"Hillary Ain't Never Been Called a (Slur)"

[LulaMay]

Why has the media highlighted Rev. Wright saying "God Damn America", but NOT his remarks that Hillary Clinton doesn't know what it is like to be called a name, a slur, or be treated as a "non-person"?

Because his remarks are boldly, offensively, off-the-charts sexist; filled with so much AUDACIOUS DENIAL that sexism even exists, that the media, in relation to it's own sexist abuse of Hillary, rather enjoys it, and the pardoning from the good Reverend at his pulpit, if you will.

Rev. Wright said, in his 'sermon' (LA Times, link below);

-snip-


"Hillary was not a black boy raised in a single-parent home -- Barack was," Wright said in the Christmas sermon, delivered from the pulpit at Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ.

"Barack knows what it means to be a black man living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people. Hillary! Hillary can never know that. Hillary ain't never been called a nigger! Hillary has never had her people defined as non-person."

-snip-


I wonder how many black women cringed inside a bit at his remarks?

Women don't know what it's like to be called names?

HILLARY has never been called a name, a sexist slur?

How many women are there who have not known the pain of being called the B word (and not in 'fun'), the C word, the W word, asked 'how much", or told where our place is?

How many women HAVE NOT felt defined as 'less than', inferior, subservient, "non-people" in this man's world, even if they 'graciously' accept the idea as natural or ordained?

How many religions are there are on this planet that DO NOT claim woman must submit to man, claim she is subservient to him as commanded by GOD himself?

That is a question few people address with frankness or clarity, certainly not the media.

But Rev. Wright's 'sermon' goes well beyond that. He denies that WHITE women don't know suffering.

His attack on Hillary Clinton is oppressive to all women, but it is meant to be especially oppressive to black women. He lies to black women that white women don't know pain, that we live in some Camelot where 'our' men never mistreat us or call us names. He encourages black women to believe their suffering stems from racism alone. He encourages them to believe that racist/sexist abuse they experience from white men is only due to racism, that white men only abuse women of color. He encourages them to believe that the abuse they experience from black men stems from their being 'emasculated' by white men, and shamed by being placed supposedly below white women. He lies to black women that all their suffering would end with the destruction of racism alone, and the advancement of black men into sharing a plane of equality with white men. His intent is to DIVIDE BLACK & WHITE WOMEN, for the benefit of black men, and all men, by stereotyping white women and shaming black women who dare to feel anything in common with them.

We watch again as the media lets it slide by, without questioning Senator Obama why he has associated with Rev. Wright, chosen him to be his spiritual mentor/advisor, for so long, some twenty years, (his current 'denoucement' not withstanding). We watch as the media does this and continues their campaign against Hillary Clinton.




ttp://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-obama15mar15,0,5976747.story

[krawhitham]

1. I bet Bill has

[NOLALady]

56. He may have been called a slur

but I doubt if he's been called a N.....r

[krawhitham]

58. Was he not the 1st black president?

[polpilot]

101. Another Clinton lie. Print a color photo of Bill.

[rodeodance]

130. You do not know your history or you would not have said such a foolish thing.

Another Clinton lie. Print a color photo of Bill.

[itcfish]

146. I Am Sure Obama Was

not called a "bitch, c__t, Lesbian" either. I doubt Obama was called the N word much by his white mother or grandparents.

[NOLALady]

153. Silly.

Parents and GrandParents don't use slurs when referring to their children. You said "much". You think they called him slurs sometimes? That's sick and ridiculous.

The slurs start in Kindergarten from kids who were raised like animals.

[roguevalley]

102. Hey, LulaMay, how come you disabled your profile? Don't want

anyone to know how many minutes you've been here? How about it? Why hide yourself if you're such a stand up gal?

[Umbram]

2. As always, you are pulling things out of thin air.

They've showed the clip where he criticizes H.C. over and over.

Anderson Cooper (I think it was?) even played it during the Obama interview.

[rodeodance]

4. oh goodies --a few minutes compared to days. yup--gooodiiiiiiie

[rodeodance]

3. you have esp--some friends and I were talking of this just this am.

[LulaMay]

12. I bet a lot of women have been talking about it...even if quietly

I'm not hanging around responding to the junk much today...it's always the same people, same old crud anyway.

I hope some people read this stuff, feel supported by it. I know I do when I read your posts. Maybe it gets some people who haven't seen it that way thinking.

Have a good day rodeo gal, Cheers.

[rodeodance]

5. REC

[Breeze54]

6. Quite frankly, I don't care what he said in '01 or '03.

It was a loooooooong time ago.

Isn't he retired now too? :shrug:

So, how is McLame doing in this run for the WH?

[Saturday]

8. Recommended. nt

[LulaMay]

25. It is entirely relevant. He spoke in support of Barack and against Hillary. These are his beliefs.

[roseBudd]

75. So he prefers the brother, you prefer the white woman. That's life.

Hillary called him nothing but a speech and change you can xerox.

[Breeze54]

83. Oh brother...well, if a retired ministers speech from FIVE yrs ago is going to

get your panties in a twist, maybe you need to find something new to do?

Who cares what he said five years ago? So, he may be sexist. What else is new?

How many men have you met that aren't, in even just a small way?

I haven't met many. I've met a few who aren't. Do I like that?

No but I'm not going to post 85 threads about it.... ad nauseum.

[SeaLyons]

138. December 25, 2007

is not 5 years ago.

[itcfish]

147. What Happened to Separation of

Church and State? Does that apply to all churches?

[Beacool]

132. He made his comments about Hillary this past Christmas, not years ago.

Lovely Christmas sermon, isn't it? While most people were hearing from their pastors words of love and peace onto mankind. Rev. Wrigth sought one of the most holy days for Christianity to lambaste a fellow human being.

Christian? I think not..........

[Upton]

7. This is gettin old

[LulaMay]

21. That is what you seem to hope for. Women aren't going to stop speaking up about it though.

[Upton]

39. Are you a black woman?

otherwise I find your equating racism with sexism to be downright ludicrous.

[itcfish]

152. Black Men

Got the vote before ANY woman, black white or purple got the vote. Sexism is alive and well.

