Women only: Regarding the use of the term 'girls' to describe women.

[redqueen]

Last edited Tue May 1, 2012, 02:03 PM - Edit history (4)

("Women only" refers to *voting*... discussion is of course open! (Can I say "duh" here? ) I apologize for any confusion about that. But seriously, duh!)


Most women seem to take issue with someone using this term to describe a woman they are not friends with / do not have a prior understanding that it is acceptable to that particular woman to do so.

As for me, I have no problem with it, when it is used by women I know to describe ourselves.

What do you think?


on edit: This poll is not meant to determine what men should say. This is to find out what women think about the use of this term. Thanks.

and another edit: I would like to express to the admins my enthusiastic appreciation for the "show usernames" feature on polls... and for the Disclaimer! LOL!

45 votes, 2 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	I don't mind anyone referring to women as girls. I think it's no big deal at all.
	14 (31%)
	I don't mind when my friends or other women refer to each other that way, but otherwise it might sometimes be offensive.
	4 (9%)
	I don't mind when my friends or other women refer to each other that way, but otherwise it is usually offensive.
	23 (51%)
	I find it demeaning no matter who uses the term or why.
	4 (9%)
	2 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[RobertEarl]

1. I am not a girl

But I love girls. They are all women and ladies, and I love them all.

Anyway, just thought i'd be real egalitarian and poke my nose under your tent and say Hi!

[redqueen]

2. A real egalitarian?

What's that supposed to mean?

Dominant groups don't get to tell minority groups what they should find offensive. Just so you know.

[CTyankee]

11. it takes serious insensitivity...

[RobertEarl]

16. Right.

The ""Women Only"" headline inspired me. That was not very egalitarian, hence my reaction. I oppose all forms of apartheid. Just the way I am.

[CTyankee]

26. Oh, you saint, you!

[redqueen]

32. Undertsandable, but take a moment to think about it.

Do you actually think non-minority groups should have any input into what minority groups find offensive?

Do you think it wasn't necessary for me to stipulate in advance that I only wanted the opinions of women to be reflected in the poll results?

[RobertEarl]

36. Do what you want to do

And I'll do the same. As long as we don't try to hurt each other, it's all good. Let's party!!

[seabeyond]

39. and the white male conservative says to maddow.... you girls, .... in order to diminish, dismiss

her.

the thing

it is used to hurt

not hurt the hurt, but to hurt the power of our voice, the contributions we make, the right to speak out

so stay true to your stance. understand, you are part of the problem. your right. and privilege

[RobertEarl]

48. Seems to me

That you are trying to hurt me. You don't even know me. Why would you want to hurt me?

[seabeyond]

56. seems to me that you are purposely trying to be sexist. why? what is the pay off for you? nt

[CTyankee]

61. allow me to offer a word here. His purpose is to get attention.

Let him bang on his high chair tray. WE shall discuss.

On with the conversation, women!

[seabeyond]

64. what a woman you are, lol... nt

[seabeyond]

82. now you are just sounding.... creepy. nt

[iverglas]

273. snork

[seabeyond]

274. ya. i know .... nt

[sabrina 1]

62. They can't hurt you if you don't let them.

Have you ever seen someone try to insult someone else only to have them seem not to notice the 'insult' at all, or just laugh out loud? Nothing is worse than firing a shot and missing so spectacularly. It is up to US to put anyone who thinks they can use a word as a weapon in their place, by making them miss their target.

Sorry, unless it's someone who is working on insulting me, which means they will be doing more than using a word, I can't get excited about it. Too many other things to be concerned about.

[seabeyond]

66. who is excited. called a discussion. nd the way and reasons usage like these

should be addressed. awareness is a good thing.

[DutchLiberal]

75. I find it very offensive of you to accuse another poster of being "a problem" simply for disagreeing

That's a tactic I see you using on DU all the time: whenever somebody doesn't agree with you, you paint them as someone with malicious intentions. It's not fair; it's a personal attack. You should use logic and arguments, not character assassinations.

the thing

it is used to hurt

not hurt the hurt, but to hurt the power of our voice, the contributions we make, the right to speak out

So when I call my best friend, who's the same age as me by the way, a girl (the way she calls herself a girl) I am "hurting her power to speak out"? I will inform her of this, 'cause I don't think she knew!

[redqueen]

40. It'd be nice to get some answers to those questions. nt

[me b zola]

109. Are you not familiar with polling?

If you want to find out what women think, why in heavens should we ask men? Perhaps you think you should answer for us?

[DutchLiberal]

68. Since women make up 50% of the population, how are they 'a minority group'?

[redqueen]

71. I have explained this to you before.

Not bothering to type it out again. I'll deign to get you a link though.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/384500/minority

You're welcome. Again.

[DutchLiberal]

78. So you're making up your own definitions now?

Okay. Good to know.

[redqueen]

79. Sweet Jesus. nt

[TriMera]

121. Since you seem to have some strange aversion

to reading, here's a PowerPoint presentation for you. It has pictures and everything.

http://core.ecu.edu/soci/juskaa/soci2110/Lectures/Gender/index.htm

[Scout]

133. excellent! n/t

[TriMera]

152. Well, ya know...

some folks are more "visual" than others. Just trying to help out.

[CTyankee]

281. Yes, we must be kind. They need help. I am more than happy to offer it!

[stevenleser]

470. Great presentation nt

[seabeyond]

12. but a girl is not a woman. is a boy a man? lmao. nt

[RobertEarl]

14. Sure.

It ain't the meat it's the motion.

It's in the way that you use it.

It's like when some asshole calls me a commie. I am a commie, but yeah, it pisses me off when some capitalist asshole uses it to put me down.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

300. He is if he's a good old boy.

[Confusious]

320. A man can be a boy

I am when I get a new toy. Of course, the toys got a bit more expensive then when I was 10 or so, and the hobbies a lot more complicated.

[Lizzie Poppet]

347. And in that sense, women can be girls, too!

I get as giddy and excited over a new bike (avid cyclist here) as I ever did when I was little.

Being called "girl" offends me when I interpret deliberate demeaning intent. It also does so when I encounter unthinking casual usage that reflects what seems to be a mindset of relegating women to a lesser status - although I find I'm more tolerent of older men doing this, considering them to be a product of their generational culture...a bit of discrimination on my part, if I'm being honest.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

3. It's always about context.

I have seen waitstaff refer to a group of senior ladies as "girls" -- it was cute and the ladies enjoyed it.

Though I am 52, I use "girls" commonly myself, about friends my own age.

When it is used to demean or as a slur towards women then yeah, it bugs me. Also when it is used by men towards other men to imply they are weak ("You throw like a girl&quot it bugs the crap out of me.

[redqueen]

5. Yes, hence the two middle-ground poll answers.

That last one, we had a knock down drag out in GD years back about that. The majority agreed that saying someone 'throws like a girl' as an insult is A-OK!

[Whiskeytide]

42. My daughter plays Fast-Pitch softball...

... and she and her friends proudly wear T-shirts that say "I throw like a girl". All I can say is you'd better have a good glove when she unloads one on you.

But I'm interrupting. Typical guy. Sorry. Carry on.

[redqueen]

45. Oh no no no... I'm sorry, I didn't mean to say I didn't welcome men to post...

I just didn't want them to be voting.

I really should have worded that OP more carefully.

Thanks for your post.

[seabeyond]

51. yes... the are playing off of, mocking that is said and good for them

that is how we address it in our house, with mockery.

[EFerrari]

50. Yep.

I got up into the face of a checker at the market the other day for calling me "dear". I asked her how she ever got to be a manager talking down to her women customers. The context was wrong for that kind of presumed familiarity.

[zappaman]

90. Wow!

I have no anger issues like that, so if someone calls me "hon" or "dear" or "sweetie&quot a bartender actually did last week), I don't go ballistic.

[DutchLiberal]

94. I think it's more about self-confidence than anger issues.

At work, I and other guys my age (I'm 26) are being called "boys" by our female co-workers all the time. I am never offended or upset by that. I have the self-confidence to know what I'm worth and I don't think anyone could make me feel any less about myself by any word they used.

[zappaman]

98. That's a good point. n/t

[TriMera]

167. That self-confidence that you're so proud of

was handed you by society on silver platter because of the fact that you were born a "boy". Women, on the other hand, have to work a little harder for that self-confidence. Partly because we have to deal with certain people that always feel the need to bolster their own self-confidence by telling women that they don't know what they're talking about. You see what I did there?

[DutchLiberal]

190. Yes, you turned women into helpless, powerless victims who can't do anything on their own...

because of The Patriarchy.

Yep, you're really helping women this way.

[TriMera]

195. That's what you got from my post?

I think that and your transparency page tells folks all they need to know.

[DutchLiberal]

198. That's what you said.

You said women can't have any self-confidence because men (the patriarchy) won't let them.

I think that and your transparency page tells folks all they need to know.

Of course, the lazy only go for post titles, never bother to check the substance of the posts and completely throw out the context of a thread and then quickly jump to a conclusion about a person they've never met.

Yes, it is intellectually lazy, but if it can help you to frame a discussion a certain way, why not?

I give women much more credit than just being powerless victims of men, but I've noticed people who call themselves 'feminists' don't. I think that's much more telling than skimming a headline and then throw out accusations. But maybe that's just me.

[Scout]

257. "You said women can't have any self-confidence because men (the patriarchy) won't let them."

no, that is not what was said. and your transparency page is ... well ... transparent. as are you and your childish motives.

here is the meat of the post (bold emphasis mine):

Women, on the other hand, have to work a little harder for that self-confidence. Partly because we have to deal with certain people that always feel the need to bolster their own self-confidence by telling women that they don't know what they're talking about.

so show me where it says women can't have any self-confidence because men won't let them.

[DutchLiberal]

277. Sure, if you cut up the quote it's easy to look like you're right.

You 'forgot' to add the first sentence which said I had it easy because 'The Patriarchy' favored me because I'm a boy. Implication: "You're a man and therefore unfit to comment on anything related to women so STFU. Men are given self-confidence by nature and women have to work for it, thus women should be pitied." Blatantly false, of course, since there are millions of men who are anything but self-confident, but whatever floats your boat (whatever fits your narrative).

I find this funny:

certain people that always feel the need to bolster their own self-confidence by telling women that they don't know what they're talking about.

Like the 'feminists' (their term) in this thread who said that women who didn't agree about the so-called offensive nature of the word 'girl' had "self-confidence issues"?

You can childishly point to other people's past posts as long and often as you want as a means of distraction, but nothing will ever erase that blatant hypocrisy.

[noiretextatique]

441. you know you are a male behaving badly, don't you?

really...you are hijacking this thread for attention, so this is my last post to you. it's because you feel privileged enough to claim that a woman who is insulted by attempts to demean her is "victim." it is really just about HEARING AND RESPECTING the experiences of other people. not about using your own experience as a MALE (being called a boy) to deny women's experiences.

[Bladian]

218. Please, don't assume men are some pillar of self-confidence.

I'm one of the least confident people that I know. I've had self esteem issues for years. And yes, I am a (young) man.

[Confusious]

322. Nobody handed me anything

I was abused by my stepmother and picked on by classmates.

That "self confidence" was earned.

[redqueen]

97. Same here...

although in a certain context, and a certain inflection, I might take offense (though I wouldn't go off, don't see the point).

[EFerrari]

104. But you do seem to have reading issues.

Not only did I not go ballistic, I wasn't angry. Newsflash: you don't have to be angry to defend your boundaries or to reject sexism in public places.

[redqueen]

106. The way you said it... "got up into the face of"...

might have led to the misunderstanding.

[EFerrari]

120. Could be. It's the internet after all and we can't see expressions

although the expression is about directness not rage.

I think the problem with accepting "girl" or any diminuative or inappropriate terms of familiarity is that they erode women's agency and autonomy in the public square, re-enforcing the idea/practice that women don't have or need either. And the experience is almost always tonal in context.

Which is the main reason that asking for a list of forbidden words just misses the mark entirely.

[redqueen]

123. "asking for a list of forbidden words just misses the mark entirely"

Indeed.

I did interpret that expression as meaning that you were upset at the time, so that's behind my misunderstanding at least.

[EFerrari]

128. Getting "up in someone's face" is just a literalization of "confronting"

(coming face to face) which can denote hostility or defiance but doesn't necessarily. Language geekiness on my part.

[seabeyond]

131. not only can it be done without anger, i use a smile

and nice and genuine and is well received.

i know what you mean.

[DutchLiberal]

129. So if someone would refer to you as a girl, you wouldn't be able to 'get into that guys face'?

I think the problem with accepting "girl" or any diminuative or inappropriate terms of familiarity is that they erode women's agency and autonomy in the public square, re-enforcing the idea/practice that women don't have or need either. And the experience is almost always tonal in context.

If the use of the word 'girl' indeed "erode women's agency and autonomy in the public square", then could you have reacted the way you did, getting in the face of the male employee? If your theory is correct, then would you be reduced to a helpless and powerless victim just because he used the word 'girl'?

Don't you see your theory is worded a little... apocalyptic?

[zappaman]

112. Yes, I'm sure you were very calm

when you "got up in her face".
My bad.

[EFerrari]

115. Newsflash 2: You don't have to be angry or combative to confront someone

which is what getting into someone's face means literally.

In fact, it's usually much more impactful if you are smiling and calm.

[zappaman]

119. It means to confront someone angrily

If you weren't confronting them angrily, then maybe a better phrase?

http://www.englishforums.com/English/PhraseSomeonesFace/zjwgh/post.htm

[EFerrari]

124. I'm not hiring editors today.

[msanthrope]

306. "I got up in (his/her) face" is so common among my clients that if I had

a nickel for everytime I heard it, I would be rich.

Of course, I am a criminal defense attorney.

[LanternWaste]

122. I can only imagine that you never take exception when someone says to you

I can only imagine that you never take exception when someone says to you, "bless your little heart"... which is also just as benign as "hon" or "dear"

[redqueen]

125. As a native Texan...

I really would never think 'dear' or 'hon' or 'sweetie' were meant to be belittling or insulting.

And I'll go one further and say 'bless your heart' is not usually used in a nasty way, either. It is used as a way of being nasty without being too nasty, but most often it means something like 'Aw, I'm sorry'... said usually when some bad thing has befallen someone and you want to show you feel for them.

[DutchLiberal]

130. But if someone insisted those terms were belittling or insulting, would you stop using them?

Even though you know there's nothing insulting about them?

[TorchTheWitch]

168. With them, of course

It should go without saying. If behaving a certain way or using certain language around someone who has told you that it is annoying or offensive to them then common courtesy dictates that you don't behave that way or use those words around them in order to not annoy or offend them... even if you yourself disagree or even think it's ridiculous.

Common courtesy anymore has flown out the window. People seem to believe that their own beliefs and feelings are the center of the universe and have no obligation to curb voicing those beliefs or feelings around those whom they KNOW are annoyed or offended by them because they believe their own beliefs and feelings are more important than anyone else's. To not CARE that some are hurt by the refusal to accommodate their feelings by doing such a SIMPLE and courteous thing as to not behave in certain ways or use certain language around those people you KNOW are hurt and offended by it is the height of selfishness and rudeness.

People are different and have different beliefs and feelings, and there is no hope of people being able to get along and even learn how to see eye to eye without employing some basic common courtesy and accommodate the beliefs and feelings of others especially when it such a SIMPLE thing to do.

So yes, OF COURSE one should stop behaving a certain way or using certain language that they KNOW is annoying and offensive to others when around those people or one is a selfish, rude boorish person that needs to learn that the entire universe is not centered around them, their beliefs and feelings are not more important than others, and in order to get along with others then some SIMPLE common courtesy must be employed.

[seabeyond]

170. you are so awesome, consistently and always.

as i said in my post, i didnt not see an issue with girl. or b**** or other language. i have learned since then that it is offensive to some, sometimes many and why. and it has not been an issue not only adjusting my language, but defending those that feel that way.

your posts are always insightful and right on.

[DutchLiberal]

185. So if someone told me the word "and" is offensive to them, I should stop using "and"?

There's a difference between common courtesy and capitulating for people who always only want to have everything their way. That's all I'm saying.

There are some people who try to spin that into "you just want to be able to use foul language" or even "you don't want to extent respect to women". Not that they don't know such allegations are ridiculous and have nothing to do with the point I'm trying to make. It just fit their agenda of always wanting to have everybody bow down to them and do everything their way. (Not saying you're one of them, of course.)

So yes, OF COURSE one should stop behaving a certain way or using certain language that they KNOW is annoying and offensive to others when around those people or one is a selfish, rude boorish person that needs to learn that the entire universe is not centered around them, their beliefs and feelings are not more important than others, and in order to get along with others then some SIMPLE common courtesy must be employed.

Okay, I get what you say. But now I have a dilemma. The very same people who keep insisting that the word 'girl' is offensive to women and demand we all stop using the word are also the people who have thrown out gems like "all men are potential rapists" (actual quote) and similar misandrist things. I've asked them to stop using hurtful slurs like that, but they won't. They believe they have the right to say things like that and will not extend the common courtesy to knock it off. Yet they demand we stop using an everyday word like 'girl'. So the selfish, rude and boorish people who think the universe center around them when it comes to spreading shit about all men in the world now want me and others to extend common courtesy to them.

What is wrong here?

[LanternWaste]

290. I see "bless your heart" as either genuine concern, or a back-handed compliment

I see "bless your heart" as either genuine concern, or a back-handed compliment. I'm Texan (DFW) too and hear it often in my congregation as a sincere form of benign blessing; but much more often, outside of church, it really is little more than a condescending verbal pat on the head.

As for myself, I'd rather not be referred to as "hon" or "sweetie", but this *is* TX, and it's part of the vernacular so I never make an issue of it. It's as common as "y'all". Sigh.

[justabob]

403. In my experience, they very often are belittling

I am native too, and the little endearments everyone adds in conversations drive me nuts. I especially loathe being called "sweetie" by men. I am a 41 year old woman, not your fragile little girl. I don't even like my mom to call me sweetie, I am not five. It doesn't bother me so much from a woman, but I still don't like it, especially from a perfect stranger. I also think there is a certain subset of good ol' boys who use those terms to imply weakness, fragility, and/or to be condescending.... my vocabulary is totally failing me and I can't find the right words.... sigh.

[zappaman]

132. You are correct. n/t

[leftynyc]

134. Me neither

Especially when it's an older person. They aren't trying to be offensive and frankly, I find many people these days are just looking for shit to be offended about. Because I'm smart enough to know when someone is looking to offend me, I'm not playing that game.

