If Pansy is in, does it mean Bitch/Witch etc. are in too? If you are going to be hypersensitive

[stevenleser]

about words that could be construed as slurs against one minority class, shouldn't you be consistent? Hillbots are going over the moon to be hypersensitive about any word that could possibly be construed as a slur against women. Do they not think the GLBT community deserves the same consideration? Hello?

[Tarheel_Dem]

1. the height of hypocrisy. were you around for the many threads

that called Obama sexist because he addressed an elderly woman as "sweetie"? I thought I had seen it all, but they've stumbled all over themselves to defend the term "pansy". Go figure....

[stevenleser]

2. It is definitely the height of hypocrisy. For the sake of civility, I bought into not using bitch...

witch etc. Fine. Now Hillbots are totally cool with Pansy? I've been meaning to join PFLAG for some time now, today, I am definitely doing it. I hope everybody reading this thread does too.

[olkaz]

3. Right with you.

I was told using the "B" word was baaaaaaaad.

It seems some folks want it both ways.

[stevenleser]

12. It just goes to show you just how diversity sensitive those screaming "Sexism" really are

Faux outrage screamers all of them

[emilyg]

6. Where?

link

[ccharles000]

28. Pansy is not an anti gay slur.

[BlueIdaho]

29. Except for when it is that is.

[lastliberalintexas]

30. Yes, it is

I find it incredibly offensive that anyone would use that language or try to defend it. It isn't as bad as Obama actually having a campaign event with an ex-gay movement preacher, but it's close enough. They both need to remember the party that the vast majority of GLBT individuals support.

[ccharles000]

31. I disagree.

As a gay man I did not find it offensive.

[Orrex]

4. If you people could just be hetero white males, we wouldn't have this problem.

Heck, if everyone were a hetero white male, we wouldn't have any problems in, say, sixty or seventy years, tops.
(:sarcasm:)


I have to confess that, in casual conversation, I find myself using the B-word, in part because women of my acquaintance use the word without even blinking. Still, my time on DU has helped me to become more conscious of the impact of my words, so I try to choose them with greater sensitivity.

I apologize for using "you people" in the subject line, but it seemed to fit the faux boorishness of the post

[backscatter712]

5. I see two problems here.

One is the usage of these kinds of perjorative words, a crime of which I myself am guilty of (yeah, call me out for it - I'm guilty as charged.), as is a large number of DUers on both sides. That includes the use of slurs - racial, sexual, orientation-based, misogynist, as well as common name-calling - Obamabots, Hill-Shrills, etc.

The other is that some people, on both sides, go out of their way to be offended. There's a certain amount of looking for things to take offense from, because that can be used to assume "victim" status, take control of the discourse and use it to bully and berate. If you seek to be offended, especially here, you'll rarely be disappointed. And some of the problem is that some people, when they feel that someone's using "victim" status to bully and berate, they're going to counter-attack, and the result is an epic flamefest.

My advice: 1. Stop with the name-calling and slinging of perjoratives. I know it's fun, but it does stir the shit. 2. If you're on the receiving end, think about just ignoring it. Use the ignore feature (the plonk), or alert the mods if it's really offensive, but if it doesn't hit that threshold, let it sink.

[stevenleser]

7. There is more nuance then that here. One is by everyday supporters, the other by a major endorser

What does it say that a major Hillary endorser used the word "Pansy" in his official endorsement speech? Doesnt that absolutely require a response by Hillary distancing herself from that word?

[backscatter712]

8. Good point. This isn't a flame fest by random net.idiots.

This is a politician who used that word in an official statement.

Sometimes, the best thing to do is let people who say that crap just let their statements go on record.

That does more harm to them than any of our counterattacking.

[stevenleser]

11. We need to make sure it is heard by everyone though. This should not be allowed to stand unchallenge

unchallenged

[Coexist]

9. did i miss pansy-gate?

I was phonebanking.

[stevenleser]

10. It's just starting. So far no response from team Clinton

[4themind]

23. I think that is a subtle hint that...

he has a relative priority of attention and contributions of his time....Personally, I'd rather see neither word(s). I don't like using the word pansy for the same reason I don't like using the other words you mentioned and I won't let anyone make me stoop to using it, out of fear of losing. I won't give them that power. Also, I think quite a few of the people you're targeting as hypocrite's, don't care in so much as what ever helps their candidate (and I'm sure there are some on the other side that may have similar thinkings as well)

[walldude]

14. Best reply I've seen in any thread all day.

:toast:

[tabasco]

26. LOL!

I wonder if people will still call scandals "gates" 1000 years from now.

[stevenleser]

13. Tues evening kick!

:kick:

[frickaline]

15. no pansy is not ok either, although at least it wasn't being used to demean a specific GLBT member.

Target is the main difference here as I see things.

[stevenleser]

16. If a word is a slur and we are being hyper sensitive about slurs, we shouldnt use them.

So, Hillary and Hillbots have a choice. Disassociate yourselves from what Easley said, or they are uber hypocrites.

[frickaline]

17. can't say as I care for your delivery style

I am an undeclared voter and even I see your obvious agenda. It offends me that you would use serious issues like these that you care nothing about for your own gain.

[stevenleser]

25. I am deadly serious about GLBT issues. I cant send you links of articles

from long before this nomination process started if that helps.

[newmajority]

18. This thread also needs some Pansy Division

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

[backscatter712]

19. Random digression: Didn't the UK field a warship named HMS Pansy during WWI?

[Forkboy]

20. Yes, it was sunk by cannon launched yarn balls.

:yoiks:

[Dr Fate]

21. So long as it doesnt piss off "working class" red-necks, why should they mind?

???

[Toucano]

22. That was inappropriate for an endorsement announcement, to be sure.

I don't see what it has to do with Hillary Clinton any more than that which an Obama supporter might write on a discussion forum is a reflection on Obama.

[nichomachus]

24. Easley should have just said "pussy" instead of "pansy"

then no one would have any complaints.

Gays don't care.

And the Hillary supporters have already said that words don't matter.

Can you imagine if an Obama supporter said he preferred Obama because he wasn't a pussy. God, you'd have to put earplugs in to block out the sounds of Hillary supporters shrieking day and night.

[TexasObserver]

27. Pansy is objectionable, period. No other words need be addressed.

Bitch and witch are not words of the same order as Pansy, particularly since it was used in a context which clearly suggested it was an insult meant to emasculate gay men.

I don't think it helps the dialogue to rope in the whole conversation about bitch and witch. Depending on context, those can be objectionable, but often are not. They have connotations that are not literal, and are used for males and females alike.