. Thank you. TDale313 Feb 2014 #131
+1 Squinch Feb 2014 #348
To play the devil's advocate Bodhi BloodWave Feb 2014 #115
I do respect their choice, I never said a word against the models Bjorn Against Feb 2014 #124
Not one single person has said a single word against RBStevens Feb 2014 #140
You signed up on Feb. 18, right? The actual thread was posted 4 days before that. Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #152
Perhaps it was the egregious nature of that particular thread that RBStevens Feb 2014 #154
You claimed no one said anything nasty about the women in the picture. Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #155
No I saw those statements and I thought given the context of the RBStevens Feb 2014 #158
They struck me as awfully ugly things to say, and aimed at the women themselves. Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #159
Obviously my milage does vary. RBStevens Feb 2014 #161
Things that make you go "Hmmmm." opiate69 Feb 2014 #157
the trash button is a highly Niceguy1 Feb 2014 #145
Heated discussion is normal on a political forum LittleBlue Feb 2014 #147
As the Rush lyrics go, "If you decide not to decide, you still have made a choice." stevenleser Feb 2014 #199
Thanks for your follow up in ATA, Bjorn Against BainsBane Feb 2014 #164
Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus. . B Calm Feb 2014 #172
The question, to me, is whether a few people will decide My Good Babushka Feb 2014 #173
Um.. all moderated discussion boards include the premise of "a few PeaceNikki Feb 2014 #178
Yes. Two people get to decide, and I'm one of them. Sheldon Cooper Feb 2014 #185
Of course, everyone should abide by the administrators decision My Good Babushka Feb 2014 #190
"liberality, abundance, and vigorous debate" sounds great, but Sheldon Cooper Feb 2014 #192
I would only point out that those who claim to demand respect for everyone My Good Babushka Feb 2014 #193
I have no idea how that relates to my post, Sheldon Cooper Feb 2014 #194
.... Democracyinkind Feb 2014 #186
You are warned that you can't discuss it in the Mens Group boston bean Feb 2014 #191
You're asked not to discuss it in that actual thread, because that's not what the thread is for. Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #236
right....... boston bean Feb 2014 #239
Yeah, you made a patently false assertion. Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #316
really? boston bean Feb 2014 #318
In the OP for the 3rd thread, yes, I made a -request- that it not be derailed. Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #319
Yep, and you derailed my point beyond, with a bunch of BS accusations. boston bean Feb 2014 #325
Where, specifically, did I make any accusation about anything? Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #331
accusing me of making a patently false accusation: boston bean Feb 2014 #334
You're having a conversation with someone else, not me, I think. Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #336
yeah, why did you have to make that declaration. boston bean Feb 2014 #347
Is this really how you enjoy spending your time on this planet? Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #349
No, it's really not how I enjoy spending time on this planet, you? boston bean Feb 2014 #354
You're right. The precise words you used were, "many objected". Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #355
Uh, for full transparency, I provided the exact text from the OP and who made it boston bean Feb 2014 #356
I think the subthread speaks for itself. Warren DeMontague Feb 2014 #358
I'll talk to you anytime. boston bean Feb 2014 #359
He made a request, not a warning... opiate69 Feb 2014 #321
Just for the record... opiate69 Feb 2014 #407
The message seemed pretty clear to me. boston bean Feb 2014 #491
Wrong question. MadrasT Feb 2014 #198
The post in question didn't transgress the terms My Good Babushka Feb 2014 #200
Another one who says if it's not written down in TOS, boston bean Feb 2014 #201
+1 n/t Gormy Cuss Feb 2014 #214
Now you are moving the goalposts. MadrasT Feb 2014 #205
Over the years, DU has shut down discussion on a number of topics that caused strife, PeaceNikki Feb 2014 #216
You can't very well have a discussion BainsBane Feb 2014 #350
You really couldn't make this stuff up... opiate69 Feb 2014 #357
Your support for the women of DU is much appreciated. DLevine Feb 2014 #177
Respect? Harmony Blue Feb 2014 #206
And some queer women felt that posting that in GD was still cinnabonbon Feb 2014 #215
All kinds of non-political stuff is discussed in GD Orrex Feb 2014 #233
I still don't see why I'd want to see lesbian soft porn in GD? cinnabonbon Feb 2014 #241
I haven't seen any lesbian soft porn in GD. Orrex Feb 2014 #242
Good for you? cinnabonbon Feb 2014 #470
You set a low bar for what qualifies as porn Orrex Feb 2014 #493
In my opinion, some people should be charged with littering theHandpuppet Feb 2014 #252
And there are some lesbians here... theHandpuppet Feb 2014 #219
Plus 1000. DURHAM D Feb 2014 #229
Thank you. cinnabonbon Feb 2014 #466
Sexual orientation is entirely irrelveant to this conversation BainsBane Feb 2014 #262
Yeah, that puzzled me too. cinnabonbon Feb 2014 #467
Good post Bjorn... I also agree with your ATA thread Ohio Joe Feb 2014 #218
So if I open a door out of 'respect' for women, what do we call that? The Straight Story Feb 2014 #220
wow. boston bean Feb 2014 #228
What? The Straight Story Feb 2014 #235
Did it ever occur to you that boston bean Feb 2014 #237
Of course it did The Straight Story Feb 2014 #243
I don't know why you would have such a problem boston bean Feb 2014 #246
It is a definitional issue The Straight Story Feb 2014 #261
Quit lying about what I said Bjorn Against Feb 2014 #266
Well now The Straight Story Feb 2014 #276
Bwahahaha! You still can't get past the Doors? Whisp Feb 2014 #244
And your reply is what? The Straight Story Feb 2014 #263
No one is asking you to treat women differently BainsBane Feb 2014 #269
Your reply is exactly what I have been talking about The Straight Story Feb 2014 #284
You are not showing respect because you have made clear BainsBane Feb 2014 #287
As for subhuman BainsBane Feb 2014 #291
And some think they are the sole arbitrator on what is and what is not The Straight Story Feb 2014 #297
No one is claiming to be sole arbiter BainsBane Feb 2014 #307
About recs and doors The Straight Story Feb 2014 #317
Hmm it appears my reply above was alerted on, the results: The Straight Story Feb 2014 #290
"he does not belong on DU" pintobean Feb 2014 #294
I wish people were made to sign on all alerts. nt. polly7 Feb 2014 #299
That one didn't need to be signed. pintobean Feb 2014 #308
Much like about half, by my research, of the much ballyhooed "Recs" opiate69 Feb 2014 #310
Oh, my. Desperation is the mother of invention. BainsBane Feb 2014 #352
I know.. it's such a dogs life for some... opiate69 Feb 2014 #361
Some dog's have a pretty good life. BainsBane Feb 2014 #366
And some don't. polly7 Feb 2014 #369
insightful as ever polly BainsBane Feb 2014 #371
It shows that polly7 Feb 2014 #373
Are you going to always bring that up. hrmjustin Feb 2014 #382
When she denies the presence of socks here and basically laughs at someone for polly7 Feb 2014 #383
Whether there are socks or not she admitted her mistake so just let it go. hrmjustin Feb 2014 #385
Did you mistakenly assume I take orders from you? polly7 Feb 2014 #389
Polly I am sorry if you took it ad an order but she did not say socs don't exist. hrmjustin Feb 2014 #392
I disagree. Apology accepted. polly7 Feb 2014 #393
I have to say I personally like her and think. she is a great poster. hrmjustin Feb 2014 #394
That's great! polly7 Feb 2014 #397
Which group? hrmjustin Feb 2014 #398
Your HOF group. nt. polly7 Feb 2014 #399
Hof is not my group. I post every once and awhile to say hello or k and r. hrmjustin Feb 2014 #401
That's true. I'm guilty of it myself. polly7 Feb 2014 #404
Thank you for listening. hrmjustin Feb 2014 #405
If I apologize for doing something, can I then claim that the thing in question never happens? lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #403
She never said they don't exist. hrmjustin Feb 2014 #406
Ignore and ignorance are close cousins. lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #409
I don't read it that way. Thefact is lots of people are members of this site don't post or post hrmjustin Feb 2014 #412
It looks like you're doing HOF's dirty work. pintobean Feb 2014 #421
For your information I told her to do the same thing. hrmjustin Feb 2014 #423
I'm confused... How does ignore effect ones black list? opiate69 Feb 2014 #425
No. If I don't want you judging my posts pintobean Feb 2014 #430
Ok.. That still doesn't make much sense in regards to Bane's Spartacus thread... opiate69 Feb 2014 #432
If they empty their iggy lists pintobean Feb 2014 #433
Ok.. Yeah.. I finally got around to that lol.. opiate69 Feb 2014 #434
Did you read through that thread? pintobean Feb 2014 #435
Lol.. Yup... opiate69 Feb 2014 #437
What would happen if there were no "iggy" lists and no jury *blacklists*? RBStevens Feb 2014 #442
Something like this pintobean Feb 2014 #443
You know, I appreciate fine films from the 80s RBStevens Feb 2014 #444
You want me to speculate pintobean Feb 2014 #446
Not really. Thank you for taking the time to answer with words though. RBStevens Feb 2014 #454
That's quite the machievellian mind you have there BainsBane Feb 2014 #453
Did you alert pintobean Feb 2014 #456
Would that be like your recent alerts on my OPs? BainsBane Feb 2014 #457
Not me. pintobean Feb 2014 #459
Yup, that's what this is about. Not one of them has commented on the OP, which is ironic R B Garr Feb 2014 #474
It's easier than actually articulating a position on an issue BainsBane Feb 2014 #384
Exactly!!! polly7 Feb 2014 #395
Twilight Zone BainsBane Feb 2014 #400
Well I admit, I erred there. polly7 Feb 2014 #402
What argument am I running from? BainsBane Feb 2014 #408
Who threw Riff under the bus?? opiate69 Feb 2014 #413
Heh ... polly7 Feb 2014 #419
Cute dog... but... ( ya had to know there was going to be a "but") opiate69 Feb 2014 #374
It's okay, my dear, sweet Opiate BainsBane Feb 2014 #379
Oh, I bet I know what it is.. opiate69 Feb 2014 #380
I got it right. BainsBane Feb 2014 #381
if you think you have something earth shaking to reveal, by all means do. opiate69 Feb 2014 #387
ZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz BainsBane Feb 2014 #391
This message was self-deleted by its author rrneck Feb 2014 #388
Lots of people are members here and rec but don't or hardly post. hrmjustin Feb 2014 #411
And, as I know you also saw on MIRT... opiate69 Feb 2014 #414
That is true but no one is denying that. hrmjustin Feb 2014 #415
I guess I'm just more cynical than the average bear. opiate69 Feb 2014 #416
I understand. hrmjustin Feb 2014 #417
I reccognize most of the names in the rec list BainsBane Feb 2014 #478
snork!!! opiate69 Feb 2014 #300
Ya know what is really funny? The Straight Story Feb 2014 #306
It is called respect BainsBane Feb 2014 #265
Isn't it amazing how they think that treating women decently is saying that women are weak? KitSileya Feb 2014 #278
Yes, but I wouldn't mistake it for stupidity BainsBane Feb 2014 #285
That is a very good point. KitSileya Feb 2014 #289
"MOVE YOUR FOOT!" yes, this, +1 MadrasT Feb 2014 #351
Thank you Beringia Feb 2014 #225
Thank you for this Op. K&R (with respect)... Jasana Feb 2014 #226
Thank you for this Bjorn. thucythucy Feb 2014 #238
I understand your point, but I feel like this might feed the trolls more than anything. chrisa Feb 2014 #257
And a thread about suicide among men doesn't attract trolls? lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #274
What a sad spectacle. JVS Feb 2014 #472
These trolls are going to have to go on a diet soon betsuni Feb 2014 #460
Go for it. Welcome to DU. rrneck Feb 2014 #495
So, waddya think? rrneck Feb 2014 #315
and we danced, and we cried, and we laughed and opiate69 Feb 2014 #322
I agree Jack Rabbit Feb 2014 #320
"There's nothing to discuss" pintobean Feb 2014 #328
Right because it was posted by a woman! RBStevens Feb 2014 #396
k&r Liberal_in_LA Feb 2014 #335
Hey! blkmusclmachine Feb 2014 #344
Because this thread needs even more straw BainsBane Feb 2014 #360
There are so many wonderful men here wryter2000 Feb 2014 #363
Name three rhett o rick Feb 2014 #438
What about the woman adult models on the covers.? Are they not free to do this legal work? Sunlei Feb 2014 #463
This question has been answered a lot in the other posts nt cinnabonbon Feb 2014 #471
Your thread has reminded me why I don't support certain feminists on DU. Waiting For Everyman Feb 2014 #476
Oh dear betsuni Feb 2014 #479
Until they want to be for ALL women, I'm not interested. Waiting For Everyman Feb 2014 #480
No betsuni Feb 2014 #481
I think you missed the word *certain*... Violet_Crumble Feb 2014 #482
Could you give some examples then, please? betsuni Feb 2014 #484
Can't do that, because it'd be considered a call-out by a jury... Violet_Crumble Feb 2014 #485
I didn't notice anything in this thread! betsuni Feb 2014 #492
They're easy to identify. pintobean Feb 2014 #483
Private meta war room? betsuni Feb 2014 #486
I'm going with Violet's answer. pintobean Feb 2014 #488
Oh, well, it's all so secretive and cryptic betsuni Feb 2014 #506
My nerves are fine pintobean Feb 2014 #507
I wouldn't have used "hit a nerve" betsuni Feb 2014 #510
Wow. redqueen Feb 2014 #499
Is there a point? Waiting For Everyman Feb 2014 #500
The point is self-evident. redqueen Feb 2014 #501
Because they're different. Waiting For Everyman Feb 2014 #502
Ouch, my brains betsuni Feb 2014 #508
"Certain women???" ScreamingMeemie Feb 2014 #509
Just wanted to say again thucythucy Feb 2014 #505