[dkf]

9. You are completely outraged that Rev Wright says nobody called Hillary an N-word?

You know I just can't get the energy up for that.

Seems not very relevant to me.

Then again, I'm not completely fixated on how my being a female or a minority has screwed me in life.

[LulaMay]

17. I'm outraged he suggests women aren't called names, sexist slurs. Don't distort my words.

[dkf]

61. I didn't see that really.

He comes from it as a black person. You come at it from a female. You both discount each other's angles so I see that you are doing the same thing that you are calling him out on.

[LulaMay]

112. He made a comparison that on its face denies women are oppressed or called slurs.

[Ino]

73. You're distorting HIS words!

He said Hillary's never been called an "N", which is true. Once again, you are charging sexism where none exists. You claim an inference, then attack on the basis of that imaginary construct. This type of ridiculous argument is EXACTLY why feminists are laughed at, so you are defeating the whole purpose...

unless that IS your purpose.

[roseBudd]

76. This is not about sexism this is about knocking down Hillary's opponent

[roseBudd]

10. Sorry but you can't make me feel sorry for white women, who go to good colleges, that their parents

probably paid for. I have a feeling Hill's parent's did not need a grant for their children to get a degree.

Can you say that for Michelle or Obama's parents?

[LulaMay]

15. If you read my post, you would see I'm defending black women in a very specific way...all women.

[roseBudd]

74. Except black women are voting for your perferred candidate's opponent, Clinton's base is older

white women because after Obama became a viable candidate black voters who have been faithfully voting for white faces that have a D after their name switched their allegiance to the brother. Can you blame them?

Some resentful Hillary fans do.

Some resentful Hillary fans have been arguing that the suffering of white women is equal. Their evidence is Salem Witchcraft trials & Spanish Inquisition. I would argue that those examples are a stretch.

The Irish Potato Famine has also been put forth.

[jillan]

19. Ummm - Obama went to Yale and Harvard. Michelle went to Princeton and Harvard.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/10/AR2007051002573_2.html

http://www.presidential-candidates.net/barack_obama.htm

[roseBudd]

77. Not because their parents could afford it. Do you really think every low income AA gets to go to

college?

[Breeze54]

85. If they have good grades and apply for financial aid.

Will they go to an Ivy league school? Only IF they have excellent grades
and then they could get scholarships and free tuition at Harvard.

[roseBudd]

99. Not as easy as you might imagine for a lot of socioeconomic reasons. Poor people live

disorganized, chaotic lives. Imagine your mom is a ... Imagine the life experience you might have and the things you might see.

When I was a life guard at one of the inner city pools I worked, this one would have been the lowest income neighborhood, Over-the-Rhine. The little bars of soap disappeared every day because the kids took them to give to their moms.

I know I never had to worry about having soap when I was a kid.

[roseBudd]

103. Not as easy as you might imagine for a lot of socioeconomic reasons. Poor people live

disorganized, chaotic lives. Imagine your mom is a ... Imagine the life experience you might have and the things you might see.

When I was a life guard at one of the inner city pools I worked, this one would have been the lowest income neighborhood, Over-the-Rhine. The little bars of soap disappeared every day because the kids took them to give to their moms.

I know I never had to worry about having soap when I was a kid.

[Breeze54]

114. I was and am

a "poor people" and I managed to figure out how to apply for a PELL Grant/Student Financial Aid.

One can apply online! It's not that hard to do and they also have paper apps. or you can call

an 800 # and request one. We used to steal TP, when things got rough too. ;)

[roseBudd]

116. Congratulations! Did all the kids in your neighborhood fare as well?

[Breeze54]

117. Congratulations?

Why aren't you an insulting little shit.

FU!

[nomorenomore08]

22. Yeah, I think all Wright really meant was that Hillary came from a more privileged background.

nt

[LulaMay]

30. That is not all he said, by any stretch of rationalization.

[BlackVelvet04]

54. either you are being deliberately obtuse or you're just plain stupid...

So you think ALL white women get to go to college? Get their parents to pay for it? Never are raped or abused? Are all rich and privileged?

[roseBudd]

78. Whites are not overrepresented among below poverty households. Blacks are. No one said all whites

rich. Many are. I live near a college. The nearest grocery is a ghetto grocery. Some of the privileged white kids shop there. The contrast is obvious.

[Breeze54]

92. Poverty declined in all groups in the '90's but rose in * yrs.

Number of African Americans in Poverty Declines While Income Rises, Census Bureau Reports

http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/cb98-176.html

SEPTEMBER 24, 1998 (THURSDAY)

"African Americans accounted for 60 percent of the decline in the
number of poor persons in America between 1996 and 1997," said Daniel
Weinberg, chief of the Census Bureau's Housing and Household Economic
Statistics Division. "Nationwide, about 400,000 fewer families were poor
in 1997 than in 1996, and more than half of them were African American
families."

The number of poor African Americans dropped from 9.7 million in 1996 to
9.1 million in 1997, while their poverty rate decreased from 28.4 percent
to 26.5 percent. For African American families, the number and
percentage in poverty fell from 2.2 million to 2.0 million and from 26.1
percent to 23.6 percent, respectively.

In 1997, the poverty rate of African American married-couple families;
female householder families with no husband present; and individuals was
lower than their 1989 pre-recessionary rate.

The poverty threshold for a family of four was $16,400 in annual
income in 1997 and $12,802 for a family of three.

African American households experienced an increase in real median
income of 4.3 percent between 1996 and 1997 from $24,021 to $25,050. Also,
in the past three years (1995-1997), median income levels of African
American households achieved or surpassed their 1989 pre-recessionary peak
level.

Other highlights:

Poverty

- In 1997, the number and poverty rate of African Americans was
9.1 million and 26.5 percent, compared with 24.4 million and
11.0 percent for Whites; 1.5 million and 14.0 percent for Asians
and Pacific Islanders; and 8.3 million and 27.1 percent for
Hispanics. The poverty rate for Hispanics did not differ
statistically from the rate for African Americans.

- For families, the number and percentage of poor in 1997 was
2.0 million and 23.6 percent for African Americans; 5.0 million and
8.4 percent for Whites; 244,000 and 10.2 percent for Asians
and Pacific Islanders; and 1.7 million and 24.7 percent for
Hispanics. The poverty rate for Hispanics did not differ
statistically from the rate for African Americans.

