General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLooks like @womensmarch finally decided to listen to actual women instead of old white guys as it's
I, for one, am glad to see this.
Pat Fuller ? 🇺🇸❄
🖖 Retweeted
Victoria Brownworth? @VABVOX 28m28 minutes ago
Looks like @womensmarch finally decided to listen to actual women instead of old white guys as it's 2017 not 1917!♀️
Link to tweet
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)their jobs and gain more seats to fight Trump.. I am so going!
sheshe2
(83,633 posts)Keep us informed. I am to far away to attend,
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)glad it is over. But politics involve passion and sometimes people get carried away.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)What follows will be the responsibility of others.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)iluvtennis
(19,825 posts)DesertRat
(27,995 posts)BigmanPigman
(51,560 posts)when I saw it on my emails 5 min ago. Then I looked at the rest of DU and saw this post. YEAH!!!!
procon
(15,805 posts)This was a good decision and it will let women take central roles. Women should lead the way and give testimony to encourage, support, and inspire their sisters in the struggle for rights and equality. Let our brothers, friends and lovers listen and participate as our trusted allies, aligned with the righteousness of our cause, not their own agenda.
calimary
(81,085 posts)Bettie
(16,058 posts)Time to move the goal posts! Find another thing to nitpick about to keep us all divided.
sheshe2
(83,633 posts)We are living with an admitted sexual pervert, in our White House, that stalks and preys on women. We have a GOP that is trying to take women's rights and equality away from us. This was a conference advertised to be for women, first conference in 40 years. Then after the refund date they announced that a man would be the first speaker...not a woman, a man. I am so sad that on a Democratic board that defending women and their rights and making our voices heard is just nitpicking to you.
This conference was suppose to be about us.
George II
(67,782 posts)sheshe2
(83,633 posts)Bettie
(16,058 posts)watch...there will be another quibble with this event and people will once again declare the organizers dead to them.
I'm tired of the infighting. We should be banding together to fight the monsters in the GOP (including the horrific orange clown in the WH) and instead we're fighting over, honestly, the primaries again.
I am a woman, but I don't believe that one speaker makes or breaks an entire conference.
Mediumsizedhand
(531 posts)You are the only one being negative.
Bettie
(16,058 posts)attack on this.
Before the Women's March, there were daily posts about how awful it was.
I have no faith in anything anymore.
The only thing I'm sure of is that we will lose big if we stay divided and, given what I see here daily (and how many threads I trash on a usual day), we're right on schedule for that. a
I predict that in the next 24 hours, there will be some new "OH MY!" moment about this conference.
Mediumsizedhand
(531 posts)Squinch
(50,901 posts)sheshe2
(83,633 posts)Defending their right to have a conference that was announced to be for Women is fighting the primaries? I think not. Women's issues did not begin and end with the primary and in fact has nothing what so ever have anything to do with it.
It was advertised as the first Women's Conference in 40 years. It was for us. Now it is again.
melman
(7,681 posts)Nothing else. At all. Ever.
sheshe2
(83,633 posts)Not everything is about Bernie. This is about woman and I am appalled you do not understand that. It was not about the man, it was about a man.
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)It's clear to everyone what this whole uproar has been about.
sheshe2
(83,633 posts)I have no problem with any man speaking, no woman does....well unless it was Dump or a GOPer...lol.
You all keep jumping on these threads and telling us it is clear why we protested a man opening a Woman's Conference because it was 'the man' when it was always about 'the women'. Sad that none of you have applauded or supported a Conference that was aimed at women until a few organizers decided differently and made it about politics. For once, just once could you reach out and support women? Gotta tell you, we are pretty magnificent creatures. You should try to get to know us sometime.
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)Or a keynote speaker. He was speaking on the first day, which could have been any number of reasons, but the interpretation was made to make it seem like it was all about him.
Looking at this from a lens bigger than these threads leaves the reason obvious.
all american girl
(1,788 posts)The headline speaker should be a woman...we have tons of awesome women who should have been thought of before any man. Sorry, but sometimes it is just about women wanting things for women. I'm not sure why everyone is confused about this, or upset.
yardwork
(61,533 posts)They only just now asked Debbie Stabenow to open. Its less than a week before the conference.
The organizers admitted that they made a mistake and they fixed it.