[Quantess]

4. It depends on the age of the "girl"

And the age of the person who is calling her that.

[redqueen]

6. An elderly senior executive referring to his young secretary?

e.g. 'I'll have my girl order lunch.'

[Quantess]

46. "I'll have my woman order lunch" doesn't sound any better.

May as well say "wench" in that case.

[MadrasT]

73. "I'll have Lisa order lunch"

Or "I'll have Mrs./Miss/Ms. Smith order lunch" would work just fine.

An employee is not a possession, so the problem is with "my girl" (not just with use of the word "girl&quot . "My girl" needs to be replaced, not just "girl".

[Quantess]

166. Well, obviously.

I was just addressing the OP's premise that it's always better to say woman than girl. In this example, clearly both would be poor choices.

And it wasn't me who brought it up, either.

[Scout]

74. cuz, you know, saying "i'll ask my assistant to order lunch"

is just so fucking difficult to think of, i know.

[Quantess]

173. The way the question was framed to me by Redqueen

was word choice of "girl" vs "woman". Obviously, "assistant" is the best choice, but that wasn't the question.

[robinlynne]

7. When I was 20, it might have bothered me. Now at 50+ it makes me laugh and smile.

[redqueen]

9. Really?

The older I get the more it bothers me... when men use it. I can't think of a time I've been bothered by women saying it as long as it's not used in a nasty way.

[robinlynne]

8. When somone is being demeaning, it doesn't matter what term they use. It's demeaning.

[seabeyond]

10. interesting poll and let me tell you why. what i voted is not specifically how i feel,

but closest to the options given. with clarification.

i dont see young women as women but it is the same with young men. so i have a bit of a problem using it as a whole for like 18 yr olds that are declared as adults.

i had a tough time using women. i used ladies or girls like most all i am around. it seemed like it was an insult using women. as if we were calling them old or something. i realized this about a year ago. it took a lot of work for me to personally get beyond calling women girls and ladies. to own the word. then i started noticing all others doing this, too. and i started having conversation. why we did this. i started falling in love with the word woman. not particularly liking girl and lady.

i was at a car lot talking to a woman. she says.... i am the only girl here. woman, i said. you are a woman not a girl. she was going to dismiss it with a wave of the hand and then stopped talking, looked me in the eye and said.... thank you. yes. woman. we had a bonding moment.

my 14 yr old son was talking the other day. he always goes into these stories. he says, .... there was a girl

i stop him there. i need the facts. woman or girl? i ask.

woman he says.... and goes on with the story.

it matters. i was picturing a girl. i have so separated the words that i no longer see a woman when i hear girl.

anyway, i didnt care for many years. now i do. not the end of the world when someone uses girl. i get we are conditioned. but....

[CTyankee]

22. I always use "women" when we are talking about women. I reserve "girls" for what are really

girls. My granddaughters are 10. 13 and 16. The younger two are, IMO, girls. The oldest is a young woman, who has a summer job lined up, is taking tough subjects in school with an eye towards college, and has both a boat license and a motor vehicle license. I would use the same standard for the term "boy" and "man." I think it is a degree of taking on responsibility for oneself.

I avoid using Ladies except in a humorous way, but I have often used the term "a dear lady" to refer to someone who is, well, a dear lady. I think it is respectful to someone who would call herself a lady.

I'm not crazy about the term First Lady. I would refer to Michelle Obama as a strong woman, a wise woman and a deeply caring woman.

[seabeyond]

27. good for you. i really had to condition myself to use woman. i love the word

glad i recognized and shifted. but yea for you doing that.

[CTyankee]

37. I have tried and tried to understand why so many women have felt this way.

I guess it is because the term lady is an honorific. When I taught a class of Hispanic women I was referred to as La Senora. I know that in France you call a woman who is not a kid "Madame" and in Italy "Signora." I'm guessing that "lady" is the same impulse to be gracious.

[seabeyond]

47. personally investing the time thinking and discussing this. age

the greatest insult to a woman is aging. all of society is opposed to a woman aging. continue with girl.... and she is not fully mature. maturing women in our society is bad.

i think that is why it is done. the underlying ugly of society, for the nicest of reasons. and of course there are those that use it to condescend. to dismiss womens voice.

but i think the majority is a kindness to not draw out that a woman has aged. that is why i am opposing the word girl, for a woman. i am allowed to age. it is ok. it is not an insult.

[DutchLiberal]

84. Oh. My. God.

my 14 yr old son was talking the other day. he always goes into these stories. he says, .... there was a girl

i stop him there. i need the facts. woman or girl? i ask.

woman he says.... and goes on with the story.

Wow, what a jolly household you must have.

[zappaman]

93. Veritably a household of fun! n/t

[EOTE]

127. You better believe it.

So, two guys walk into a bar.

Wait a minute, are these men or boys?

They're men, but that's irrelevant to this joke. OK, two men walk into a bar...

What do these men do? Do they have jobs? White collar or blue collar?

None of this has anything to do with this joke.

SEXIST!!!!

[madokie]

13. I'm always at a loss as how to properly address the woman half of humanity

I have a lot of things I call the man half and most of them are not good for discussion so I'll leave them out.
So fill me in

[redqueen]

15. Women are regular people, just like men, and just like men, we have different opinions.

If you don't know the woman, my kind suggestion is that you not assume it's ok to refer to her or any other woman as a 'girl' until you know her thoughts about the matter.

Seems simple enough, right?

[madokie]

28. Thank you

I know now

Personally I don't know if us men can ever be equal to mothers, You all are special

[seabeyond]

30. i dont know. i have a special place in my heart for my father. he was awfully special, too

with his respect and character i was able to value my worth that has allowed me to avoid a lot of the pitfalls women fall into.



dont be selling those men short. lol. i wont have it.

[madokie]

52. Mybad

[seabeyond]

59. ya ya ya. nt

[redqueen]

67. That's biased against women without children!!111!

No but seriously, dealing with pregnancy is often far from easy, I ain't gonna argue with that! And being a good parent of either sex is so difficult, too.

There's a lot of complicated stuff involved with being a mother in the patriarchy, I'd prefer to discuss that somewhere other than this thread, though.

[snooper2]

17. If you are over 30 we can use damsel, under 30 we can use lassie, that work for ya?

I don't think we can use maiden, that's a synonym for virgin right?

[redqueen]

20. Please see the update to the OP. nt

[snooper2]

23. Update's cool but I don't think that works very well on the public internet tubes

And who told you I was a boy anyway LOL

[redqueen]

25. The clarification wasn't about who should be voting...

but about the purpose of the OP.

If you'd like to start an off-topic subthread, feel free! Just letting you know it's not why I started he poll. Thanks!

[cbdo2007]

18. Why would anyone find this demeaning???

And how is the average person supposed to determine which one of the 50 terms each person they deal with prefers over the other terms and which ones offend them???

[redqueen]

21. Please see the update to the OP. nt

[Gormy Cuss]

24. Why would African-American men find "boy" demeaning?

Hint: it's as a way of diminishing worth.

[DutchLiberal]

88. Why would you think I would "diminish" my sister's "worth" by calling her a girl?

You really think I would do that to my own sister?

The argument of the anti-"girl" people just doesn't make any sense.

[Gormy Cuss]

140. Is your sister an adult? If she is, then yes you risk diminishing her worth by call her a child.

Whether you use it that way I cannot say. If she's an adult and you call her girl in circumstances where you would never refer to a man as a boy that is exactly what you are doing whether it's conscious or not.

[DutchLiberal]

193. I seriously think some posters have disconnected their theoretical views from the real world.

Your bombastic language undoubtedly fits in perfectly in a Gender Studies class or a feminist textbook, but what I'm trying to get at, is that it's pretty useless in the real world, because the vast majority of people, male and female, simply don't perceive it that way. Most people don't see hidden agendas behind everyday words like 'girl'. Because mostly, they're not there. Life generally tends to be much simpler than what theorists cook up during their philosophizing.

The discussion about the word 'girl' has been done before, in Help & Meta. I was told there by another member that I was devaluing and belittling my female co-workers and supervisor by referring to them as 'girls'. I showed that thread to my co-workers and my supervisor. They laughed their asses off at something they perceived as ridiculously far-fetched and over-the-top.

If you or anybody else don't like to be called 'girls', I won't call you that. It's as simple as that. But don't tell me I cannot use that word because it IS 'diminishing' or 'devaluing' etc. like that's a fact. No, that's an opinion and, from my experience with women of all ages, a minority opinion.

[Gormy Cuss]

208. Never took a gender studies class. I've lived life as a girl and a woman.

I've been in work situations where men referred to women support staff as girls but never have I heard the men in support staff jobs referred to as boys. I've also worked in environments where calling the clerks "girls" would result in a reprimand because it violated the sexual harassment policy.

Yes, the discussion has been had here before and will be had again. Welcome to DU.

[DutchLiberal]

212. I just used that as an example; it wasn't an attack on you.

In my work environment, men of my age (I'm 26) are called 'boys' and women of the same age are called 'girls'. By ourselves/themselves and by others. It was bizarre to read outsiders accuse me of sexism over something my co-workers are perfectly okay with.

I've also worked in environments where calling the clerks "girls" would result in a reprimand because it violated the sexual harassment policy.

That's the saddest thing I've ever read.

[Gormy Cuss]

224. IIRC it was consistent with EEOC guidelines

because the company was a government contractor and had to demonstrate EEOC compliance.
I think it was based on the potential for creating a hostile work environment. To minimize the risk of complaints the company just made it clear that the expectation was that we would use other language.

[DutchLiberal]

229. I don't know what EEOC guidelines are. What does EEOC stand for?

I just think it's sad. And pathetic.

[Gormy Cuss]

245. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

The government agency in charge of such workplace issues.

It's really not pathetic. Enforcement is based on intent, so if you're joking with a friend and no one else is witness there's no violation. If others are offended and you cease to use the term EEOC probably would rule against you/your employer.

http://www.eeoc.gov/

[DutchLiberal]

247. I still think it's nonsense.

[Gormy Cuss]

261. I understand, but it's not considered such under U.S. law. n/t

[DutchLiberal]

262. That's true. Then again, many laws are nonsense, too.

We can agree on that, right?

[Scout]

144. so where's your "False Comparison" accusation now? n/t

edit added link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/124084399#post66

[DutchLiberal]

194. I was comparing calling a woman a girl with calling a woman a girl?

Where's the falseness?

[Scout]

259. nope. try again.

read the subject of the post you replied to.

when i mentioned African American men and being called boy in relation to women being called girl, you accused me of "knowing" that was falsely equated.

so, where is that same accusation from you now, in relation to this new post?

edit because i forgot this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1240&pid=85098

[DutchLiberal]

265. I compared women to women; you compared women to African-Americans.

What are you trying to get at?

If you're really so desperate to play "gotcha" games, you've gotta word your gripes better so I can understand them.

[cbdo2007]

89. It all depends on context.

I'm sure I could greatly offend females with both the terms "girl" and "woman" when used in the correct context, but you can't just make a blanket statement based on one small group and situation and expect society to adhere to it. I know white men who would be offended by the term "boy" yet I know African-American men who use the term all the time.

[Gormy Cuss]

141. I was replying to a question of why it would be perceived as demeaning.

That was the context. I didn't make a blanket statement. And yes, some African-American men may call others "boy" but when a white person calls an African-American man "boy" it's loaded with the historical context of diminishing them and the white person had best understand that even if s/he calls white men "boys" too.

There is a similar history of referring to women as girls in our culture and that is the parallel I drew. Others have used examples, such as male bosses referring to their secretaries as "girls."

[DLevine]

160. I agree. Well said. n/t

[DutchLiberal]

87. Because Andrea Dworkin told them to.

Oops, I shouldn't have said that. Disagreeing with a particular brand of feminism (even though you have supported all main feminist issues yourself all your life) gets your posts hidden nowadays and gets you labeled a sexist.

[Scout]

142. don't worry your pretty little head...

you've already been labeled a sexist long before this post.

[DutchLiberal]

179. OMG!!!!!1!1 You just said 'pretty little head'! I'm gonna alert!!!!1!1

You devalued me!!!

you've already been labeled a sexist long before this post.

Yes, by people who call themselves feminists, but belittle, ridicule and talk down to women who don't make the same choices in life as they do. Color me impressed.

[noiretextatique]

445. here's a clue: grown women don't like to be called girls; black men don't like to be called boys

if you don't understand why those terms are demeaning to those groups, i don't know to tell you.

[Spazito]

19. I first chose the third option but after thinking about it...

I think context and the age of the person, male or female using it, comes into it as well. There are seniors, both male and female, who use it and they certainly mean no offense by it at all.

In the end I chose the second option of the choices offered.

[Taverner]

29. As a dude may I chime in?

Calling women "girls" is dismissive, patronizing and downright sexist. To me, it's kind of like calling a man "Boy! Get over here, boy!"

[redqueen]

33. Yes! Yes of course, sorry

I suppose I should clarify, IMO only women should be *voting*... discussion is of course a free for all.

[dmallind]

43. the boys in the band? Playing poker with the boys?

[Taverner]

63. The perception of "girls" is different than "boys"

Kind of like "occidental" and "oriental"

Yes, they both pertain to east and west, but the term oriental has a lot of baggage occidental doesn't have.

If I say "How are you girls?" it comes off as dismissive and patronizing

If I were to say the same thing to men, it would sound weird. "How are you boys today?" Unless I'm a waitress named 'Flo' it just doesn't come off right.

The term "girl" likewise can be "reclaimed" by women, for instance the RiotGrrrl movement reclaims the word.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

149. There's a difference between the plural and the singular.....

Calling someone "boy" or "girl" rarely has a positive or endearing spin behind it. Especially since you gave a specific instance where it's clearly meant to be insulting.

I've frequently had friends and waitresses refer to the group I'm with as "boys". Never thought much about it. It's kinda flirty, which I guess is a whole other issue.

[99Forever]

31. Is there ANY term that...

... some "politically corrective" control freak won;'t find a way to be "mortally offended" by?

I mean really. Could some people have any thinner skin?

Wow, just wow.

[seabeyond]

34. white male privilege takes us a long way

huh.....

we dont have to consider why something might be offensive, just moan because someone dare be offended. a true privilege.

[redqueen]

38. Many offensive terms are used to reinforce social norms...

and many of those norms are unfair.

There aren't many groups that' don't 'get' this. I'm wondering now if you belong to the main 'I don't get it' group, as far as the use of language to reinforce oppression is concerned.

[DutchLiberal]

96. I'm sure he gets it. He just doesn't agree with it.

So there's no need for you to be condescending to him by implying he's too stupid to 'get it'.

(But that's an old tactic used often on UD.)

[redqueen]

99. So he understands these terms are used to maintain a group's dominant status...

yet he thinks that's fine and dandy?

DU is certainly the wrong forum for him, if that's the case!

[DutchLiberal]

103. No, he doesn't agree with your theories about these terms.

(Neither do I, by the way.)

You know that's what I meant, I'm sure.

[redqueen]

110. They're not *my* theories, just as the definition of a minority group is not *my* definition.

Fucksake, why do I bother?

[seabeyond]

111. "Fucksake, why do I bother?" i do not know. why?

[redqueen]

116. Hahahahaha...

[DutchLiberal]

113. Okay, then he doesn't agree with SOMEBODY ELSE'S theories that YOU used...

There, is that better for you? Or are there more hairs you wanted to split?

Who dreamed up the idea that the term girl "are used to maintain a group's dominant status" and what was she smoking? ('Cause I'd like some of it, too!)

[Scout]

146. oh they get it all right

they just don't give a fuck.

[DutchLiberal]

200. Or they just disagree.

Have you ever heard of grey? It's that thing that's between black and white.

[Gormy Cuss]

53. You forgot the sarcasm tag. n/t

[99Forever]

174. No, my friend ...

.. I most certainly didn't forget a damn thing, but thanks for the crappy attempt at being snarky. I'll file it with all of the other special comments.

If I spent as much time shopping for reasons to be self-righteously "offended" over mainly innocuous terms said about me and others like me, I wouldn't have time for much else. I don't know about you, but I have real ACTUAL shit in my life that merits my attention that isn't something I can just ignore because it's trivial fluff. If the worst thing that happens to you in a day, is that someone with no ill intent calls you by a term you decided to be "offended" by, I'd say you've had a pretty easy day.

[Gormy Cuss]

215. I'm sorry about the "actual shit" in your life

but this thread isn't measuring whether major life crap is more important in the moment than being called a girl.

One woman being called a girl is nothing in the greater scheme of things. Discussing whether women as a group being called girls is damaging to gender equality is.

[99Forever]

266. What you seem not to want to...

.. understand, is that when you raise a stink about trivial crap, it reflects negatively on the serious issues of REAL gender bias.

For example:

http://front.moveon.org/the-war-on-women-in-6-simple-tweets-from-sen-barbara-boxer/?rc=fb.fan

Being the misogynistic boy I am, I linked that on my Facebook page. Keep fighting the important fights, mam.

[Gormy Cuss]

279. What you seem not to want to understand is this isn't trivial.

To suggest that it is misses the reality that language influences perception. If you're old enough to remember when there were only policemen and firemen rather than police officers and firefighters, you should understand what that means.

[MadrasT]

280. REAL gender bias...

...is perpetuated and nurtured by these silly little (seemingly) trivial things like language.

Language reenforces and influences perception and behavior.

Why is it assumed that because some of us care about potentially harmful language, we don't also care about many other things?

This isn't an either/or choice.

P.S. Caring about language and advocating for language awareness is not the same as being "perpetually offended" or "outraged by a word". I understand that subtlety will be lost on many. I admit that I had to hear it a zillion times before I "got it".

[DutchLiberal]

92. Be prepared to have your post alerted on because you "don't think women deserve any respect"...

... in 3... 2.... 1....

[noiretextatique]

450. spoken like a true ally

respecting people is not "political correctness." it is just respect. go to a corner is harlem and start yelling racial slurs and see how well you are receive by the "thin-skinned," boy.

[99Forever]

462. So now the word...

... girl is on the same level as the n-word?

You really actually believe that? Seriously?


That's one of the most patently ridiculous things I've ever read.

Note, there is NO sarcasm implied or intended.

RIDICULOUS.

