Misogynistic language....

[boston bean]

People who take a stand and speak out against it are not weak persons. They aren't cowering in some corner and covering their ears. Or to feign offense. In fact, the abuse one takes for doing so makes them brave and a hero.

Changing a culture is not an easy thing to do. Yes, it takes action, but it also takes a willingness to confront it where it is seen and not make excuses for it..

When misogynistic language is used it gives one an insight into mindset of the one using it. It is not just words. Words have meanings. We use words to state our meaning and opinions.

No woman I know likes to be called c*unt in a derogatory manner by anyone. That is just the plain truth. If you know one, well, I would suggest they are in the tiniest minority.

That word when used is an indicator of contempt for women by the one using it.

Make no mistake you are judged by your words, because they are what one uses to tell us they you are. That is why on an political internet message board you will see vociferous condemnation of its usage. Because we know each other by what we type. It's not to control others, or to be word police, it is actually combating a mindset that is all to prevalent and one that is harmful to women.

[cwydro]

1. Anyone who directs that word at anyone is just

juvenile. Not to mention low-class and in need of some vocabulary expansion lessons.

It's actually pathetic when someone uses it imo.

[MrMickeysMom]

2. Excuse me, but...

Who was called c*unt? Was that your imagination?

(I'm copying what you wrote, though nothing is left to the imagination, is it?)

[bettyellen]

29. Ask Earl G

[Buzz Clik]

46. +1 The perfect response.

Well done.

[MoonRiver]

102. But it's much more fun to whine and complain incessantly.

[MrMickeysMom]

365. I don't seem to be the one doing that...

I seem to be the one that actually read it, but go ahead with the little rolling eyes thing. It's quite in fashion these days.

[MrMickeysMom]

366. Do you ask people to interpret what you owns eyes are capable of?

Yes, you do.

I've already been to ATM to ask the appropriate questions, thanks for your indirect answer.

[mcar]

3. K&R

Really sad this even needs to be expressed here.

[Zamen]

4. It might be offensive

But I wouldn't go as far as to call it misogynistic.

[MoonRiver]

6. I cannot believe you just said that.

Unless.....

[KingCharlemagne]

7. In the UK, it is still a perjorative but lacks the purely anti-woman connotations it

has here. (Or, rather, is used equally in the UK to refer to men and women.)

I do think it's an expression of misogyny when directed towards a woman in the U.S., though.

[Zamen]

9. Well if it was directed at all women, then possibly

I don't agree that it is though.

[KingCharlemagne]

13. Insofar as the term, as used in the U.S., reduces a woman to one of her

body parts, thereby objectifying her, I would beg to disagree. But I take your point. I think beyond a certain point, we're arguing semantics which, while fun, rarely produces any momentous breakthroughs.

[Zamen]

16. That's a bit melodramatic

No word has that kind of power over a person unless they allow it to.

[boston bean]

18. The power isn't in the word, it's in the reality of the culture where

women are thought of in that fashion.

The usage of the word is what clues us into how one thinks about women.

[Zamen]

41. Only the person using those words knows how they really think

It's not for us to speculate.

[boston bean]

43. That is just ridiculous.

[beevul]

63. I speculate that was an insult.

Ridiculous, you say?


Or do you in fact truly know better what you mean by your words, than others do?

[boston bean]

64. When I am having a conversation or read something, I understand intent.

and to say that one couldn't possibly do that, is ridiculous.

[beevul]

71. What about in ambiguous situations?

You are not a mind reader.

Do you default to the worst interpretation or the best interpretation, and what criteria do you use to decide which way to default?


I love how everyone "KNOWS" what he meant when he quoted that other poster. KNOWS who it was directed at, witthout any regard to the person that spoke to NYS on the phone and sussed out his intent.

In a CLEARLY ambiguous situation.

[boston bean]

73. Possibly it is those who feel it was ambiguous that have an issue with clearly understanding?

[beevul]

84. Possibly its those who rush to condemn who also rushed to a (mis)understanding.

Some of us are bouncing it off the FULL context. Some of us are not.

Read against the full context, it says something very different than what is claimed. And its not just two or three posters saying that.

Some of us give weight to the fact that NYS spoke to a DUer on the phone. Some of us are uninterested in that.

According to him, his intent was as WE thought, not as YOU thought, and others and admin think.




If that doesn't constitute "ambiguous" in your book, there is no point having further discussion with you, as you have your mind made up and are closed to the idea that you and many others could be entirely wrong.

[boston bean]

87. uh huh...

We won't change eachothers minds. Admin has spoken. Skip will have to work with them and see if they buy his story.

[treestar]

195. Why is his intent not to be decided by everyone on their own?

His intent was as WE thought and not as YOU thought?

Taken from the context of his other posts, his intent here is not credible even if we do believe the phone story.

[beevul]

541. It goes to the nature of the thing.

His intent, can ONLY be decided and known, by him.


To everyone else but him, it is speculation. Nothing more, nothing less.

Taken from the context of his other posts, his intent here is not credible even if we do believe the phone story.

Opinion, not fact.

And that's what this is really about. Separating 'opinion' from 'fact'.


I always get a charge out of folks who think they know better what I mean, than I do.

I'm sure NYS feels exactly the same way.

[Exilednight]

398. You want it both ways. You claim everyone else misunderstood, but

You knew exactly what he meant. Yet you fail to realize that it is you who may have misunderstood.

[marble falls]

144. The times I've had to witness its use were never ever ambiguous. How could it possibly be used.....

ambiguously?

[jtuck004]

158. When it is not used, but assigned as the result of a mind-reading tantrum. n/t

[lark]

232. The use of this word in our country

is not ambiguous at all. It's a vile word meant to demean women and is saying that this body part is all they are, nothing more. Playing word games is just trying to be cute about being vile. It's like the N word to African Americans in this country - no excuse, no tolerance for either word. Makes me wonder about anyone who would attempt to excuse this.

[Zamen]

268. It's a word meant to demean people - usually, but not exclusively, women

It's not like the N word at all.

[treestar]

269. How is it different?

The N word is used to demean a group of people.

[Zamen]

274. Exactly

Whereas the C word is used to demean whoever it is directed at.

[treestar]

279. the N word can be used to demean whoever it is directed at

It's used because the person is of that group of people. Just like the C word.

[lark]

325. Totally disagree

with both sentences. In this country the c word is used exclusively for women.

[Zamen]

326. That's not true in my experience

[lark]

332. When it is used on a guy,

it's to call him a woman's body part, so still a put down for women.

[Zamen]

335. So is calling a guy a part of the male anatomy a put down for men?

You can't have it both ways.

[BreakfastClub]

457. That is the exact same argument that

people who want to use the n word make. They say they call white people that too. I don't care if you want to call horses the n word. It's still racist. And the c word is still misogynistic. Fail.

[KitSileya]

318. If you are standing on my foot, it doesn't matter if it is an accident or deliberate

My foot hurts the same regardless of your intent. The same with derogatory language - it doesn't matter if you didn't mean to hurt with the words you say, if I tell you that you using that word hurts me, and you say it wasn't intentional and then keep on using that word. then I know exactly what kind of person you are. In that case, you are the kind of person who would keep standing on someone's foot while protesting your innocence and claiming your right to stand on anyone's foot.