Bonobo

(29,257 posts)
5. I urge you to recall that it was posted by a woman.
Mon Feb 24, 2014, 11:10 PM
Feb 2014

Enough with the implications that it was done by some kind of misogynistic man.

Kali

(55,039 posts)
86. ...
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:40 AM
Feb 2014
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024548058#post30
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024528019#post87
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024530323#post69
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024548058#post5

I am sure it was posted a few more times than this quick search. Not to mention the multiple times the person who posted it bragged and took "full responsibility" for it. Now please tell the world what the fuck it matters who posted it?
 

quinnox

(20,600 posts)
91. It matters very much, because we keep having a few duers imply it was all the men's fault
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:46 AM
Feb 2014

that kicked this off by posting that OP of the swimsuit issue with the bikini pics. There was another recent thread too, that was full of old time bikini pics and magazine covers posted by "Tiyee" or something like that, and I think they also are maybe a woman. At least that is my impression.

But I'm not sure, so I didn't mention that before.

Kali

(55,039 posts)
100. so if some asshole of any group does something that is offensive to a large number people,
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:01 AM
Feb 2014

even (or maybe especially) to that same group that the offender belongs to, that somehow makes it all ok?

you see, it does NOT matter who posted it. It matters that it was posted to stir shit, and it matters that this is primarily a political discussion forum, that tries to be INCLUSIVE and PROGRESSIVE, not a man-cave in somebody's carport.





 

quinnox

(20,600 posts)
104. No, it doesn't make it ok. But it does make those who are implying this is all the work of
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:06 AM
Feb 2014

"misogynist men", to be false.

Also, I have seen several woman feminists, who I personally have a lot of respect for, disagree with some of the "certain group" ones, who tend to be very militant in their views.

What I am saying here is I think it is very unfair and manipulative for a small sub group to keep pretending that they speak for all the women and all the feminists on DU, when time and time again, I have seen that is clearly NOT the case.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
169. It means all the men who have insisted that the views
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 07:07 AM
Feb 2014

of the hundreds of DUers who find such threads offensive are entirely insignificant have cover because women are responsible for all that ails the world. It has absolutely nothing to do with their repeated scoffing at women's concerns, repeated claims that what we want is meaningless, and their ahistorical blathering that objectification has always existed and always will, and that women rather than men are responsible for it because some of us wear make-up and heels.

The excuses have changed rapidly. First it was objectification doesn't exist. A few fringe feminists imagined the whole thing and maligned DUers firmly committed to equality. Now that they found out hundreds of members object to their crap, they've moved on to new excuses. It's always been that way, and objectification is the fault of women. White Knighting keeps women dependent and furthers oppression. So they throw their sacrificial lamb under the bus. The key point is under no circumstances will they assume any responsibility for their own posts or acknowledge that anyone but themselves is worth listening to.

It's a transparent game that the vast majority of DUers are seeing straight through. Bonobo even tried to claim he didn't even know she posted in the men's group, despite the fact he had posted a thread there calling out TA for offending her. My guess is someone, or a few someones, put her up to posting that thread. Now that it's clear that people are offended, they throw her under the bus.

You see, for many of us this is about issues of equality and diversity. The gender of the poster of that first thread is less important than the overall sexism and misogyny that has become obviously to virtually everyone on this site. Yet for some, all that matters is blaming women and absolving men of any responsibility because ultimately all they have ever cared about is their own privilege.

ConservativeDemocrat

(2,720 posts)
326. It sounds like you were calling the woman who posted the SI pics an "asshole"
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 04:53 PM
Feb 2014

...since that was the topic of the discussion.

You have every right to disagree with someone, but the "asshole" bit seems a touch disrespectful.

On the other hand, I personally am not so thin skinned, so it doesn't really bother me. I'm just answering your question.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
168. Are you going to claim you haven't posted in defense of objectification?
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 06:50 AM
Feb 2014

Last edited Tue Feb 25, 2014, 07:22 AM - Edit history (1)

Are you going to claim we imagined that thread of yours, the recs on the sexist threads, and repeated posts defending those threads? No woman is responsible for your posts. You are. I get there is this little game on, but you are sadly mistaken if you don't think most people see right through it. The charade is up.

whopis01

(3,536 posts)
175. I believe the point of the OP was
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 08:17 AM
Feb 2014

about how the women who expressed their feelings regarding the images were treated.

So it wasn't really about the original post as much as it was about the treatment of women who responded to the original post.

Bonobo

(29,257 posts)
92. On phone so couldn't check all links but
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:49 AM
Feb 2014

I looked through 2 of your 4 links and couldn't see the offending photo.

Kali

(55,039 posts)
103. I wasn't posting any offending photo.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:05 AM
Feb 2014

I posted a few easy-to-find examples of but, but, but...it was a woman that posted it.

Kali

(55,039 posts)
134. the point
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:46 AM
Feb 2014

is I was replying to quinvox.

you keep beating that dead horse, as I pointed out last night and as you did again tonight, quinnox made the comment that it was "Odd this little fact keeps being overlooked or unmentioned" so I attempted to correct the facts and again point out that it matters not a single tiny bit who posted the stupid magazine cover.

the repeated attempts to imply that it is somehow a significant fact that it was a woman who posted it is kind of pathetic, really.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
240. I don't recall 1/100th of this amount of disdain for the
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:44 PM
Feb 2014

poster of those huge (including full-frontal) naked men pictures posted in GD.

Does it all depend on who posts what?

Caution: GRAPHIC male nudity.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022584574

polly7

(20,582 posts)
250. Odd there wasn't day after day of outraged posts over those pictures
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:17 PM
Feb 2014

by people offended at seeing nudity. Seems a bit unfair to throw someone to the sharks for doing far less than what's been done with absolutely no criticism for it.









Kali

(55,039 posts)
253. well I see you are taking the opportunity to do so now
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:27 PM
Feb 2014

better late than never, I guess

(you do realize most everybody is fine with nudity, right? for me the issue is whether DU GD is the appropriate place to post sexual images that objectify women)

polly7

(20,582 posts)
254. Only because I'm sick and tired of seeing one person painted as
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:29 PM
Feb 2014

a horrible, nasty person for doing far less than has been done and accepted here before - in GD.

Sorry if you have a problem with that. I don't.

Apparently, everyone is not fine with nudity. As the thousands of outraged posts have shown.