- African American families with a female householder, no husband
present, experienced a significant drop in both the number and
percentage of families who were poor: 1.6 million and 39.8 percent
in 1997, down from 1.7 million and 43.7 percent in 1996.

Income

- In 1997, African American households had a median income of $25,050,
lower than that of Asian and Pacific Islander households ($45,249),
White households ($38,972) and households maintained by a person of
Hispanic origin, who may be of any race, ($26,628).

- African American households had an average income per household
member of $11,998, based on an average household size of 2.75 people.
The average for White households was $20,093, with an average size
of 2.58 people; and the estimate for Asian and Pacific Islander
households was $18,569, with an average size of 3.17 people.

- The per capita income of African Americans was $12,351 in 1997,
compared with $20,425 for Whites, $18,226 for Asian and Pacific
Islanders, and $10,773 for Hispanics.

The data are from the March 1998 Current Population Survey. As in all
surveys, the data are subject to sampling variability and other sources of
error.

Poverty Rate Lowest in 20 Years, Household Income at Record High, Census Bureau Reports

SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 (TUESDAY)

http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/2000/cb00-158.html

The nation's poverty rate dropped from 12.7 percent in 1998 to 11.8
percent in 1999 the lowest rate since 1979 and real median household
income reached $40,816, the highest level ever recorded by the Census
Bureau (household income data were first recorded in 1967), according to
two reports released today by the Commerce Department's Census Bureau.

"Every racial and ethnic group experienced a drop in both the number of
poor and the percent in poverty, as did children, the elderly and people
ages 25 to 44," said Daniel Weinberg, chief of the Census Bureau's Housing
and Household Economic Statistics Division. "Declines in poverty were
concentrated in metropolitan areas, particularly central cities. And, on
the income side, this was the fifth consecutive year that households
experienced a real annual increase in income."

Poverty

According to the poverty report, 2.2 million fewer people were poor in
1999 than in 1998 32.3 million versus 34.5 million. In addition, the
percentage of people 65 and over who were living in poverty reached a
measured low of 9.7 percent in 1999 and the proportion of the nation's
children in poverty was the lowest since 1979 16.9 percent.

The percentage and number of poor declined in the Northeast and West and
remained unchanged in the South and the Midwest. The poverty rate in the
South did not change significantly from the 1998 measured low for that
region.

Except for Whites, the 1999 poverty rates for the nation's major racial
and ethnic groups set or equaled historic lows. The rate for African
Americans, 23.6 percent, was the lowest ever measured by the Census
Bureau, and about 700,000 fewer African Americans were poor in 1999 (8.4
million) than in 1998 (9.1 million).

The poverty rate for non-Hispanic Whites, 7.7 percent, equaled its
measured low reached in 1988-1989 and did not differ from the rates
recorded during the 1973-1974 and 1976-1979 periods. Between 1998 and
1999, the number of poor non-Hispanic Whites dropped from 15.8 million to
14.9 million, a decline of 900,000.

In 1999, the poverty rate among Hispanics (who may be of any race) was
22.8 percent which statistically equaled its measured low last reached in
1979. The number of Hispanics in poverty fell by 600,000 between 1998 and
1999, to 7.4 million.

The poverty rate for Asians and Pacific Islanders decreased to 10.7
percent in 1999, from 12.5 percent in 1998, also equaling its lowest
measured value. The number of poor Asians and Pacific Islanders decreased
from 1.4 million in 1998 to 1.2 million in 1999.

A three-year average (1997-1999) poverty rate for American Indian and
Alaska Natives was 25.9 percent, with an estimated 700,000 living in
poverty. This is the first time that the Census Bureau has shown poverty
data for the American Indian and Alaska Native population. The average was
used because the American Indian and Alaska Native population is
relatively small and multiyear averages provide more reliable estimates.
(The Census Bureau recommends, however, that caution be used in
interpreting these data, noting that 1990 census results showed
differences in poverty between the American Indian and Alaska Native
population living in American Indian or in Alaska Native areas and those
residing outside those areas. Poverty data from the Current Population
Survey cannot make a similar distinction.)

Based on comparisons of two-year averages (1998-1999 and 1997-1998), no
state showed an increase in poverty rates and seven states Arizona,
Arkansas, California, New York, South Dakota, Utah and Virginia, plus the
District of Columbia showed decreases in their poverty rates.

The average poverty threshold for a family of four in 1999 was $17,029
in annual income; for a family of three, it was $13,290.

By contrast on 2008:

One out of eight U.S. citizens lives in poverty

www.chinaview.cn 2008-03-13 11:08:25

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-03/13/content_7780213.htm

BEIJING, March 13 (Xinhua) --

Almost one out of eight U.S. citizens lives in poverty with poor population in the United States constantly increasing, according to a report issued here Thursday.

It was revealed in the Human Rights Record of the United States in 2007 which was released by the Information Office of China's State Council on Thursday. The report was prepared to help people around the world understand the real situation of human rights in the United States.

According to statistics released by the U.S. Census Bureau in August 2007, the official poverty rate in 2006 was 12.3 percent. There were 36.5 million people, or 7.7 million families living in poverty in the same year.

In another word, almost one out of eight U.S. citizens lives in poverty and the poverty rate in Mississippi was as high as 21.1 percent, a figure released by USA Today was quoted by the Chinese report.

The poverty rate of major U.S. cities was 16.1 percent. The rate was 15.2 percent in suburban areas and 13.8 percent in the south. The poverty rate in the Washington D.C. was 19.8 percent, which meant nearly one-fifth of its citizens were living in poverty, it said.

The report also outlined that the wealth of the richest group in the United States has rapidly expanded in recent years, widening the earning gap between the rich and poor.

The earnings of the highest one percent of the population accounted for 21.2 percent of U.S. total national income in 2005, compared with 19 percent in 2004.

At the same time, the earnings of the lowest 50 percent of the population accounted for 12.8 percent of the total national income in 2005, down from 13.4 percent in 2004, the report quoted a Reuters coverage as saying.