Its kind of sad that a handful of men cant accept that. Did it really mean so much to you to have a man open the Womens Conference?
progressoid
(49,931 posts)Link to tweet
1:46 PM - Oct 12, 2017
yardwork
(61,533 posts)progressoid
(49,931 posts)I figured it would be easy to find since everyone keeps talking about her tweets. But I guess my old eyes aren't as good as they should be. I went back to the 12th and that's the only one I could find in her twitter feed addressing this.
yardwork
(61,533 posts)Sea lions are cute this time of year.
betsuni
(25,367 posts)That's why there was no "uproar," and nobody cares about Sanders being on a panel. Opening, headlining: this is the reason.
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)He was speaking on the first day, then it got blown out of proportion. He's a big and popular name, so it would be wise to let people know he was there.
Like my other response says, the reason is clear.
Response to Lordquinton (Reply #88)
betsuni This message was self-deleted by its author.
melman
(7,681 posts)But this most certainly was, 100% and everyone knows it.
progressoid
(49,931 posts)I'm gonna go ahead and say, no.
fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)at a women's conference. However, Sen. Sanders was not a good choice considering his stance on Identity politics (AkA social justice which includes women's rights) and he also called planned parenthood establishment. His stance on women's abortion rights has been disturbing to many women including me. Some think it is about one man...it is not. It is about women's rights. We are under attack and can not be relegated to the back of the progressive bus while our menfolk who think they know best work on populist economics which really can't include us without social justice. Women's rights are human rights and are not negotiable.
"Reproductive rights advocates have also been disturbed by Sanderss post-election comments on abortion rights, as Rebecca Nelson notes at Cosmopolitan. Sanders endorsed Heath Mello, a mayoral candidate this year in Omaha, who had sponsored or voted for several anti-abortion bills during his time in the Nebraska state legislature. When criticized, Sanders said such choices might be necessary if were going to become a 50-state party...To others, Sanderss willingness to budge on the issue of abortion was at odds with his campaign message of proud, unapologetic democratic socialism. If the left doesnt need to compromise on a $15 minimum wage or single-payer health care, some wondered, why give ground on abortion rights?..."It also fed the fear among many feminists and other activists that Sanders might be willing to sacrifice racial and gender equality in favor of economic populism. Economic policy is not the singular answer to violence, hatred, oppression, and marginalization, Carmen Rios wrote at Argot in response to Sanderss November speech. That doesn't mean it isn't important it just means we don't have to choose. It means we cannot choose
This is why Sen. Sanders was not a good choice for a woman's conference and yes his votes are stellar, but his words not so much. Read the article if you have a chance...good article explaining the issue...uses different sources.
https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/10/13/16469216/bernie-sanders-womens-conference-speech
Mediumsizedhand
(531 posts)Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)important battle...a woman's convention should have a woman starting it off and Sen. Sanders in particular was a bad choice for reason already posted.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)I can tell you when I complained I was basically told to bad so sad and get lost.
sheshe2
(83,633 posts)Time to move the goal posts! Find another thing to nitpick about to keep us all divided
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029722277#post4
Now you call it a "quibble". What a sad thing to do on a Democratic board. You as a woman are trivializing what all these women stand for. They want there voice heard, and it was, they want equality and the basic human rights over their own bodies at a Conference for Women.
Please do not seek to demean what we have to say and feel by calling it 'nitpicking' and 'quibble' when we express our opinions and protest something that we feel is wrong.
all american girl
(1,788 posts)I'm so tired that people seem to think women are just being petty, instead of listening to the actual outcry as to why this was wrong.
sheshe2
(83,633 posts)susanna
(5,231 posts)on edit: clarity as to who I was responding to because this thread got craaaaaazy.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)sheshe2
(83,633 posts)By calling it nitpicking it diminishes our voice.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)That is a good move.
mcar
(42,278 posts)The organizers should have realized this from the get go.
sheshe2
(83,633 posts)They do know. They heard us, mcar. They listened.
Gothmog
(144,884 posts)Nevernose
(13,081 posts)Michigan senator Debbie Stabenow is delivering the opening remarks. Sanders and a couple dozen other people are speaking on opening night. Thats not nitpicking; thats an actual, meaningful difference.
Sanders is also in Congress, fighting tooth and nail against the GOP POS who are trying to take women's rights and equality away and found time out of his busy schedule to speak to women about that effort (for free, as best I can tell).
A man who has been a consistent champion of womens rights with a 100% rating from Planned Parenthood and NARAL has two percent of the total speaking time. Giving someone else two percent of the time in the name of diversity sure as Hell seems like poetic justice to me.
betsuni
(25,367 posts)sheshe2
(83,633 posts)You all want to pile on, have at it.