R B Garr

(17,023 posts)
248. You are very committed to taking things out of context
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:13 PM
Feb 2014

Just a quick look at the comments by the poster of that thread and you see the context she provided. It's ridiculous that you keep taking things out of context and pretend that no one notices.

FAIL.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
251. And you are very committed to talking shit about people and things you
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:19 PM
Feb 2014

Last edited Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:49 PM - Edit history (1)

know nothing about.

There has been thread after thread of people stating they were insulted simply by having nudity placed in GD.

Why the double standard?

FAIL.

R B Garr

(17,023 posts)
258. The posts leading back to your post are about a female posting the SI pictures
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:49 PM
Feb 2014

You threw the nudity in as a way to bash seabeyond, and a typicial Fox News tactic to spin this into a poster-bashing session and to personalize it even more which is obviously where you like discussions to be -- bashing posters so you can flame them and get posts hidden. Very transparent. Very.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
260. I'm not 'bashing' anyone.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:52 PM
Feb 2014

I'm asking about a double standard, and I don't give a shit who posted what ... I remembered those photos and really can't grasp the hypocrisy of burning someone at the stake for something that was accepted here without even a smidgen of outrage.

You know what's transparent? Your hypocrisy.

R B Garr

(17,023 posts)
270. I wouldn't trust your interpretations of double standards and hypocrisy
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 02:34 PM
Feb 2014

based on what I've seen you post that is taken out of context, and usually to continue old flames that were probably taken out of context then, as well. Just like I wouldn't trust Fox News to give me a fair and balanced story.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
271. I suggest you check out a mirror.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 02:37 PM
Feb 2014

What's taken out of context? Posting nudity for a specific reaction? Those male photos were posted as payback for the 'horrifically insulting and degrading FEMEN pictures!' posted as part of the reporting of their activities.

Some here seem to have a (conveniently) short memory when it comes to things like this .... depending upon who it is they feel needs to be bullied and demonized until they're run off or banned.

Like I said ....... it smells bad. Really bad.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
281. No.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 02:53 PM
Feb 2014

I'm equating a picture of three women on a beach with the posting of full-frontal nude pictures of males to get even for those awful, disgusting FEMEN women pictures.

Try to keep up.

R B Garr

(17,023 posts)
295. No. You are taking things out of context deliberately to push your own agenda.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 03:18 PM
Feb 2014

What the subtext is really about are the motives and reasons for posting the pictures which you clearly misrepresented. Now it's just pictures of three women on a beach? You're a hoot.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
298. LOL.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 03:22 PM
Feb 2014

Try harder.

The hypocrisy of defending one whole set of pictures obviously meant to inflame and insult while watching another poster being attacked and abused like she's just committed the worst sin in the world for posting a cover of a magazine - for WHATEVER reason, is lost on those with the agenda.

You're not a hoot.

R B Garr

(17,023 posts)
327. Context, polly. Get some. This is your little corner of Fox News/Benghazi
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 04:53 PM
Feb 2014

This is exactly like Fox News propaganda where you repeat talking points in the hopes they stick. You are very transparent.



polly7

(20,582 posts)
330. I did point out the context.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 04:58 PM
Feb 2014

You're defending the usage of extremely graphic pics in GD meant to insult a whole group of people here simply because someone was upset at the FEMEN women being shown as part of the that coverage. One woman is being skewered for something far, far less offensive than another was cheered on for. Doesn't that bother you at all? It does, me.

What is propaganda about this? Did you see the thread? There wasn't a single objection to the nudity, that I can remember.

(GRAPHIC nudity) http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022584574

R B Garr

(17,023 posts)
332. The two are not equal, polly. You are very transparent. Have you even read this OP?
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 05:05 PM
Feb 2014

Why don't you respond to that.

You are just trying to get people to talk about individual posters here so you can bring personalities into it to try to get posts hidden. What I have seen of the poster who posted the SI pictures is that she is an active member of the Men's Group and posts derogatory comments about other women often, including me when I reminded her that she did not provide any commentary or comments to her SI pictures, yet she was trying to take credit for those who did contribute actual dialogue. She insinuated I was a man-hater, so I guess in her mind, there is competition for men here. She can have the men. I'll stick with the issues that affect me and that I am interested in.

I'm not interested in your continued misrepresentations of events.


polly7

(20,582 posts)
337. Oh, you're so right. They're definitely not equal.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 05:11 PM
Feb 2014

Thanks for admitting that.

I'm not 'trying' for anything. (Is that why you post here?) I stated to one poster that I respect VERY much that I think it's heartless to treat one woman a certain way, with all the horrible things that have been said about her, while ignoring that an even more egregious (for those opposed to nudity) post was pretty much taken in stride, with no one demonized, called to be banned, burned at the stake, called pathetic names, etc. etc.

No, Riff doesn't post derogatory comments about others without provocation (and we all respond to that) and there are some of us who find more equality and empathy, compassion, desire for fair and equal treatment by that group of people you and yours try to demonize day after day than the one that bullies other women and then dares assume they speak for all of us.

I'm not interested in your re-construction of history.

R B Garr

(17,023 posts)
340. This is exactly how you wanted this to go. Now you're back to bashing posters
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 05:19 PM
Feb 2014

which is where you wanted this to be in the first place so you can escalate into getting posts hidden.

You are very transparent, polly.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
342. I have no interest in getting anyone's posts hidden.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 05:27 PM
Feb 2014

It's a shame you don't understand that the hurtful treatment for one shouldn't have reached the point it did, based on previous GD posts.

one_voice

(20,043 posts)
364. I actually agree with you here...
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 07:14 PM
Feb 2014

Last edited Tue Feb 25, 2014, 07:47 PM - Edit history (1)

The two are not equal, polly



One thread was posted without 'outward' ulterior motives. The SI thread wasn't posted out of spitefulness. Yet the person that posted the OP has been under fire ever since. It shouldn't matter that she posts in the Men's group. Are the men bad people? Why would that be a mark against someone?

The other thread was posted specifically to get a reaction--it was a 'take that'--clearly written in the OP of that thread. It was posted out of spitefulness.

The same people that had issues with the first thread, didn't seem to care that the latter was posted.

Those same people are constantly talking about this being a progressive board, equality, and respect for others. How does that happen when you turn a blind eye to one of these threads but not the other. How is that not the height of hypocrisy? How is that respect? How is that equality?

I had no problem with either thread. Except the hypocrisy between how each OP was treated.

Maybe the SI thread should have been in the Sports group or the lounge, not GD; that's an issue for the hosts.

So, yeah, I agree, they're not equal. One was out of spite the other (as far as I know) was not.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
365. Thank you!
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 07:22 PM
Feb 2014

It's really hard for me to sit back and watch someone be publicly shamed and insulted .... I know many are averse to any nudity in GD and I understand that, but what one poster has been subjected to is so over the top, it's bizarre. Words DO matter, and they hurt ... sometimes more than anyone but the person on the receiving end can understand.

R B Garr

(17,023 posts)
473. Thanks for agreeing they aren't equal. We disagree as to the reasons why they don't equate.
Wed Feb 26, 2014, 01:53 AM
Feb 2014

The SI issue was posted out of spite and as a way to whip up old flame wars as evidenced by those on this thread who have not even bothered addressing the OP, but have just ground their own axes, which seems to happen from thread to thread to thread over and over.

You might want to read the OP and comment on it. It's really a shame that meaningless unrelated conversations such as this are allowed to stay, and I regret if I was a part of it by pointing out polly's lack of context when she started posting and basically spamming this thread about old flame wars.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
487. And here you go again.
Wed Feb 26, 2014, 07:38 AM
Feb 2014

I provided context - the hypocrisy of burning one woman at the stake day after day for doing something far less than has been done here before. That old thread wasn't flamed by anyone, it was a good laugh. Why the double standard?

RiffRandell

(5,909 posts)
422. Who are you, the DU Hall Monitor?
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 09:42 PM
Feb 2014

I can post in any group I damn well please.

Provide the links where I often post derogatory comments about women. I haven't had any posts hidden recently.

I said I'll take credit for a spirited discussion regarding the SISI.

Talk about taking things out of context!

R B Garr

(17,023 posts)
424. Gee, the very first thread I opened in the Men's Group, there you were
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 09:47 PM
Feb 2014

making snide comments about other female posters here. That's all I've ever seen you do. Isn't that why you're here now?

You can take all the credit you want, but it doesn't make it true that you contributed nothing in the way of discussion and anyone can see that. You just posted pictures. The very women you mock in the Men's Group are the posters who contributed substance.

Apparently you didn't even read the link polly provided that was unrelated to anything except the personal vendettas you two have with many posters here.

You can quit with your disruptions now.



polly7

(20,582 posts)
490. She didn't 'mock' anyone, so shove your boring, repetitious bs.
Wed Feb 26, 2014, 07:42 AM
Feb 2014

She's allowed to post in any group she wishes without you following her around, checking her posts for tone and content. Who are you, anyway?

You go on claiming 'personal vendetta' 'whaaaaaaaaaa' about anything you can't justify, are you afraid to even admit the hypocrisy and unfairness of the way she was treated for posting a simple magazine cover vs. absolutely NO reaction for posting worse here in GD? Your outrage against nudity here is very selective.

 

pintobean

(18,101 posts)
301. That's all it ever was
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 03:29 PM
Feb 2014

just a picture of three women on a beach. Seeing as anything else would be sexist and/or objectification. It's kinda funny who actually did that.

R B Garr

(17,023 posts)
329. I take it from your comment you didn't even read the OP
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 04:58 PM
Feb 2014

You should try reading it and responding to that.

 

pintobean

(18,101 posts)
333. We're pretty far removed from the OP
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 05:06 PM
Feb 2014

in this sub-thread. You should try following the flow of the conversation, rather than trying to dominate it with silly insults.





This is where you compare me to fox news, now.

R B Garr

(17,023 posts)
338. "We"? Nice try. If you follow the posts back, "we" started discussing polly bashing seabeyond
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 05:16 PM
Feb 2014

and doing so out of context, as usual.