Women have made it quite clear that using that word is unacceptable, and anyone who still uses it is doing so deliberately. There can be no innocent misunderstandings when it comes to the c-word, just as there can't be any misunderstandings about the n-word and most other slurs. Use the c-word, and you are deliberately stepping on women's feet, and you intend to hurt by doing so. And if you do, I don't want to know you.

[Zamen]

360. I don't think women have made it clear, actually

Do you speak for all women?

Just because you feel hurt, it doesn't mean your feelings are rational or valid. Your feeling of hurt is totally out of proportion to the actual reality.

[treestar]

367. Classic misogyny

Your feelings may not be rational or valid.

I speak for most women when I saw the C word if offensive. I'm not black but will speak for all black people that the N word is offensive. Some things you can just do.

[MoonRiver]

368. Ah yes, "the irrational little woman" argument.

[treestar]

369. +1

Always comes to that eventually. And about the one where we choose not to have equality. We like it better that way.

[MoonRiver]

440. Yep, and, wait for it, "it's that time of the month, honey. You'll think more

clearly in 5 days." Thinking more clearly always means agreeing with the man.

[cui bono]

510. Oh boy... you really should stop now.

But I fear that you didn't.

Please stop telling women their feelings are not rational or valid. Perhaps it is your beliefs are not rational or valid. See how that works both ways?

You just can't tell someone their feelings are not rational or valid, especially about something like this. This is not a new debate. This is not a new word. It is almost never directed at a man, so I don't think that point is holds. It is pretty much exclusively used towards women. The fact that it is different and not considered offensive in the UK is irrelevant to it being offensive here. This is a board for the US seeing as it is a board for Democrats of the US Democratic Party.

If you don't think women have made it clear, search this site, search google, you don't have to only listen to women about it, you can get plenty of men saying the same thing. I think you just need to enlighten yourself. Perhaps this isn't something you've been exposed to much before. So maybe you just don't get it yet.

However, you can never tell someone their feelings are not rational or valid. That's just plain wrong. Especially when you are talking to an oppressed/discriminated against group.

[Zamen]

154. Well what does the usage of the word "dick" tell us about how people think about men?

Not a lot really. Most people casually throw the word around without really thinking about it. It's not necessarily an indication of a deep-seated hatred of all things male.

[Skittles]

476. yes it is

I would not even bother

[pnwmom]

518. We can do more than speculate. The person who uses the C word knows how most women feel about it

just as they know how African Americans feel about the N word.

To use either of those words anyway is a deliberate provocation.

[gollygee]

526. Too late

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=323642&sub=trans

Zombie troll is zapped.

[pnwmom]

527. Thanks for the info, gollygee. nt

[KingCharlemagne]

19. Now we're into the realm of metaphysics and neurolinguistics, at which point

I must beg off, being a mere layperson in both areas (albeit a huge fan of melodrama!

[MoonRiver]

22. So offensive how men make light of a woman being insulted in the most

disgusting manner imaginable. You win the race to the bottom for clueless misogynists.

[bettyellen]

33. If you're not arguing we should allow n****r as well-

Then you really do not have a consistent point.
Are POC here "over sensitive" too?
Should we not care about the extremely hostile atmosphere racism and sexism creates in - of all places- a progressive political space?

[Zamen]

40. I'm not saying we should allow anything

Just pointing out the difference between something actually being misogynistic, rather than simply being offensive.

[prairierose]

228. Sorry, but that word...the c word and others...

actually are misogynistic. There really is no argument. It is not a word used for endearment, it is a word that is used to cause hurt or belittle. There is no argument about that except from people who are misogynists or have not paid attention to the discussion we(as a culture) have been having about that word for over 50 years.

Go ahead and try to make less of the use of that word. Go ahead and try to say people who get upset by its use are " just too sensitive&quot another method of telling women to shut up) or are "word police". Yup, I'll take that title because after 50 years of argument, I am tired of the people who argue against its use. People who do not seem to understand that words have power and that the use of any word that marginalizes or diminishes or demeans any group of people, is language that hurts everyone. When any group of people is pushed down, stepped on or swept to the side, it hurts everyone.

By telling someone that they can not know what the person was thinking when they said that (or typed it), you are telling that person, they should just "get over it". Stop being so sensitive, stop being such a girl, stop being over emotional, because you know that women are over emotional.. These are all shortcuts for putting women in their place. They are all shortcuts that women recognize. So when you use any of these shortcuts, you may be saying more than you know but what you are saying is misogynistic. And I do not have to be ab le to read minds to know what the use of the c-word means. Just as I do not need to be a mind reader to know what the n-word means. As words become un-usable in a more enlightened society, new words take their place but the underlying meaning remains the same, a means to marginalize that part of society that the speaker feels is not worthy of consideration or courtesy.

Go ahead and argue.

[Zamen]

235. But this is my point

The word DOESN'T diminish or demean a group of people. Even if I accept that this word has as much power as you say it does, it only diminishes or demeans the person it's aimed at, not a group of people. Therefore it might be offensive, but it's not misogynist, unless it was aimed at women in general.

[MoonRiver]

254. You have a mother, and maybe a wife or daughter.

How would you feel if someone called one of them the "c" word?

[Zamen]

264. I wouldn't be happy with anyone calling them any rude or offensive term

There's nothing special about the "c" word itself as far as I'm concerned, it's as bad as all the others.

[MoonRiver]

275. Agreed. Let's stop insulting each other.

[Zamen]

281. Agreed

[prairierose]

280. This is the only thing I will say to you...

the fact that you "do not accept" that the word does apply to all people whenever it is used makes it impossible to talk to you about this. Are you pretending not to understand how language works in order to minimize the damage done or are you just a person who refuses to accept that language does damage people and has been used to control people or groups of people?

When hateful words are aimed at one person; they are aimed at all persons of that group. That is one of the things that gives the word power. And while some women are trying to take back the word "slut",for example it is still a derogative term that is used to demean or diminish or control, just as the c-word is.

Try reading an article on general semantics.

[Zamen]

284. If one guy calls another guy a "dick"

I don't take it personally because I also happen to be male. If one word that refers to a part of the sexual anatomy doesn't apply to all people, the other word doesn't either.

[treestar]

370. You are ignoring the centuries in which

women have not been treated equally.

Calling a man a dick hurts him no more than a black person calling a white person whitey.

[Zamen]

371. Have you been alive for centuries?

[treestar]

372. Of course not.

But we are still working on equality for women. You act as if it's the same for men and total equality achieved. Also sounds right wing. Would you tell black people they aren't slaves so they shouldn't complain about any words used against them?

History affects us. How shallow to act as if it means nothing.

[treestar]

387. You do not even have the liberal attitude towards

such subjects. Sounds almost right wing to insist past oppression is completely gone and everyone is treated equally today.

[Zamen]

388. If we're going to discuss whether everyone is treated equally today, that's one thing

But people don't have the right to appropriate the suffering and oppression of others who lived centuries ago.

[uppityperson]

391. Acknowledging the past maltreatment of a gorup of people is "appropriate the suffering"?

[Zamen]

393. Acknowledging is one thing

Expecting special treatment because of it is another.

[uppityperson]

396. What "special treatment" is expected, and by whom? What do you mean?

[Zamen]

399. Anyone who thinks they should be allowed to insult and offend others with impunity

While everyone else must tread on eggshells around them.