The number of "ultra-high-net worth" U.S. households, that is, those with a net worth of 5 million U.S. dollars or more, excluding the value of their primary homes, reached 1.14 million in 2006, a 23 percent rise from 930,000 in 2005, the report pointed out.

Top executives of major U.S. businesses made an average of more than 10 million U.S. Dollars in 2006, 364 times that of ordinary workers. They earn as much money in one day of work as ordinary workers make over the entire year, the report said.

Looks like the decline in poverty was during the Clinton years
and poverty rose significantly during the bush administration.

[IdClaire]

82. good point...

[OhioBlue]

11. get over yourself.

What in this statement says that white women live in Camelot?

--- "Hillary was not a black boy raised in a single-parent home -- Barack was," Wright said in the Christmas sermon, delivered from the pulpit at Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ.

"Barack knows what it means to be a black man living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people. Hillary! Hillary can never know that. Hillary ain't never been called a nigger! Hillary has never had her people defined as non-person." ---

Everything he said is factually correct. You twist his words to say that she has never been called a name. That is NOT what he said. He said specifically that she's never been called a ni**er.

How does he state that white women don't know suffering? I don't see that at all.

And, there is a HUGE f-in difference between women feeling like they are treated less than equal in a man's world and actually being owned, sold and traded as property.

I'm a white woman and I'm sick of this "yeah but we got a worse deal" BS. There is sexism in the world and you HARM efforts to change minds when you manufacture ridiculous stuff like your OP.

[XemaSab]

16. Word.

This out-victiming shit is getting really old.

[Moochy]

27. In the OP's case I beleive it to be intentional charicature

"makin us look bad" etc

[LulaMay]

43. By continually attacking me pesonally, you show others that you have no point, only a reaction.

You don't like what I say, but you make no argument about it. You simply resort to personal attacks.

It is not something I will waste my time on anymore.

[Moochy]

45. Oh Good Another Clinton Poster Strike!

[rodeodance]

31. Get over yourself.

[XemaSab]

33. I'm goddamn tired of the "women are victims" attitude

It's bullshit and I can't support it.

[LulaMay]

36. It's not an "attitude", it's a reality that women are victimized with sexist attacks.

[XemaSab]

42. Here's the deal:

I've sued for sexual harassment and won, I've had to put up with sexist bullshit in the workplace... I've seen it.

I've also seen my grandma and other women I know going through life with a pissy, whiny "victim" attitude, and it just doesn't do anything for anyone. It doesn't help my grandma to be in a little pity-party all the time, and it doesn't help the people around her see her as a STRONG woman who raised 4 kids as a single mom.

Men who act like victims are ridiculed, so why should we give women a pass? :shrug:

I think this victim shit does us WAY more harm than good, and it should be scrapped.

[rodeodance]

40. too bad

[BlackVelvet04]

57. then maybe Wright shouldn't have said what he said....

it's the Obama supporters and the Obama campaign who are constantly whining about victimization.

[XemaSab]

59. I think he said a lot of stuff that he shouldn't have said for sure

but as far as which camp is whining about victimization... well... I think team Hillary is putting out quite a bit of it.

[roseBudd]

79. But the Spanish Inquisition... but the Irish Potato Famine, Salem Witch Trials!

[TahitiNut]

38. (sigh) Yup.

The idea, as expressed on DU, that Hillary "knows what it's like" because she was told that the Astronuat Program didn't accommodate females at the time ... nauseates me. Competing "flavors" of human objectification - detestable.

[PerfectSage]

13. Have you ever been called a broken record?

Have fun figuring out Hillary's presidential performance.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20040521.html

[LulaMay]

18. The squeaky wheel... I'd rather speak truth to power than be thoughtless and dismissive.

[Vinca]

14. I thought Wright made a good point with that remark, namely that

white people can't appreciate what he's talking about because we've never been called nigger. He could have added a whole lot more. Was your white family owned by someone? Any of your relatives lynched? Did attack dogs stop your father from going to school? Ever been denied admittance to a restaurant? Back in the Reverend's heydey, he could probably preach at a church in a town but be unable to find a hotel to sleep in.

[LulaMay]

20. Why are you comfortable with sexist remarks, however you believe they are intended?

[OhioBlue]

28. they weren't sexist remarks. n/t

[LulaMay]

34. It is sexist, and absurd, to suggest Hillary/women aren't called slurs, aren't treated as inferiors

[OhioBlue]

41. It's ludicrous to think anyone hasn't been called a name

and treated as an inferior one time or another.

There is a huge difference between that and the legacy of slavery, institutionalized racism, segregation, etc. that comes with the word Ni**er.

[Vinca]

60. Those remarks weren't sexist. It isn't sexism every time someone

makes a remark that includes the name "Hillary." I was the first woman on a police department back in the 1980's and trust me, I know sexism.

[LulaMay]

122. Yes, they were. He made a comparison that suggested women aren't oppressed, called slurs

or know tha pain and suffering that comes from it.

[jlpohio69]

23. No, she probably has not been called the N-word...

but she has been called a b*itch, c*nt, monster, wh*re, dyke, liar, murderer...the list goes on and on and on....and all the name-calling coming from the Obama camp.

[LulaMay]

29. You are distorting my post. Hillary has been called hateful slurs, we know the pain of it too.

[OhioBlue]

35. "we know the pain of it too"

are you freakin' kidding me? Who hasn't been called a name? White, Black, Hispanic, Man, Woman, hell, everyone has been called a name.

There is a huge difference between using the N word and calling a person a name.

You're just incredible.

[LulaMay]

37. It is ludicrous to suggest that it is not sexist, nor hurts women, to call them 'B', 'C', 'W'....

These are SEXIST NAMES FOR WOMEN.

Moron is not.

[OhioBlue]

46. no - it's ridiculous to even attempt to make a

comparison. and especially ridiculous to try and put words in Reverend Wright's mouth. That is pathetic.

[roseBudd]

80. Was she called Honky? Cracker? Did it hurt really bad? Girl? How old was she when she was first

called a hateful word? Did her parents explain it to her?

[LulaMay]

121. It's interesting that you believe women aren't so badly hurt when called a slur.

It's one of the ways we are cast as 'non-people'.