This is a waste of time with you now. Read the OP and respond to that. Try something new for a change!

polly7

(20,582 posts)
341. 'Bashing seabeyond'.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 05:24 PM
Feb 2014

As opposed to the 'bashing' RiffRandel has been subjected to for posting a magazine cover. You don't get it, it's got nothing to do with who posted either, it's the hypocrisy and cruelty of attacking one woman so viciously for posting a damn magazine cover, while another walked away undoubtedly laughing. Of course, when that same woman here is called a dog and the poster saying it is applauded for it, I don't suppose she was ever worthy of equal treatment from some, amirite?

Oh, and that 'dog' comment and the brutal treatment of Riff is a strange thing, considering who recommended that earlier thread.

R B Garr

(17,023 posts)
345. You're just spamming now. Riff solicited insults in a recent thread,
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 05:52 PM
Feb 2014

so she seems pleased with her efforts and wanted even more "feedback", if you will, probably to alert on posts so she could get them hidden.

Anyway, you have a good rest of your day. I've got to run and do some errands.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
368. Exactly. Despite the fact the guys threw her under the bus
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 07:37 PM
Feb 2014

Last edited Tue Feb 25, 2014, 10:17 PM - Edit history (1)

on a dime.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
440. You did, in the thread to which I responded this morning
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 10:44 PM
Feb 2014

Last edited Tue Feb 25, 2014, 11:26 PM - Edit history (1)

and Bonobo and Quinnox did so above. You couldn't wait to point out that it was all her fault, that is was all due to women and that the men who have carefully stoked the fires of hostility against women on this site are entirely without blame. It feeds right into Blue Harmony's thread that women are at fault for objectification because some of us wear make-up and heels. The menz used her as cover to insist that none of you had anything to do with the endless threads clearly posted to mark territory and make clear women who don't defer to men aren't welcome. Jeff made perfectly clear, as have others, that those threads were posted with the deliberate intention of pissing off feminists. They were intended hostilely and they were received hostilely. Only the game backfired. It exposed hundreds of DUers to the misogyny that is common place here and they have said enough, as hundreds of recommendations for threads such as this one, Bjorn's thread in HOF that has over 180 recs, and Warren Stupidity's thread shows. The charade that only a few fringe feminists object to the misogynist bullshit has been exposed for the lie it is. The game backfired.

If I had so-called "friends" who choose to defend themselves by saying "it's not us; it's her," I would certainly consider that being thrown under the bus. Fortunately, I choose my associations more wisely.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
445. Uh huh.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 10:59 PM
Feb 2014

All those posts were in response to something akin to "men posting T&A on DU is unacceptable" or a similar argument. When someone says "men do..." it's legit, IMHO, to point out that it was a woman who posted it. Riff, herself, did the same thing numerous times.

But if she's got a problem with me, I trust she will let me know herself. She's completely capable of making up her own mind about things, in my experience, unlike the people here who have suggested she has "Stockholm Syndrome", or the like, because she posted the cover to the sports illustrated swimsuit issue, a crime against humanity apparently on the Pol Pot/Cambodian Killing Fields level.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
451. I could care less about her relationship with you
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 11:30 PM
Feb 2014

The point is the game you all are playing. This OP doesn't ask: who posted the SI thread? It is about the widespread misogyny. Naturally you don't give a shit what hundreds of members have said. You have made that perfectly clear. You all use her as cover for ongoing hostility against feminists. No one buys it. As the OP made very clear, the issue is far beyond the SI cover. It is how some members treat women who don't defer to them with absolute contempt and repeated disrespect. That disrespect now extends to the hundreds of members, men and women alike, who have said they are fed up with the crap. But why should that matter to you?

One confused poster is running around accusing people of "attacking Riff." The only people who have even mentioned her are those seeking to use her as cover for their own posting behavior. I responded to that point, and if it is raised again I will do the same.

 

opiate69

(10,129 posts)
461. Just to reiterate...
Wed Feb 26, 2014, 12:04 AM
Feb 2014
Kindle as a bookmark currently has more recs than this thread. Since you're so enamored with recs lately.
Oh, and... Sunday LOLCats has more than the one in your group that you keep flogging. A lot more. Just cause, apparently it means something out something..

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
464. Let's reiterate
Wed Feb 26, 2014, 12:26 AM
Feb 2014
Compare and Contrast

SI cover thread, 24
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4498713

Kate Upon in space 5
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024521817

Objectification is women's fault 5
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024550887

And as a historian, my personal nominee for highest level of derpitude,
Objectification will always exist. 8
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024549576



I used to think HOF exaggerated the misogyny around here, 183
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=38236

It's about respect for women (this thread), 112

Thanks to Skinner and Earl G for the locks, 121
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024547063

I'm against the gender wars but women shouldn't be the ones to surrender 62
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024535851

DU should be ashamed that members deny objectification is a problem, 75
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024538977

T and A threads create a hostile environment, 175
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024522226

Now I'm no math genius, but even I can figure out the second set of numbers is a lot bigger than the first. And you are indeed right that LOL Cats has more. It always does because it is entirely uncontroversial. Is that a revelation to you?

RiffRandell

(5,909 posts)
447. I hardly consider them verifying a woman made the post "throwing me under the bus"
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 11:22 PM
Feb 2014

Last edited Wed Feb 26, 2014, 08:25 AM - Edit history (1)

or their opinion that it shouldn't have been posted in GD; they're entitled to it.

Unlike you, I don't need everyone to agree with me all the time (male or female) which blows your entire theory about me out of the water.

Speaking of games, you're the one that keeps bringing up the amount of recommendations like it's a fucking contest.

My 7 year old daughter doesn't brag when she wins Apples to Apples JR.



BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
455. It is a reflection of the views of hundreds of members of this site
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 11:45 PM
Feb 2014

and a clear refutation of the meme that only a few fringe feminists object to the hostile environment and pattern of misogyny that has become common. That is why it is important. It shows what members of this community think. If you find their views and lives irrelevant, so be it. No one can convince you to give a damn about people around you.

I have no idea what you believe, Riff. I have never once seen you articulate a political position. I have only seen you snipe at people. I know who you like and don't like, but I have no idea what you believe. So the idea that you don't need people to agree with you means nothing to me. I know you and I have never discussed a single political or social issue but you nonetheless decided to gossip about me in the men's group, from which I am banned. I don't even know if you talk about politics at all. I don't know anything about your views.

So you keep laughing about what hundreds of members of this site are concerned with. It does show the complete disrespect with which you hold the hundreds of members of this site who have said they have had enough.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
367. I must have missed the posts attacking her for posting the cover
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 07:36 PM
Feb 2014

What I've seen are general responses to the climate of hostility and misogyny, and her chiming saying "it was me, it was me who posted it." I don't think anyone sees this as about Riff in particular.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
370. If you think this is about disdain for one member
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 07:39 PM
Feb 2014

You aren't reading at all.

If you think the objectification of men is the same as that of women, I don't know what world you live in.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
372. I don't know what world you live in if you think
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 07:43 PM
Feb 2014

I was in any way speaking about the 'objectification' of anyone. Does pointing out the hypocrisy in the way women are treated here, depending upon whether or not a certain group accepts them, tell you what my views are on the 'objectification'? NO. Not even a good try. Pathetic, actually.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
377. You mean the way you treat women?
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 08:02 PM
Feb 2014

Yes, I would agree with the term you use to describe the rift between your criticisms of others and what you yourself do. In fact, some members have insisted that I and some others couldn't really be women because evidently real women don't concern themselves with equal rights and know their place is to defer to men at all times.

The OP is about objectification and respect for women, something hundreds of DUers have said they find offensive. That is the point of this thread. I realize you think this and many others threads are about who you like vs. who you don't like, but most DUers are more concerned with broader issues, like the content of the OP: objectification, equal rights, and respect for women.

You complained that whoever posted a picture of naked men wasn't pilloried to your satisfaction, as you insist--absent any evidence whatsoever--that Riff has been for posting the SI thread. I have seen no one shaming or blaming her for that post other than herself and the men who seek to justify it by saying "a woman posted it." In fact, I have seen few people even mention her. The OP is far more concerned about the subsequent reaction to the posting by people who so hostilely dismiss the views of hundreds of women and men on this site who have said they find such posts hostile and misogynistic. So if you are concerned about how Riff has been treated over this incident, I suggest you take it up with the guys who so quickly threw her under the bus.

Your insistence that this is about attacking one woman is clearly without any evidentiary basis. Reading the OPs might help you figure out what the issue at hand is.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
378. Sorry, I got tired of reading your long screeds a while ago.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 08:06 PM
Feb 2014

Too hard on the eyes. You might want to paragraph a bit more .... or lecture less.

Once again, my post was regarding the OTT condemnation of one woman here, who's been treated like shit for a while now by your group, compared to the treatment of one of your own for doing much worse and getting rec's for it. I totally understand why you want to ignore that.

 

pintobean

(18,101 posts)
390. It's the same ole, same ole.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 08:26 PM
Feb 2014

She should just get it readable once, then copy and paste. It would cut down on the edits, too.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
462. I don't think this situation will EVER be resolved to some peoples' satisfaction.
Wed Feb 26, 2014, 12:08 AM
Feb 2014

So with that in mind, here's a video of some quadruplets cracking up.



 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
153. It wasn't ABOUT the pictures themselves....it is just the reason it occurred...
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 02:54 AM
Feb 2014

and there are some women.....who WILL do anything to impress their male peers by the way so pointing out a female did it...is no excuse...(there is a term called Stockholm Syndrome)

The point is.....that it was used to send a message...and it contained some vile comments to support that contention....

It was meant to stir up emotions about whether or not there is gender discrimination....That women should just STFU. There are a number of men you know that feel rejected by women and somehow think that women have all the power in the world....because they aren't popular with women (probably because women sense this). Because they think women have power over them.....they subconsciously hate women.... one that got banned today is an example that comes to mind. Men like that think THEY are the victim of women.....so they want to hurt them! There are other men who subconsciously feel the same way....and will react similarly but deny that is their motivation...they may not be as overt about it....but they hold deep seated resentment of women for some perceived previous rejection....

We women are exposed to that kind of thinking ALL THE TIME! Day in and day out....