[uppityperson]

402. Seems you are one of those who wants to "be allowed to insult and offend others with impunity"

"people don't have the right to appropriate the suffering and oppression of others who lived centuries ago", they "Expect special treatment" by wanting to be allowed to insult and offend others with impunity?

[Zamen]

404. I just want the hypocrisy to end

[uppityperson]

406. What hypocrisy?

[cui bono]

511. Who thinks that? Where are you getting this from???

[LanternWaste]

528. Language can in fact (and has... and yet still does) factor into the collective repression of a mino

Language can in fact (and has... and yet still does) factor into the collective repression of a minority. (See: Social Origins of Language by Danmiel Dor and On the Edge of the Primeval Forest by Albert Schweitzer)

However, no doubt you'll support your premise (or, more accurately, an allegation) with objective, peer-reviewed (and relevant) material to illustrate yours is not predicated merely on opinion, yes?

[Gormy Cuss]

128. Do you feel the same way about n****r?

How about slurs against other races or against LGBTers, or Jews, or Muslims, etc?

Words have power to influence thinking. Calling poor people lazy for example presumes that the poverty is a result of moral failure rather than external factors By assigning blame to the low income person it absolves others from moral responsibility to aid them. Welcome to the modern GOP.

[nichomachus]

94. So can we assume

That you've never called someone an "asshole?" That would be the ultimate in reducing a person to a body part.

[Sheldon Cooper]

103. Yes, but everyone has an asshole.

So, it's not a gender slur. Whereas c*nt is definitely gendered.

[erronis]

126. Balls and prick/dick seem to be acceptable, however. Jeez.

[robbob]

130. What about "dick"?

What about "dickhead"? What about "Rinse Penis"?

Or to go in a slightly different direction, does anyone have a problem with calling Rush a fat sack of shit, or a mountain of child molesting blubber or any other such insult that references his putrid overweight bloated mass?

I certainly don't, the man is human garbage, but aren't we objectifying him by his body type rather than his views and (rancid) opinions? Is that right?

Now, if a female right wing hack, Ann Coulter, for example, were to be insulted here at DU in such a way, expressing ones hatred for her by insulting her looks rather than her ideas would people be ok with that? I think not.

Is that not a bit of a double standard?

[Zamen]

138. It's only gendered in the sense

That it refers to a part of the female anatomy.

[nichomachus]

168. But the argument was

That you couldn't reduce a person to a body part. And we have no problem calling a man a dick, which is pretty gender-related.

[BlueJazz]

15. Same in Australia. I don't use the word at all. 1: It offends people here, but most importantly..

...my Mother hates it.

[KingCharlemagne]

17. The Aussie and UK angle brings up a funny, if tangential, joke:

An American took his British friend to a baseball game. The Brit, having grown up with Cricket, got most of the rules straight away. But it was when explaining the concept of a 'walk' that the Brit grew puzzled. "Why is he walking to first base?" the Brit asked. "Because," his American comrade responded, "he's got four balls." Upon which the Brit loudly shouted, "Walk proudly, mate. Walk proudly!"

[BlueJazz]

25. LOL! Good one!

[hifiguy]

241. As Churchill said, Americans and Brits are two peoples divided by a common language.

Never heard that one before.

[still_one]

197. and of course we know how non-superior the British feel through history

Last edited Sun Jun 7, 2015, 03:22 PM - Edit history (1)

More important most refined Brits do not spew the word all over the place as you imply

[DemocratSinceBirth]

34. The F word is offensive "but I wouldn't go as far as to call it homophobic."

SARCASM

[Cha]

37. Too bad if you wouldn't.. it is.

[Doctor_J]

42. du spends far more space discussing pc and perceived insults than politics

Example:

"Hillary Clinton has become a multi millionaire due to wall street friendships"

"So you resent that a woman got rich!!!!"

Hopefully the cunning stunt discussion will go away in a few more weeks.

[Buzz Clik]

50. No, it does not. But we get your point.

Hyperbole is our best friend.

[Doctor_J]

201. well, this thread will soon be over 200 replies, Ida's thread has over 600

Most scold threads get dozens of recs. And many if not most of the threads that start out political are hijacked by chronic axe grinders. I don't really foresee the party regaining its moral center or its relevance under these circumstances.

[Buzz Clik]

211. blah blah blah. And you're contributing to this one.

You don't like the nature of certain thread? Trash them.

[Enthusiast]

59. Thank you.

[deurbano]

364. I don't understand the need for all the insults, no matter which candidate one supports.

But they aren't all just "perceived" insults... and some are sexist.

Before Sanders entered the race, many complained Clinton was just too "old." Not just old in her ideas (which is a perfectly fine) but OLD. To me, it was a double standard based on looks that I believe is imposed much more harshly on women. (Elizabeth Warren has less wrinkled skin, so some of those promoting Warren's candidacy didn't seem to realize they are less than two years apart in age when they proclaimed Clinton too old.)

I've also heard (here) that Clinton would be nothing without her husband. Anyone vaguely familiar with her life's history would know that is BS, and it is insulting and sexist, too.

In 2008 here, Clinton was called Shrillery (etc. etc., etc.). So, I think there is some reason to be concerned that things can get out of hand, ESPECIALLY if a well regarded and long-time poster thinks it's okay. Many (most?) posters didn't know what the spoonerism meant, but the poster who was banned did know. (As he made that clear in an earlier post, back when the term was used against Sarah Palin.) So, it's like this slightly underground way to call something Clinton did cunt-ish. Not everyone would "get" it. (Almost makes it worse.)

I would like him reinstated after a "time out" (or whatever), but I think he and some others first need to acknowledge it's not overreacting to find the use of cunt (or cutesy work-arounds) unacceptable on this Democratic forum.

Just argue the candidates' records and positions without all the stupid, offensive insults. And yes, some Clinton supporters also say stupid, offensive crap.

For the record, I support Sanders... and have already voted for him once, when I was living in VT in 1996 and backed him for governor. (Hope he is more successful this time!)

[Doctor_J]

503. But the hof is determined to keep this alive for as long as possible, primarily to

maintain the "Hillary is a victim" narrative.

[deurbano]

507. I don't support Clinton and I'm not involved with HOF, but still, I took the time to post.

I'm also not trying to keep alive some narrative, and I don't want the poster banned. So... maybe I am just genuinely concerned about the sexism I mentioned. And yes, Clinton does seem to be a lightning rod for some of the worst impulses from both right wing assholes and some self-identified progressives. I could see a continuing debate about whether the poster should be banned or not, but not about whether it is appropriate in a Democratic forum to call a woman's actions cunt-ish... or to call a woman a cunt. (Any woman, much less a Democratic candidate.) The defense of that is alarming, which is why I (with my very low post count for someone who has been here since 2002) would bother to comment.

I can't stand the idea of a repeat of 2008, but I'm not sure any lessons were learned:
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/pressing-issues-by-digby-blogosphere-is.html

[awoke_in_2003]

285. You probably think

the n word isn't racist, I reckon.

[LeftishBrit]

408. Depends where you live

In the UK, and as I understand in Australia, it is considered as one of the rudest swear-words that one can use; but not specifically misogynistic. It is used equally for men and women.