Why would you assume it hurts any less for a woman to be called a 'C' word than it is for a black person to be called a 'N'?

From the youngest age girls are made to feel 'different', less than. They learn that it is an insult for a boy to be called a girl. They are mocked for being a girl, in countless ways I won't bother to list, because I don't believe you mean to consider it.

They are molested and raped in numbers much greater than boys (who are also almost always abused by men too).

Yes, it hurts "really bad".

[roseBudd]

126. I have never been called bitch, cunt or whore, nor was I taunted as a girl

[calimary]

47. All you have to do is remember the John Lennon song - "Woman is the 'N-word' of the World"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5lMxWWK218

Great segment from the old "Dick Cavett Show" INCLUDING the song!

John, wherever you are, WE SURE NEED YOU NOW!!!!!!!!!!

:cry: :loveya: :patriot:

[LulaMay]

51. Yes. You should post that. I've never seen that youtube.

[calimary]

63. John Lennon was a remarkable man. One of those towering Once-in-a-Century figures.

Dick Cavett's talk show is out on DVD. John Lennon's/Yoko Ono's is one of the segments in it. "The Dick Cavett Show" was a real trip!

[LulaMay]

65. I used to watch Dick Cavett with my mom all the time. If only we had real talk shows now.

[anonymous171]

24. Another "My group has been more oppressed" thread.

*sigh*

[LulaMay]

26. That is exactly the idea I oppose in my post.

[Moochy]

32. A request - off topic

Lula May when you post big snips from articles and type alot of accompanying text, it helps if you put them in a div.

click here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=html_table

use Blockquotes
Create a styled, indented blockquote (useful for posting excerpts from articles)

example:

Some Biased Pro-Corporatist Mouthpiece of the M$M Shilled:
http://somelinktomyarticle.com/

blah blah blah Clinton is Great blah blah

Then put your words before or after:

Blah Blah Obama looked at me funny.

[Emit]

48. That's a good suggestion because I can never tell when Lula May is quoting something

or posting something she wrote herself.

[Moochy]

50. It's hard to sort the nonsense from the propaganda

[LulaMay]

53. It's hard to argue my very obvious points, which I suspect is why you don't.

[indimuse]

44. K&R

Good post and for truth. THX!

[Ellen Forradalom]

49. Hillary's been called a cunt.

Just sayin'.

[LulaMay]

52. John McCain laughed at her being called a bitch. It barely raised an eyebrow.

[roseBudd]

96. by whom?

[Ellen Forradalom]

100. How about the anti-Hillary 527, C.U.N.T.?

NOT a fucking joke.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/24/welcome-to-the-gutter-ri_n_83062.html
http://www.citizensunitednottimid.org/

[LulaMay]

120. Thank you for the links. It's good to have, since some here dont seem to believe sexism even exists.

or is a problem worthy of their consideration.

[gaspee]

55. Good post

I am so sick of sexism being swept under the rug. Women accused of acting like victims because they point things out.

Sexism kills. How many women are killed by men every year? How many raped? How many beaten.

But if you point out the TRUTH, then you're claiming to be a victim.

Disgusting. Every last one of you.

[Mother Of Four]

69. If you are going to be against abuse and sexism...

Be against ALL FORMS of it-

This is from WEBMD http://www.webmd.com/balance/features/help-for-battered-men?page=2

You might want to take the time to actually read it.

Help for Battered Men
Domestic violence befalls mostly women, but men are victims, too.

WebMD FeatureMore than 830,000 men fall victim to domestic violence every year, which means every 37.8 seconds, somewhere in America a man is battered, according to the National Violence Against Women Survey. While more than 1.5 million women are also victims, everyone -- no matter their sex --deserves help.

"Domestic violence is not about size, gender, or strength," says Jan Brown, executive director and founder of the Domestic Abuse Helpline for Men. "It's about abuse, control, and power, and getting out of dangerous situations and getting help, whether you are a woman being abused, or a man."

There are more than 4,000 domestic violence programs in the U.S., but Brown says very few actually offer the same services to men as they do women. So where can a man turn for support when he is being abused? Domestic violence experts offer advice for men who may be falling through the cracks.

Abuse Against Men
"Domestic violence against men is very similar to domestic violence against women," says Brown. "It can come in the form of physical abuse, emotional, verbal, or financial."

As with abuse against women, Brown explains that abuse against men can mean a partner or spouse will:

Withhold approval, appreciation, or affection as punishment

Criticize, name call, or shout
Take away your car keys or money
Regularly threaten to leave or to make you leave
Threaten to hurt you or a family member
Punish or deprive your children when angry at you
Threaten to kidnap the children if you leave
Abuse or hurt your pets
Harass you about affairs your spouse imagines you are having
Manipulate you with lies and contradictions
Destroy furniture, punch holes in walls, break appliances
Wield a gun/knife in a threatening way
Hit, kick, shove, punch, bite, spit, or throw things when upset

So yes, half as many men are abused and dominated as women I give you that. However: Do not play that women are the only people being harmed.

[gaspee]

70. Don't EVEN

go there. The last refuge of MRA's -- but the prros menz are abused toooooooo........

Oh no you di'nt!

[Mother Of Four]

72. Oh yes I did.

And will continue to do so.

I want EQUAL RIGHTS, for MEN and WOMEN of all walks of life.
I want ALL FORMS of abuse, Misogyny and Misandry GONE.
I want ALL FORMS of racism GONE. No matter WHAT color or creed the person is stating it.

If something is WRONG it's WRONG- It doesn't matter what shade of beige or brown you are. It doesn't matter if your parts are on the inside or the out.

You can NOT pick and choose who gets to be MORE right. If you are going to stand for something then STAND for the damn thing, not just one aspect of it.

Or do you lack courage?

[gaspee]

81. If you seriously think

that the numbers of men abused by women even approach the numbers of women abused and MURDERED by men are even close, then you are seriously deluded.

Women, as a class, are oppressed by men, as a class.

Are individuals within each class, ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS, guilty of hurting the other? Or course they are. But it is on the base level, the socialization level of our society that stops oppression as a class. Individual humans are always going to act inhumanly. There's not much that can be done about that. But we can do something about the oppression of one class by another.