YOU will note that many of the same ones on that thread are the same ones that OUTRIGHT deny that women are discriminated against. Some even went so far as to outright deny racial discrimination....thinking somehow they too had been discriminated against (for things they CHOSE in life I might add, completely missing the point). The only thing they proved is that they do NOT have empathy or respect for those who actually have been. This minimizes the problem ....its insulting and degrading.....and it is a disgrace. It has a chilling effect and it stifles debate....

DU should not be a place where people that do that kind of thing are tolerated because they are "cute" or funny....Denial of racial or gender or sexual identity discrimination should NOT be tolerated on DU! It should NOT be an argument here that minorities, women or the LGBT community should HAVE to fight. Isn't that part of the Democratic platform? Democrats are fighting to END discrimination....to end it....you have to be willing to accept that it is very real.

Being one of "us" should mean that we accept these truths and we are fighting to improve the civil rights of those that have been discriminated against....we should be about EQUALITY for everyone. To make that happen first we have to all agree that it IS the reality we live in...and we should NOT allow women and minorities and the LGBT community to be treated like they have been recently around here....Women should come to DU and expect a level playing field where the fact that they are women doesn't mean a Tinkers dam. Objectifying women in that environment makes them feel like peices of meat to be devoured....THAT is the message that OBJECTIFYING women creates....that we are nothing more than slabs of meat.....so therefore how can we have legitimate political discourse and expect that we are being taken seriously? That our voice matters?

If the things I have seen in GD regarding women and minorities lately occurred on the job.....you can bet, at the very least, someone would be watching those sensitivity training videos.....at the LEAST.

Dorian Gray

(13,542 posts)
180. But does it really matter
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 08:33 AM
Feb 2014

one female posted it. Many others said... "take it somewhere else" and explained why they were uncomfortable with it. We can either listen to their feelings or we can ignore and fight for the right to.... post sexy pictures in GD????

I am a female. The pics didn't bug me. But people are explaining why they feel uncomfortable with the image.

I was talked down to by someone in another thread (quite rudely) on the side that I'm defending right now. For being silly. I'm not so prone to listening to her, so I get why people seem to want to put their backs up and capitulate. BUT... there are a lot of other women explaining why the images are disturbing to them. Can we not listen and maybe consider?

(The images are not what bothers me. It's the digging in of the heels and justification for posting the images that I find issues with.)

arely staircase

(12,482 posts)
196. It is like a real legend now. the facts don't matter, just the greater truth it supposedly
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 09:58 AM
Feb 2014

represents.

CreekDog

(46,192 posts)
227. well then why don't we talk about how it was posted by a woman but almost constantly defended by men
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:21 PM
Feb 2014

like yourself.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
25. My how the stories get more and more distorted with each retelling
Mon Feb 24, 2014, 11:35 PM
Feb 2014

That comment was months before she posted the SI thread, and you don't even have that right. There is a whole thread on it in the Men's group. Did you not check its posting date?

Certain members have expressed outrage that juries, on rare occasion, hide a post insulting women as b.....es (literally female dogs) freely, while one member couldn't let an opportunity pass by to use the c....t word.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1114&pid=12924
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1114&pid=12936

As for the thread being posted by a woman, that is irrelevant. The members of this site most hostile to feminists, most but not all of which are male, have been the ones insistent that they simply do not care in the slightest that most women and indeed the majority of DUers find those kinds of posts inappropriate on this site. The person who posted the Kate Upton thread was male, as have been those who have posted threads insisting objectification "will always exist" or is the fault of women rather than men, and dozens of other similar threads doubling down on the offense.

I will also note that one female member of the site who goes to the mat to defend the SI thread insisted that those of us who object to things like that can't possibly be women and that we should be required to prove our sex. Evidently that person assumes only a male member could care about equal rights and then women by nature understand that they should remain deferential to men at all times.

I care far less about the gender of a member than what he or she stands for. It someone aligns themselves with those hostile to women's rights, that is the salient issue, not their sex.

Clearly some look for female accomplices to justify their ill treatment of women, just as the GOP looks to people like Clarence Thomas and Alan West to justify racism.

One of the ugliest aspects of misogyny is that women internalize it. All of us do to some extent or another, but some never become aware of it and go about putting down other women in order to seek male approval.

rrneck

(17,671 posts)
35. Hey,
Mon Feb 24, 2014, 11:42 PM
Feb 2014

The words that you substituted for "b.....es" and "c....t" still went into my head. Don't ever type them again on this board.

Jetboy

(792 posts)
39. It is wrong to compare a woman to a dog. How did the people in that thread not understand
Mon Feb 24, 2014, 11:48 PM
Feb 2014

that?

That thread really opened my eyes to what is going on here.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
42. So you did see the comment?
Mon Feb 24, 2014, 11:53 PM
Feb 2014

So why did you just now claim it was because of the SI post, when you had to know it wasn't? Did you deliberately intend to mislead? And how, I wonder, does a comment by one person "open your eyes to what is going on here" ?

Do you agree with then with the members who use words b....h and c...t to refer to women? Is that acceptable to you while that other comment from months ago was not?

Jetboy

(792 posts)
45. I read the entire thread and it was horrific the way she was treated.
Mon Feb 24, 2014, 11:57 PM
Feb 2014

I didn't know that the incident happened prior to the SI posting. I have yet to see any condemnation of the comment which again is very odd if you asked me.

Of course nobody should be called those names here or anywhere else.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
135. Why is it my responsibility to condemn it?
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:48 AM
Feb 2014

Did you condemn the person who called Redqueen a w. . .e? Did you condemn the insults against me as mentally ill, unhinged, and a b. . . h? Did you take responsibility for the deaths in the Ukraine? Why am I responsible for a comment I had no part in?

You knew that comment was made months ago, yet in this thread you falsely claim the person was insulted because she posted the SI thread. Yet you knew that wasn't true. Additionally, when Tuesday Afternoon addressed you directly, your comment to her was that I had not denounced the comment. It would appear you are far less interested in any of the parties involved or the actual content of the exchange than in using it as a club against other women on this site, whom for some reason you have decided are responsible for something they never said.

It appears to me that you are raising that comment as a means to deflect from the subject of the OP, as if the fact that person was insulted justifies widespread misogyny. It is difficult to see your exchange here as anything other than a rather clumsily executed pursuit of an agenda.

Jetboy

(792 posts)
141. I was simply pointing that fact out.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:56 AM
Feb 2014

I wasn't on DU when that thread happened and only saw it recently. I was mistakenly under the impression that it happened after the SI thread she posted. My agenda is that of justice and equality for all.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
163. In that case
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 04:09 AM
Feb 2014

I would urge you to consider the broader context. I am not defending that post. I won't defend any such personal insults. I also am not familiar enough with the content of the post to comment much about it, though I know a great deal about the circumstances surrounding it. That insult is one among many, and the people continually pointing to it have made plenty of their own. That poster in fact has made a number of negative comments about me in a group from which I am banned, despite the fact I had never even had a conversation with her. As a result, I can't bring myself to be especially concerned with her feelings. I take your word for the fact you don't support the agenda of those who are hostile to feminists and equal rights. I would caution you, then, to avoid playing into it. There is far, far more going on that you realize. You might read Bjorn Against's thread in ATA for starters.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
62. I did not read the thread
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:18 AM
Feb 2014

nor was I part of the exchange. However I was called upon to apologize for it on multiple occasions, by men who have insulted women on this site as whores and a series of other degrading terms, including those linked. Why I should apologize for something I had nothing to do with escapes me.

I am continually amazed that particular insult is viewed so much more seriously that the dozens of others that occur each and every day, many of which are worse. It's clear the whole thing serves a mercenarian purpose. The person targeted in that exchange gives cover to men who oppose equal opportunity and care not one iota what the majority of women or indeed the majority of DUers find hostile and offensive. I do not consider someone who opposes my civil rights as more important than the rest of humanity. I suspect most of the men who point to that example don't really care about the insult to her as much as they like to use it as an excuse for opposing feminists on this site and women's voices overall. If you decide that one exchanges tells you something about the site more broadly, I expect whatever it is telling you is what you wanted to believe to begin with. One person doesn't represent more than one person, unless of course people want to use it as an excuse for something else, which is precisely how that incident has played out.

RiffRandell

(5,909 posts)
426. Can you at least admit it created a hostile environment for women?
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 09:59 PM
Feb 2014

That does seem to be your favorite phrase lately.

I never called for you to apologize. Why would I? You didn't say it. However, when it was brought to my attention that I did make a mean personal attack almost 2 years ago, I most certainly apologized because it was the right thing to do and I felt bad about it.

The insult doesn't bother me nearly as much as the hypocrisy.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
436. For women?
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 10:32 PM
Feb 2014

How many women are you?

It was a personal insult to you. Tell me why exactly a personal insult to a person who has made negative comments about me, despite my never having had a conversation with you, should concern me in any way? What makes you so much more important than everyone else on DU who is insulted?

Are you going to apologize for gossiping about me in a group from which I was banned, despite our never having had a conversation? I don't see that you are a paragon of virtue to sit in judgment of others or declare yourself primordial WOMEN. Are all the attacks against me personally a hostile environment for women? Or are we again back to your being more important than any one else on this site?

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
441. What hypocrisy is that?
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 10:50 PM
Feb 2014

You have yet to explain to me why an insult to you is more important than the many insults to other men and women on this site, or why you should be entitled to gossip about people you have never talked to, while if anyone says anything to you it's an affront against humanity.

I don't happen to consider you any more important than any other human being on this planet. An insult to you means no more to me than an insult to any other member on this site. If I bothered to keep in my head all the personal attacks against me and brought them up months later as you do, I would have nothing else to think or post about. Cowgirl up. Everyone gets attacked. You are no more important than any other member of this site. The constant raising of that particular attack above all others is most certainly a stunning example of hypocrisy.

TA has made plenty of attacks against me, which is why I had her on ignore for a long time, until just after that incident with you in fact. The one benefit of certain members using you as fodder in their war against feminists is that it prompted her and me to patch things up. I moved on. You can too. Only that exchange with you serves the purposes of a few on this site, whose concerns have nothing to do with your honor or well being. That anyone expects I or anyone else to denounce something we have no part in shows that its purpose is entirely mercenarian.