I still wouldn't recommend using it in the UK, as it's highly offensive; but equal-opportunity-offensive.

But as I understand, in the USA it is indeed misogynistic in its use.

[whathehell]

480. It is offensive

and when you become female, you'll be in a position to judge whether or not it's mysogynistic.

[MoonRiver]

5. Once again, thank you Boston Bean!

We communicate our views through language. Aside from body language, which doesn't exist on the internet, language is the only medium of communication we have. When someone calls a woman the "c" word I interpret that to be an insult of the most vile kind. It's not a joke, unless one is 11 years old, and most 11 year olds know better. Banning someone who uses that term is the appropriate thing to do.

Thanks mods!

[boston bean]

100. .

[MoonRiver]

114. BB

[Glitterati]

8. Sorry, but

YOU don't get to speak for all women.

YOU most decidedly do NOT speak for THIS woman.

I am grown up.

I make my own choices/decisions and do not need the Feminist Police coming to my defense.

Frankly, I find YOU and YOUR actions far more offensive and detrimental to all women.

YOU are not my protector as I need no protector.

I am a woman. A feminist woman who defines her own limits and acceptable behaviors.

I have no need for your brand of feminism.

on edit, for clarity:
I'm no fan of NYCSKP and found his militant defense of Obama as offensive as these "feminists." I don't care who/what/why someone got banned/didn't get banned.

My point is........YOU ARE NOT MY SPOKESPERSON.

YOU DO NOT SPEAK FOR ALL WOMEN.

ASSUMING SUCH A POSITION IS AS OFFENSIVE AS THE LANGUAGE YOU SAY YOU ABHOR.

[MoonRiver]

10. And you do not speak for ME, a feminist woman.

BB is not a protector. What a joke. She is speaking the truth about insulting words used to demean women. Are you OK with being called the "c" word?

Also, exactly what brand of feminism do you ascribe to? Most feminist I know do not like sexist insults to be slung at them. These insults, btw, usually come from right wing women haters.

[Little Star]

11. Boston Bean speaks for me..

You are the one who doesn't speak for this woman.

[Bluenorthwest]

12. And yet the OP does not imply she speaks for 'all women' she is speaking her own mind and that

seems to set you off. Don't you think the OP has a right to speak her own mind, or does the OP have to speak to please you?

[ann---]

14. OMG

It was only an opinion - one I agree with by the way.

Any woman who tolerates that kind of language against her
(or any woman) demeans the state of womanhood. That word
is toxic and NEVER has an "alternate" meaning. It is crude, rude
and disgusting.

There - I'm a woman and I said it.

[Buzz Clik]

52. +1

This response ranks up there with, "How dare you suppress my freedom of speech."

Discuss board antics.

[notadmblnd]

116. Please tell me, exactly how do you view that word, the "C" word?

If you would, please explain to me how it is demeaning and why it is toxic?

I really want to understand the reason why so many find it the ultimate insult.

[treestar]

132. Is it not kind of obvious?

Reducing a woman to the one body part that indicates she is just a sexual object.

[notadmblnd]

186. No, I don't think it is obvious. At lease to me it isn't

Please feel free to articulate in depth. I am sincerely listening.

[MoonRiver]

229. It's obvious to any woman who has feared being sexually assaulted,

which most of us have. Any man who uses that term is automatically suspect. It indicates he demeans and sexualizes women. Instinctually, at least to me, a man who openly uses that term is on my radar screen, and I would avoid him, for many reasons. I'm lucky that I have always had respectful and kind men in my life, but many women have not been so fortunate. That's why we don't like use of the "c" word.

[boston bean]

246. Yep. The anger when it's said..

I'm going to be completely honest, when I have been called that word, I immediately felt fear for my physical safety. The anger was palpable. I couldn't move away any faster.

In a way another power, physical prowess using palpable anger, used to keep us in fear and in our place.

I certainly didn't sit there and give an essay to the person as to why it was wrong to do that.

[MoonRiver]

262. Yes, at that point it's fight or flee. We can't fight someone who is twice our size.

I've been there, and fortunately got away.

[phil89]

361. So you think

if a guy uses the c word, that makes it more likely he's a violent sex criminal?? Talk about crazy.

[MoonRiver]

362. Of course. And every woman here knows that.

[treestar]

374. A guy who uses that word has contempt for women

More likely to be a misogynist, in fact probably is. thus more likely to be an abuser.

[Zamen]

378. That's not true at all

How do you know how people feel about women?

[boston bean]

436. Because women know when they are being mistreated, insulted, demeaned, believe it or not...

I know it might be hard to imagine, but it is true.

[uppityperson]

438. fwiw, they are flagged for review

and their next couple incarnations already banned.

[boston bean]

441. oh good. thanks for letting me know. nt

[uppityperson]

442. However, they'll be back, I am sure

They need a new hobby.

[boston bean]

455. tedious is a word that comes to mind..

[prayin4rain]

20. What a complete mischaracterization of the OP. Whether an intentional mischaracterization, or not,

makes one wonder the motivation.

[Cha]

49. Exactly, prayin4rain.. what's the motivation behind going ballistic on the OP for nothing?

[prayin4rain]

294. I guess seeing a woman stand up against the establishment causes anxiety

and they want to be sure that the establishment doesn't mistake them to be one of the people rocking the boat? Call women a c*** all you like, I'm fine with it, sir.

OR, it could be....I'm rough and tumble too, if you think a little word is enough to rattle me, then you obviously don't know who you're dealing with.

But I think the fact that they chose the route of mischaracterization of the OP fits better with one of these motivations than the other.

[Cha]

471. I lost any respect I ever had for people who chose to feign ignorance and mischacterize

anything for the sake of their own "agenda" .. and that's what's going on here.

they stand out like the proverbial "sore thumb".

[BlueJazz]

21. I was a little put off by your post.

But after giving it some thought, I understand what you're saying. Refreshing.

[MoonRiver]

23. So, fill us in. What's she saying?

[BlueJazz]

31. I'll try. I believe she's saying: Look, I'm an individual..I'm a woman who defines my own life.

I choose not to follow the role of a woman from the 50's, 60's, 70's through June 7th 2015 or for that matter, any point in time.
I don't need a man to walk on the curb side of the sidewalk so I won't get my pretty little dress wet. If you want to open a door for me...that's cool 'cause you do it even for 6'5' 275lb man.
I have my own "Take" on life and how I want to react to it. Some words don't bother me, some do. Don't make such a big deal out of it.

Boy..I've REALLY put my ass out on this post. She answers back: "You stupid ass, that's not at all what I was saying"
And that would be OK. I can take it.

[MoonRiver]

35. That's a lot of reading between the lines, but even if you're correct

I don't think BB was trying to force her opinion on anyone. She was simply stating what she believes. There really was no reason to go ballistic. That's the kind of thing right wing nuts do toward feminists.

[boston bean]

39. Also, I was speaking of people who do speak out about misogynistic language..

of which that poster is obviously not one who does that.

[BlueJazz]

57. To me, it's a tough subject. Depending on a individual's personal thoughts, it's rather akin to...

...a massive put-down to some people along with thinking "How low class and mocking".
And yet, others find some words like "that" word no worse than stuff they hear every day.
Consequently, did you pander to them (that hate the word) ?
Well, the answer is yes. I mean, sure..it's not asking all that much. People put up with my opinions/likes/not like...I put up with theirs.