[sufrommich]

35. I don't mind it if it's between girlfriends joking around,

although the older we get, the more we hunt for the most insulting birthday cards we can find each other ( ), it riles me when a man uses it to describe women though. I know my friends aren't being condesending,not so much so when a man says it.

[planetc]

41. I also prefer "Ma'am" to "Mrs."

If clerks and other customer service people look at me and decide that I am over thirty, they almost always address me as "Mrs.", which is inaccurate. If you want to respect my gray hairs, if you absolutely insist on it, just say "Ma'am". That would apply nicely to both the married and the unmarried.

The assumption that I am married because most women are at my age is sloppy. Another assumption, I think, is that all women prefer marriage to singleness, and would rather be inaccurately addressed as Mrs. than as Miss. I know that there are terrifically happy and productive marriages, and also know that if a woman inadvertently marries one of the egregious losers out there, she may be in a world of trouble.

There are, it strikes me, an awful lot of assumptions floating around, just as many as before the current wave of feminism. We should continue to clean up the language. I'm not sure how many centuries will be needed to achieve a non-sexist society, but tweaking perceptions one word at a time is a worthy and productive tactic.

[redqueen]

49. Love this post!

Thanks for introducing these other issues... you're right, there are a lot of assumptions floating around, and it will take a very long time to make more equitable society.

[Hatchling]

147. I prefer Ms. personnally.

Ma'am feels agist to me.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

154. I attribute this more to young people not knowing better and not being taught these things

Mrs. is for married, not an "older woman". Ms. or (Mzzzz) is all encompassing.

[closeupready]

44. I've always found the term seriously creepy.

And why any woman would encourage being referred to like that, well there are some serious self-respect issues going on there, IMHO.

[redqueen]

55. I'd say it's more internalized patriarchy than self-respect issues...

consider that it's reinforced constantly that young women are 'better than' older women. If you grow up hearing that reinforced constantly by nearly everyone around you, it's hard not to start to believe it.

[closeupready]

69. Yes, that is an excellent point, thanks.

[redqueen]

72. My pleasure!

One thing we radical feminists are careful to do (though it sometimes isn't easy!) is never to blame other women for doing what it takes to get by in the P.

[DutchLiberal]

102. I think it's offensive to dismiss other womens' opinions like that.

And why any woman would encourage being referred to like that, well there are some serious self-respect issues going on there, IMHO.

I'm sorry, but my female friends, female co-workers and female family members do NOT have "serious self-respect issues". It's demeaning and condescending to talk about everybody who doesn't agree with you that way. Some women are just not bothered by every little thing. Has that option every occurred to you?

Some women who call themselves feminists sure have lots of problems dealing with 9and not looking down upon) women who don't share their opinions...

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

165. I find your opinion pretty judgemental of other women

You've decided they must have "issues" if they see something that minor in a way different from you? How is that feminism?

Have you expressed this to women you know who use the term or don't seem bothered by it?

[Nye Bevan]

54. When in doubt, use "Lady". (nt)

[seabeyond]

60. yuk... societal enforced rule on behavior. yuk... lol

[redqueen]

65. Not sure if serious...

or trying to stir the pot a little.

??

[Nye Bevan]

80. I never complain about being referred to as a "gentleman",

so why would anyone object to "lady"?

[redqueen]

85. Ah, but 'gentlemen' were never property.

And aside from the class issues, there is also the fact that people do not refer to men as 'gentlemen'... hence demonstrating the term even more obviously as a possible means of othering.

Some women don't have a problem with it. Most feminists do. That'd be a whole other discussion, but one which might be useful if for the class / property issues alone.

[Nye Bevan]

91. These rules can be confusing....

[redqueen]

95. They're not rules.

And yeah, perhaps whoever I was talking to was offended by that. If so, she didn't say.

Thanks for your contributions to this thread.

[zappaman]

100. In all seriousness, are you saying the word "lady" is some sort of insult?

Or did I read that wrong?

[redqueen]

105. Not at all.

Just that some people do find it bothersome / offensive / whatever.

It's not something one with a familiarity of women's issues would suggest as the perfect alternative to 'girl', though it is far less offensive it is true. Many liberals are familiar with the questionable nature of the term due to the class issues involved, which is why I wasn't sure if that previous poster was joking or serious.

[Scout]

148. not an insult, but not a compliment either.

what the fuck is wrong with "woman"?

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

162. Nothing

But you know what? "Woman" can be said in a totally condescending tone as well. Context trumps the word.

Some people love language, nuance and not always being boring and saying the same old thing.

[Nye Bevan]

176. "The woman in red, is dancing with me, cheek to cheek..."

"First woman Michelle Obama"

"Women and gentlemen, may I have your attention..."

I guess those kind of work......

[zappaman]

188. Nothing wrong with the word "lady"

And a friend of mine refers to her rather large breasts as "the girls".
I'll try and find out for you if her breasts are offended...

[Nye Bevan]

197. That's disgraceful. She should refer to her boobies as "the women".

Oooops, is "boobies" offensive? Sorry!

[zappaman]

201. Ha!

[DutchLiberal]

205. The word "boobies" clearly belittles breasts.

[noiretextatique]

442. it's all about context

i sometimes cringe when i hear the word lady because i was always admonished to "act like a lady" when i was a kid, as opposed to acting like a kid or a person.

[TorchTheWitch]

410. Oh, you better believe "lady" can be offensive as hell

I'm of the age group that grew up on constantly being told to "act like a lady", which meant keep your opinions to yourself (better to have no opinions at all about anything), don't do traditional "male" stuff, don't even think about having sex before marriage or think about sex for any reason at all other than to have babies, be deferential to men, look pretty, sit on a pedestal and smile and keep your mouth shut unless it's to agree with whatever anyone else says because everyone else - particularly males - are your superior.

Because of this I find the term "lady" to be far more offensive than "girl".

[noiretextatique]

444. i just posted about "lady"

i can still hear the "act like a lady" crap i heard as a kid.

[DutchLiberal]

108. Actually, they're very simple, if you just keep two things in mind:

If you're a man and you say something, it's almost always wrong/bad/offensive/creepy/sexist.

If you're a woman and you say the exact same thing/something similar, it's always good/acceptable/empowering etc.

Those are the rules. Good luck.

[Whisp]

101. no thankyou.

I'd rather be called other names than that.

lady. harumph! sounds like a dog's name

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

155. Uh oh......re-education time.

[Quantess]

282. Cue the bad rock song...

Laaaaaaaady when I'm with you I'm smiling....wooa woooa woooa all alooooone.

[lynne]

57. I don't mind at all so long as the guys don't mind being called "boys" -

- and I sometimes call them that.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

156. You'd never here me object.

[Quixote1818]

382. I have a friend in her 30's who still says "I met a boy!!!" and I think it's endearing

As several people have said, it's about the context.

[DutchLiberal]

391. What a misandrist!

[woo me with science]

58. I picked B.

I have heard it used outside groups of friends in ways that are clearly not malicious at all. It's often playful or just colloquial.

But it can also be used as a weapon...sometimes in a way that grinds destructively over time. I agree with the poster above who said that context is everything.

[Little Star]

70. "might sometimes be offensive"....

I like that word might in there.

For me it is all about context and age of both the parties in the scenario.


Just for a laugh, at my age now it's sometimes nice to be called a girl. Not so much when i was a young woman though, especially after I had 4 children.

[redqueen]

83. Yes, context means so much...

and that makes these discussions tricky. But I do think they're important to have.

Especially when some people who are not members of the minority group in question go around declaring what is or is not acceptable based on... who knows what!

[abolugi]

76. Girls I don't mind

Its "Gals" I am not fond of.
I'm not sure why... I just dont like the sound of it for some reason

[redqueen]

86. Yes, the context of your taking offense is more personal...

less about societal conditioning and reinforcement than individual feelings and respect.

[Demeter]

107. It's not the word, but the tone of voice, that tells you if you are being dissed

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

157. Damn true

Ever hear the word "woman" used in a very harsh tone? It can be the worst insult of all.

[DevonRex]

114. I don't care at all.

Can't even begin to care no matter how hard I try, as I sit here thinking hard about it. Nope. Still not caring. Not even a twinge.

[DutchLiberal]

117. Then you must have serious self-respect issues.

At least, that's what a feminist said earlier in this thread about women who don't care.

[DevonRex]

139. I just decided a long time ago that

intent matters and that most people don't intend to insult. And, furthermore, I'm not insulted at all by it anyway. Something about being in the Army and a Fed, doing jobs that had been considered men's jobs made me focus on other things. I've never been an activist in that way. I've just lived my life and done quite well at it - in a man's profession, even though I'm a wife and mom as well.

I've got nothing to prove to myself or anyone else.

[DutchLiberal]

178. That's a healthy attitude to have! Thanks for your post.

I've got nothing to prove to myself or anyone else.

Exactly what I was getting at.

Nothing but the utmost respect for what you've done and accomplished in life.

[tabbycat31]

126. Is there a feminine equivalent to the word "guy"

Because I hear terms like "well the guys are going to go to the game with the girls" and in this case the male species is not referred to as "men" but as "guys."

"Woman/women" sounds much more formal (as does "men&quot while "guy/guys" sounds more casual.

[DevonRex]

135. Gal. But I hate that word. Sounds too

country & western to me. I see Dale Evans in a very very old rerun when I hear the word gal.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

158. Really? "Gal" got used a lot in all old movies

I remember Cary Grant and Jimmy Cagney saying it a few times......

[DutchLiberal]

206. Yes, and "doll" and "broad", which we also cannot use anymore.

My film collection is misogynist!

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

258. I think as long as you don't shove a grapefruit in her face......

....you should be ok.

[Lars39]

137. "Guys" denotes mature males....while "girls" aren't mature women.

[Hatchling]

151. And this becomes a confusing issue for me.

My women friends and I refer to each other as guys. As in "Hi, guys!" What are you guys doing?" I've heard other women doing the same and also toward mixed groups as well.

I was under the impression that "guys" was becoming a gender neutral term for groups of people. Are we going wrong here, enforcing underlying patriarchal memes?

[seabeyond]

153. calif i was raised with hi guys, for everyone. texas is hi yawl.....

it is something we joke about in this house. i hadnt noticed it until texan hubby pointed it out

[Hatchling]

164. Opposite for me.

Born in Indiana of Southern born parents and it was Y'all or All y'all. Moved to California where it was guys.

[Lars39]

159. Being born in the north, but raised in the south from about 10 onwards,

I used "guys" as gender neutral until the move. Then I was told, "I'm not a guy", by females. Most of the time I hear the word ladies emphasized, almost like it's a joke. If you want to try a fun experiment, start taking notice if those that use "ladies" ever say "women".

[frogmarch]

136. In my family

we women often playfully call each other girls – and the men often playfully call us girls too. It’s all in good fun, and no one intends “girls” as a slight. We often call the men in our family boys. We see nothing wrong with it, but we’d never call adult strangers or mere acquaintances “girls” and “boys.” Just close friends who feel the same way we do about it.

No one had better call me “old girl,” though.

To each his or her own.

[LanternWaste]

138. Your poll went in a direction I did not expect.

Your poll went in a direction I did not expect. I think I may have to re-evaluate how liberally, and in front of whom, I continue to use the term.

These additional perspectives are always enlightening!

[seabeyond]

291. btw... i forgot about your post in all this mess of a thread. i wanted to ask

how did the poll do in a different direction. what do you have to reevaluate.

i always value what you have to say.

[Blue_In_AK]

143. I have a pretty high tolerance for words of all kinds

unless they're used in a hateful or demeaning way. As for the term "girls," it doesn't really bother me.

[WillowTree]

145. No big deal. No deal at all. I actually have important things to concern myself with.

[Scout]

150. like taking the time to post to tell everyone how many more important

things you have to concern yourself about!

[Little Star]

295. +1

[WillowTree]

303. I just find this to be trivial to the point of being a non-issue. YMMV.

Always glad when I can make someone laugh, though. Not enough of that around here some days.

Have a good one!

[CTyankee]

307. well, then, why did you waste that valuable time to make people laugh on this thread?

You could have been doing something not "trivial" as you put it. Why are you here in the first place?

Maybe you should just restrict yourself to what your think are real "issue" problems, not this.

Hmmm....

[WillowTree]

310. I hope your day improves.

Or at least your mood.

[eridani]

161. Pass. Depends on the situation

If you would use the term "men" in a statement, never use "girls" in an equivalent statement. If you are talking about boys, girls is appropriate, as in "I'm going out with the boys (girls) tonight." Either way, this is a statement about taking a temporary vacation from adult responsibilities.

Ladies and gentlemen, not ladies and men.

[seabeyond]

171. seriously? lol. nt

[seabeyond]

336. you are a genius. you caught me copy and pasting the poster i replied to.

By Jove! I think you've diagnosed the issue exactly.

Everything is a code, a hint, a suggestion. He doesn't have non-consenting sex -- she cryptically said she wanted it by not saying she didn't want it -- just like we cryptically call all sex (with him?) assault.

Tricky, tricky girls. Devious things we are.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=280184

[seabeyond]

344. ah, copy and pasting is not a matter of excuses, but a reality.

this better explains my position. i am giving you the benefit of doubt this is not about attack, but understanding.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002631791#post10

and you comment about demean and judge IMO is pure bullshit. lol

[seabeyond]

337. seaglas, if you have read any of my posts in this thread, you would recognize that i too

fell into the conditioned habit of calling women ... girls. i learned, recognized, acknowledged and i work on change.

i am not "hiding" anything here.

[seabeyond]

345. i think that is what i have done. nt

[DutchLiberal]

368. That, right there, is the key, I think.

And even after learning possibly still not agreeing, but disagreeing respectfully.

I've tried to make that point a thousand time. They maintain that if you don't agree, you "don't get it" or "you need to be educated". They will not accept that some of us DO get it and ARE educated, but we just don't agree. But disagreement to them only means either you're unwilling to understand or too stupid to understand. So either way, you're f---ed and they're still superior.

[DutchLiberal]

367. And that is not the worst part of that thread.

The real disgrace is that I got a post hidden because somebody alerted and took the subject-line of that one post deliberately out of context. And of course the jurors didn't bother to read the whole thread to read my previous, much more elaborate comments which gave a totally different picture of my thoughts than the one line the alerter abused to get me kicked out of the thread and brand me as someone I'm not.

My best friend in high school was a rape survivor. So is my cousin. Yet I have to sit here and be told I'm "condoning sexual assault" because I don't think consensual sex with an inexperienced girl is assault. Like they said it was assault when president Kennedy had sex with his secretary. So they tricked me in explaining my position, then alerted on me, had my post hidden and now I am 'branded'...

Some people on DU play these games. They go to great lenghts to blacken other good members. Character assassination is their preferred tool. Defamation and vilification are no strangers to them. And once you disagree with them in another thread, on another subject, all they have to do is point at the transparency page they helped to create by deliberately misrepresenting someone's views in the first place.

That's how they roll.

They're not interested in discussion. They're not interested in other people's points of view, unless those are in line with theirs. If they are, there will be no end to patting the other on the back, handing out compliments, spreading hugging emoticons etc. But when you're not in agreement, the only thing you'll get is "lol"-s, "rofl"-s, maybe a "Geez!" or "sigh" if you're lucky. That's not what I call a discussion.

If you don't agree with them on all issues all the time, you're a sexist and a misogynist.

[redqueen]

182. Yes, that was my one and only reason...

I started this poll solely with the expectation that people would say things that I could go discuss elsewhere. And not because I cared at all about finding out what women on DU thought about this habit that so many people have.

You got me.

Good job, detective.



(Do I need a sarcasm tag here?)

[DutchLiberal]

214. Well, since it's a public forum it's not technically 'behind their backs'...

Immature? Yes. But not behind anyone's back. Technically.

[DutchLiberal]

242. That last thing goes without saying.

[KansDem]

169. I suppose it depends on the situation

Recently, I and a co-worker were referred to as "boys."

We're both in our mid- to late-50s and were talking when a 30-something woman walks up to us and said, "Pardon me, boys." She was asking directions.

Anyway, her voice and mannerisms were very Myrna Loy-esque and I it felt like I was in a "Thin Man" movie. She seemed to catch herself and smiled after she spoke, which I interpreted as an acknowledgment that she might have committed a faux pas, but I wasn't offended.



I almost responded with my best Bogart voice and said, "Sure, Sweetheart. What's on your mind?"

[lunatica]

172. I think people should try not to get so offended all the time

It makes you old and bitter and nasty. It's much better to be called a girl than those ugly things.

[Nye Bevan]

177. If the biggest problem someone has is being called a "girl" or a "lady"

then they are not doing too badly.

[polly7]

180. My Dad always had a smile on his face when he 'and the boys' (his words) were

to meet up for coffee and their weekly bullsh* session. The 'girls' at the nursing home lovingly refer to one another that way. Men are always telling us they feel so sorry that us 'girls' have to lift them into the ambulance. I think it's sweet, actually.

[redqueen]

184. That silly rhetorical device is used way too often...

sometimes people discuss things besides the biggest problems they have, for all kinds of reasons.

Shocking news to some, I suppose.

[redqueen]

183. Do you really think that was sneaky or subtle?

Might as well come out and say it.

[lunatica]

236. yeah...

I thought it was

[polly7]

175. No problem with it at all. nt.

[DCBob]

181. Funny, I just had this discussion last night with good friend who is a woman...

and took offense at my use of the term "girl" to describe a an adult female friend of mine. I do understand why it can be offensive to women but it has become ubiquitous in is use now... in TV, movies, magazines, books, etc... and lots of women use it also. To me its a term of endearment or even flattery.

However, I would never want anyone to call me a "boy"!

[redqueen]

186. Since we all live in the patriarchy, terms which belittle women are ubiquitous, it is true.

They are everywhere.

And since all women grow up in the very same patriarchy, they mostly internalize those linguistic habits which so often shape our thoughts.

It's like The Matrix. http://www.sinfest.net/archive_page.php?comicID=4051

[DCBob]

187. I also forgot to mention my friend "convinced" me not to use the term anymore..

at least not in her presence. She wouldnt feed me anymore if I did it again.

[redqueen]

189. Hope you liked the comic!

[DCBob]

192. Yes, very good.

Thanks for the link.

[DutchLiberal]

217. That darn patriarchy!

Bad patriarchy! Bad, bad!

I say we send patriarchy off to bed without dinner. That'll teach him.

[ecstatic]

191. I'm more sensitive to it because of DU

The use of the word "girl" is really noticeable on The Bachelor, but then again, that's a demeaning show to begin with. I agree with another poster who noted that context is important.