How about you and Bonobo denounce the attack against William769 in GD a couple days ago? Or how about you assume responsibility for the racist thread on watermelon and fried chicken? Shall I hold you accountable for random things you had no part in? Of course not, yet for some bizarre reason people seem to want to use that insult against use as a club. That should tell you it has nothing to do with you and everything to do with their own ends.

sheshe2

(84,131 posts)
99. I was on the jury for that very post.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:59 AM
Feb 2014

It was a 3/3 decision. It was a nasty comment and should have been hidden.

What has been going on here has been verbal abuse. That leaves scars that no one can see. The wounds run deep.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
268. Perhaps,
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 02:26 PM
Feb 2014

using the example of a dog instead of any other pet was my real mistake.

The point I was trying to make was that I thought Riff was saying and doing things to please the boys, to be in their good graces and receive positive attention from them.

I realize the word dog is connected to the word b*tch, but my intention was that her BEHAVIOR was reminiscent (to me) of a favored PET, not that she is a b*tch or other gender-based slur.

I hope this clears up any questions regarding that post.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
283. possibly ... I am not well versed enough or knowledgeable about all the
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 02:56 PM
Feb 2014

terminology to speak to that. There is a lot of psychology at play here in all of this. The motivating factors behind why certain people behave certain ways.

It just seems to me that some women constantly seek out men for validation, confirmation. Only they can speak to the reason why they do it.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
286. Could you give specific examples?
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 02:58 PM
Feb 2014

Or is it just enough to make the claim?

How do you expect to get answers if you just make these cryptic accusations over and over with no real reference to an actual case of it?

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
292. I was not talking to you and, I asked no questions of you. In Fact, I was ANSWERING a question
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 03:14 PM
Feb 2014

directed To ME from PintoBean.

I asked no questions therefore I require no answers.

Peace.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
303. thank you, pintobean. It was nice talking to you. I am sorry our subthread was derailed.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 03:31 PM
Feb 2014

Have a good day.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
305. You can't just go around insulting other women here without expecting to get asked
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 03:32 PM
Feb 2014

about it, can you?

It wasn't pintobean you were insulting.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
309. I wasn't insulting anyone. I have asked and answered and I am done here. You have a problem with me?
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 03:39 PM
Feb 2014

I suggest you do as others have offered as a solution.

The answer to your problem is solved with the ignore button, the little red x by my name.

Use it liberally.

Be progressive with it.

Take charge of your DU3 experience.

Have a Nice Day, polly7

polly7

(20,582 posts)
311. Yes, you WERE.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 03:42 PM
Feb 2014

And no, I don't ignore people who feel they have the right to insult and bully others with accusations they can't even back up. I have an equal right to respond to it.

Thanks anyway, though.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
468. Yes, but that term is usually in reference to men.
Wed Feb 26, 2014, 01:05 AM
Feb 2014

So, I would say that no, what was done by that person was not white knighting.

I think it could be called "currying favor."

This leaves gender completely out of the equation.

Kali

(55,039 posts)
339. interesting how few can see that
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 05:18 PM
Feb 2014

how one (mis)perceived insult aimed at one woman has all these same people jumping on your ass, yet not one of them sees the insults thrown by themselves or others.

even if you did outright call another woman a dog rather than the reality of making an allusion to the way a PET acts, it would be nothing compared to the crap that goes on against women in general from the hostiles around here.

isn't there some famous quote, none are so blind as those who won't look?




sheshe2

(84,131 posts)
465. Sorry for the confussion...I was talking about this post
Wed Feb 26, 2014, 12:56 AM
Feb 2014
I will also note that one female member of the site who goes to the mat to defend the SI thread insisted that those of us who object to things like that can't possibly be women and that we should be required to prove our sex. Evidently that person assumes only a male member could care about equal rights and then women by nature understand that they should remain deferential to men at all times.


Won't name the poster, but it wasn't yours.

R B Garr

(17,023 posts)
469. Whoa! I didn't make that connection about a female dog or that slur at all.
Wed Feb 26, 2014, 01:34 AM
Feb 2014

I took it as being loyal like man's best friend, i.e. unthinkingly loyal to a fault type thing or maybe to mean being vicious as in competitive about men. I realize this needs to be dropped, but I just wanted to point out that it never occrred to me that your analogy meant anything about a female dog.

You've handled this very graciously, I must say, which is why I wanted to point out that the B word wasn't at all how your analogy came across in my reading, so you are taking a lot of flack for posturing purposes at this point.

sufrommich

(22,871 posts)
184. It's funny how that keeps being brought up by
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 08:50 AM
Feb 2014

people who kept it zipped when other women here were being called crones,hags,harpies,manhaters and being falsely accused of lying about sexual abuse.

Jetboy

(792 posts)
44. The poster said something to the effect that they had a dog pictured in their
Mon Feb 24, 2014, 11:55 PM
Feb 2014

head and it reminded them of Riff. To me it was about the worst thing I've read on here yet nobody called them on it. Very strange IMO.

rrneck

(17,671 posts)
46. Nah.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:00 AM
Feb 2014

I'm not going to go digging for it, but it was just a hyperbolic analogy. Any time the term dog comes within ten miles of anything about women all the wrong associations latch on like parasites. Nobody here is Shakespeare and it's not fair to flog people with a single statement forever. She had to listen to a fair bit of shit about and that should be it.

Jetboy

(792 posts)
50. Yes, and more about being a good little lap dog wanted to be petted.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:03 AM
Feb 2014

I know I am the last one to judge what is wrong or right for women but if that's not wrong, what is?

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
54. good lord.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:11 AM
Feb 2014

are you for real?

I am in this thread. You want to talk to me about it? shoot me a PM but, stop with this nonsense when I am right here.

and yes, there are a lot worse things that can be said and done.


Jetboy

(792 posts)
63. I didn't pay attention to who posted it but since you are the one you can feel free
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:19 AM
Feb 2014

to PM me how that was ok to do.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
130. TA, it's because it has nothing to do with you
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:41 AM
Feb 2014

or the remark against Riff. It's nothing more than an excuse to deflect from the issue of the OP and thereby imply that misogyny is justified.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
273. I am trying to not take it personally and, to leave personalities out of all this...
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 02:40 PM
Feb 2014

believe me -I- am trying.

but, at some point I have to defend this character assassination of me.


rrneck

(17,671 posts)
75. It's hardly a mortal sin.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:28 AM
Feb 2014

Part of the problem with this whole "pictures on DU" controversy is the inflated penumbra of outrage that stretches to the limits of perception. With that kind of outrage there will always be somebody somewhere on the internet willing to pull your chain. People are too eager to be outraged for it's own sake.

It's like this. The dynamic in the current objectification battle is that the Bloods don't want to see certain types of images on DU at all, and the Crips respond by finding boatloads of images, articles etc. that fit the TOS and the SOP. The more pissed off the Bloods get, the higher they raise the bar on acceptable images, and the Crips use the Google machine to gin up more stuff to piss them off.

It turns GD into the back seat of a minivan on vacation, but there it is.

So being annoyed about what somebody said months ago is really no different from being annoyed about bare bottoms in GD.

Jetboy

(792 posts)
79. I didn't know that happened so long ago. I just can't fathom how that flew but
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:34 AM
Feb 2014

the SI thing didn't. What I am doing is trying to understand how what flies is decided and who is deciding it. It has been very interesting since I've been lucky enough to have some time to really read DU for the first time in a good while.

rrneck

(17,671 posts)
102. Because this is a political message board.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:04 AM
Feb 2014

It's an amateur think tank for public policy and culture war scrimmaging. This place is made for partisan posturing. It's a petri dish for ideological extremism. Feminism has been a pretty important part of Democratic politics for a while now, so anybody calling themselves a feminist is gonna have some pull. Deal with it. When you get tired of that tell people you own an AR15 and see how you do with that.

Jetboy

(792 posts)
112. And bless it's existence!
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:13 AM
Feb 2014

I'm a Democrat- when something is unfair I call it out, ESPECIALLY when it's the powerful doing it.

rrneck

(17,671 posts)
113. I try to set my sights a little higher.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:15 AM
Feb 2014

But if you want to bark up that tree, it's all you dawg.

Jetboy

(792 posts)
120. What I love aoubt DU is that your worst enemy on one issue is your best friend
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:24 AM
Feb 2014

on another. I love 1950s music and style and expressed my opinion in a thread about Rockabilly lifestyle. This person absolutely grilled me about the racism and misogyny of that decade (which I wasn't even alive for).

Next time I'm on DU I find myself passionately agreeing with that very same poster on another issue!

DU should be about the post, not the poster.

R B Garr

(17,023 posts)
84. LOL, this is great, especially for the intended poster
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:38 AM
Feb 2014

Not to mention that this faux outrage and confusion over a very understandable analogy is like watching the Fox News Group gin up some talking points ala Benghazi. Fake!

 

RC

(25,592 posts)
129. You pretty much covered it.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:39 AM
Feb 2014
It's like this. The dynamic in the current objectification battle is that the Bloods don't want to see certain types of images on DU at all, and the Crips respond by finding boatloads of images, articles etc. that fit the TOS and the SOP. The more pissed off the Bloods get, the higher they raise the bar on acceptable images, and the Crips use the Google machine to gin up more stuff to piss them off.


What I don't get is the almost constant belittling and put-down of the men here, with anything being put up in our defense by either gender, is deemed to be derogatory toward women.
Someone up above mentioned FOX News. Their way of doing the "news" covers the way used to put the men here on the defensive. Facts and reality have little to do with the misandry being perpetrated here. Twist and make up stuff. When we object, charges of misogyny are tossed out. In fact the misandry here is being denied, when in fact, it is high profile all over General Discussion.
No one should feel to be under attack here on DU for not toeing to any group's rules, outside of that Group. Yet DU is being turned into a war zone and instead of seeing the problem, too many people here ignore it, or assumed it is some petty squabbling. But more often, anyone that can see what is actually happening, is assigned the roll of the enemy, by those that are actually waging the war.
I have mentioned 'blow-back' a few time and was told those pictures were not the blow-back, but were posted to objectify women. No They were not. it is blow-back. Never mind most of those pictures are widely available almost everywhere in the reality of the real world. But for some reason, on this adult political web site, reality cannot intrude, we must defer to the most narrow interpretations of vocal group objecting to widely available pictures being posted here. Never mind DU is supposedly an Adult web site. Never mind there is lots of other stuff here that people object to. It is only what this one group says is objectionable that needs to be paid attention to. Nothing else seem to matter to them. Something is very wrong here.
I was told by a female DU'er, not long ago, that this group reminds her of the Teabaggers. I think she may be correct.

rrneck

(17,671 posts)
142. Ideology is a consumer product.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 02:00 AM
Feb 2014

This is an ideology delivery device. Some people are junkies.