One sentence to Senator Stabenow.........then the rest of your post is all about Bernie. This was all about The Women's Conference...Women. All women, colors and preference. The Conference was about empowering women. Our equality and our lives. Yet here you are making it about one man when it was never about him, nor should it have been.
I give up.....carry on just leave the women behind because we obviously mean nothing to you. When you make this all about one man you leave us behind.
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)I think thats its you that made it about Bernie. I didnt invite him the women throwing the conference did that. I spoke in support of the women organizing the womens conference, without a lot of help from national leaders meaning an actual grassroots effort to promote women.
YOU made two percent of the speakers, and less of the programming, about a man whose biggest claim to fame so far is LOSING to a woman. I wrote three paragraphs: one about the woman actually giving the opening in direct contradiction to what you claimed, and the other two about a human being that has done far more for womens rights than most living Americans have. You seem to be the one concerned with genitalia. So thats 100% of that post about women and their supporters. All of it. Maybe Im wrong, but yours seems to be super concerned with personalities involved. Much less than the people who did all the actual work.
Im not the one arguing in thread after thread here and across the Internet about how one token voice is silencing women. This is, in fact, the first of these threads Ive jumped in on.
Im not making it about ANYTHING. Im not there. I didnt attend or contribute or organize it. Even if I had, whats the harm in giving 1/50th of the time to a male ally with an excellent track record of supporting women? Hes a token. Hell learn how it feels, right? He gets about 1/500th if the total programming.
One male voice out of scores of speakers and thousands of participants is not leaving women behind.
Were all in this horror show together and we all want better for everyone and that includes the many women and men that want to hear people like Bernie Sanders speak.
This divisiveness that Bernie and Hillary people keep pushing? Arbitrarily and capriciously? Its doing way more to empower people like Dotard Donald and his crew of fundamentalists than anything Clinton or Sanders EVER said about each other on the camps trail.
Why cant we just support each other? Serious question. The fucking Republicans have us tearing each others throats out over two candidates that agree with each other 95% of the time. This is crazy at this point, and our seemingly always total inability to get over shit, at this point, is just sort of depressing.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)involved. I have seen ads for the conference with her pictured...but I don't know if that is true. What is true... is Tamika and other leaders invited Sen. Sanders to give a speech on opening night at a woman's convention...no doubt the usual stump speech! She admitted she knew it would be unpopular and waited until refunds were unavailable to announce it. Those who want to hear from Sen. Sanders, and as you know I am not one;I don't like his post-election stance on women's rights, can attend one of his rallies, but we do not need to do listen to him at what is supposed to be a Women's convention. Not everyone is a fan. I respect Sen. Sanders work in the Senate...but I would not attend any of his rallies...and resented being tricked into it...glad it is over. We truly need to unite and beat the GOP in 18 and 20. I hope this mess makes Sen. Sanders think long and hard about running in 2020, he has less support than in 16 and will not win the nomination in 20... but will sow controversy and division should he make the attempt. We don't need that in 20 where we must win to save the courts and any hope of a progressive agenda.
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)But him running again in 2020 would be an unmitigated disaster, on that much we can agree.
We have so many young, talented Democrats waiting their turn. I remember when an unknown guy with a funny name from Illinois was brought to Nevada to campaign for Democrats here in 2004. Half the crowd thought OBama was going to be Irish.
I cant wait to kick some GOP butt in 2018.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)I voted for Sanders in Ohio...now after the stuff he has said about Democrats, Mello...all the stuff... I just don't care for him. We need new blood. I want a younger candidate...let's move into the future.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)susanna
(5,231 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)You are right. And it isn't "everyone" who is opposed to your comment, it is only "everyone who is posting in this thread."
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)So you can be in favor of that persons comment all you want, its factually wrong.
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)It used to be that men who support women were not villains. I used to be that black women who put together a women's conference were not called liars. Pretty soon, there will only be a few women who are "acceptable" to some of the people here. It is divisive, just like the comment said.
peggysue2
(10,819 posts)Listening to women in regards to a Women's Convention. You would've thought this was a no-brainer. But I'm sure the correction/clarification is appreciated by . . . the women involved and those expecting to attend.
The blowback from this snafu must have been significant.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)when I saw it.
Me.
(35,454 posts)turned out to be a truly good faith effort
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)yardwork
(61,533 posts)NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)I don't care if Sanders has a small role in the convention; speaking at a panel discussion about resistance is fine. I don't like him, but that's okay too.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)But the opening speaker should be a woman at a woman's convention.
+ 1000
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)pnwmom
(108,953 posts)OR the headliner?