Tell me, do you buy the "blacks are racist too" argument? Even though, as a class, the oppression of racism only goes one way?

I fear you are beyond reach, therefore you will go on my ignore list. Ignore the ignorant is my motto and it serves me well.

[Mother Of Four]

84. On the off chance that you didn't ignore-

Why don't you educate yourself on what a progressive is?

http://therevolutionarytimes.blogspot.com/2008/02/definition-debate-what-is-progressive.html

It's really sad that you would think injustice in any form is "Ok"

And I firmly agree with you that AS A CLASS men oppressing women is a thousand times more prevalent. I would never argue against that. I also feel that AS A CLASS Racism goes one way- again something I would never argue. You can't argue with the truth, it doesn't change.

However it's also important to be against it in any form at all, wouldn't you agree that in a perfect world a person could be judged only on their merits instead of their outer trappings? No matter if its the color of their skin, what parts they were born with, or a difficult to pronounce name?

If you don't, then I don't know what else to say to you.

[LulaMay]

105. Men (as a group) have oppressed women (as a group) with violence, intimidation.

It is not the reverse. There are men addressing it and fighting it, but that has been and still is reality to one degree or another for most women in this world.

You deny that reality by highlighting the few cases of women being violent to men, which are almost always a defensive response to male violence and verbal abuse/intimidation.

You should have to volunteer at a battered women's shelter for a year for what you posted.

[Swamp Rat]

62. Straw Man

Assuming you are referring to Rev. Wright's sermon that included the following statement:

"Barack knows what it means to be a black man living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people. Hillary! Hillary can never know that. Hillary ain't never been called a nigger! Hillary has never had her people defined as non-person."

The Straw Man set up:

"Why has the media highlighted Rev. Wright saying "God Damn America", but NOT his remarks that Hillary Clinton doesn't know what it is like to be called a name, a slur, or be treated as a "non-person"?

The conclusion to the Straw Man argument:

1. "Because his remarks are boldly, offensively, off-the-charts sexist" - No evidence was presented that demonstrates Rev. Wright's comment was sexist.

2. "filled with so much AUDACIOUS DENIAL that sexism even exists, that the media, in relation to it's own sexist abuse of Hillary, rather enjoys it, and the pardoning from the good Reverend at his pulpit, if you will." - This is an illogical statement. There is no evidence Rev. Wright was sexist "in the pulpit," nor in "denial that sexism even exists," nor has been pardoned by the "media," the latter of which may or may not have a sexist agenda with regard to Hillary Clinton. The fact that the media focused on one thing and not another is not evidence of sexism on the part of Rev. Wright.

3. Even though women have been treated as inferiors throughout history, even until this day, Rev. Wright's sermon referred to "rich white people" and "Hillary Clinton," and did not address the issue of sexism.

4. "He denies that WHITE women don't know suffering." - The fact that he did not address the issue of sexism, in that particular sermon, is not itself evidence of sexism. This is fallacious reasoning.

6. "He encourages black women to believe their suffering stems from racism alone." - This is an assumption, not a fact.

7. The fact that people have used the slurs against women have nothing to do with "black man," "rich white people," and "nigger." He is clearly talking about the issue of race, slavery, and the historical mistreatment of African Americans, which also continues to this day.

8. "His attack on Hillary Clinton is oppressive to all women, but it is meant to be especially oppressive to black women." - There is nothing presented here to indicate that Rev. Wright has or ever intended to oppress "all women" nor "black women."

9. "He lies to black women that all their suffering would end with the destruction of racism alone." - No evidence exists to support this.

If you are concerned because Rev. Wright did not discuss the issue of sexism, then you should attend his church and speak to him directly, or perhaps write a letter to him.

[LulaMay]

64. 1. Suggesting that Hillary/women arent treated as inferiors 'non-people',or called slurs is evidence

Your very first argument is easily disproved, as your entire argument that follows is. Rev. Wright's remarks are sexist because;

1. he denies the existence of sexism by claiming women, even women like Hillary, aren't ever treated as inferiors or servants (to men in women's case) or as he put it 'non-people'. He did not qualify his remarks whatsoever.

2. his comments suggest by comparison that women aren't called slurs like black people are called slurs. He did not qualify his remarks whatsoever.

3. There exists a plethora of evidence that women, of every color and income/status level are/have been treated just so.


Unless you believe that sexism doesn't exist, and deny the boundless evidence that it does, and that ALL women are subjected to it, your arguments hold no water. In fact, they are as absurd as the Rev's sexist remarks.

[Swamp Rat]

86. The argument you have presented is baseless and fact-free.

1. What did I argue? All I did was debunk your argument.

2. He did not 'deny the existence of sexism'. Where is the proof? Your opinion does not suffice - it is not fact.

3. "There exists a plethora of evidence that women, of every color and income/status level are/have been treated just so." - Red Herring fallacy.

"Unless you believe that sexism doesn't exist, and deny the boundless evidence that it does, and that ALL women are subjected to it, your arguments hold no water. In fact, they are as absurd as the Rev's sexist remarks." - non-sequitur and Negative Proof fallacies.

You have proved nothing.

[LulaMay]

97. It's a FACT that he made a COMPARISON that denied women are oppressed as a group, called slurs.

It is a FACT that women do indeed know what it is to be defined by another group (men) as 'non-people'.

It is a FACT that women know the pain and humiliation of being called slurs used to oppress only them, such as the C word, B word, W word.

To deny those easily proven FACTS and that the Rev. was OBVIOUSLY making a comparison in order to claim Hillary Clinton hasn't suffered as a woman the way Barack Obama has suffered as a black person is to PURPOSELY MISS what he was saying.

You didn't debunk anything.

You could not answer these points or facts without denying sexism exists, nor could you make the absurd claim that Rev. Wright wasn't being sexist unless you denied that he was comparing Hillary's experience (being a white woman) to Barack's being a black man, and purporting that she doesn't know what it is to suffer from DISCRIMINATION.

Would you like me to draw it up for you on a Venn diagram?

[Swamp Rat]

118. LOL! Yes, draw it up on a Venn diagram.

This should be very interesting. :D

[live love laugh]

115. You won't get thru to this individual. They have a very transparent agenda.

As you said, you have no argument only a response to a non-argument really.