[boston bean]

60. I'm not following at all.. sorry.

[BlueJazz]

65. See, I told you it was a difficult subject for me. Maybe I'm not following the obvious....

...or I try to read too much into posts ?

[Glitterati]

77. You got it, BlueJazz

thank you.

I don't need a "protector" of any kind......not a male one, not a feminist one, not anyone but ME. ME alone.

If I find offensive language anywhere, I'm free to make my own decisions how to react to it. Or not react to it.

I don't need a self proclaimed feminist or anything else to protect my poor offended ears/eyes.

NO ONE speaks for me. But. me.

And, let me add - I find the feminist ganging to this post just as offensive as SKP and the ObamaCheerleader gangs.

[treestar]

101. Where does the post say you had to?

Why do you think it's no big deal when some man calls you an unpleasant word?

Would you say the same about the N word?

You've decided you are going to let men put you down with the C word and shrug it off. Why can't others feel differently?

[questionseverything]

352. so the c word is off limits but

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026794236

this popular cartoon, referring to men's body parts is ok?

seems like if one is a banning offense...the other should be too

[BlueJazz]

106. Thank you. I can say: I got something right out of this subject. I liked what you wrote.

[ann---]

93. A woman can still be a

strong individualist while agreeing that certain words are
NOT acceptable. It doesn't take a "man" to understand that.

Maybe she isn't offended by the "c" word. I don't understand
why not.

[treestar]

104. Yeah that's a little strange

It seems anti-feminist to seek approval of men that way - hey look, I don't take offense at these things, could be a thing done to please men and get their approval, which is anti-feminist to the root.

[Comrade Grumpy]

125. Nice creative speculation. n/t

[treestar]

98. Don't make such a big deal of it

That's be telling other women they should put up with the use of misogynistic slurs.

It really lets men define things. I'm not offended by this word and that'll get me the approval of some men.

[seaglass]

27. Yeah, BB is not speaking for all women, it's very clear that we are not all alike. She even made

explicit exception for women who don't mind if they, their mothers, their daughters are called a c*nt.

[Starry Messenger]

45. She speaks for me.

Nuke the all-caps, why don't you? Her post says nothing about speaking for all women--just that it isn't "weak" to fight misogyny in language and that no one she knows wants to be called that.

[Cha]

47. What are you getting all bent out of shape for? boston bean is not even saying she speaks for "all

women".

And, you go all ballistic on her.. using your capital letters.. telling her she's as bad as the one using the misogynistic slur.

She has "assumed" no position.. it is you who has assumed a position of ignorance on what she actually said.

[JTFrog]

66. /facepalm n/t

[marym625]

78. +1000

Thanks for this!

People who give the word power over them are bringing the movement back decades. It's a real shame.

[treestar]

109. So would you say that about the N word?

Are black people setting it back decades by letting this word have power?

And it does have power. That's why liberals can't even type it out just to refer to it.

[marym625]

124. No, I wouldn't

I also wouldn't call someone that disagreed with me stupid or anything similar.

That doesn't change what I said.

The LGBTQ community took power over many words. Including queer. The Q in LGBTQ. A word that used to be derogatory. The women, the dykes, in Dykes on Bikes, actually had to fight in court, and won, to use the word Dyke and took the power.

The same had been done with the word in question here. Until some people decided to give the power back.

[treestar]

131. Are you actually advising African Americans

to take back the power over the N word? I know they do use it, but white people can't. Not without being considered offensive and supporting racism. Same with the LGBTQ words. Women could thus say it and use it with each other to try to make it less offensive to them. But men still couldn't use it.

I would never use the N word or any of the offensive LGBTQ words. I am unlikely to use the B or C words even so. But then I'm not much of a cusser.

[marym625]

153. Again, no I wouldn't

I have never once used the n word.

I used examples to illustrate what had previously been true of the word in question. I am not talking about words that still have power. And as you said, many of the black community do use the n word with each other. In my mind that particular instance is similar to saying I can call my mother mean but god help you if you do.

And in the instance of the word in question, I don't need anyone speaking for me. A life long feminist who has fought hard for women's rights my entire life. And probably done much more than many here

[treestar]

192. No one is speaking for you

but have a different opinion. That people should not call women that word.

[marym625]

200. The OP makes declarations

Declarations I, and many others, disagree with.

I said my peace. I explained my reasons. No one has to agree with me, nor with the OP.

[boston bean]

134. It is called "in group" usage to take back the word.

They don't accept white people using it derogatorily, nor do gay persons accept usage of homophobic slurs by straights that is intended to demean, insult, and diminish.

[treestar]

140. True. And no way would a poster not be banned

for using the K word on Bernie. It's only women who have to hear how it's no big deal.

[marym625]

162. Any word meant to demean anyone

A group or an individual, should be admonished. To directly call someone anything with the intent to hurt someone directly is not cool. Yet it happens here often

If someone calls me a dyke, or a carpet muncher, or whatever the word or phrase is of the day is, which has happened many times (not here) I just laugh at it. As I have with the word in question.

We give words power. And the power given to this word over the last few days here is unbelievable.

"Slang is a language that rolls up its sleeves, spits on its hands and goes to work" .Carl Sandburg

[boston bean]

167. Again, it is not the WORD as it stands alone as 4 letters.

It is the meaning of the word, the mindset, the contempt and hatred it displays for women.

It is not simply 4 letters typed into somebodies computer screen. It is a culture. That is the offense.

[marym625]

170. and the power of the word us given by the reaction to it.

[boston bean]

172. No it is not.

It is a reality for women to be thought of as nothing but genitalia. And someone who uses that word has just outed themselves as feeling about women that way themselves.

There is power in the word as it relates to a reality.

[marym625]

178. If that were true

Then the words queer and dyke would not mean what they mean today. And the word in question wouldn't be as mild as it is in other countries.

We disagree to a point there is obviously not going to be any agreement. You said your peace and I said mine.

[boston bean]

182. What??

They do still mean what they do today, when used by a person in a derogatory fashion.

Are you straight?? Just asking because I'm trying to make a point... If you are, and you go and call LGBT those in a derogatory fashion, you'll find out right quick it's not acceptable.

[marym625]

188. No I am not straight

Hence being called dyke and carpet muncher. Which meant absolutely nothing to me.

[boston bean]

191. ok, so what if a straight person said them to you in an insulting derogatory demeaning fashion.

It still rolls right off your back?

You don't think those words used to back up a homophobic culture are damaging?

[marym625]

196. It was homophobic straight people that said it to me

And yes, it rolled off my back.

It's only damaging if I allow it to be. Again, like queer now being part of the LGBTQ. And dyke being defended in court by dykes on bikes.

[treestar]

199. So you would actually use those words on DU?

When referring to someone else? If you thought Hillary was a lesbian - said in some quarters - you would have no problem calling her a dyke? And you really have no problem with straight people calling you that? What if their tone indicates homophobia?

Do you tell other lesbians that don't like to be called that they should just be tough like you are and let it roll off their back?

[marym625]

215. You mean like when we ride our Harleys in the Pride Parade

And are listed as Dykes on Bikes?