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)I heard there was significant backlash...I am not on any committees or anything but some of the girls I work with at election time are and there was some real pushback...some were even talking about holding an alternative convention at the same time...I would have gone to that.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)going and intended to disrupt the Sanders speech...holy shit! Glad it is over...we really do need to unite and beat the living shit out of the GOP in 18 and beyond.
JI7
(89,239 posts)betsuni
(25,367 posts)Why did they say he was if he wasn't -- they could've cleared this up immediately. If he was, they're being dishonest: disorganizers, not organizers.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)I haven't paid much attention to this brouhaha, but in a quick search just now I found several tweets from Convention organizer Tamika D. Mallory. I'm not fluent in Twitter so I'll just give you the URL that was in my browser window:
Link to tweet
Here's the gist of what she said in several tweets back on October 12:
* Weeks ago, the organizers announced Maxine Waters as the headliner;
* "Maybe folks should ask why mainstream media didn't give a black woman the same attention when she was announced as a headliner & speaker?";
* A USA Today article referred to Bernie as "a headliner", as to which Mallory wrote, "notice that everything else I said is in actual quotes except this part. This was a paraphrase of the question and answer."
My tentative conclusion is that Mallory never said "a headliner" let alone "the headliner". Similarly, the information that Bernie would be a speaker on the opening day was transmuted into "they...announced him as the opening speaker," as you put it.
Based on my limited research, it's at least possible that the organizers planned a pre-eminent role for Bernie, but then, facing backlash, made the "decision" (so widely lauded in this thread) to downgrade him. On the evidence I have now, though, I'm going to go with Occam's Razor. There was a game of Telephone here, augmented by a couple of regrettable media tendencies: First, as Mallory implied, the media don't think a story about a black woman is as newsworthy; second, when Bernie's name popped up as one of the speakers, the corporate media saw a chance to generate a lot of clicks and sow dissent on the left by exaggerating his role.
Someone in the Twitter thread charges the organizers with failing to control the message. There may be some truth to that, but they presumably had a lot on their plates and (somewhat naively) didn't realize how this one attack on the event would get hyped.
pnwmom
(108,953 posts)Look at the TITLE of the USA Today article that the Women's March tweeted.
Link to tweet
And look what the organizer said in response to a question about Bernie being the headliner. She didn't deny it.
Oct. 12
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/10/12/bernie-sanders-speech-womens-convention/756825001/
When Women's March co-founder Tamika Mallory was asked: "People are going to say, wait a minute, theres a man as the headliner at the Womens Convention, the first womens convention in 40 years?" she replied:
"I would say that (U.S. Rep.) Maxine Waters is also coming to the conference, and we know she has been a very, very powerful voice in terms of all weve seen happening in terms of this administration, particularly, and shell be at the conference as well. And a lot of other people have been invited to the conference and were hoping to hear back from these folks. Thankfully, SenatorSanders has agreed to attend."
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,308 posts)Maxine Waters was always they keynote.
Most of the players didn't eve know she was speaking. One refused to believe she was even asked to speak prior to Sanders. No amount of links to contemporaneous news reports to the contrary would suffice.
Are we still accusing the organizers of lying about inviting Harris, HRC and Warren? Or are we good now?
Is this still a Putin funded event or are we good now?
betsuni
(25,367 posts)Why would a woman headline speaker at a women's convention be big news? This is not surprising. When a man was announced as headline speaker at a women's convention, it was surprising and therefore newsworthy.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)saw a link that thanks Maxine for allowing them to use her words in the title of the convention but nothing about speaking until after Sen. Sanders was announced. Also, to announce the speaker after the time for a refund had passed and then to make it a racial thing in their comments...does not show naivete on the part of organizers of the women's convention but cold calculation. I am glad women stood up and it was resolved. Now we have Democratic elected who are running for office speaking on opening night and that is a good thing. This is not about corporate media...women objected to having a man open a woman's convention.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)This subthread is about the charge that the organizers are "pretend[ing] they never announced him as the opening speaker." No one has given me a link showing that the organizers did actually make such an announcement. Mallory has said that that report was the media garbling the facts.
I've provided information from someone with first-hand knowledge. My inclination is to believe her unless and until there's solid evidence to the contrary. If you disagree, fine, you go right on thinking that the organizer of the Women's Convention is lying to the public about what announcements they made.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)announcement. I am just glad it ended on a positive note.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)👏🏾👏🏾
Iggo
(47,534 posts)Phew! Thank god!