[etherealtruth]

196. It's all about context

When my mom or dad refer to my sister and I as "the girls" (I am 50 and my sister is 43) ... I have no problem.

When the other project scientist in my group refers to the other two of us as "the girls" (again, I am 50 and my female co-worker is 30)... I take it in the condescending spirit in which it is intended ... it (in this case) is intended to diminish and infantalize two project scientists that are more skilled than he is.

[bluesbassman]

199. I just use "you people" for everybody. I like to offend unilaterally.

Just joking.

I usually reserve "girls" for women I know well or or children and adolescents. "Ladies" is my choice in professional or social situations where I am not well acquainted with the women in question.

I really think a lot depends on the circumstance and the delivery. Condescension is always wrong no matter what words you use.

[seabeyond]

202. a question

not an attack. not a correction. not a lecture. just a simple question because i am fascinated with this and i really want to hear why from others. i did this, too. and my hubby does it. and my two sons. we discussed it. not pointing fingers. not challenging you. and not telling you to change.... . did i cover it all? (not talking to you personally either, cause i think you can handle this question.)

oh, and it isnt the most important question in the world, or all of my world or make me angry, or anything else. K

""Ladies" is my choice in professional or social situations"

why would you choose lady in a professional environment. because, i am pretty sure we would say man, not gentleman in a professional environment. so why are you not comfortable with woman and use ladies?

again, i am not doing any of the stuff above. but i am curious.

i find a lot of people feel this way.

[Nye Bevan]

204. "Gentleman farmer" (nt)

[bluesbassman]

207. Good question.

I would use "ladies" when referring to a group, i.e. "Are you ladies going to be going out to lunch today"? Or "women" if I were to reference a group to a third party

If I was referring to a woman in talking to a third party, I would use "woman", i.e. "There is a woman on the second floor who may be able to help you".

That help?

[seabeyond]

211. interesting. thanks. nt

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

219. I use "gentlemen" to open my business emails to address the multiple males on my contact list....

...and have greeted multiple people at my facility as such. And yes, add "ladies" to that when a female is present.

Granted, I never went to Harvard or got an MBA, so maybe I'm being a rube.

[seabeyond]

220. i dont get why the attitude is necessary. i really do not. and yes

there will be times that men and women in a group will be address ladies and gentlemen. i can even say often. that was not the point of my post, nor what i was asking. or the reason for the question.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

231. I'm sorry....what "attitude"?

I freely admit, I didn't attend business school nor any seminar that tells me how I should address people in those settings. Maybe I'm doing it wrong. I was simply being honest that it's possible I'm not following correct etiquette.

[seabeyond]

235. as many posters have said, many of us did not realize the conditioning we have all fallen into using

girl when addressing a woman. so listen, learn, acknowledge and be aware.


it really is not so hard.

just as spade a spade and niggardly have nothing to do with african american, yet i dont use cause people perceive it to be.

or some are not comfortable with B**** so i have listened, learned, acknowledged and dont use.

i dont need a degree or attend a seminar

i have du

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

237. Your question to the other poster specifically said "You don't use the term gentleman".....

...in a business setting, and I told you I did. Apparently you thought some sort of "conditioning" prevented that. Well, it hasn't for me. No one has objected or rebuked me for it. Maybe that doesn't fit your narrative, but so be it. I guess I'm somehow disrespecting someone, supposedly.

Apparently, it is hard for some of us, especially when the unwritten rules are becoming more arbitrary every day.

[seabeyond]

238. you are telling me, when you talk to the men in your office you use gentlemen and not men?

i have never worked in a work environment where gentlemen was the go to word. ever.

the gentleman at the front desk will help you. nah

the man at the front desk... yes

the lady at the first desk.... often

the woman at the front desk.... works

the girl at the front desk.... ya, that too.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

240. Sorry, I do, I explained the situations I use it in my OP

...which I though you read.

So, where's my nearest re-education camp to fix this? Apparently I'm not doing it right.

[seabeyond]

241. So, where's my nearest re-education camp to fix this

i really dont play this game.

[DutchLiberal]

244. ROTFLMAO

[DutchLiberal]

243. The attitude that you don't agree with her.

For shame, really!

[DutchLiberal]

248. lol

[IMG][/IMG]

[seabeyond]

251. you were the one that INSISTED on only THREE women on ALL of du had an issue with girls and ALL the

rest of du and the world had no problem with it at ALL.

right? that was you, right?

where is all this knowledge and brilliance of yours throughout the thread in observation and the poll proving your point?

not

yet you still prance around as if you know wtf you are talking about.

isnt it embarassing?

we even have a govt agency that says dont call women girls and you say.... well they are wrong. genius.

[DutchLiberal]

253. Hyperbole.

It´s not for the over-dramatic.

[seabeyond]

254. do you need a link. a quote to YOUR statement. talk about fuckin hyperbole. right in

front of your face and still, look the other way, nothing happening here.

[DutchLiberal]

260. ...

[IMG][/IMG]

[DutchLiberal]

268. You're projecting.

Textbook example of projection if I ever saw one.

[seabeyond]

270. and still... i count more than THREE. but hey, ignore it. nt

[DutchLiberal]

275. Enjoy the flamefest by yourself. This is really below my standards.

[seabeyond]

276. THREE, in the whole wide world, only THREE women prefer to be called a

woman.

THREE

[Mc Mike]

286. Dang, Dutch.

You have thousands of posts, so you must be a good Dem. You surely must be seeing the current unprecedented level of repug attacks vs. women.

The O.P. is talking about one fundamental reinforcing mechanism used by bad people, to keep doing bad things. It's about colonization of minds, (belittlement, infantilization, objectification, call it what you will), achieved through the language a person uses when addressing another person. The post doesn't even make a statement, it just asks DU women what they think. Everyone that uses that language isn't bad, but it is aiding the people who are thinking and doing bad. And using it because it is 'traditional', or 'no big deal', is lazy thinking at best.

Maybe Dworkin hurt you. But you're capable of making your own O.P. that addresses the excesses that you feel Feminists are guilty of perpetrating, instead of making umpteen postings on this one. Bitter infighting among Progressive Democratic allies serves no one.

VOChoice.org could use your energy (brains, fighting spirit), if you're willing to help women and Dems against the real bad guys, who are the repugs and not the Feminists. It's a very positive channel, check their org out.

[redqueen]

288. THANK YOU! nt

[Mc Mike]

289. Solidarity, Red.

[seabeyond]

292. i am asking if i can fall in love, another woman is saying mouth dropped open

thru out the whole reading of your post.

but what is significant about this, is your post is so obvious, and should be so normal. why on a progressive board are women flabbergasted to read your words? in the past, it would have been a norm.

that is something when the norm shifts so, that high praise comes from what should be a given.

example. parenting. especially when kids were younger, you would not believe how many people would mention what a GOOD parent i was. for merely doing my job.

i would say, this is not a pat on the back material. it should be expected. lol

[Mc Mike]

318. Thanks, Sea.

I usually don't get praised for acting normal, or even get called normal, period, so it's a welcome change. But you're right. The ideas are simple and should be a given, should be expected -- at the very least on progressive boards, if not a 21st century developed society. Like good parenting.

The bad side never lost a fight that they don't come back to, once the heat dies down. They never forget a loss, and always try to reclaim their 'rightful' dominance. So progressives seem to be spinning their wheels, fighting rear guard actions, re-litigating settled issues. What a pain in the dupa.

We will still win anyway.

[DutchLiberal]

298. Thanks for your post, I appreciate it.

(I didn't name any names in this post, so I hope I haven't offended anybody. I'm genuinely grateful for Mc Mike's post and the opportunity to clarify some things, so I hope nobody will be jerk and alert on it just because she/he might disagree with me.)

Yes, I'm very concerned, alarmed and disgusted at the GOP's war on women. I've told some friends over here how things are looking out for women in the States at the moment and they couldn't believe what I said. They were shocked. They, like me and probably most people in the US as well, thought that issues like birth control, a woman's right to decide over her own body, abortion etc. had all been settled in the 1960's and 1970's. Now someone who was a serious contender for the presidency had questioned all these things. Not to mention the onslaught on womens' rights in Mississippi (closing their own abortion clinic) and Arizona (reversing Equal Pay laws) and that other state where vaginal probes are now mandatory if a woman needs an abortion.

I'm with every woman who opposes this backward and dangerous trend. I must admit I don't think very highly of president Obama anymore (I feel like he has continued too much of Bush's policies), but the no.1 reason I want him to defeat Mitt Romney is to make sure women's rights won't be trampled on any further. I also hope he gets the chance to replace Scalia on the Supreme Court with another progressive, maybe another woman, who will rule more favorably for women's rights.

I have always considered myself 'a feminist man'. I have always supported feminist issues, like equal pay for equal work; more women in high political office; more women in management positions; affordable daycare for the kids to make working easier; fully paid maternity leave; and of course the right every woman has to decide for herself over her own body, which in my book, should be a given.

The reason you see "bitter infighting" in this thread between me and a couple of other members, is because these members work relentlessly to paint me as a sexist, a misogynist, a woman-hater and what have you not, because I don't agree with their, what I consider, radical points of view on some issues. I don't think I'm a pig because I think prostitution should be legal. I don't think I'm enabling abuse and exploitation of women because I don't have any problems with pornography. And those are just the issues where I can see and understand their points of view, for which they offer legitimate arguments --even though I don't agree with them. But even asking a girl out at work is now deemed "a form of coercion" on DU; not calling sex with a virgin rape is now considered "creepy" and "condoning sexual assault"; and now even calling your best friend a 'girl' is "belittling and devaluing".

I see this thread as part of a concerted effort on DU by a tiny, but vocal minority, to make anything men do or say toward women suspicious, creepy or even harmful. Everything that is deemed perfectly acceptable to the vast majority of people is now under attack because of conspiracy theories about 'The Patriarchy' that has us all indoctrinated. But our three or four brave little warriors are continuing to educate us until we "get it". Forget that there are lots of people who simply don't agree with these theories; they are labeled as dumb f---s who "don't get it." Condescending. (And then turning around and say WE are condescending.)

They work hard to push their morals on others and they constantly belittle anybody who doesn't agree with them. For instance, because I don't agree prostitution should remain illegal, I am "arguing like a true sweatshop advocate" whose only interest is "to be able to have women do only as you please". Oh, and apparently because of my position on prostitution, I see women as "semen receptables". I have to read that kind of shit every goddamn time and it's all allowed to stand, but if all do is disagreeing with someone on the appropriateness of asking a woman out at work, an alert is send saying I'm "a serial sexist offender" and that I "don't think women deserve any respect" and my post gets hidden. Just for disagreeing, I think women don't deserve respect. Apparently.

But the feminists who complain the most about how little respect men have for women (for not minding porn, or for not minding prostitution), are the first to slam other women who disagree with them. Just look upthread and you'll see posts of women writing that other women who don't mind the word 'girl' are "seriously lacking in self-respect". In other words: we, self-appointed feminists, will decide for other women what they should think and when they should be offended. And then THEY turn around and claim the moral highground?

THAT'S the reason I no longer wish to associate myself with the label 'a feminist man'. Of course I still support the issues I've always supported and I'll always rail against the GOP when it comes to their war on women, but I now reject the label 'feminist' because I think, at least on DU3, it stands for looking down on people who make different choices in lifestyle; it stands for pushing your morals onto others; it stands for insulting men, ALL men.

"All men are potential rapists" I've read on DU3. And it was said by someone in this thread who's now using misplaced sarcasm to point fingers at others. That's where my defensive attitude comes from. I'm their ally on feminist issues. They insist seeing me as a sexist and misogynist because I don't kowtow to all of their whims. That's all.

(And the sad thing is I'm afraid to hit the 'post reply' button, because I'm sure someone will alert on this, citing only the last paragraph and my transparency page and jurors will hide it without even reading the post. Wouldn't be the first time.)

[redqueen]

299. My God.

There is so much misrepresentation in that post.

Amazing.

[DutchLiberal]

304. Really? The attack-mode, immediately, again?

This, to me, proves to me you have no interest in an honest discussion/conversation. At all. If you had, you wouldn't have made that post. You would have written an answer, instead of an accusation. Yet another one.

What is there in my post that isn't true? Didn't women in this thread who said they didn't mind the word 'girl' get schooled by other feminists who said those women had "serious self-respect issues"? Didn't a prolific DU feminist say that "all men are potential rapists"? Didn't one of DU's feminists tell me, after I defended my stance of legalizing prostitution: "spoken like a true sweatshop defender"? Didn't a DU feminist say that, if she had her way, she would force adult women in the porn business to undergo therapy and even have them committed because they clearly were incapable of making the right choice? I'm not paraphrasing here, I'm quoting. This has been said and argued on DU.

Self-proclaimed feminists have advocated for taking away womens' agency because those women didn't make the choices in life the feminists wanted them to make. And then they turned around and blamed 'The Patriarchy' for taking away womens' rights --by horrible means, like using the word 'girl'. Do you deny this happened on DU? If you do, you're not telling the truth.

Maybe it's time to look into a mirror instead of saying everybody in the world except you is wrong.

[Mc Mike]

319. I guess I should not 'try to teach my grandpa how to suck eggs', but

maybe try to do an OP on fair vs. unfair allegations of sexism.

It looks like you feel hurt by past non-alertable or TS-able arguments. I've read DU for years, but so much is posted, that I've never seen those arguments. I looked in on this OP, to see how DU women feel, so I'm intruding a bit here. But the sheer volume of the posts you're doing here is doing no good, it comes off like angry revenge.

If you du e-mail me, I'll use it like a caucus option, to comment on your #298 post. But I can't exchange opinions on those issues here, because it would feel like a thread hijack. I'll be happy to talk to you later, or post my opinions on your OP, I just can't talk anymore to you in this space.

Women's rights activists can't force anyone to kow tow to them, because they aren't in the driver's seat. Simple power dynamics.

Have a good one, brother.

[redqueen]

321. Not that you asked for my opinion,

But that is one thread hijack I would not mind at all. It seems to me it might be beneficial for others to be able to read if they are interested.

[Mc Mike]

323. If I have your o.k., will do.

Last edited Thu May 3, 2012, 10:49 AM - Edit history (1)

On edit, added: it just occurred to me how truly polite you were being to me, in 321. You didn't ask for my opinion in the OP, and I sneaked in anyhow. Then you prefaced your 321 with an extremely polite 'not that you asked for my opinion', and it's your own OP! I always wanted your opinion, that's why I looked in. Dutch should see this, I can't yet see how your side of the debate is wrong, or even inpolite.

[redqueen]

325. Oh you have more than my ok.

You have my appreciation.

[DutchLiberal]

329. Why is my 'sheer volume of posts' "angry revenge" and, for example, seabeyond's isn't?

seabeyond has made as much posts, if not more, in this thread. But she's not being accused of "angry revenge", is she?

I thought your post was sincere, but maybe I was wrong. If you look at my posts in this thread in which I argue, with arguments, you know, ideas and such, and then say they're "angry revenge", I start getting doubts you are as impartial as you made yourself out to be.

Up-thread, I've argued why it is condescending of self-proclaimed feminists to belittle other women, saying they "have serious self-respect issues". In the post you were replying to, I've gone to great lenghts to explain where I stand with regard to feminist issues and how I see them getting corrupted by a small but vocal minority on this website. And I've backed up my claims. What responses do I get? Either nothing, or the two standard responses the two most vocal feminists on this thread ALWAYS resort to:

"Sweet Jesus", "My God", "Sigh" (redqueen) or "lol", "rofl", "lmao" (seabeyond)

Real gems, eh? That's the ONLY answer they EVER give when faced with arguments, ideas and theories that don't agree with them.

Just look at what seabeyond wrote in response a post of mine down-thread: more trolling. More trying to get a rise out of me. Getting a rise out of people is what she does whenever they don't agree with her. She's been playing this childish game with me throughout the entire thread. Just look for it yourself, I've had to break off two possible flamewars that she wanted to instigate with her trollish behavior. She's stalking me throughout the entire thread childishly trying to get a rise out of me.

... and then I'M the one who's looking for "angry revenge"?

Please...

[Mc Mike]

358. That was just my impression, not meant as an indictment.

I addressed all of 298, in as full detail as possible, with as many facts (opinions, ideas) as possible, so you know where I'm coming from. I said the points and ideas where I thought you were right, and said the points where I thought Red and sea were right. As a non-judge and non-jury member on DU, that's all I can do. It seemed to me like angry revenge and vituperation from you because both us boys (or men) shined in on this thread, which was asking for women's opinions, and sea is a woman, so it's her home court. If you post a male-issue op (I suggested it before), I'll show up to post. If I like it, I'll rec it, like I recced this op. I'll stick up for anyone I think is right. Maybe you will be pleasantly surprised, and find out this gender war is over.

You are free to doubt me, this is America (maybe you're in the Neatherlands, but they're pretty free, and you're American). But it stretches credulity to posit that I'm secretly a woman, involved in misrepresenting myself as a man, to lull you into false expectations of sincerity and impartial fairness. Try typing Mike Mc or Mc Mike into the search box, top left. I usually don't shine in on Women's issues at all on this site, but still recommend VOCHOICE.org to my allies that fight against the repug 1%'s War on Women.

I've gone to great lengths to explain my side with you, arguments, ideas theories. My side is not 100% the same as Red and Sea's necessarily, but they've both been very polite to me. They are everything could ask for in a 99% issue ally. They and I don't have a past, like you and they have. If I did, I wouldn't seek their thread out, because nobody is changing anybody's mind, and nobody will hit ignore or declare armistice. Check out Red's response to my initial reply to your #298. I'll take that kind of 'condescension' anytime, it's actually regal. Your ideas tell me that you also are a good 99% issue ally, and I never throw away a good ally without a lot more cause than my perception of your anger has given me. Even if they give me a rolly eye icon, to boot. We don't disagree on a terribly large amount of ideas, as far as I can see.