I never said it SHOULD be used anywhere. But when it is used, I won't give it power over me.

Of course I have a problem with homophobia. I'm not going to help them by cowering over a word.

I am not even going to respond to the stuff about Hillary. The only thing I will say about Hillary and the LGBTQ community is that it's a shame her initials are HRC. The HRC is actually losing traffic because of that.

[treestar]

221. The Dykes on bikes decided to call themselves that

I'm talking about straight people using it to insult you.

Again you are talking about "cowering," does that apply to people objecting to the N word?

I'm not cowering over the word. I'm objecting to its use to insult women. NYC hates Hillary, wanted to insult her, and used that word which is to refer to her gender in a negative way. He could have called her a "warmonger" or a "corporatist" and he would not have gotten banned.

[marym625]

230. I'm not going to get into what he meant or didn't mean.

Not doing that again.

I have already answered these questions. More than once.

[treestar]

238. He got banned for it

Because it was clear what he did mean.

He would have gotten banned for calling anyone a dyke. This is a liberal board. Your supposed not caring about that word notwithstanding. We don't use bigoted slurs.

[marym625]

256. I don't believe he was doing anything but mocking the troll.

That's how I took it.

Unless it was some Republican that came to DU just to troll, which happens all the time, often with them staying just inside the rules, I wouldn't want anyone banned for saying dyke. Especially to me. I can handle myself

[boston bean]

227. Ok, another question, cause I'm curious as to what you are meaning.

The dykes on bikes... are you saying that's no problem because it is in group, or that there is an in group problem with lesbians being called that...

[marym625]

231. I'm sorry. I don't understand your question

[boston bean]

236. Sorry.... Not sure how to put it... LOL

In other words is there a problem within the LGBT community where the name "dykes on bikes" is being used and lesbians are not in favor of that?

Or is this a case of in group usage for the pride parade..

Thank you for being patient.

[marym625]

248. Some guy in California

Actually filed a lawsuit to try to take the trademark Dykes on Bikes away from the group. He used the argument that the word was offensive so it shouldn't be allowed to be trademarked. The group fought back and won.

I don't know anyone personally that has a problem with the word. I do know some do but not in my circle. I don't know of a soul that has a problem with Dykes on Bikes that isn't straight

Mostly, the issue is any label. And that's because the spectrum of sexuality is so wide and varied

[boston bean]

286. If it is in group usage, I agree, that guy was an asshole.

But if some KKK rally decided to use it to attack lesbians in one of their marches, I'd be pretty pissed off.

[marym625]

295. The kkk doesn't do anything but try to insult

Their words don't hurt. Their actions do. Like making sure the police forces across the country have members. Like having say in the St Louis County PD.

That pisses me off.

I think we have beat this to death. I appreciate that you were respectful in your questions

[boston bean]

297. thank you Mary. nice to have a good conversation. much appreciated.

[marym625]

300. see what we can accomplish? :) eom

[boston bean]

303. a Bernie and a Hillary supporter... whoda thunk it!? LOL

[marym625]

305. Now, let's do the same on the issues

Not this second. I need a break

[boston bean]

204. Well, Mary...

when I've been called a c*nt, it took me a back at first, but I wasn't all hurt and damaged by it.

What is damaging is the culture and the usage of words within that culture to perpetuate bigotry. So, maybe remove yourself from the personal.

I'm sure you realize that someone using those words is indicative of a homophobic culture and it should not be tolerated... Especially on a democratic internet board. I can assure if someone here called you those words, I would vote to hide them in a split second. Not to protect you personally, but because that shit is indicative of a culture that disgusts me and has no place in my life, even though it creeped in.

[treestar]

205. Exactly and that's why we protest using them

on Coulter or Palin.

[marym625]

218. That's your right to feel that way

I think it's done nothing but give more power to the word. Though it has brought out some very hypocritical stances from others. Not you.

[cwydro]

437. Me too.

I was called dyke a lot in my younger years. Usually by young male idiots who suddenly found out they were going to get nowhere with me (or my girlfriend).

I laughed. It never bothered me. I would tell you how I answered them, but it might get me a hide, so I won't.

Sticks and stones.

[marym625]

472. exactly

And it's almost always some dude. Especially, as you said, who realized they weren't going to get anywhere. Only way they can stroke their ego.

I am curious about your response. But I don't want you getting a hide.

[cwydro]

473. I'll pm you.

[marym625]

474. Can't wait

[Zamen]

345. "It is a reality for women to be thought of as nothing but genitalia."

That's quite a generalization to make. How many men would you say actually think like that in reality?

[boston bean]

347. enough of for it to be an issue. any other questions?

[Zamen]

349. I don't agree that the issue is as big as you're claiming

[boston bean]

350. Of course you don't. I never would have thought you would. nt

[Zamen]

354. I look forward to speaking with you much more in the future

[JTFrog]

517. Maybe in your next reincarnation. n/t

[Glitterati]

193. You are exactly correct

and when the gang rushes to hide it from all the "sensitive" eyes/ears, they give it power it does not deserve.

It is the OVERreaction that causes the pain, moreso than the use of the word.

I am fully capable of using the hide button if I choose to. I am fully capable of responding to such crude language if I choose to.

Hiding it and removing the offending author means there is absolutely no hope of explaining, in a calm, rational manner why such language is offensive.

THIS reaction - hiding, banning - means it lives on. Hence, this thread.

[marym625]

206. yep.

And I truly just can't keep saying the same thing over and over. I have replied with explanation as to my point about as much as I can.

[Glitterati]

216. Waste of time

The "all powerful" have already decided your motivation. No need to continue.

Hard to see anything but anger when all you do is based in anger.

[marym625]

226. I honestly think that Boston bean and treestar

Are truly just very perplexed by my attitude. I just don't know how else to say it.

[treestar]

244. Stop talking about other posters and

talk about the issue. I am not perplexed at all. I am arguing the word is offensive and you are arguing it is not. If you don't like to be argued with, avoid talking to people who say things you disagree with.

[marym625]

259. seriously?

Ok. I will stop talking to you

[treestar]

375. You were talking ABOUT me

[hifiguy]

253. Their implied professions of being able to read minds

and of omniscience would be ludicrously funny if they were not so sad.

[Glitterati]

288. Armchair psychology

pathetic, actually. But also very, very dangerous when combined with a passive aggressive "leader" personality who can convince others to do their dirty work.

[hifiguy]

292. So true. And there are never any consequences for that behavior.

I left DU for a year because I was so sick of their bullshit but there are too many people here I like and respect for them to keep me away.

[marym625]

271. I was at least half wrong there

[treestar]

217. So you would seriously say that to black people?

If some white person uses the N word to describe them?

BB keeps trying to explain it is how it reinforces the already existing racism or misogyny.

Yet you keep pretending society doesn't exist and does not have these features.

Yes you can give the word no power over yourself, but other women may not have it as good.

[Glitterati]

224. In case you hadn't noticed, treestar

I have no intention of playing your word games.

[treestar]

247. It's a valid comparison

One you know puts you in a bad place, thus your non-responsive post.

[Glitterati]

252. Bwahahahahahahahahahaha

the "all knowing" speaks!

I haven't responded to ANY of your posts. In case you hadn't noticed.

When you affixed your own version of my motivation, you negated any reason to respond.