At least you expose the agenda by actually posting responses that MAKE SENSE.

[LulaMay]

124. Yes, equality for women.

[cooolandrew]

66. OMG. Hillary is talking down to Barack not the reverse that is his point.

...HRC is 2nd place despite her spin if someone in 2nd place offered you VP and imainge you were black what would ou interpret that as.

[citizen snips]

67. I guess Wright forgot to add that Obama's mother is white.

[LulaMay]

68. Good point. He very conveniently did.

[citizen snips]

71. All the little details make all the difference.

[NOLALady]

154. A white Mother

has nothing to do with the way a person is treated. The taxi driver who will refuse to pick him up does not know or care about his heritage.
A white parent cannot protect their child from sexism or racism.

[IdClaire]

87. there's race and then there's class

I'm getting ready to read a book when it gets here from Amazon, recommended on this site called Deer Hunting for Jesus that talks about why the white working poor in Va vote in Republican in direct opposition to the party that would do the most for them. Percentage wise there are more blacks that are in poverty but in sheer numbers there may be more millions of white folks who are poor too. Not trying to minimize the African American experience, just point out that many whites are hurting too.

[NOLALady]

155. Of course there are more whites hurting.

I just can't wrap my mind around the fact they will consistently vote against their best interests.

You would imagine that sooner or later they could figure it out. :shrug:

[jenmito]

88. It's a FACT. She never HAS been called the "n" word. She never HAS been pulled over for driving

while Black. She never HAS had to experience living as a Black man. Black women were shown saying, "Amen" to his comments. And I've seen the clip played over and over. Obama strongly denounced THOSE remarks, too.

[LisaL]

You contradict yourself.

On one hand, you seem to be claiming that Rev. Wright was saying nothing but the truth.
On the other hand, you claim Obama strongly denounced Rev. Wright's words.
Maybe you can explain to me why Obama strongly denounced those words if they are nothing but the truth?

[LisaL]

89. You contradict yourself.

On one hand, you seem to be claiming that Rev. Wright was saying nothing but the truth.
On the other hand, you claim Obama strongly denounced Rev. Wright's words.
Maybe you can explain to me why Obama strongly denounced those words if they are nothing but the truth?

[jenmito]

93. I'm not contradicting myself. I find nothing wrong with what Wright said. But Obama HAS to

denounce them no matter HOW he feels about these statements. It's politics.

[LulaMay]

95. It is his COMPARISON that is sexist. He virtually claims women aren't called slurs, aren't oppressed

It is his comparison that is sexist.

He's saying women, especially white women AREN'T OPPRESSED, don't know what it's like to belong to a group that is oppressed and defined by another group as 'non-people', subservient inferiors, when we most certainly DO. We have been defined, as a group, by men, as a group, in just this way (there are men addressing it, fighting it, just as there are white people addressing racism, fighting it). There are sexist slurs, name calling, that are used specifically to harm US, just as there are racist slurs.

It is a DISMISSAL from him that women suffer under sexism AT ALL, let alone in comparison to how black people suffer under racism.

To ignore that obvious point is to purposely miss what he's saying.

[JAbuchan08]

129. He *virtually* claims women aren't called slurs

virtually huh? ridiculous.

I can't wait until after the primaries so we can see who is a real Hillary supporter and who is a put on. It should be interesting.

[shayes51]

127. So black people really like and agree with the comments, but

Obama condemns them? Wright is right, Obama is wrong? My head is spinning here!

[Azathoth]

90. Yeah, it's so hard being a college-educated white woman nowadays

Someone oughta tell those uppity black men that they don't know what real suffering is. :eyes:

[LisaL]

91. Yea, just as it is hard to be a Harvard educated black man,

apparently.

[jenmito]

94. He got to Harvard despite his hardships.

[LulaMay]

98. and women don't face the hardships of discrimination? It's the comparison which is the point.

Honestly, I can't believe how some of you resort to making the most absurd arguments because there's no defending his remarks as dismissive of women's oppression.

[jenmito]

104. Not like BLACK people. Hillary's the wife of an ex-president! NO contest. n/t

[LulaMay]

107. That is patently absurd. Being the wife of a former president hasnt insulated her from sexist attack

She has been attacked as a woman repeatedly in the media. She has been called every sexist name in the book, spoken about by male dominated media in the most vile manner.

[jenmito]

111. Your statement is patently absurd, comparing an ex-First Lady who uses her gender as often as

possible to Obama's lifetime struggles.

[LulaMay]

123. I didn't make the comparison. Rev. Wright did. You can't argue how I responded either. She

has been called every sexist name in the book, so how has being a former first lady saved her from that? It hasn't at all.

In fact, it goes to show how any woman can and is abused with sexism.

Barack Obama has had struggles as a black person, and Hillary Clinton has had struggles as a woman.

She has not appealed to women voters any less than he has appealed to black voters either.

[jenmito]

143. You MUST be joking!

Hillary has USES her "victim-hood" at every turn. She most definitely DOES appeal to women voters WAY more than Obama appeals to black voters by having people hold signs saying, "Women for Hillary." I got a letter from her saying,
"And there's one thing in particular that you've done by participating in my campaign that fills me with pride. You've let every little girl in America know that she can be anything she wants to be. I couldn't be more proud." (Bold emphasis HERS!)

Could you imagine if Obama had people holding signs saying "Black people for Obama"??? He can't, because Black people are a minority in this country and if he plays up the fact that he's Black, WHITE people could be turned off. But women are a majority, so Hillary can and DOES use her gender to get votes. She has said more than a few times that she EMBODIES change just by being a woman. So I guess that means Condoleezza Rice would ALSO embody change even though her policies are exactly like Bush's. Get real.

[roseBudd]

128. Yes real suffering is Jimmy Choo or Manolo Blahnik? How to decide?

[reflection]

106. A LulaMay "sexist" post.

I'm SHOCKED, I tell you. SHOCKED. :)

[LulaMay]

108. It's too bad there are so many people who dismiss sexism as easily as you and Rev. Wright.

The world would be such a better place were it not for that.