[Mc Mike]

328. 2nd re to 298, per Red's 321

If you went with your second para in your post, (or first non-bracketed para), then full stop, I'd second that emotion 100%. Or 99%, to use the current vernacular. It's possible I live in that 'other state' you referred to, because I'm in PA. Most of the women who are my family members, relatives, and friends live in PA under Repug Gov. 'Close Your Eyes' Corbett and his mandatory t.v. ultrasounds, which of course the repugs force the US citizen to buy. Despite their opposition to health care forced buy mandates, 'intrusive' big government, big government take-over of health care, and all other forms of pre-natal care. (That Opus Dei sheisskopf santorum actually campaigned on this! Really.) It's also possible that you're talking about Alabama, Georgia, Texas, Virginia, because in the life's a blur or repuglicans and red-meat (to paraphrase Zippy). You're hurt and mad because someone attacked you verbally or through print. I'm mad that Corbett is hurting even a woman who is a complete stranger to me way over in Philly, let alone my loved ones. You may be madder, but who's hurt more?

[DutchLiberal]

331. You're mixing up two totally different things.

You're hurt and mad because someone attacked you verbally or through print. I'm mad that Corbett is hurting even a woman who is a complete stranger to me way over in Philly, let alone my loved ones. You may be madder, but who's hurt more?

That's demagoguery.

What's happening with regard to womens' rights being trampled on is one thing. What's happening on DU with a tiny minority trying to shove their morals upon everybody else is something different entirely. The second has no relation to the first. I will never give up my opposition to the GOP's war on women. I will never give up my support for most feminist issues.

So, how does caring for womens' rights conflict with pointing out the hypocrisy and the belligerence of some feminists on DU? I don't see it.

I'm not hurt or mad because somebody attacked ME. I'm mad that a tiny fraction of self-proclaimed feminists on this website are trying to shove their morals down everybody's throats and that they insult, denigrate, belittle, ridicule and devalue everybody who disagrees with them --not only men, they do it to other WOMEN as well! They say things like: "they're lacking self-respect", "they are conditioned to think that way" (meaning: if we 'school' them, they'll finally 'see the light', meaning: 'they're in the dark now') or even "If I had my way, those women [in the porn business] would be forced to undergo therapy, because they can't make decisions of their own."

Feminists. Looking down to and talking down to other adult women. Then turning around to blame me and other men for looking down to and talking down to women.

It's not that I'm hurt. It's the hypocrisy, the misplaced sarcasm and the hugely out of place holier-than-thou attitude that I cannot stand.

[Mc Mike]

364. I'm sorry you feel that way. It wasn't meant as an attack.

I'm not trying to demagogue you, just putting it in perspective (and just my perspective). The two issues are gender and equality issues, and from what your post 298 said, I felt we were both mad about the War on Women, and were allies. I still feel that, from this current post 331. The answer to who hurts more, is 'that stranger in Philly', who's being physically attacked by that Barney Rubble looking swine Corbett. I suggest tabling the disagreement about rhetoric, while we're busy pounding the repugs into rubble, as allies.

I don't see the Women's Issue posters' as having hypocrisy. They are trying to frame the issues so as to achieve progress, or at very least fight off the nazis' moves against women and us all. I don't see you as having hypocrisy. I see the hypocrisy of the 'pro-life' repug 1%, who 'care' about that fetus as a human, until month nine. After that, let the little welfare fraud starve. They just want control over the reproductive rights of the 99%. On one hand, the repugs are saying 'if I had my way, those women would be forced to undergo state mandated rape, and have to pay for it.' On the other hand, since the women here are all just interacting on line, there is little chance of any 'Maoist Feminist Separatist' re-education camp style 'forced therapy'. From my perspective,there's only one real threat here, and I wish all allies would declare armistice, go separate paths, and fight the bad guys together, even if on different fronts.

That's it Dutch. I'm all tuckered out. We could make a 15 page booklet between our postings here, but probably no one would read it. I again respectfully suggest abandoning this thread we hijacked, and if you o.p., I'll weigh in. As succintly as possible, unlike this time. I have no disrespect toward you, we just disagree on the significance\importance of certain methods used by people to address other people. And maybe a little about which issues to expend energy on in defending peoples' rights, and which targets to use that energy against.

[Mc Mike]

330. Third para, fourth para

Last edited Wed Nov 23, 2016, 08:29 AM - Edit history (1)

I back Obama, through Labor, Spring, and Occupy, but not with his official campaign. I don't want to get too cozy, because I want to pressure the shyte out of him once we get him his second term. His campaign isn't paying me, and I don't try to hijack any Occupy or Spring actions vs. the 1%, but my co-protest activists (allies) know where I stand. Scalia could be replaced with a paper weight, and it would be an improvement. But you're right, a woman appointee would be great. Call Rose Bird out of forced retirement, she rocked. That's why repug govs Wilson and Dukemeijan targeted and eliminated her from the bench. A 5 woman 4 man court would be more populationally representative, and we all love Democracy.

I don't call myself a feminist, I self-appelate as 100% Equal Rights, including LGBT. I'm a straight guy, but both groups are my allies. It sure doesn't hurt me to see that my allies get all of their rights. Since I work heavy construction, commercial and industrial, saying I'm a 'feminist' isn't the best outreach method to a bunch of fun loving guys, but my Coalition of Labor Union Women allies see me backing them on the job sites. The boys might not like it, but they'll fight about anything anyhow, even moronic stuff like use of company tools. So at least if they have a problem with equal rights for women co-workers, at least we're fighting about something important. I agree with your 4th para sentiments mostly, except that daycare is a labor issue, not a Women's only issue. And equal co-parenting in employment law would be a tremendous advance for men and women, the family, society, labor, and the world. Probably the Scandinavians will have to get on that one, we're too primitive over here currently.

[Mc Mike]

348. 5th para, prostitution:

Last edited Wed Nov 23, 2016, 08:34 AM - Edit history (2)

I mentioned in the 'DU e-mail caucus offer' reply that I missed all the former fights, because this site has a ton of postings on it all the time. Half the time I can't figure out if the poster is man or woman. I think Mad talked to me twice, and I don't know where she went, but she was the tops in sentiment, politics, and output. I like D & P, but haven't 'seen' her lately. I had frequent positive interactions with S1 and A I '03, and I thought JDP was a guy while we were cross posting, for the longest time.

So, on porn and prostitution. I've looked at porn. I never 'patronized'* a prostitute (*Interesting word). I went to one strip club in San Diego, one time, due to quite a bit of coercion by my non-union construction company bosses. We were building a high rise hotel near Old Town (north west San Diego). Amusingly, the same characters also tried to sell and get me hooked on crystal meth (crank). The strip club was no fun for me, because if you're lonely, you just wind up feeling wistful, doing something like that.

Kurt Vonnegut's Rabo Karabekian character bragged to a woman that he loved about all the romantic conquests he had during WWII combat operations, and she said "Let me guess. Everywhere you went, the men were dead, and the women were trying to feed themselves and their starving children." Everywhere the US military bases itself, prostitution dens spring up. R and R for the boys, get them feeling sexy and juiced up so they can get back to work. (I strongly doubt there are any 'Midnight Cowboys' out there slinging for our active duty women personnel.) That r & r is a security risk that frankly degrades our national security and fighting capability, but the same repugs that don't care about that are crying about letting lesbian and gay soldiers have consensual sex in the same military. The GOP: wrong about everything, all the time, at the top of their lungs.

I'm no Holy Roller like Santorum, though I'm a practicing Catholic. The anti-Woman pro-nazi faction in my religion has been in charge of that outfit since they bumped off John 23 and J.P. 1, but they'll leave or kick me out before I leave. They also get zero in weekly donations from me, because they have more money than God. The hierarchy is busy socking it to the nuns, because they dared to oppose the repug and Vatican attack on Women's health. Hell, the hierarchy is shutting down the convent and grade school a couple of blocks up, flushing St. Mary's sisters down the tubes, and that's just a real estate business profit-motivated move. This whole section is a real digression on the issues at hand, but to me, Saint Mary is the Catholic version of Woman God.

Anyway, as a non-holy-roller, I think God's a woman as much as a man. But I don't think that I have the right to tell someone else what they can and can't do with their sexuality, God didn't speak to me like Joan of Arc (or l'il bush, Santorum, Perry, Bachmann, Cain, etc.). I do think in the bottom of "patron's" hearts, they know that the prostitute needs the money, even if they're not supporting dependants and not a drug user, even if they are earning on the jet-set end of the sex trade scale. When they 'oooh ooh baby', even really convincingly, it's because they need money and don't have it, and the 'customer' has money and won't give it otherwise. I had a Shane MacGowan 'Old Main Drag' moment once, decades ago, and that's all I'll ever say about that. Period.

It really frosts me that people who have expendable income see fellow humans who are in need, and think 'I could use them to have a good time, and release some endorphins.' No love. I strongly regard the mass of 'patrons' as an unfriendly 'occupying' force, like the nazis in WWII Paris, or the US in the SE Asia bungle in the jungle. They have it, our people need it, so our people have to do what they want. This is wealthier Americans in an unfriendly occupation of other Americans' neighborhoods and community. I love Lenny Bruce, so I don't oppose his 'matter of fact' approach in prostitution patronage. He was probably among the least offensive of his prostitutes' clients, but I bet his women kin didn't appreciate it. In short, prostitution is just not for me, personally. I can't regulate other people's behavior, but if I could pay a prostitute to not have sex with the hostile occupiers, I would.

On edit, fixed so the 4th para would show up. It was glitching.

[Mc Mike]

350. 5th para, porn:

Last edited Wed Nov 23, 2016, 08:37 AM - Edit history (1)

I admit to having seen a good deal of porn. At the bottom of my heart, I know that it's pictures of prostitution, so I have indirectly patronized prostitutes, though I just said that I never went with a prostitute (I meant physically, in reality). My paying for it means that I encouraged the producers to make more, and I was wrong to do that.

Flynt, Hefner, and Gucchione work for government psy-ops as well as the mob, in my opinion. Castle Bank, the Wer Bell hit attempt by Flynt, the linking of progressive investigative journalism to 'pornographic thinking', all the signs are there. It's an attempt by the 1% to eliminate love from 'love-making'. It should not escape notice that the thought crime Winston and Julia committed in Orwell's "1984" was that they looked at each other during the two-minute hate and thought 'I love you' instead of 'I hate and fear you'. Porn is the nazi's way of keeping two people from love, because when they love each other, it fucks with the 1%'s hegemony. They fill in for each other's blind spots, they see right through the rulers' bull shit, and they're an unstoppable force. Bad for business.

Porn has gotten progressively more detailed and graphic as the years have progressed. It also attempts to splinter human sexuality into dozens of distinct kinks. Most porn is consumed by straight and gay men, but if any man or woman does want to consume porn, it sure isn't my call on how they should conduct themselves. Porn consumers may find that their physical and mental sexual state requires more extreme stimulation, like if someone tapped you on the shoulder all day, your shoulder nerves would get numb, so they'd have to tap you harder and harder to get your attention.

The porn-pros escalate you from one beautiful person, to you have to have two other partners to get turned on, then you need an orgy, or you need a foot fetish, or bondage, or very old, or very young, or very heavy, or the smell of roses, etc. ad nauseum. If you ever looked at a straight 'gentleman's' magazine, and suddenly came across an ad for a hermaphroditic or mid-surgery transgender, you probably weren't expecting it from the cover of the mag, but that is the propagandists trolling to lead you down one of their dozens of kinks, banking on you being harder to turn on. It could be photo shopped, or a transgendered person is taking the gig out of need, to get the rest of the procedure done. There go the colonialists occupying us again.

I have to run. (Spring 99 event occurring soonest.) Let me finish replying to 298's last 5 paras later, and I promise I won't filibuster further, but will be back to give you fair time later, Dutch.

[DutchLiberal]

359. "Porn is the nazi's way of keeping two people from love,"

Okay, I didn't even read any further. I thought comparing prostitution patrons to occupiers was bad enough, but I could see your point and your analogy, but this is batshit insane.

I'm out of this thread. Don't take the effort to comment any further; I will not be reading.

[Mc Mike]

365. Har har! But I strongly oppose the Birchers.

I was just arguing against a big bald beefy Ron Paul anti-semite bircher, at a Spring 99 event, about 5 hours ago.

I love Strangelove, though. Peter Seller's nazi scientist talking about a nuclear 'first strike' study undertaken by the Bland Corporation. He talked about Rand again in his last movie before he died, Jerzy Kosinski's 'Being There'. Big mason pyramid at the end of that one. Jerzy was supposed to be at the Tate Polanski mansion when Manson's nazis killed all those people. Tate and Polanski had worked on Bobby Kennedy's L.A. campaign the previous June.

How's that for some OPE, Warren? I aim to please.

[Mc Mike]

357. Para 5 - 10:

Nobody on DU ever picked a fight with me or told me what to say or think, re gender politics. We're reading and posting on different subjects, up to now. Usually I get amused toleration, or 'follow your bliss, pal.' I never heard anything about asking a co-worker out as 'coercion', but I never discussed it, because my wife wouldn't approve, in spades. But nothing wrong with two equals that work together going out on a date, or having any kind of consensual good time, in my opinion. It only hurts to ask if the other person is subordinate at the job. I never heard sex with a virgin is 'creepy', 'rape', or a 'sexual assault' on this site, either. I disagree with the sentiments, but they have never been brought up on any thread I've read or posted on. Between 2 consenting equal adults, it's none of my business. Saying 'girl' to your best friend is obviously none of my business, but that wasn't the point of the OP poll.

You feel they accuse you of condescension and belittlement, and you feel they have been condescending and belittling. The only way to achieve a cease-fire is to stop firing. There's no reason to keep up the destructive cycle of interaction, and nobody is reaching for the 'ignore' button, but there's nothing enjoyable to me about the type of post interactions I've seen. Nobody here pushed their morals on me, ever. As allies, we go our own way and mind our own business. By your writing, you don't come off as dumb, so I disagree with that part. The 'you don't get it' part, is you don't get that they want to be left alone to say and think what they want. Post your own OP, see if they follow you to be mean. I'll read what you have to say in your o post, if I see it in our neighborhood, and I'll contribute my 2 cents. I have a big mouth, and don't mind agreeing or disagreeing with others' opinions.

I missed the 'seriously lacking in self respect' post, but you'll admit it is a monster of a thread at this point. I disagree with the statement, but I remember Paul Mooney doing a bit where he said the n word 50 times a day, to keep his teeth white. After the Seinfeld guy melted down on stage in his stand up, Mooney quit using the word. Chris Rock used to use the word, and Whoopi convinced him to quit. Wanda never used it, and she's one of the funniest people out there. They all had their own opinion about the use of a derogatory term, and a white looking person like me has no business telling them what to do. But none of them is using the word anymore. The way those men and women used the n word or not, is the same way women can self-appelate as 'girl', or not. It's none of my business, and they didn't ask for my opinion.

No woman here ever (told me they) looked down on me, told me what to think, pushed their morals on me, insulted me. If I saw it happen to another person, I'd say it was wrong. I'm glad you're still an ally against the swinish repugs and their war on women. I don't believe all men are potential rapists, so we agree there. I audited Bettina Aptheker's Women's Studies at UC Santa Cruz, and took Marsha Millman's Soc. of Love there. And I could see a real separation between those two genius women and men. They were always ready for an attack to come from men, because they were attacked by men so much. Both classes were very worthwhile, though.

Lastly, you can't force someone to kow tow if you're not in power. We're all allies against the repugs, in a lot of issues, in this case it's the 'War on Women' issue. The bigger person will cease fire first, and declare Armistice. That's about all I have on post 298, and I bet Red and you could agree on at least one thing, that you both wish she didn't give me the go ahead to type this book onto the thread. Har Har.

[seabeyond]

361. actually....

i have enjoyed reading your posts thru out, for the simple fact you spent the time to self reflect and honestly share an opinion from so many angles, subjects and issues. i LOVE it. what i see the site as.

the all men are potential rapist came from a comment (i forget who) that when a woman dates a man, sees a man on the street, she does not know he is not a rapist. from a womans point of view, all men are potential rapists, until they are not. not that all men are rapists. i could go out with my buddy i have known for years, and he could rape me. i could swear he wouldnt, not who he is, but at any point, he could. doesnt mean he will. same with the stranger walking down the street. or he passes by and says, hey, how are you. i say fine, and you.... and we go on our way.

the problem with much of the discussion is the purposeful misrepresentation of what is being said to have confrontation. and then it becomes nothing more than a waste of time.

but

i have enjoyed your posts. and was glad you put the time into them. i always enjoy hearing a man discuss this to get a better view.

[Mc Mike]

366. Thank you, sea. I lost Dutch, a couple of posts north of here.

If the Women allies ever need some help with pernicious intrusions, e-mail me to let me know. I can drop by and out-bore or out-crazy them into leaving, apparently. My overabundant sharing of thoughts and feelings seemed to operate like a can of raid. I was trying to be respectful as possible, but such is life. I guess I lost one guy ally here, which I'm sorry about, but I got good interactions with you and red, which means I came out ahead.

The 'men rapist' comment charge D leveled went in one ear and out the other. Nobody accused me of rape. I never heard or saw it posted. Rape is power, not sex, and it's not sexy. There are definitely fetishists out there whose kink is rape-centered porn fantasies. There was recently a rape centered vodka ad that the model sued the vodka company over. There are quite a few jag-offs telling the masses what to think, in so many mass media venues. All benefits the 1% swine.

The massive number of hostile postings did seem a waste of time, which is why I suggested a tasteful e-mail caucus to D. But such was not to be.

Thanks for reading the umpteen posts I made.

[redqueen]

385. Your own familiarity is extremely lacking as well, it seems.

I spent the first six years on here as a pro-objectification, pro-porn, pro-prostitution 'sex-positive'* feminist. So... yeah.


And this thread is about calling grown women "girls" and how acceptable that is to women, not porn.



*"sex-positive" is a loaded piece of anti-radfem propaganda. Just as people who are anti-choice are not "pro life", people who are pro-prostitution and pro-porn are not any different from radical feminists about being sex-positive. We're all positive about sex.
http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/blog_comments/sex_positive_feminism_a_term_that_needs_retiring

[Mc Mike]

412. Thanks for the welcome. Sorry if I offended you.

Dutch brought the porn up, and I just gave my opinion. Even a measly < 100 post-er is apparently allowed to do that, on this site.

Thanks also for mentioning Alex Jones, the fat blowhard Bircher from Dallas. The Rolling Stone article on him half a year ago covered his many Bircher connections.

I never talk about the Bilderbergers, Illuminati, CFR-Trilateral Commission, Protocols of the Elders, Rothschilds, or NWO. A very experienced post-er like you should be able to argue without putting words in their 'opponent's' mouth. My go-to bad guys are the masons, nazis, and Birchers (LaRouche, Beck, Paul, Jones). I also like to bash Opus Dei and P-2, because I'm an anti-nazi Catholic.