And I do not plan to respond to any more of your posts.

[treestar]

267. But you still haven't answered about the N word

Because you know it's a valid comparison.

Ever heard a black person make the equivalent screed as you made? " I can handle myself. I'm black and I don't care if you call me a N****r. I won't let that have power over me. You other black people complaining are just weak."

Try posting such a lecture to the black posters here and see if you don't get banned from DU.

[Glitterati]

270. Nothing you say is valid

hence a waste of my time.

[Puglover]

310. You are speaking with someone

who in no uncertain terms told the LGTB folks on this board that, "You have plenty of rights." when Obama was getting heat on marriage equality.

And now is outraged that someone used the c word.

IMHO you are right.

Nothing the poster says is valid to me until I hear an acknowledgement of that hideous post. AND an apology.

And watch. Very likely I will be told to "get over it".

[Glitterati]

313. Not surprised

Just a puppet being manipulated to do the dirty work of others.

For some people, gang membership is all important.

[Puglover]

320. That and marinating in the

DU outrage du jour.

It's simple. Don't call people names. They all suck. How people deal when they are called names is an individual choice. Period.

[Glitterati]

322. Outrage

compounded by more outrage.

They are outraged by the initial outrage, then get outraged all over again when you dare to disagree with their outrage.

Whew, I just don't like to stay so damned MAD all the time.

[boston bean]

323. Except when someone says something you find to be bigoted, right?

Then the discussion never ends. I mean you just referred to a poster who I am assuming said something that really offended you years ago??

I'm not saying you don't have a right to be offended, but dang, give others the leeway you provide yourself.

[Puglover]

327. Telling a group of people that they don't need equal rights is

somewhat different then someone calling me the f word.

The name calling I can brush off. And again I wouldn't tell anyone else how they should react. I only am speaking of myself.

The fact that there has never been an apology or any kind of acknowledgement of how hurtful that was is for me unforgettable.

As to the PPRing. I am sorry a long term member got it. We never um, got along.

I cannot see why common sense needs 400 OP's and yes, to answer your question I have largely been ignoring them.

[boston bean]

333. Well, may I attempt to tell you how all the defenses of this

might as well be telling many women here that their issues/rights don't matter... I'm sure if someone hurled a slur at a well known gay rights activist or you in particular, and every one said no big deal, move on, he didn't mean it, even when you see it for yourself that he did, and told you to basically shut up about it and beg for them to be allowed to return... it would be of a concern that bigotry is residing in some hearts, which in turn affects the rights of those who are victim to it.

If it was just a given that it was unacceptable, there would be no need for further discussion... however, the reality is that is not the case. It is all to acceptable to many.

[Puglover]

337. You see I believe that bigotry resides in all of our hearts.

What matters is how we choose to deal with it.

If you don't know of her google Jane Elliott sometime and watch some of her work.

I happen to believe the woman is a miracle and others find her methods awful.

[boston bean]

339. So, are you saying speaking out about it is harming the cause?

Because that is what people are doing?

I'm seriously asking... and don't tell me that it is my tone, or that it is my way.. I'm not saying anything outside normal feminist thought. I do recall you told me once that I was too aggressive and unlikeable. Many years ago in Meta... I'm over it though...

If people didn't fight for rights, we wouldn't have them. If people didn't make it known that slurs aimed at particular groups were unacceptable, there would be more of it than we have today.

So, count me in for changing hearts and minds.

[Puglover]

343. I think maybe one of the differences between you and

I is that I simply do not think DU represents RL in any way shape or form. My husband is one of the smartest and together persons that I have had the privilege to know and he wouldn't spend a minute here. You can look at my post count after 12 years and see how much time I hang here. And probably 12k out of my 15+ k were short posts in the moderator forum.

You are obviously passionate about it BB and that's fine. I just don't equate posting on DU as "fighting for rights".

I don't think DU has any effect on anything but DU.

In the end we agree basically. Don't call people demeaning names and everyone should have equal rights.

[boston bean]

346. Nor do I think DU is my real life.

However, it is a website I visit that obviously has some bigotry issues. You've seen them, so have I.

So, I am going to ask as nicely as I can to not paint me into a box like DU is my only life.

The internet if full of campaigns for equal rights.. without it, I'm not sure LGBT would have come so far in such a short amount of time... and I know there is much more to go....

This is how we communicate on a larger scale... it is not a for nothing activity nor is it useless.

[nadinbrzezinski]

439. Thanks

People should also google the term Implied Bias.

We were made very aware of it, so we work hard to avoid it. (Not that any of us could succeed 100 percent of the time, and this statement will only make sense after reading into the subject)

[treestar]

383. Exactly. And I did not say what they said

I did and take it out of context.

I always supported gay marriage. Yet I'm a homophobe. Imagine that, the homophobes support it too.

And there remembering a post and poster that long is grudge holding to a scary degree.

Yet it's OK for NYC SKIP to say what he did! What hypocrisy!

[Puglover]

445. Please show me a post where I said what NYCSkp said

was ok. It was not.

As I have said repeatedly, he wasn't my favorite poster. And I cannot imagine what he was thinking when he made that post.

I have no feelings about his banning except it's sad when a long term poster that has contributed a lot to this website is TSed.

But please I beg you. Show me where I have posted that it was "ok".

[treestar]

449. OK so you think it's not OK to say that.

At least that's the case. I figured you rabid hatred of me might cause you to let that slide since I was on that side. I was going to ask you if you thought what I said was so horrid why wasn't what NYC said even worse as I didn't use any words like the F word.

[Puglover]

450. "Rabid hatred."

C'mon Treestar drama much. You talked DOWN to us from a place of privilege and actually "shamed" us. That hurt. Badly.

All I have ever asked from you is an apology or acknowledgement of that. And you can't seem to do it.

I rabidly hate mosquitoes. I don't "hate" you.

[treestar]

381. Whose dirty work?

The C word is offensive to most liberals. Geez. How hard is that to deal with? Why do you find that so outrageous?

You have to hate people who think it is offensive?

Since you're such a champion of gay people what if one tells you the F word is offensive? The poster I was debating would be furious with you as for them everything is about gay rights. They come first and foremost and we should abandon all else. Do you agree with that? Because if not, you would have got into a tangle with that poster too.

Yet I think you would to be consistent tell them they should just get over it and most gay people don't care about being called those words and they do not speak for all gay people and how dare they try?

[treestar]

380. Of course you take that out of context

Hold grudges much?

And how does that have anything to do with the C word being offensive? You think it is not offensive because of some post I made ages ago when arguing with someone who boils every single issue down to gay rights - even those that don't have much or anything to do with it?

So much hatred.

[Puglover]

420. Of course that is what you always say.

Instead of, "I'm sorry. It was an awful thing to say." Why is that so difficult for you unless you stand by that awful post. Because believe me if I heard that from you I would never reference it again.

As someone just told you just in case you missed it. "Nothing you say is valid." Nothing.

A whole bunch of GLTB DUer's saw that post and wrote about it. Want links?

Not once have you done ANYTHING but double down.

And you have the unmitigated gall to lecture me about "hatred". Physician heal thyself.

Oh and just to show your "taking it out of context" is utter horsecrap...........

http://www.democraticunderground.com/113727459

[pecwae]

512. PL

[treestar]

377. Well that's pointless

Nothing you say is valid either.