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)in this.
Glamrock
(11,787 posts)9000 fucking teeth gnashing posts based on bullshit! AWESOME!
Response to riversedge (Original post)
Post removed
Response to Post removed (Reply #43)
SharonClark This message was self-deleted by its author.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,220 posts)For finally coming to their senses, after some serious smackdowns!
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)now
sheshe2
(83,633 posts)We are good now. Our voices were heard, doesn't happen often for us. Amazing in 2017 our voice could be silenced. We are thrilled that the conference that was set up as the first in 40 years to honor women, motivate and empower women is doing just that.
all american girl
(1,788 posts)What She said
GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)I have a personal interest in this story but I wanted to make sure you knew that I haven't and wouldn't have gotten directly involved in a decision that needed to be resolved between women - and I can pretty much guarantee that I wouldn't have been listened to if I had. Your post is spot on in every way and I am glad for all involved. Thank you!
sheshe2
(83,633 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)....in raising funds for the event. Faced with an angry constituency that was either not contributing, not signing up to attend (at $295 each) and some backing out even without getting a refund, the only thing left to do was rearrange the speakers.
Each and every woman who spoke up was simply "reclaiming my time"!
Mediumsizedhand
(531 posts)UtahLib
(3,179 posts)sheshe2
(83,633 posts)"reclaiming my time" Love it! That we did George, that we did, everyone of us that spoke up did just that.
Thank you Auntie...you reclaimed your time and so did we.
George II
(67,782 posts)sheshe2
(83,633 posts)And she ain't lion...
George II
(67,782 posts)Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)musette_sf
(10,198 posts)Gothmog
(144,884 posts)Ferrets are Cool
(21,102 posts)the OLD WHITE REPUGS. Give me a fucking break.
George II
(67,782 posts)Tavarious Jackson
(1,595 posts)Purveyor
(29,876 posts)all american girl
(1,788 posts)Not everything is about old white dudes...sometimes it's about women. It's OK to have women speak to women about women...we don't need white dudes to tell us what to think.
FSogol
(45,435 posts)progressoid
(49,931 posts)His name begins with Bernie and ends with Sanders. If Jimmy Carter had been chosen to speak, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
I'm not really sure what it is about Bernie that gets people so upset.
obamanut2012
(26,041 posts)R B Garr
(16,950 posts)the divisiveness that speaker caused again.
kcr
(15,313 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,253 posts)Was deliberately misreported and then hyped to create division between progressives, and that this annoucement represents no change on the part of the conference. So what was all the f*ing fuss about over a lie?
yardwork
(61,533 posts)Instead, Mallory repeatedly tweeted that Bernie Sanders was the opening speaker, and that Maxine Waters was also speaking.
Debbie Stabenow is only just now asked to be the opening speaker, less than a week before the event.
There was no misreporting. The events organizers changed their plans because of the intense pushback. The criticism worked.
ProfessorPlum
(11,253 posts)for clearing that up
MrsCoffee
(5,801 posts)The Russian (and even some domestic) troll farms have been great at using Bernie to divide groups.
Great to see women standing up and speaking out. Im sick of the tone deafness in politics.
all american girl
(1,788 posts)event (and not a man) would make people get so upset. Women spoke up and were heard, if that upsets some, they may want to look at themselves and sort out why they are upset about women's voices.
yardwork
(61,533 posts)A handful of men in this thread seem to be hysterical at the thought that a man is no longer the opening speaker at the Womens Conference.
Most men and women posting here see this as a very positive correction by the organizers. But a couple of posters are beside themselves with disappointment and rage.
Very illustrative.
all american girl
(1,788 posts)would rather have a woman, and many let there voices be heard. It's sad really, makes me think some don't want to believe women when we state our opinions...like they know more they we do about ourselves.
Demsrule86
(68,455 posts)IronLionZion
(45,380 posts)There are old white men trying to put women in their place. Bernie isn't one of them.
liquid diamond
(1,917 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,676 posts)We have heard a lot about date rape, which is a heinous act in its own right. But, this is something different. This is old guys abusing their autocratic power over women. They should forfeit their positions and jobs over this.
On edit: In lieu of Bill Cosby's similar actions, maybe we should edit it to old powerful guys.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Looks like @womensmarch finally decided to listen to actual women instead of old white guys as it's 2017 not 1917!♀️
7:17 PM - Oct 17, 2017
50 Replies / 190 Retweets / 484
niyad
(113,021 posts)such a problem should NEVER have come up.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)if it was done to them.
thank you, niyad.