Every group needs extremists. For my money the left doesn't have enough of them, and the few we do have are extremists about the wrong issues. We get both barrels of that here. I've actually seen people advocate purges here. It's like the French revolution or something. But from what I understand that's a pretty standard dynamic in revolutionary ideology.

Every family needs a crazy uncle that embarrasses them. But it's best to only trot him out for Thanksgiving.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
282. And there you are
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 02:56 PM
Feb 2014

Last edited Tue Feb 25, 2014, 03:46 PM - Edit history (2)

dedicated to pulling chains, despite the fact hundreds of DUers have said they find it unacceptable. You think the extremists are those who value human equality, whereas the ones who deliberately and repeatedly show no concern for the views of the majority of posters on this site are not?

Prohibitions of those sorts of pictures in public workplaces and public buildings has been standard for decades, which anyone who has held a job with a company that follows labor law knows. It is prohibited by Equal Opportunity Law as founded in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I have no doubt that some believe Civil Rights too extreme for them, but then those people aren't really liberals or Democrats. They are reactionaries. There is nothing extreme about basic respect for other human beings and not using public forums as though it were your home. Amazingly, most people understand that the world is filled with a diverse range of people, some even born after 1940, who may perceive the world differently from them. They know that maintaining community requires respect for other human beings. Yet some insist the only thing that matters is their own ego and desires, and that everyone else on the planet is entirely irrelevant.

FYI, ideology itself is not a consumer product. Everything is not about profit. True some people maintain ideologies that are firmly rooted in capitalism and see their sexuality and their very rights as connected to the profit of corporations. For example, they can't imagine their sexuality apart from porn and SI swimsuit spreads, both of which exist to generate profit. Or their notion of personal freedom is linked to unfettered profit for gun companies. There are, however, many kinds of ideology. Some are quite simple: All human beings are created equal; listen to their concerns, even when they don't look and think exactly like you; and treat them with respect. Yeah, that's really extremist. All it requires is understanding that the self isn't the only thing that matters.

rrneck

(17,671 posts)
312. Well, lets see if we can find a crouton in this word salad...
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 03:44 PM
Feb 2014
"...hundreds of DUers have said they find it unacceptable."

I'll defer to the administrators of the site to answer that question. But you already knew that, didn't you? Have you stopped to wonder why Skinner replied the way he did? Don't you think he is aware that every word he says gets quoted and parsed to oblivion? He just gave you some important information there, I wonder if you have the good sense to use it.

"Prohibitions of those sorts of pictures in public workplaces and public buildings has been standard for decades..."

You aren't at work. You don't have to show up here, and if you do you have all sorts of tools to tailor the experience to your liking. All this moaning is just telling other people to STFU. Sound familiar? Are you comfortable with silencing progressive voices? Cultures change, and liberals are supposed to promote and embrace change. Of course there is the danger of unintended consequences. Deal with it. Clinging to outdated ersatz ideology won't work for anyone but the people selling it to you. Besides, that's what conservatives are best at.

"FYI, ideology itself is not a consumer product."

Yes, it is. Especially on the internet, and if you aren't buying something, you're the product. Or do you really believe Laci is a selfless crusader for your pet cause and not building a career in the media? You couldn't be that star struck, could you?

"...they can't imagine their sexuality apart from porn and SI swimsuit spreads..."

Bullshit. Images don't work that way, and literalism puts you in bed with these people. How's that for kinky?

Well damn. No croutons. Lots of vinegar and oil though. Look, when someone's basic reason for being here is to be hyper sensitive, they will always find something to be pissed off about. And for ideological fundamentalists, the bar never goes up. Reasonable people understand that. The real question to answer is why do people do it. The truth is that tribalism pays. For some it pays in money. For others it pays in fame (hopfully resulting in money). For still others it pays in power (hopefully resulting in more money). On an internet chat board, the only payoff is egotistical self gratification.

Hey, you got a case to make? You want to save us from ourselves? You got all the answers? Prove it. And bullshit boilerplate don't count.



BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
324. Why don't you tell us what Skinner meant?
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 04:40 PM
Feb 2014

Last edited Tue Feb 25, 2014, 05:22 PM - Edit history (2)

When he locked the Kate Upton thread? When he said he had alerted on SI posts?

Hundreds of DUers find it unacceptable. Your response is what? Too bad? You don't care about anyone but yourself? You have explicitly said that saving lives of children is not worth the inconvenience to gun owners from modest restrictions. You are indeed ideologically consistent in showing that your own wants are more important than the social good. Your views toward a hostile environment are in keeping with that. The inconvenience of going to another site or actually buy an SI issue is too great to forsake posting the images in DU and enjoying the subsequent shit storm that ensues.

This is a public place. It is place for Democrats. Real Democrats value diversity. They know their primary voter base is women and people of color. Skinner also locked the Upton thread and told the GD hosts such posts are not allowed. It is indeed private space, but that private space isn't your toilet. I have never tried to silence progressive voices. There is nothing progressive about male supremacy. In fact, I haven't tried to silence any voice. I've tried to convince you to listen to someone's besides your own, to the hundreds of members who are sick of the misogyny. We have said we don't like the SI and other bikini pictures in GD. SI is, I suppose, a voice of sorts, but it is the product of a media conglomerate. That it generates millions in profit may make it more valuable to you than the views of the majority of members of this site, but most of DUers do not share that belief. The fact you claim you don't have to pay attention to common offline practices meant to enhance diversity certainly shows that those of us who would like DU to behave accordingly are not the extremists. You claim a loophole for why you shouldn't have to be concerned about civil rights and equal opportunity law. You are right that DU is not required to abide by such laws. It would be a neo-Nazi site if it wanted to, but the fact is most people here are liberals and maintain liberal values of inclusively. You are openly hostile to that position and claim there is something "conservative" about valuing the diversity of voices in this community rather than just yourself and those who think like you. I hate to break it to you, but Ayn Rand is not a paragon of liberalism.

Ideology as consumption: I believe Laci is making a point. A point that should be easy to understand for people of all educational levels, which is why the video is valuable. I understand that you have no conception of a world outside of capitalist commodity fetishism and that you think the current ethos generated by that economic system is somehow natural and immutable. That is an attempt to justify the status quo with tired old appeals that it has always been that way. I have no reason to question that your conception of ideology is entirely linked to consumption and profit. You have repeatedly shown that your values correspond with consumer capitalism, which makes sense because you, like all of us, are a product of the current system. However, history is instructive in that it shows what people assume to be constant and immutable is not so. The notion that profit is a virtue and somehow natural dates from the late 18th century onward. It was not always been that way, and there have been many different kinds of ideologies that produced no profit and did not seek profit. The Moral Economy of the crowd, for example, is a popular ideology that in fact arose in opposition to profit. The notion of the Inkari as an indigenous religious figure who would descend to earth and free the Quechua and Aymara peoples from Spanish colonial rule was not only not a product of consumption, it arose in part in response to attempts to impose consumption. There are hundreds of other such examples. Ideology existed long before consumer capitalism; ideologies have risen in opposition to consumer capitalism; and ideologies will arise after the demise of consumer capitalism.

Bullshit on your Southern Baptist canard. It completely misses the issue. Amazingly, human beings can and have had perfectly happy sex lives before corporate pornographers and media conglomerates generated profits. In fact, those genres substitute for actual sex. To pretend it is about innate sexuality is truly sad. I can't imagine what it must be like to feel your most intimate nature cannot exist without corporate profit in mass media or the human trafficking endemic to the porn industry. Imagine thinking that one's very sexuality depends on a system than reduces millions of women and children to slavery. What a sad and exploitive notion of human sexuality you have. But hey, the Christian right opposes human trafficking too. That must mean it's a good thing, right? Guilt by association? Since we're playing that game, You know who is in your corner 100 percent on these matters? The cavers and freepers. They share your views on the subject down to the tee because they too resent equal rights and think the only people who matter are white men and those who bow to their will.

You want to pretend that liberalism includes only the ethos of old men nostalgic for period before the Civil Rights era, that it by its very definition excludes women and others who care about human equality. Bullshit. You are seeking to justify male supremacy and the denial of equal rights. There is nothing more reactionary that that. You've may have convinced yourself there is something liberal about opposing the rights of the majority of the population, but few people are going to fall for it. It's a transparent effort to justify exploitation and cling to privilege. The body politic no longer exists for white men only, and the Democratic Party certainly does not.

rrneck

(17,671 posts)
343. And in stampedes the Gish at a full gallop.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 05:36 PM
Feb 2014
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop

Your style, such as it is, runs pretty consistent. It begins with a restatement to suit your needs, then follows it with a boatload of self aggrandizing bombast and accusations. So, with that in mind, let's begin.

You have explicitly said that saving lives of children is not worth the inconvenience to gun owners from modest restrictions.

Dig up a link. And don't quote mine it.

Real Democrats value diversity. They know their primary voter base is women and people of color.

You missed a curiously ironic word there - but. Lets try it again. Real Democrats value diversity but they know their primary voter base is women and people of color. Nice two tiered system you got there. Just perfect for telling people to STFU. Which is what you are telling other members of DU to do.

Skinner also locked the Upton thread and told the GD hosts such posts are not allowed.

Not allowed in GD, as I recall. It was an SOP issue. And it wasn't the original Sports Illustrated cover OP, but the "zero gravity" OP. But that's an interesting thing for me. I'm a GD host, and ordinarlly I'd vote to lock something like that in GD because it isn't big news or an issue. But the hue and cry raised about it by people like you make it an issue, thus making it much more difficult for the hosts to come to consensus to lock it. Either objectification is an issue in this country or it isn't. If it is, then it belongs in GD.