[sniffa]

109. You poor thing

:hug:

[reflection]

110. Well, don't be modest.

I mean, you're helping to create the climate for everyone. If life were a music shop, you'd be a simple whistle. One note, and very loud.

[rodeodance]

131. You are right--most posts upstream are into name calling, and mocking. They

don't want a conversation. No brain-er ugly responses on their part.

[reflection]

133. Oh c'mon rodeo.

It's like finding a doll in a dusty old curiosity shop with a pull string that only makes the doll yell "sexism". Something you'd laugh at for a few minutes and then not purchase. Even a simple coin has two sides. LM has one.

(edit for spelling)

[rodeodance]

134. I believe sexism is prevalent and should not be belittled.

[reflection]

136. I agree.

Nor should DUers be beaten over the head with it everyday. What do you think?

[rodeodance]

137. Well, based on many of the responses, this issue needs to be brought to light. How

often??

[reflection]

139. I think once a week is sufficient.

But that's just me.

[rodeodance]

140. no,--a few a wk --but neither of us control posters. have a good day.

[reflection]

141. Of course we don't..

Obviously some can't even control themselves.

And still others can post 1000+ diatribes about evil men, but fail to donate even $1 to the man who makes DU possible. What a sexist attitude. Use resources given by a man and then denounce him. Kind of undercuts their message.

(if it is against DU rules to call out non-donors, I respectfully request a mod remove this message)

(edit for grammar)

[LulaMay]

150. Good thing for you that women's rights activists didn't confine themselves to speaking once a week.

Typically, I do not write an opinion more than a few times a week, though I do post relevant articles or information, and other posts. This election however has brought out a deluge of the worst sexism, and so much of it is posted on this board, that I feel compelled to be a voice against it. There certainly aren't enough.

Perhaps if more women, women like you, said something more about it, and didn't attack other women who do, there wouldn't be such a need for the FEW here who have the guts to do it.

You purposely distort my words to discount what I say, and the seriousness of it as well.

Women who speak up are often called man-haters to discredit them. It's very close in tone to calling them lesbians, as if it's an insult. Do you subscribe to that?

I wonder how you assume to imagine who I am and how I feel about the men in my life, just to insulate yourself from giving consideration to what I write.

I recognize and speak often about the thoughtful, good men who are addressing sexism and speaking up to end it. I do not call men "evil", although the crimes a high number of them commit against women, girls & boys most certainly are.

If you feel "beaten over the head' with my opinions, then don't bother reading them or responding.

Leave the thread.

Otherwise, you sound insincere and simply angry about what I wrote.

[reflection]

151. I'm not a woman. (what a strange assumption)

There are so many strawmen in your response it is a fire hazard.

I never distorted your words and I never said you hate men. I *did* say I think it is hypocritical for you to use a forum administered by a man as a stomping ground for your sexist hate while not fiscally donating to it. But then, it's probably socio-economic inequities that don't give you the fiscal latitude to contribute, I'm sure.

I'm not angry at what you wrote. Just irritated. Your behavior is that of a gnats at a picnic - of no consequence, but enough to distract everyone from the event at hand.

And how I sound to you matters not to me in the slightest. If you want to throw elbows in a crowd, you're going to get elbowed back. That's equality. I'll not leave a thread because you are having a faux fem-fit.

Take care. I'll wait for the next high-pitched whistle which announces your next post.

(edited for spelling - thanks to my wife for catching it)

[JeffR]

113. Do you even read what you post here?

Or do you just pound away at your keyboard stringing together a bunch of pseudo-insights expressing (quite poorly) your inchoate anger?

My guess is the latter. Of course, I do have a penis, so no doubt my inherent sexism is making me think you're just as dumb as a post. I'm sure if my reading comprehension skills weren't clouded by all this testosterone, I'd come around to your worldview.

[LulaMay]

119. I'm supposing that you simply don't like what I wrote, or the facts of the matter.

[JeffR]

125. You're half right, good on ya.

I don't like what you wrote & have written on DU recently, because I found it wrong-headed and it hinted at opinions I sincerely hope you don't have. I hope you're better than you're coming across here. I'll go one better and say I hope you're a good person I happen to disagree with. But no, I emphatically do not like what you wrote. I think it's deliberately divisive, obtuse and cartoonish, at best.

As to the facts of the matter, I'm having trouble believing you would recognize a fact if it came up and bit you in the ass, assuming your posts recently have been anywhere near sincere.

[Beacool]

135. I find it very interesting the excuses Obama's supporters make to justify Wright's

race baiting comments. Yes, black people have been treated shamefully in this country, but so have women and women of color have the double onus of their race and gender.

I find Wright's words offensive and I don't care who agrees with me or not, but if some of you don't think his words reverberated among whites you're wrong. I went to a large birthday party in Reading, PA this weekend and quite a few people mentioned Obama's pastor and thought that his remarks about Hillary and the GD sermon after 9/11 were not only inappropriate but also racist and unpatriotic. BTW, these are the voters that he needed on his side. Wright didn't do Obama any favors with his inflammatory sermons.

[rodeodance]

145. His comments did no good for Obama--did you see the

post--the rass. one --?--someone posted it. Wrights words not going down well at all.

It was a poll asking about his comments.

[Beacool]

148. No, I didn't.

Though, I do think that this is not going away any time soon.

[ensho]

142. agree, true

nt

[girl_interrupted]

144. Obama was a black boy raised in a white household

First by his mother, then by his white grandparents. Does Wright even realize this? He wasn't your "average" black boy. And women weren't denied the right to own property, have access to birth control, refused entrance into certain careers & be able to vote? Did Wright forget all the white people who struggled along with black people to get civil and voters rights for blacks? Like Andrew Goodman & Michael Schwerner & Viola Gregg Liuzzo who gave their lives in this struggle. Has Wright ever heard of desegregation, & Affirmative Action? According to Wright, the black man is so held down, there are no black doctors, lawyers, politicans and athletes. Maybe if Wright took his head out of his ass and looked around, he'd realize there has been a lot of changes. And where was Wright during Katrina? Was he in a row boat carrying supplies? Why doesn't he ask where Condi Rice was? Honestly this guy is a jerk.

[AGirl]

149. Sexism against Clinton doesn't count for Obama supporters.