I notice how you and D believe I'm involved in a conspiracy with red and sea, while simultaneously painting me as a wacky conspiracy-theorist. My word to you, that I'm not a former radical fem post-er who has been TSed and reincarnated, is not going to disabuse you of that notion. If you could point to a post where I ever weighed in on 'radical' Women's issues, you'd have at least one substantiating fact to back your assertion. In reality, I just back red and sea on the simple sociological issue that the OP poll brought up, and have never clapped eyes on them or their posts in DU before.

Simply put, I've said I don't believe that I have a right to tell a woman what word she uses to self-appelate. I don't believe that it's any of my business what two consenting adults do with their sexuality. I don't believe that I have the right to tell anyone what to do regarding porn consumption, I just know why I endorse an economic boycott of it. You can enjoy yourself, however you want, alone or with your significant other, and it's not my business. D brought up prostitution and porn, in one of his many (many, many) postings that tend to divert from the simple idea Red polled DU women on.

Since you're an OPE fan, I'd like to mention that the Lavender Mafia owns the porn distribution sites in the Pittsburgh area, kind of like how the Pagan bikers and the Farrakhan-ites own illegal drug distribution around here. I don't know what to make of it, in terms of conclusions to be drawn from the fact. But thought I'd mention it, in case it would be helpful to you, either to have further evidence to pigeon-hole me as a conspiracy theorist, or just for purely informational purposes.

[Mc Mike]

433. Thanks for the welcome, again.

About your hunches, even Spidey's Super Senses have occasionally misled.

I picked up some more POE for you from 5-3 Maddow's show, segment 1. A story about nazi J.T. Ready (just killed 4 people in AZ, including a 16 month old child), and his connections to repug politicians Russell Pearce, Sheriff Arpaio, and Kansas's Kris Kobach (KKK, for short.) Ready was also an elected repug committee person. Repugs with nazis (one of my go-to bad guy conspiracy groups).

I could say to the vituperative guy post-ers here "Don't worry your pretty little heads about that, boys. You just keep up your important fight vs. some progressive DU womens' 'incorrect' sociological or linguistic theories", but they didn't listen the last 5 times I suggested that concept.

[Mc Mike]

440. I didn't pipe up until post 286.

After reading the first 280 posts, my opinion was that D used the site 'rules' in a very lawyer-like way, adhering to the letter of the law, while violating the spirit zealously. (Just an opinion. I can provide no links). He seemed to bring old axe-grindings to this OP. The way each side of this 'sexism vs. censorship' argument approaches the other, to debate the issue, is colored by past disagreements that I missed, and have no part in. The multi-thousand post-ers here have a history, and they know where the other ''side's'' bodies are buried, thread-wise.

Red's post was really a kind of caucus call. I like the idea of people who are already on the same page, more or less, getting together to hash out and refine their idea. My opinion of DU itself was that it was a kind of caucus of progressive dems, and I started looking in on it due to a referral from Al Franken and Sonoma State's Project Censored, in the mid-2000's -- not enough to know the personalities, just enough to pick up good Dem info, on a lot of issues. But DU is too bulky and unwieldly to serve as a single caucus currently. And my offer of an e-mail caucus to D was sincere. If rq had ulterior motives, and really wanted the poll\caucus to go the way it wound up, then my hat's off to her as a brilliant strategist and tactician. She may be, but I think she is also honest and above board.

Red's OP title wasn't 'Boys are stupid, throw rocks at them', (but if it was, I might still have looked in, just to laugh. Not to get mad, just to get an enjoyably happy laugh). I snuck in because I wanted her opinion, and the opinion of DU women that wanted to caucus on the issue. As long as I didn't vote or pipe up, I couldn't see the harm of looking in and listening to the caucus, because I wasn't spying on it to report back to an anti-woman OPE conspiracy group. I figured if I didn't make my presence known, it wouldn't bother them. I had no disagreements with any women on the post about how they should self-appelate, because that would be a bigger sexist offense on my part than me calling that woman a 'girl'. Like I'm in charge of telling her what to think about herself and her life.

I was honestly curious to hear their opinion, (and D didn't appear to be. He was not helping me hear women's opinions, anyway. He was kind of getting in the way. All perfectly legally). I already knew I wanted her opinion, so when red posted me (#321), on her own OP thread, prefaced with the title 'Not that you asked my opinion', it was easy to ignore how great a person she was showing herself to be, and I just started typing reams to D. I caught myself (3.5 hours later) and went back to edit my response to her, but I had ignored her real nobility due to unreflective sexism. It's true.

D had a similar blind spot in his initial response to me (298). His 4th para constitutes affordable daycare as a 'woman's rights' issue, but it's a labor and working families issue. That statement is not for the purposes of pointing at him and yelling 'sexist!', but it shows how being blind on one issue can adversely affect effectiveness on another issue. Because he didn't see women's equality on the affordable child care issue and in the workforce, a good Dem like him isn't thinking to back labor and social justice org's struggle on the issue effectively. He's actually hurting labor by misconceiving this issue, and I'm a labor guy. I'm just allied with Women's Equality. I'm not asking him to help set up a day-care for my labor union sisters and brothers, or lobby Congress, or anything. On this issue, it would be helpful if he just changed his mind.

RQ's info on post 384 (Khnet Shroedingers rapist), her freethoughtsblog link in 386, and her sig-line links are all excellent reading. (The stfufauxfeminists link in her sig-line may be more of a general recommendation, or there was a specific post on that site that just got bumped down due to daily updates, I'm unsure.) Red's 384 should be one post south of our current location (this post), if you're interested and haven't read it. Somehow, this o.p.'s consideration of 'how do we see ourselves' and 'how do we see others' turned into a battle against perceived 'p.c. language censorship thought police' and 'censorship of porn'. In reality, it was just a request to consider or reconsider how we think and what we say to other people.

I recall the Meese Commission on Pornography, Flynt vs. Falwell, the 'obscenity' indictment against Lenny Bruce, and any OP you make on any of those would attract my avid attention. There is something wrong about an alliance between any kind of Women's rights activists and Meese, Falwell, Dobson, Flynt. Similar to when Civil Rights leader Malcolm X had his mind in pawn to the system, when he was backing Elijah Muhammed. Muhammed was in bed with klan and nazis at the time, and also the Hunt family. (EM's Hunt family connections were why the 'chickens coming home to roost' comment by Malcolm upset Elijah so much.) Farrakhan definitely did help kill Malcolm, and his people are in bed with aryan skinheads, klan, and nazis. Malcolm changed his mind about hating whites and backing a Black hate leader who was in bed with organized white power haters of Blacks. So the gov bumped him off, using their bad guys that infiltrated the NOI, and the movement was already so thoroughly infiltrated that the gov could count even leaders like Elijah M and Louis X as pro-gov agents. (When I say gov, I'm talking intel, not LBJ. And you referenced my own quirky OPE before, but my viewpoints can't possibly compete, in lunacy terms, with the 'flying saucers and bean pies' of the NOI.) When I see a Woman's rights person on the same page as nazi freaks like Meese, Falwell, Dobson, and Flynt, I think they are either good people like Malcolm whose minds are in pawn to the system, due to outrage at huge injustices, or they are bad gov infiltrators into a good Rights cause, trying to warp or de-rail that cause, and getting paid.

That doesn't describe red or sea, or any of the Women's Equality posts that I have read here. I agree with them on the op issue, and haven't ever had that many women simultaneously happy with me before, (without it being a result of me leaving their general vicinity.) My opinion on censorship and porn doesn't involve a desire to regulate your behavior in any way, I just know why I favor self regulation and an economic boycott. I'm willing to discuss with you, any time, Pat Califia's Meese Commission coverage (of the Becker and Levine split with Dworkin and MacKinnon on the issue): http://cultronix.eserver.org/califia/meese/

One last piece of 'purity of our precious essence' for you. Everyone around here knows that Falwell was a swine-like nazi, that opposed everything DU stands for. But Mark Lane, the lawyer for Flynt vs. Falwell, was also bush family friend John Hinckley's lawyer, and also Jim Jones' lawyer, when Congressman Ryan was investigating Jonestown. Ryan's assassination in Guyana was quickly followed by the assassination 9 days later of two other San Fran area elected officials, Moscone and Milk. (Mayor Moscone had been forced, well before the Jonestown massacre, to appoint Jones as the head of the SF Housing Authority. I wonder what George and Harvey were talking about and working on right before Dan White ate all those twinkies. Maybe, possibly, staffing or housing issues.)

So the ostensible sides in Flynt v Falwell are 'freedom of expression' vs. 'morality'. The gov was on both sides of that court case, so they couldn't lose. A real 'heads they win, tails normal people lose' coin toss. They want us to tear each other apart fighting for one of their leaders or the other.

[redqueen]

384. He was referring to Schrödinger's Rapist

http://kateharding.net/2009/10/08/guest-blogger-starling-schrodinger%E2%80%99s-rapist-or-a-guy%E2%80%99s-guide-to-approaching-strange-women-without-being-maced/

After you read that you'll see why I don't bother attempting to converse with him. Once someone decides to misrepresent something so baldly I take it as a given that they're not interested in serious discussion.

Nobody tries to paint him as anything. He fights with the more radical feminists on the board because he disagrees with us and can't just leave it at that.

And it was actually a guy who said that asking someone out while at work was coercion. So... yeah... not sure why he's associating that with anyone in this thread... and who knows where he got some of that stuff but obviously he's not keeping it straight very well if he's paraphrasing Schrödinger's Rapist as 'all men are rapists', ranting about something some guy said in the lounge, and claiming multiple people said something when only one person did, ... anyway so yeah, that's a small example of why I don't bother.

[redqueen]

399. A "girl", was it?

Perhaps some woman did say it. If I mistakenly assumed you were ranting and railing against something which more than one person said, which I apparently did, then I apologize for the misunderstanding.

[Mc Mike]

411. All right. +1. Up to speed, now.

I thought I made him mad, and he left. That's what he said. But he's just mad at my thoughts, and is still buzzing around your post.

The khnet article is excellent, and he is seriously mis-repping it. Coming in here to see what women think is one thing, I'm guilty of curiously sticking my nose in, too. But he's been stomping up and down the thread ever since, when one o.p. from him would let him expend his energy and get his viewpoint out in a more positive way. Which is what you did.

I suppose I understand why you don't hit ignore, because he'd still be posting merrily away with gross misreps on the issues, and his incorrect perceptions would be the final word. So cocksure he's right, and has been wronged. If I ever, in the past, cross posted with a DU radical feminist, it was on tangential pro-Dem issues where we could attack 1% repug moves together, and I never knew I was sharing the space with a self-identified radical fem, most times I didn't know the poster's gender. He's looking like a 'men's rights' 'activist', who seeks out Women-specific issue posts, like a moth to a flame. Using the DU rules like a lawyer to fight his good fight, against the oppression that all men are suffering under. Har har. Harking back to dipshit Ken Kesey's 'medical matriarchy' conspiracy vs. the Jack Nicholson character. "We want the world series, Nurse Ratched. We voted on it."

DU could use a caucus option, and I pointed that out a long time ago. The site programmers know a lot more about computing and design than I do, so I have no idea how much difficult work they already put in, to make this site as it stands. But it seems like, if you and others are in agreement about something, you should be able to call a caucus to discuss it, without having to deal with someone, who clearly disagrees, hijacking the 'meeting of minds'. The result of the caucus could then be o posted as an open thread.

That way, nobody could use 'the rules' like a lawyer to thread stalk, just looking for an argument, and trying to derail other DUers thoughts, instead of building their own thought train.

[hlthe2b]

413. Refreshing to see your posts....

I'll just leave it there. (but more progressive men should be taking on what I believe to be minority views that very strongly smack of misogyny or even overt female contempt. I'm reassured when I see someone doing so and doing so so well).

[Mc Mike]

424. Thanks a lot, hl.

Last edited Sat May 5, 2012, 05:40 AM - Edit history (1)

I agree with your 'minority view' assessment. The opposite side seems to be ape-ing repug tactics, here. A small vocal minority that's wrong, about everything, at the top of their lungs. If the OP was such a non-issue idea that was beneath contempt, why bother to look at it, or come in here? There are thousands of other OP fishes, in the DU sea.

On edit, due to uneccesary seeming snakiness on my part, added:

I told D a bunch of places where I agreed with him, so if he's 'wrong about everything', that makes me a hypocrite or liar. I agreed with him about the wrongness of what he perceived as attacks from DU Women's issues posters. Red and sea provided links and info that disproved his perceptions, so I was really agreeing with his hypothetical list of possible wrong things that someone could say. I just don't agree with his perceptions of reality.

He probably doesn't want me to anyway, since he later assessed me as 'nuts', and who wants a crazy person to confirm their perceptions? That would be bad for his self-esteem, mental health-wise.

[DutchLiberal]

369. "All black men are potential violent gang members"; "All muslims are potential terrorists"

How are those comments any different than what you wrote here?

the all men are potential rapist came from a comment (i forget who) that when a woman dates a man, sees a man on the street, she does not know he is not a rapist. from a womans point of view, all men are potential rapists, until they are not.

I see no difference. You're using the exact same 'logic' and reasoning.

Only difference is you can get away with your notorious men-bashing on DU, whereas if you had said the same thing about African-Americans or muslims, you would've been PPR'ed a long time ago. (And rightly so, because we allow no racism and bigotry on DU, for good reasons.)

[polly7]

372. I agree, and I'm so sick of seeing this here. nt.

[zappaman]

373. No kidding

"all men are potential rapists"?
Disgusting.

[DutchLiberal]

375. How DARE you belittle a woman's point of view?

Must be because you were raised in a rape culture! Your opinion clearly is the result of the pornofication of society!

By the way, the fact that I am replying all throughout this thread is called "running through the thread like my hair is on fire", "trying to tell women how to feel". When seabeyond does exactly the same, replying all throughout this thread, telling women they *should* feel offended when they're not, is all about "educating" and "making people aware".

But I can't whine about a double standard, because I've had "male privilege" all my life.

[DutchLiberal]

374. You should go to the History of Feminist group if you want to get really sick.

I just came from there.

You know what I learned there?

That as a man, I am brought up in a "rape culture" in which I was being "taught" from a very young age by "the patriarchy" that I should "see all women as whores". Apparently, because I'm a man, what I really mean when I'm giving a woman a compliment about the way she looks, is that I want to "reduce her to her fuckability". As a man, I'm "a potential rapist" to all women. I can't see women as real people because I'm "conditioned" to see them as "objects". That doesn't only go for me, but for all men, everywhere. That isn't misandry, mind you, because "misandry is bullshit"; it doesn't exist. You, a woman, "have very little idea of how much men hate women". But that's because this isn't a progressive board, but a "BROgressive board", where "sexist/misogynist crap freely flies by on a regular basis".

Oh, and then they all laughed with their little clique that I apparently had been under investigation of MIR, "as he should be". And no, they didn't see the massive hypocrisy.

But really, I shouldn't whine about this. After all, I have had my self-confidence "handed to me on a silver platter" by "the patriarchy".

[zappaman]

376. You ventured into that den of nastiness?

You got balls, man!

[DutchLiberal]

377. I don't think saying "balls" when you mean "courage" is appropriate on DU3 anymore.

Somebody might get their knickers in a twist over it.

^ Is that still allowed?

[polly7]

380. Nah ..... I don't go there.

The 'rape culture' .... hey, I learned too from probably the same posters months ago that date rape was somehow different ..... not as bad as other rape ya know. Cause boys are conditioned and ... well, how are they supposed to know what's right and what isn't?? it's not really their fault ....... it's society's for all that porn and sexism they're force fed. How f'ed up is that? As someone who's been in that situation, I haven't found myself caring much at all to 'learn' anything more. I trust that I'll know sexism when I see it ..... and being called 'girl' isn't something I'll lose a second of sleep over.

And I have seen how many men here are treated like crap for pointing out the obvious, that context is everything. It's really starting to bother me, it's belittling and bullying and I don't know why it's allowed to go on.

[DutchLiberal]

389. Yeah, you'd think that by now, The Patriarchy would have all feminists banned from this website!

Their posts must have gone unnoticed by The Patriarchy. Ugh, they're getting sloppy lately.

[FedUpWithIt All]

427. + + + + n/t

[redqueen]

387. You agree?

Do you know what Schrödinger’s Rapist is?

[DutchLiberal]

396. She wasn't replying to that. She was replying to a female DU'er calling all men rapists.

And just because that girl on DU didn't make it up herself, doesn't make it any less disgusting. Just like it wouldn't be any less disturbing to spread racist stuff on DU just because someone else wrote it.* If you'd say "all women are potential whores" you'd get PPR'ed faster than you could say 'patriarchy'!


*And yes, I once foolishly used a term that I shouldn't have and got my post rightly hidden for it; and no, I didn't know at the time the term was invented by Rush Limbaugh, because I learned the term at DU2 from another liberal and no, I didn't use it in the same way Limbaugh apparently used/uses it. I learned from wikipedia what it really meant/means and I've never used it since, nor will I ever use it again.

[redqueen]

386. Ahem.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/crommunist/2012/01/16/shuffling-feet-a-black-mans-view-on-schroedingers-rapist/

[DutchLiberal]

388. Either for ONCE, address what I write instead of spamming links or else don't bother me anymore.

I'm not gonna wade through an entire blog of a random person on the internet.

I asked seabeyond how saying "all men are potential rapists" is different from saying "all muslims are potential terrorists". Now, I know you two search all of DU all day long to see if the other wasn't criticized somewhere, so you can jump on it and back the other, no matter what she said... and you certainly have every right to do so... BUT! maybe it would be nice, for a change, to let the person whom I actually ADDRESSED answer, or else to deliver a substantial contribution yourself. Not spamming insignificant blogs from random persons.

[redqueen]

390. I read that months ago, as did most other feminists, when it was being discussed.

And I'm quite sure that just as I have explained the whole 'sociological concept of a minority' thing to you before to no avail, I've explained this as well. We discussed it at the time, when I first read it.

This time I'm unwilling to expend as much effort. It's a reasonable decision to make.

[DutchLiberal]

397. We have never discussed that before and I was never in a discussion about "all men are rapists"...

I just read some girl on DU saying it.

Doesn't make a bit of difference, though, it's still inappropriate, vile, disgusting, harmful, malicious, offensive, over-the-top, ridiculous and mean.

