Another Way to Look at the Use of the "B" word to describe a man.
Use it on DU with reference to a woman, and the thread will be hidden by a jury.
Use it to define a man, and it is likely to be left on view.
Why? Because that word is treated as misogynistic when used to describe a woman. It is generally taken to mean that the woman in question is not a submissive person who keeps her opinions to herself. If a woman asserts herself, some will use that word to describe her.
When used to describe a man, it generally refers to a man who IS submissive and unassertive. Or one who is a coward.
That is why the word is seen by women as a slur on women in the first place, no matter how it is used. When applied to a woman, it means she is acting like a man. When applied to a man, it means that he is acting like the mistakenly stereotypical woman who is submissive and weak. In both cases, the word is insulting to women and reflects the attitudes of our patriarchal society.
It is an ugly word which actually describes a female dog, not human beings. That is the only use of the word that is not misogynistic.
= new reply since forum marked as read
No shit. I've seen so many good posts removed, because of someone who probably didn't even get the point due to their rush to be "offended".
I've also seen other post remain in the same thread using the same word in the same context. The double standards need to go.
talk about pedantic nonsense taken to an absurd degree
it is that type of ridiculousness that will cost us elections if adopted as official messaging
another example
'fear shaming', mentioned negatively (and rightly so) by BannonsLiver (hat tip to them)
what the absolute fuckery is that all about?
that level of ludicrous word policing and openly infantilising (omg, now I am being anti infant! /sarc off) projection is the stuff of destroying our party
and it often feels like people are just listening to individual words, not what is actually being said. This can end up shutting down meaningful conversation.
We all have words that we are sensitive about, but most of us don't go around correcting others because of our own personal preferences. I tend to listen more to a person's intentions and meaning, not their vocabulary choice.
I don't feel "elderly" either, but I understand that to someone in their twenties, thirties, or forties, that is what they see and at their age, I probably did as well. When I was in my fifties, I remember a very young employee referring to me as "old", which really threw me off. She meant it as a compliment though, as she didn't see me as acting or talking like an "old person". 
Meanwhile, I'd like to carry on insightful, interesting conversations without feeling that my every word is up for scrutiny or censor. It would be nice if we spent more time actually listening to people, instead of always judging them.
Italian hardcore punk legends from 1983, on the Welcome To 1984 (a Maximumrocknroll compilation)
Raw Power - Fuck Authority
In 1983 they recorded a 19-track demo (sometimes referred as Brown Studio Tape) and two songs appeared in the Italian punk compilation, Raptus. The tape also included the song «Fuck authority», which appeared in Maximumrocknroll's international punk and hardcore compilation, Welcome to 1984.
Absolutely. Furthermore, I am not going to apologize for a post that I made a couple years ago when I called Trump a prick.
I apologize if that offended anyone, but damn, don't we have more pressing concerns right now? 
We can resume all the handwringing and circular firing when our democracy is secure.
Hey, you hurt my sphincter's feelings! 
I’m offended! 
Below is a link to the JMU paper. I've come to especially agree with these paragraphs in the conclusion:
"The normalizing of bitch indicates the lack of imagination that results from living under conditions of entrenched inequalities. Why is “bitch” a preferred tool of women’s empowerment? That women would rather call themselves or other women bitches—rather than feminists—suggests that domination and subordination have become the only legitimate options in U.S. society. Even if women who proclaim themselves “bitches” could be taken seriously, that would hardly be a feminist solu- tion; we’d have women divided into the categories of “bitches” (honorary men) and “doormats” (all other women). Sound familiar?
A woman who enjoys the honorary status of man by using “bitch” may have fun with “the girls” or win temporary acceptance from “the guys.” But this individual gain ultimately is part of a collective loss for women. That women use “bitch” re- inforces the idea that women are essentially different from men, and in a negative way: men may act like jerks, but women are “bitches.” And only men who act “like women” (members of the subordinate category) will be accused of “bitching.” Wom- en using men’s pejoratives for women is flattering to men; at the same time, those terms legitimate sexist ideas about women."
https://www.jmu.edu/socanth/sociology/wm_library/ezzell.reclaiming_critical_analysis.pdf
And when you don’t, your message gets gobbled up by the thing that will kill our movement, the Democrats’ weapon of choice for suicide: The Tone Argument.
So have at it, kids! 
End of story.