And by the way, I posted an OP about that "zero G" photo shoot myself. Since you're such a political Svengali, see if you can figure out the implications.

I believe Laci is making a point.

Really. Good for her. Now is another golden opportunity to explain it (And that link should help clarify the cozy relationship you have with the SBC). Have you figured out what that point is yet?

Amazingly, human beings can and have had perfectly happy sex lives before corporate pornographers and media conglomerates generated profits.

Of course they did. They even managed it before the Victorians coined the word pornography. There is no one to one correspondence between an image, or for that matter anything else, and any specific human behavior. That notion went out with the Victorian era even as the "P" word lingers on.

The last paragraph is just self aggrandizing bombast and baseless accusations. I'll say it again, if you don't provide rational proof for your assertions, you're just entertaining yourself. And I have no doubt you enjoyed it.



Jetboy

(792 posts)
72. Never had a single exchange with her that I recall but that doesn't matter.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:25 AM
Feb 2014

Heck, I despise all of the T and A stuff as it's just trashy.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
77. I don't know what your specific issue is with me
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:32 AM
Feb 2014

but, I think you and I are done here.

Now that you can no longer deny not knowing who made that post I am politely asking you to cease and desist with this nonsense or,
I will be forced to seek recourse.

Your continuing to bring it up borders on harassment and hostility and, I do not appreciate it.

I hope you understand.

Peace.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
85. Have you not been here since DU2 made the change over to DU3?
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:39 AM
Feb 2014

I am reading your replies to other posters and this is the impression I am getting.

Tuesday Afternoon

(56,912 posts)
89. Jetboy, This is no longer a moderated site. There is jury system in place and Hosts determine if
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:46 AM
Feb 2014

threads fit the SoP for the group. Click on the tab :about this group:

Things have changed drastically around here.

Jetboy

(792 posts)
95. That's interesting. Thanks for the information. I really enjoy DU but normally
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:51 AM
Feb 2014

don't have much time to read.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
128. The worst thing?
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:39 AM
Feb 2014

Worse than ridiculing and insulting as a liar someone who recounted her story of being raped as a child? Worse than calling women b...s and c...ts? A b....h is a female dog, after all. It's worse that condemning a victim of child abuse who denounced her rapists as herself being the abuser? Worse than telling women they aren't really women? Worse than referring to black people as N....s? Worse than calling posters mentally ill? Worse than saying women who object to misogyny need therapy? Worse than a man's telling a woman he wants to rape her? Worse than wishing people dead? Worse than calling rape victims liars and defending rapists and pedophiles? Worse than trying to normalize pedophilia? Really? Why is that? Clearly we have very different senses of morality. You see, I don't think one member being called a dog (though I am told that is not what the comment actually did, but say it did for argument's sake) is no worse than calling another a dog, and I certainly don't think it worse than many of the other attacks I listed above.

From what I saw in that post, I did see a number of people denounce the comment. The fact a witch hunt thread was erected for that purpose shows far more concern about that insult than the many others those same members regularly deliver themselves. You do enjoy deflecting. Apparently that comment from months ago is more important than the subject of misogyny and mistreatment of all women. In fact, it would appear some think it justifies misogyny. It justifies treating women as objects and making clear that the views of the majority of women and the majority of the members on this site are entirely inconsequential in comparison to a few members intent to mark GD as male territory. Really what it does is provide an excuse for a rather clumsy and transparent deflection.

Jetboy

(792 posts)
136. I believe in treating all people with respect and do my best to live by the
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:51 AM
Feb 2014

Golden Rule. I hope to NOT see all of the stuff that you describe but if I did, I would condemn it.

BainsBane

(53,137 posts)
139. If you have't been around much
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:55 AM
Feb 2014

as you noted down thread, and haven't read much lately, how could you claim to know what the worst insult has been? And that still doesn't explain why you feel holding me responsible for that comment is more important than discussing it with the person who actually made it.

Jetboy

(792 posts)
146. Anyone can make a mistake but only a quality person can own up to it.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 02:05 AM
Feb 2014

It's over and done with as far as I'm concerned.

And you are correct that I haven't been around much lately. I am very busy but enjoy stopping by DU occasionally.

Bjorn Against

(12,041 posts)
10. I urge you to recall all the posts you made which were dismissive of women's concerns
Mon Feb 24, 2014, 11:19 PM
Feb 2014

You seem to want to pretend this is about a single post, it is not. The problem was not so much the initial post, the problem was with the way people like you responded.

Bjorn Against

(12,041 posts)
55. I have seen enough of your posting history to know how dismissive you have been of women
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:12 AM
Feb 2014

You can tell me to look up all the posts that you want, but the fact that you may have said a few things that were not dismissive does not make up for the overall pattern we have seen of you dismissing women's issues.

Bonobo

(29,257 posts)
67. Bjorn, think whatever you like
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:21 AM
Feb 2014

You don't know me and it is clear that you have recently established in your mind an entire concrete category of monolithic misogynists, devoid of humanity, and now I, being on that list, must be reduced to that small group.
Nothing I ever say will remove that mote from your eye. I have become a useful prop in the newly created movie that is entitled "the noble journey of Bjorn" and I will continue in that role in your mind.
Fine. But you do NOT define who I am nor do you understand my life experiences. I reject your cartoonish caricature.

 

RBStevens

(227 posts)
97. The Noble Journey of *The White Knight* Bjorn you mean -
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:55 AM
Feb 2014

right?

This is the way that those who are familiar with MRA talking points go about dismissing men who stand by women in their efforts to be recognized as entirely human.

betsuni

(25,865 posts)
144. Yes the pattern
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 02:02 AM
Feb 2014

I see it, too. When I discover that a male member who is defensive and dismissive of women lives in Japan, I think, "Ah, okay, I understand." Western Woman, the feminist nemesis! Google "Charisma Man." We Western Women in Japan are used to it.

 

lumberjack_jeff

(33,224 posts)
259. See? Just like you said. This has nothing to do with bikinis.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:50 PM
Feb 2014

"Objectification" is only a jawbone with which to beat up on the people who a) didn't post the photos, b) were ambivalent about them when they were and c) "are missing the point" when they observe that it wasn't a man who posted them.

The issue is the belief that for DU to be welcoming to women, it must be hostile to men; witness the male suicide thread.

 

lumberjack_jeff

(33,224 posts)
256. You're right. It's not about the swimsuit issue.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:41 PM
Feb 2014

If it were, then topics like the suicide rate among men wouldn't have attracted the same kind of outrage from the same gang of posters.

 

Comrade Grumpy

(13,184 posts)
11. And that you actually have to click on the thread to see the stuff that so offends you.
Mon Feb 24, 2014, 11:19 PM
Feb 2014

You'd think that as soon as you went to GD you were confronted with porn staring you in the face. But really, you had to read a thread title that said something about a Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue and decide you wanted to read it.

 

quinnox

(20,600 posts)
13. Ah, but to these extremists, just like religious right fundies, a women showing
Mon Feb 24, 2014, 11:21 PM
Feb 2014

her backside in a swimsuit picture is porn.

 

RBStevens

(227 posts)
106. And just who exactly are those extremist religious-right-fundie-like folk
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 01:07 AM
Feb 2014

here at this site who say that women showing their backside "is porn". And where has that been said?

eridani

(51,907 posts)
170. Right. There just isn't the slightest difference between cheesecake stuck on your
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 07:22 AM
Feb 2014

--refrigerator door and the same cheesecake stuck on the public bulletin board at your workplace.

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
323. I feel badly for the sub-literacy of idiots and dolts who are unable to make the distinction...
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 04:39 PM
Feb 2014

I feel badly for the sub-literacy of idiots and dolts who are unable to make the distinction between respect for others and religious, right-wing fundies.

Of course, I'm not referring to you-- you certainly do know the difference, regardless of whether or not you yet maintain the conflation to add melodrama to an otherwise shallow premise.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
431. oh, right, we wouldn't want to add melodrama to any shallow premises, here, now, would we?
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 10:04 PM
Feb 2014

oh, right, we wouldn't want to add melodrama to any shallow premises, here, now, would we?



....certainly not here in the 20th thread about a picture that was posted a grand total of once, nearly two weeks ago.

pnwmom

(109,029 posts)
52. So? I don't know what motivated her. But she is just one woman who apparently doesn't care.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:07 AM
Feb 2014

Many more progressive women do.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
166. Yeah and Clarence Thomas says a lot of things
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 04:16 AM
Feb 2014

that allow racists to make similar claims

It is still misogynistic. There are misogynistic women - or a woman might post it to discuss the misogyny. The SI does not post that for women.

rrneck

(17,671 posts)
14. I'm not sure I understand.
Mon Feb 24, 2014, 11:22 PM
Feb 2014

You can trash the thread. You can make the person that posted it vanish with the click of a mouse. But for some reason just the knowledge that a particular collection of O's and 1's exists on a server somewhere causes you that much distress?

BlancheSplanchnik

(20,219 posts)
80. just out of curiosity, what kind pf post would make you....
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:35 AM
Feb 2014

Relive your worst past trauma?

I'm seriously and genuinely asking.

Not, What kind would irritate you, or piss you off, or make you think anything like, 'Hey! Get Out of My Face, Jerk'.

And not because i want to use it to bash you with. No....

I want you to do a thought experiment, if you're willing.

rrneck

(17,671 posts)
94. Birthday posts.
Tue Feb 25, 2014, 12:51 AM
Feb 2014

Yep. That's right. Birthday posts. It doesn't have anything to do with age but the death of a loved one. It's a long story for a post, but my birthday and especially having people sing happy birthday in a restaurant is very painful for me. It still hurts after thirty years. It damaged me permanently and has cost me tremendously since. I've suffered near crippling depression because of it. Nobody knows when my birthday is because I don't want to be reminded of it and the last thing I want is cards and, dog forbid, surprise parties. Everybody loves fucking birthdays but me.

So you know what I do about it? I simply trash the thread. If the knowledge that somebody is talking about birthdays on an internet chat board bothers me that much the best thing for me to do is turn off the computer and do something else. Because this is the internet and I can't demand others adjust their behavior to satisfy my personal predilections.