[Mc Mike]

414. Another excellent and interesting post, along with the Schroedinger's post.

Thanks. To you, C rom, (and physio for the update at the end of the link.)

"They (we) can rail against the hypocrisy of claiming to be anti-sexist whilst engaging in sex-based prejudicial behaviour, or we can recognize that if we want to be accommodating to women we have to make some adjustments to how we behave. It comes back to the central question: do we want women to be more comfortable? If not, then we should say so explicitly – “we don’t care about your comfort, toots! Nut up or shut up!” On the other hand, if we do care, then we can’t simply maintain the status quo of behaviour and berate women for being afraid of rape. That doesn’t solve any problems."

I'm afraid the dutchman is too busy sticking fingers in his ears and humming, when presented with ideas he disagrees with, to absorb or address any of your right on viewpoints. It's ironic that he does so while also being very busy making umpteen posts that demand you address his ideas. He's feeling very 'entitled'.

[redqueen]

416. Comradde PhysioProffe is great

on feminist issues and many others.

[Mc Mike]

420. First time I've seen the site.

Are they classical Free Thinkers, like Vonnegut's fore-bearers?

Anything YOU want to post as a link, I will be more than happy to read. You haven't let me down, yet.

[seabeyond]

421. "feeling very 'entitled'." taht would about sum it up and a wonderful learning example

for people that dont quite get the whole entitlement thing....

[Mc Mike]

425. I tried a few of those here, to see what would bounce back.

'Patronizing' prostitutes, and regal 'condescension'. Figures you'd pick up the idea. Maybe some others did, and didn't mention it.

Might as well try to have some creative fun, while we're in the trenches here.

[DutchLiberal]

203. The story of a brave, strong young woman standing up to influential powerful men:

The film tells the story of Lawrence (Bill Nighy), a civil servant working for the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Ken Stott), who falls in love with Gina (Kelly Macdonald), a young woman whom he meets by chance in a London café. Lawrence takes Gina to a G8 summit in Reykjavík, Iceland, where she confronts the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (Corin Redgrave) over the issue of third world debt and poverty in Africa, much to Lawrence's embarrassment and the anger of his employers. However, he realizes that she is right and tries to help persuade the Chancellor and others at the summit to do something about the issues concerned.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443518/

It's one of my all-time favorite films! I bet every feminist would LOVE this movie and its protagonist for her courage, for standing up against the men who ridicule and belittle her.

But... uh-oh... look at that title! "The GIRL in the Café"!

Clearly this is the work of a misogynist asshole whose intention it was to devalue and belittle women!

[flvegan]

209. So...what are you girls talking about in here?

[bluesbassman]

213. You got stones Brother.

[seabeyond]

216. not really. just his MO. nt

[redqueen]

223. Yep.

[seabeyond]

225. lol

[DutchLiberal]

228. roflmao

[PassingFair]

210. After much consideration, the only place where the use of the words "girl" or "girls" bothers me...

Is in the workplace.

It is clearly inappropriate to refer to co-workers, bosses,
underlings, interns, CEO's or what EVER as boys or girls.

Usage in phrases such as "girls night out" doesn't bother me.

[babylonsister]

221. Just don't call me late for dinner.

Doesn't bother me at all. Call me dear, sweetie, hon, etc., doesn't bother me.

What DOES bother me is ma'am. That's a sign of respect in the south but makes me feel old. I 'get' it, but that is how I feel.

[LeftyMom]

222. In context, it's usually pretty obvious if the intent is informality or insult.

When in doubt substitute boys and see if the result is offensive or strange.

[flvegan]

255. You GO, girl!

Whoops.

Sorry.

[LeftyMom]

263. Was that part of your MO too?

[seabeyond]

267. high five woman.....

[LeftyMom]

269. I don't need a high five for joking with my boyfriend. But thanks. Or something.

[seabeyond]

271. you are welcome.

[DutchLiberal]

226. I've got sunshine, on a cloudy day...

I've got sunshine on a cloudy day.
When it's cold outside I've got the month of May.
I guess you'd say
What can make me feel this way?
My girl (my girl, my girl)
Talkin' 'bout my girl (my girl).

"Hey, turn that off! I don't want to hear that demeaning crap in my house!"
- "Oh, okay! Allright if I turn on Van Morrisson?"
"That's better!"

Hey where did we go,
Days when the rains came
Down in the hollow,
Playin' a new game,
Laughing and a running hey, hey
Skipping and a jumping
In the misty morning fog with
Our hearts a thumpin' and you
My brown eyed girl,
You my brown eyed girl.

"What did I just say?! Turn off that misogynyst drivel! It's belittling and condescending!"
- "Okay, okay! What about a little Bob Dylan?"
"Now you're talking!"

Our conversation was short and sweet
It nearly swept me off-a my feet
And I’m back in the rain, oh, oh
And you are on dry land
You made it there somehow
You’re a big girl now

"Are you kidding me?"
- "Okay, let's try Bruce Springsteen."
"A real champion of the people. I remember seeing him campaign for Obama. Surely I'm not gonna be upset by him"

Beyond the palace hemi-powered drones scream down the boulevard
The girls comb their hair in rearview mirrors
And the boys try to look so hard

[Mc Mike]

426. The Dutchman's not the kind of man..

to keep his thumb
jammed in the dam
that holds his dreams in.

But that's his secret
only Margaret knows...

He's mad as he can be
but Margaret only sees sometimes
sometimes she sees
her unborn children
in his eyes.

Let us go to the banks of the ocean
where the walls rise above zuyder zee.
Long ago, I used to be a young man
And dear Margaret remembers that for me.

-- Makem and Clancy

[Rowdyboy]

227. A fascinating thread...I would never use the term to anyone over 14 but I'm a man....Were I female,

I probablt would find it okay for my peers and inappropriate coming from men.

Thanks for an excellent read

[Bruce Wayne]

230. Is it sexist for me to say I'm broadminded?

[Odin2005]

239. Should I be outraged that us guys get jokingly called "The Boys"?

[varelse]

249. A lot depends on context

but I don't like it much when men refer to grown women as 'girls'. There's a kind of grey area with women in their late teens/early 20's but past that point, yes, it bugs me.

[jillan]

250. Just don't call me "ma'am" I hate that.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

256. I feel the same way with "sir"

Feel sooooooooo old. I don't look old......

[LeftyMom]

272. My dad turns around and looks for his father when anybody says Mr. His Last Name.

He's in his sixties and his father's been dead twenty years. But it's hard to adjust to thinking of yourself as a respected adult at any age.

[BeHereNow]

283. AS IF this was an actual problem????

WTF?
Compared to the REAL problems on this planet, why is this even
worthy of debate or discussion?

PASS, other than to express my disgust at the continued decline of discussion topics on DU of what MATTERS.

I mean REALLY?

No wonder so many other countries think Americans are self absorbed, delusional IDIOTS.

BHN

[redqueen]

285. Ah yes, one of the most common responses when feminists attempt to discuss

stuff is the pettiness / triviality / but what about x type response.

I trust you post that same comment in all of the other threads here which don't meet your personal standard of importance. No?

Anyway just be secure in the knowledge that you're not alone in thinking women shouldnt talk about certain things which you'd rather not bother yourself considering.

Thanks for stopping by!

[BeHereNow]

297. Redqueen, HERE is an actual problem, wanna come with some of us to make a difference?

http://www.re-member.org/

I want to organize a group of DUers to go, in memory of Medical Admins tremendous
contributions to other people- we have them, right in our back yard on the Pine Ridge Rez.
Poverty that you can not imagine.
My daughter went two summers ago and could not believe she was in the US of A.

Join us.
Then we can discuss some real problems.

BHN

[Mc Mike]

419. I've never been to Pine Ridge, but have been to Rosebud and the Black Hills

My wife and I recently turned out to Lewisburg to support Peltier, before the BOP transferred him. And also supported Mean's Wind Cave Sun Dance vs. Interior Dept. skulduggery. You're right, the rezzes have the highest poverty and crime rate in the country, more than even the worst inner-city settings. The housing projects east of Rapid are pretty bad, too.

But half of the people on the reservations are women, and subject to the same attacks on women that the repugs are currently engaging in nationwide. Maybe ask the Means women what they think about gender politics while you're there. The scandal of involuntary sterilization of native women by the IHS (during the Reagan admin) probably didn't escape your notice, and it was mirrored by similar scandals at the same time in inner-city clinics in the US and Puerto Rico. And by the Apartheid gov in S. Africa.

"Girl" vs. "Woman" isn't the heart of the problem, but t.v. ultrasounds are, attacks on abortion and contraception are, and rapes are. Nobody wants to win the first place prize for victimhood, here. "Girl" is just like the repug ad in the last South Dakota election cycle that called Natives 'Dogs', and compared them to prairie dogs. I've heard the phrase 'prairie n ers' used by hostile whites in the region. The ones who were using it were getting free grazing rights from the gov, on land that is still 'owned' by the natives through Red Cloud's treaty. The point is that there are many opportunities to do something to help people who are under attack by nazi 1% interests. We can all be allies fighting on different fronts. I wish you would take Dutch with you to the rez. Maybe it would keep him occupied enough so he'd stop posting on this thread.

Racism and disinfranchisement against Native Americans is a real problem. I imagine that the repugs anti-women moves are just doubling the burden on Native Women, but I'm just a white boy in PA. I hope you have much success helping the people on Pine Ridge. And thank you for your good work and efforts.

[hifiguy]

428. +1

Compared to earth-threatening problems like disease, poverty and climate change, this is worrying about the arrangement of deck chairs on the deck of the Titanic.

[seabeyond]

429. yes. womens issues are often put on the backburner, until they arent. like repug

war against women. wait.... there is still "disease, poverty and climate change". we really dont have the need to address womens issues.... yet.

thanks dude.

[hifiguy]

430. If pandemics, natural disasters or climate change

make the planet uninhabitable, or kill a few hundred million people perhaps you will see my point but few will be around to appreciate it. Those issues affect every single human being on this godforsaken mudball. But I don't expect you to acknowledge the validity of that deadly serious point.

And, FWIW, I have been pro-choice, pro-equal pay, pro-ERA, pro gay rights my entire adult life. The Repukes' war on women is disgusting, inexcusable and nauseatingly retrograde and should be denounced by everyone who gives a damn about human rights in this country. Those are real issues that need attention each and every day. Hunting for semantic needles in a haystack is, in the greater scheme of things, a waste of time and intellectual masturbation.

[seabeyond]

431. again, man, good of you to let us women know what we should be concerned with

and what is a waste of our time.

[a la izquierda]

284. It really depends on the circumstances.

I refer to my female (college) students as ladies, when talking about them to others. Example: "The ladies with whom I just spoke asked the same kinds of questions."
My friends are my girls or girlfriends, and we all range from our late 20s to our late 40s. My grandpa calls me his girl, and he's 85 so I don't care.

If a man I didn't know called me a girl, I'd be pissed. But if a man I was good friends with called me girl, it would totally depend on the context. Another example: My friends from Mexico and Spain call me "Chica." I'm okay with this. I'd feel a little weird if they called me "mujer."

[Seeking Serenity]

287. I have found this to be a (mostly) very interesting discussion

I opted to "pass" because I didn't find an answer that best described what I think about it. But I agree with several of the posters above that it's CONTEXT that determines a word's offensiveness. I will not put a blanket rule down that a word is or should be considered by everyone to be offensive all the time under all circumstances. If my husband/male friends/girlfriends call me "girl" or "baby" or whatever, I'm usually cool with it (meaning, I didn't even stop to think whether I should be offended), unless it was clear that it was meant to be dismissive, and usually even then it may be in the course of an argument or animated discussion, at which I'll let it slide even then. I'm not beneath calling my husband "sweetcheeks" or some such, either in playfulness or otherwise. If I say something that, in context, offends him, I'll apologize, as will he. And then we move on.

As far as when others do it, people I don't know, I don't know. Depends on the situation. I live in the South, so I am well accustomed to waitresses (oops, was that demeaning?) calling me "honey," or "sugar" or whatever. That's just normal for here. I never give it a second thought. But if someone I didn't know, male or female, said similar things in a different milieu, I might take offense depending on how it was said and the context.

This is way too subtle for a hard-and-fast rule that all should obey. But then, I'm not always on the lookout for things I should be offended about. I kinda take the Potter Stewart approach (paraphrasing): I may not know how to define what's offensive and what's not, but I know it when I see (hear) it. I realize that's not very helpful.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

293. I'm reminded of the time Lynette Fromm (attempted assassin of Gerald Ford)

was on the cover of Time or Newsweek with the caption, "The Girl Who Tried to Kill the President."

At the time, she was 27 years old.

Someone wrote in, noted that Lee Harvey Oswald was only 24 at the time of Kennedy's assassination, and asked, "Would you have referred to him as 'The Boy Who Killed the President'?"

[seabeyond]

294. interesting.... isnt it?

in the whole sociological and psychological/behavioral aspect of this, i find it interesting.

maybe i can find a study on it or something.

but true this. this exactly says it.

[DutchLiberal]

305. Yeah, interesting that somebody was upset by the 'belittling' of an assassin.

That poor baby.

[seabeyond]

308. 123 certainly is more than THREE people, right? 123 out of 158. seems to me

like that is well over three people.

i guess that makes you

wrong.

[DutchLiberal]

311. So you're actually standing up for an assassin?

Yeah, it was awful that a person who tried to kill the president was belittled.

But hey, she was a woman, I guess that makes it allright in your book. It probably wasn't her fault anyway. Must've been that darn patriarchy!

Keep fighting the good fights, lol!

[seabeyond]

312. it is good to see you finally admit calling a woman a girl is belittling. i knew you would come to

your sense.

good job.

123 people do not make 3. you can say it... you were wrong. that easy.

[DutchLiberal]

313. ... and then she says MEN are condescending toward others!

[seabeyond]

314. you go in every direction, yet still.... you refuse to own up to a couple simple words. wrong.

you. were. wrong.

that simple.

yet, you talk about everything but what is being said.

try it. not hard. really. wrong. that simple.

[DutchLiberal]

315. And this is the SECOND flame-fest you instigated that you may continue all by yourself!

Congratulations! You're making friends left and right!

Maybe you could talk some more about the terrible oppression of female assassins whom you seem to love so much, while I'm gone.

Just a suggestion.

Or studying spelling and grammer.

Buh-bye! And remember your no. 1 rule: you're right... because you say so.

[seabeyond]

316. why wont you simply acknowledge there are more than three people in all of du that disagree with you

why is it so very very hard for you to acknowledge you are wrong?

[DutchLiberal]

360. Dutch tv news today referred to a 27 year old assassin as "the boy".

I have yet to see anyone stepping forward to say he shouldn't be belittled that way.

My choice of words would've been "despicable asshole", but maybe that's just me.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

371. Well, that's Dutch

We're talking about English, and the word "boy" used to describe an adult man has a history here in the States, in which an African-American male could never be called a "man," no matter how old he was. He was always referred to as a "boy."

[Nikia]

296. I switched to using "women" in college

Everyone used "women". It was important to assert our equality to men and assert our adult status. After graduation, I was a little disturbed that some men used "girls" at work especially when referring to women their age or older. I thought that this was dismissive and suggesting that female workers were less important or doing less important work. Aside from this language, I have found that most men who use "girls" in a professional context are sexist in general.
Now that I am in my thirties, though, I occaisionally find myself find myself referring to younger coworkers as "boys" and "girls" when I talk about them, although not to their face. My meaning is that they are significantly younger than me and relatively inexperienced. Since I think that it would be disrespectful to refer to them this way to their face, maybe I shouldn't talk about them this way to other people, even those that don't personally know them, in this manner.

[Luminous Animal]

352. I find that using the terms young men and young women acknowledges the professional

context while being clear that they are younger than you.

[seabeyond]

353. that is what i chose. nt

[Luminous Animal]

355. A friend of mine referred to my 22 year old daughter as a "girl" and in the same sentence,

called her boyfriend a young man. As in, "Your daughter is a wonderful girl and her boyfriend is one smart young man."

[ZombieHorde]

301. I am a guy, so I did not vote.

I used to call women "girls" without any thought, but this last year or two (I'm terrible with time) I have been making an effort to call adult human females "women" and minor human females "girls."

I started to do this after saw a quick blurb on TV. It was a woman mentioning the fact those titty videos advertised on TV are called "Girls Gone Wild," as opposed to "Women Gone Wild." I did not care at first, and I did not watch the rest of the news show, but it stuck with me for some reason. I started to think about it more and more. Then I finally realized calling women "girls" didn't really match my beliefs. My words and my feelings were not aligned very well, so I made the switch.

[seabeyond]

302. (I'm terrible with time) me too me too. and the more i dont care

the worse it gets.

isnt it interesting though, what happens, making the conscious decision to switch. it has been interesting for me, anyway. now i hear girls and i visualize a girl. not an either or......

[Rex]

309. Interesting poll.

nt.

[Beacool]

317. I don't have a problem with the term "girl" as long as it's being used by other women.

I greet friends all the time with "Hi, girls". I can say that because I'm a woman. I don't think that I would appreciate it if some man who I didn't know well, or knew him only in a professional setting, called me a girl.

[Vinca]

324. The use of this term drives me crazy.

I go ballistic when a man refers to his secretary as "my girl." Never heard a male secretary referred to as "my boy."

[TBF]

327. Same - it really annoys me. A subtle way of putting down women

and I dislike when women do it as well. Perpetuating that stereotype that adult women need to be taken care of ...

[FedUpWithIt All]

332. There are more user names with "girl" in them in the offensive option.

I found that interesting. I, personally, don't have an issue with this in the slightest. I just can't even muster up the rage because in the grand scheme, there are too many other issues i find damaging to women socially.

Sorry if this upsets but it is the truth of my perspective.

[redqueen]

333. In group use is vastly different.

The same applies, of course, to using the term about oneself.

Recognizing the way its used in publications, by strangers, etc does not require "rage", just an understanding of the power of language.

[FedUpWithIt All]

334. What you are saying does not bear out in this thread.

There is a post, right here, telling of a situation where a woman referred to herself as a girl and was corrected by the poster.

I personally would have found THAT highly offensive.

The issue with debates like this is that each person holds their own standard. There are so many women on DU, perhaps even most women, who do not speak for me. They do not speak to my personal morals, lifestyle, preferences...and yet this number are frequently on hand to tell the "nets" exactly what women think, want and are offended by, without any apparent self knowledge of their own Chauvanism. I think that behavior is offensive. I do not wish to be grouped, because of my gender, at all, especially by people who hide this behavior beneath the heading of defending social rights and freedoms.

[polly7]

342. I am SO with you on this. +1000! nt.

[redqueen]

343. All about the individual. Society? pff. And apparently 'words have meaning' ONLY

if they're not being challenged by feminists.

Then they magically don't matter.

So very interesting how that works.

[FedUpWithIt All]

351. Angry? I thought this wasn't about rage.

I am not permitted to think for myself because it may counter YOUR ideas of what it means to be a powerful woman?

Words do matter. But i believe actions matter more. Any group, saying that it wants to reduce limitations and while frantically trying to impose "approved" limitations simply doesn't work for me. It is nothing but more of the same, just dressed differently.


Words are rarely a true indicator of a person's real feelings. I would rather know a person's true intent. Social pressures, which too often impose a type of conformity, at least as far as words are concerned, serve only to mask the true diversity of individual feeling. When this happens, not only is true growth lost, diversity becomes a liability. No thank you.

[redqueen]

354. LOL, hardly.

This crap is far too common to get angry about.

No idea what you're talking about as far as limitations go. I am addressing one of the ways that society is conditioned to remain a patriarchy, that's all.

[FedUpWithIt All]

356. I'm not interested in the attemps to switch out "their conditioning" for "your conditioning"

Just because group cannot see it's own chauvinism doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[DutchLiberal]

370. What do you think of another woman telling you that you are "conditioned" & thus should be educated?

I find it condescending and patronizing. I think it's like saying: "you're not capable of thinking for yourself" and "your opinions and ideas are not really yours", BUT! if you listen to US and get 'educated', THEN you'll finally be able to think for yourself.

I would like to hear your perspective, as a woman.

[FedUpWithIt All]

418. Apparently i find it offensive. I also find much of what you post offensive.

Granted, i've only seen a handful of your posts but in them I have seen you lump men, their preferences and opinions, just the same as some are attempting to do to women here. I believe you said anyone, who did not admit to feeling the way you said they must, was being disingenuous.

I find it disturbing that people are still fighting these battles at all. It should be clear by now, that women, and men, are capable of determining for themselves, as individuals, what they believe, think, feel, like, dream, desire...

[noiretextatique]

446. why can't people grasp the difference between intragroup usage

and intergroup usage? i mean really...it is the same with the n word and other words that may be considered slurs or insults if someone outside of the group uses it. it is really pretty fng simple.
i am a lesbian. i have gay male friends who might call me girl, and i would not be offended. i have female friends who call me girl...i am not offended. if my male supervisor calls me a girl at work, i would probably be offended. it really is not rocket science, is it?
who owns language? the dominant group used to own it, but not any longer. words like privilege, entitlement, etc. come to mind. remember the "angry white man?" when i run into him on the internet, he usually has a gripe about "pc police," etc. the real issue is just having respect for people, and having and using common fng sense. some people feel entitled to be disrespectful to others.

[redqueen]

447. No, it is very simple, you're right.

I have no idea why the concept is apparently a difficult one for some people to grasp.

[lumberjack_jeff]

415. Exactly.

"How dare you call me a lumberjack!!!"

[noamnety]

338. Language is how we communicate ideas

So yes, of course it matters.

[redqueen]

339. It seems very simple,

doesn't it.

[Lizzie Poppet]

346. For me, it's context-driven and situational.

In some situations, I don't find the usage offensive. Those situations usually involve a woman using the term, but even that is subject to situational context. There are no hard-and-fast rules for determining speaker intent.

I selected "Pass" on the poll: none of the options really reflected my view, although the second one came closest.

[Waiting For Everyman]

349. "Taking offense" at anything is something I don't care about and don't do.

What anyone says or thinks about me has no effect on my value as a person whatsoever. It doesn't diminish me, or elevate me. The opinion of me that matters is mine, and no one can change that but me. If someone looks down on me then that tells me they have very bad taste and are clueless, and clueless people with bad taste bore me to distraction, so it all works out fine. I have zero interest in critiquing people, and I don't think very highly of those who do. It tells me a lot about a person.

What matters to me is getting to what people are trying to say, not how they say it. People can be lousy at the "how" and be great at the "what". Or vice versa. The "what" is the gift, the "how" is the wrapping. I'll take a diamond in a paper bag over a pile of shit in an beautiful box any day.

What passes for values today is such a joke. Sad, really. But there is poetic justice - people who insist on garbage thinking have that to live with then. They may make other people who listen to it miserable but they are miserable too, so how smart is that? I detour far around dopes who can't figure that much out, so their words and opinions? Left in the dust at a distance.

[nadinbrzezinski]

363. Goes without saying, the only ones who should be referred as girls, are well

girls. The same goes for boys.

Once they become teens, that term should be dropped for both genders.

[Quixote1818]

378. I usually use the term "women" but always feel like I am making them feel old when I do that

Don't know why but using the term "woman" just seems like not carding someone to me and calling them a "girl" seems like I am suggesting they are young and energetic. However, when I see a woman who looks quite old then it just doesn't feel right calling them a 'girl".

An old roommate who was in her 30's would always say "I met a boy" when dating and I thought it was cute.

[seabeyond]

393. "I met a boy"

i saw that above, and ya.... i get the cute.

you are the first to say it feels like you are calling a woman old, using the term woman. " "girl" seems like I am suggesting they are young and energetic." i think that is what it is about and why we do it. i dont think most of it is to be condescending, though i am aware of that tactic, too. a person can feel the difference.

but i think most of us use girl instead of woman because of the pressure of women being young.

that is the reason i felt the need to take ownership of woman (i know you really dont care about this shit, lol, but whatevah, ) so we can be adult and not be anymore concerned with aging than man. we are allowed. better be allowed. cause the alternative is ugly costly plastic surgery or death. i will take the embracing old....

but, i am surprised how many wont say it is the reason we do it, and truth does NOT hurt. so yea you for saying it.

[Quixote1818]

379. Blame it on the movie Oklahoma. ;)

[Major Nikon]

392. Here's the t-shirt and the hat

[seabeyond]

395. yes... tell me, why do you want to interfer with women discussing their feelings on an issue

that concerns them? it feels like you are suggesting maybe women should not be able to discuss this.

[DutchLiberal]

398. Well, a woman in this thread was told by a feminist that "she had serious self-respect issues"

because she didn't agree that 'girl' was offensive.

So... why was nobody criticizing that feminist? Instead, that feminist who was belittling that woman got patted on the back from your friends. Why? Is belittling a woman only offensive when a man does it?

[seabeyond]

400. and a 139 women on this thread have said it is offensive when a man uses girl to be condescending

and look at the immature little game you are now playing in this thread with total disregard for all 139 of these women. not three. but 139.

[FedUpWithIt All]

417. And you seem to be missing that over 40 women polled that it was NOT offensive

Do we all have self-worth issues because we don't go along with the majority? There are a few women here who would like to see all women in a hive mind lock step. Apparently they feel they are entitled, by what right i wonder, to tell other women what is "acceptable" and i find that no different than male chauvinism.

How dare women insult other women for exercising their freedom of thought and opinion. Shameful hypocrisy.

[redqueen]

422. Is there more than one person referring to self worth?

I'm on my phone and this thread is huge, but I only saw one person say that, and I responded and she agreed with my response. Please let me know if I missed another comment lime that because it needs to be addressed.

[Mc Mike]

435. Last intrusion from me, red:

I'll come back and reply to anyone who addresses me, though.

I read all your sig-tag-line links. Interesting to read, thanks.

Since I heard the theory that I was a reincarnated t.s.-ed Women's Rights radical, could you point to any possible member 'handles' that I might be suspected of being? I wouldn't mind using site search, to see their past posts. This request is not meant as an indictment of DU mods, but I'd like to see the writings of a 'radical' woman who matches my persona ('conspiracy theorist') and my idiosyncratic methods of post.

[redqueen]

436. There's not one. That DUer got lucky once

but he also thinks several of us who disagree with his views are all sock puppets.

That way instead of pretending there's just a tiny tiny minority of women on DU who think porn and prostitution contribute to maintaining this rape culture we live in, he could pretend there's actually only one.

Why it doesn't bother him to consider that many other women who also agree with us have left this site in disgust at the rampant sexism is beyond me.

[Mc Mike]

437. The Women's rights post-ers that remain are doing plenty of good posting, though.

So I don't need to look up former members.

Your link on 'a few lite thoughts' gave me something I was blindly over looking, in my own prostitution views. I was considering the white and black women prostitutes in this area, and even the top-scale ones that operate out of the boutique mall by our city's riverboats. I completely over-looked the migrant prostitutes, and there have been a plethora of asian massage parlors springing up around here, in the last few years. The fact that 75% of the legal sex-workers in the Netherlands are migrants, and not native Dutch nationals, bears out the pay-for-rape idea. The 25% are low-income Dutch women being 'occupied' by the European 1%.

[seabeyond]

423. of course i dont forget the 40 or so women that do not have an issue at all with girls.

i wonder if those women have experienced it in a male work force that was meant to belittle or diminish them. if in some way they got it across that it was bullshit. and feeling that they dealt with it, it really does not effect them. though, if they did handle it, then voting it doesnt bother them would not be exactly correct. they recognized and dealt with. BUT... that being said, whatever, truly. it is theirs to live, figure out, think and do. i dont believe you will find me making those comments to women, though i have not perused all my posts on this thread.

THAT being said, ..... my reply to dutch had nothing to do with those women. why would i bring them into the equation. my post to dutch was specifically about the women that posted that in some manners they found it offensive. that would be the reasoning for using that number and not the 40 women that dont care. because, it was not a part of the subject that i was addressing. specifically him saying that only three women on all of du has an issue with being called girl, and no other woman has an issue.

why would i include the 40 women that dont have issue? that is not the subject. and that is not dismissing the 40 women. if we were saying ALL women had issue, and i left out the 40, then you would have something to call me out with.

really fed.... i am not in battle with this with women. i understand we have differing view. i find the differing views more interesting than the bottomline. and i find the reasons we do this way more interesting than the numbers offended and not.

edit to add... edit again.... i went back and re read, not exactly what she said

[Major Nikon]

401. Why do you want to tell men to just shut up?

Hyperbole can be used both ways.

[seabeyond]

402. i asked you a question. that would be the opposite of asking you to "shut up". so no....

it does not work both ways. yours was hyperbole. mine was not.

[Major Nikon]

404. You asked me why don't I just shut up

The difference was I knew my statement was hyperbole and you apparently have a difficult time understanding why yours wasn't. In reality I was being pretty generous with your 'question' by calling it hyperbole. It was actually more closely associated with a particular byproduct produced by a certain male bovine.

You asked me, "yes... tell me, why do you want to interfer(sic) with women discussing their feelings on an issue that concerns them? it feels like you are suggesting maybe women should not be able to discuss this."

So if I chose to answer your obviously loaded question, regardless of my answer, I would be admitting my intention was to interfere with the discussion when nothing is farther from the truth. Sorry, I don't fall for cheap rhetorical parlor tricks as much as you wish I would. I did fully anticipate your response would be something along those lines as your false accusations of people trying to "shut you up" anytime someone disagrees with you is now fully predictable. This was the not-so-subtle point I was making with my hyperbole which you might have noticed if you were more in tune with your own modus operandi.

To use your own logic, my original response was fully intended and indeed did serve the purpose of contributing to the discussion. How you can derive that someone expressing an opinion and participating in discussion (which last I checked was still allowed on DU), is somehow interfering with discussion is anyone's guess. Again this points to your obviously flawed conclusion that anyone who disagrees with you is somehow telling you to "shut up".

[seabeyond]

405. ah hahah. "I would be admitting my intention was to interfere " and by gosh, you certainly

cant own up to that. lol. yes, you would actually have to admit that your post was wanting women to shut up. no parlor tricks. an OP asking women for their opinion. you posting thought police.

false accusations of people trying to "shut you up" anytime someone disagrees with you is now fully predictable.

where was any kind of disagreeing with thought police? i didnt take it nearly so personal.

ahhh, now it was all that in manipulative chess moves ect... for a gotcha moment? bah hahahah

still... no where does it arrive at the conclusion that my asking you a question is doing the same as you, telling people NOT to express their opinion. unless it was a double dog dare twisty move in your chess game.

[Major Nikon]

406. Ya gotta love people who double down when they've been busted cold

After I accurately pointed out your old and tired BS tactic of claiming everyone is trying to shut you up, what do you do? You continue to claim I'm trying to shut you up. Fucking Brilliant!

Sorry, but you've used that tactic just a few too many times for it to be taken seriously anymore. You really should look for new methods, if nothing else just to keep from being boring. The entertainment value has its limits. If you like I'll provide links of examples of how many times you've pulled this, but hopefully you at least have a passing recollection of your own words. Otherwise I'm not going to participate in this pointless discussion any farther. If you want to continue to believe in the delusion that everyone is trying to "shut you up", be my guest. Just don't expect me not to call BS the next time you do it.

[seabeyond]

407. maybe if men wouldnt be so predictable at doing just that, you know, that old conditioning

shut them women up

then maybe i wouldnt have to call you on it so often. the words are there major. you cannot hide. even with your gainer and a half with a twist move. lol

night dude.... i am off.

[eShirl]

409. It's no more offensive than the term "ladies."

IOW, it's all in the context and inflection.

[deitzjim]

434. Spam deleted by OKNancy (MIR Team)

[Ter]

439. In a lot of ways, it's a compliment

Many love to be viewed as younger.

[redqueen]

449. It is only a compliment

because our messed up culture prizes youthfulness in women to such a disturbing extent.

So yes, if you internalize the message that younger women are better than older women, then it can indeed be intended as a sad sort of compliment.

[Bryn]

443. I remember many years ago a guy said this to me:

Most are girls
Many are ladies
So few are women

That was back in 1970's. I never did understand what he meant. He was a doctor whom I met at a fancy club.

[redqueen]

448. Sounds to me like he was criticizing women who internalized the patriarchy's values.

The P prefers that women strive to remain youthful, ladylike, etc.

I dismiss that type of criticism from men. Firstly because they have no idea what its like for girls growing up in the P. Secondly because their criticism should be aimed at the system which conditions girls to submit to the P's dictates.

[seabeyond]

451. true that, but that is an interesting point. the poster above saying a compliment

being viewed as younger. i have always rejected that because i have always enjoyed the age i was in. and that is especially true of my older years. i love it. having let go of so much of the crap. i like being a woman. no desire to be a lady or girl. but, back in the 70's, think what it was then. many women were treated as girls, expected to act like girls, were raised to believe they were to always be taken care of and were inept or whatever.

that is why so many are bothered being called girl. we have been able to embrace our woman. and those that cant.... well, ya know.

so that doctor really was all over it, wanting an adult.

it takes me back to conversation with 4 yr old niece. insisting i had to want to be a girl.

no, i am a woman.

but a girl too

no, i am a woman. lol

she couldnt get it.

[seabeyond]

452. btw, more and more men are getting into the poll voting they dont mind being called girl

isnt that sweet.....

[redqueen]

453. Sad, isn't it?

The lengths that some men will go to ...

[seabeyond]

454. wink. nt

[Rex]

455. 400 plus posts...let me wade into this epic poll thread.

Amazing what one question can bring about. I call a girl a girl if the term fits. I call a woman a woman if the term fits. I usually use a persons name instead of a term if I know them or of them.

What about the word, 'girlfriend'? Should not that be 'womanfriend' after a certain age?

How subjective do we want to get here?

[redqueen]

456. Since girlfriend has an analogous term for men,

I personally don't have a problem with it.

Due to the fact that it is balanced, it seems less problematic to me.

[Rex]

457. I have a huge problem with the word 'boy'.

I see you live in the same state as me and can probably figure out why.

Simply put, if I am talking about a 14 year old female and I don't know her name - she is a girl. If I am talking about a 34 year old female and I don't know her name - she is a woman. I would think everyone here would be that way. Seems like common sense to me.

Epic poll btw! The first epic poll!

Congrats!

[redqueen]

458. Oh yes, I definitely understand.

And it does seem like common sense, doesn't it?

Or as in the case of a man being good friends with some women who don't mind that he refers to them that way, that's all well and good, but that is between you and them, and using it to describe those women out in public would of course garner some raised eyebrows at the very least. Hateful glances or vocal outrage would be understandable completely.

[Rex]

459. I am sure you have

seen it firsthand, so have I. I've had more then one older male call me 'boy' as in 'come here you worthless piece of shit'. Amazing how the inflection and tone can make so much difference in the way a word is meant.

Just recently heard 'don't ignore me girl' used by a grown man in public toward his SO. Rude, crude and in the grocery store!

WTF!

[redqueen]

460. Those are very clear examples of when it is used

to 'put someone in their place'.

[Rex]

461. Yes very degrading and dehumanizing.

I feel for their victims.

[noiretextatique]

463. very revealing discussion

n racial america, black women were often referred to as "girls" or "gals" or some other demeaning bullshit, just as black men were called "boys." that's one of the many reasons i find referring to grown women as children insulting. and i am not talking about references in songs like "my girl," which is clearly not meant as an insult, or popular expressions, e.g., "you go girl." nor am i talking about how i address some of my female friends, especially when i have something to tell them: "girl...you will never guess what happened today." clearly i am using "girl" as a term of intimacy and endearment. i am talking about usage that is MEANT to be belittling and insulting. it surprises me that so many either don't get it or won't get it.

[redqueen]

464. If you start watching for this kind of stuff,

you will likely very soon cease finding it to be at all surprising, sadly.

[polly7]

465. I'm positive most adults are fully capable of knowing when a word is being used to insult

and when it isn't, why wouldn't we be able to 'get it' just as well as you state you do?

[noiretextatique]

469. clearly, many do not "get it" at all

and reserve the privilege for themselves to be insulting. probably much of this is emboldened by the impersonal nature of the internet, but some people really do seem to think they have the right to insult, and the right not to be called on being offensive. the excuse: "golden girls" or "my girl," or other distraction. same goes with race, as in the case with president obama. some people think it's perfectly okay to use racial slurs against him, and they are offended when someone calls them racists. "just because i use racial slurs..." the same applies to sexist language. and yeah...many do not get the problem with racist or sexist language, even some adults.

[spanone]

466. golden girls?

[Honeycombe8]

468. #1 Decades ago. #2 That's what they called themselves. nt

[MindMover]

467. Call me anything you like except late for dinner....