[qwlauren35]

312. I can imagine this.

When a black person is so powerful and the person using the word is so powerless, it becomes laughable.

"Bring it! Is that the best you can do? Call me names? I can squash you. You are nothing. Call me whatever you like."

As I said in another post, when a woman is so in control of a man that all he can do is call her a name, it is laughable. When the woman is not in control, and the man is bigger, stronger, and in a position of control, the word can be rather daunting, and me personally, I don't know whether that man will take it to the next level.

So I fight back, however I can.

[Zamen]

329. The average black person is about as powerful as the average white person

Power is not conferred on people by simply being part of a certain group, no matter what others might claim.

[qwlauren35]

336. But I'm not talking about average people.

However, you and I don't agree on a lot of things, so I'm going to stop here.

[Zamen]

338. We have to talk about average people if we're going to make any point

That is relevant to people's actual experiences. Using the extreme cases as an example proves nothing.

[treestar]

384. So they should think nothing of being called the N word

And should think no more of it than if a black person calls me "whitey?"

[cheapdate]

341. Yes, I've heard black people say that very thing.

I've heard that very point argued eloquently by black writers, that the word says something about about the speaker and not about the subject.

[hifiguy]

249. Lenny Bruce was making that very argument

more than fifty years ago. And it is still a very persuasive one IMO.

[MannyGoldstein]

156. +1 nt

[treestar]

203. OK so a Hillary supporter

calls Bernie a spoonerism using the K word. That's OK isn't it?

[valerief]

160. Yep, they took the "magic" out of those words. Can be done with any

word, too. However, too many people benefit from the "magic" in certain words. Magic words keep hate alive.

[marym625]

163. exactly!

[Omaha Steve]

214. This straight supporter of LGBYQ was going to name call you

It didn't look right. Never mind.

[marym625]

220. LMAO!

Thank you for the levity! Needed that

[treestar]

202. Oh baloney, the use of the word is what keeps the hate alive

by the racists, misogynists, and homophobes.

[bettyellen]

223. The words today are powerfully disrespectful - pretending that bigots are improving society by

Hurling slurs is bullshit. And it's exactly what you are doing. There is a whole wide world out there where people are forced to tolerate in your face bigotry. This place is making an attempt at making the atmosphere of inclusion. If you don't care about that- you should not have agreed to the the TOS.

[treestar]

255. good description of it

yeah really, racism and homophobia and misogyny is positively reduced by the targets tolerating use of these words. Words specifically coined or adopted for the purpose of putting other people down.

I think they are going with the old Eleanor Roosevelt theme about how nobody can make you feel inferior by what they say about you. But that does not excuse people saying bigoted things. Yes I can choose not to let it get me down or bother me. That still didn't make it right or respectful to do.

[mercuryblues]

79. And you don't

speak for me. I am also a grown up. Not only that, I am smart enough to know that using derogatory slurs against 1 woman, hurts all women in the long run.

The link is, when women not only allow but defend the usage of slurs against them a certain mindset is created allowing systematic prejudice against all women. Women have come to far to allow back stepping.

Much like here. The term was used and now it has spread to others using it to test the boundaries. If not pushed back against, it becomes an acceptable term to use freely. Soon enough, the belief is why all woman are *, so they can't be taken seriously. They don't deserve equal rights. They are so stupid they need us to make laws concerning their bodies.

Women get enough of that shit from republicans, who by the way use derogatory terms quite extensively. Why should we have to put up with it in our own backyard? Why should we be told to ignore being degraded?

If anything, even if YOU don't mind the word many people do. It is the same as using the N word, K, and other derogatory terms for other nationalities and cultures.

So no, just don't ask me to lower my respect for women based on your lower acceptance level.

[boston bean]

145. Good post Mercury!

Thank you!

[treestar]

95. Sounding almost like a right winger today

That was the very point. That it's not weak to object to it.

[Texasgal]

108. Relax!

She is simply stating her OPINION! Geez... no one ever said she "speaks" for you!

[Gormy Cuss]

151. She's not speaking for all women. She is speaking from a broader context of language and culture.

I'm puzzled by the women who feel the need to shout that they're not the same brand of feminists as someone who is espousing a pretty mainstream feminist idea, that language is a tool of misogyny and hampers equality.

I've had many disagreements with bostonbean and other feminists here but I've never once thought they were speaking FOR me, let alone for all women. They're speaking for themselves and basing their comments on their knowledge of feminist dogma.

[BainsBane]

483. You are free to submit yourself to degradation

and any kind of abuse you like. But don't you dare try to justify it and enable others to treat me as less than human, which is precisely what you are engaged in here.

The OP talks about women "she KNOWS." You resent that she notes women she knows don't like to be insulted and abused. Obviously she isn't speaking for you or anyone who thinks like you. She is talking about most women, who are no different from any other human being in wanting to be treated with respect. Yes, a small percentage of the population prefers to be abused and insulted. Point made. But here you are giving cover to misogynists to use that language to express their contempt for the rest of us who don't like to be treated like shit. It's one thing to seek out abuse and mistreatment in your own life and another thing to promote its use for others. That is unconscionable.

You do not speak for me or any other woman I KNOW, and if I knew a woman like you I would unknow her as quickly as possible. The OP"s point stand, and if obviously has nothing to do with you, despite your efforts to impose your own destructive preferences on to the rest of women.

[Glitterati]

531. ROFL

you really are hysterical. And, I do not mean funny.

Bizarre and uncalled for. People ARE, in fact, allowed to disagree with you.

[kiva]

501. And you don't get to say that it's OK for people to call other women

c***s. It's that simple.

[Glitterati]

532. Really?

I get to say anything I damned well please.

I'd like to see you try and stop me.

After all, I did just that already.

[kiva]

535. This is sort of like talking to a child.

So to simplify, let's just say goodbye now and you can continue your temper tantrum...I'm sure you'll find plenty of people who are willing to call you whatever you like.

[Glitterati]

536. You're correct

the childish foot stomping, fit throwing, temper tantrums is quite the sight to behold.

You're the one who came barging in the door, long after the thread had been burned out of any discussion telling me what I can and cannot say.

Very directly doing so.

Yes, very much like my daughter when she was all of 6 years old telling her friends HOW they were gonna play today.

[LiberalArkie]

24. A lot of men do not like to be called a D*ck, or D%ckhead or As^hole or any of the many accepted

slang words used.

[geek tragedy]

30. Not all insults are created equal. nt

[Duckhunter935]

36. Yes we know

It is fine if it directed at men by a few here.

Both sides should refrain from offensive and more to the point, just impolite language here.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

96. Bingo

We're talking about common courtesy. Can't see why that's so hard for many to comprehend.

[Duckhunter935]

107. Agreed. Nt

[Exilednight]

62. You don't get to have it both ways. Either all pejoratives are equally

Offensive, or it's left to each person to decide how to rank them.

You can't get mad if someone insists that being called a d*ck is equally offensive as being called the n word if you're insisting that being called a c*nt is equally offensive.

By doing so, you've just relegated yourself to the same level as the right-wingnuts who try and force their religious moral values upon us.

[hifiguy]

265. Quit using irrefutable logic.

That is often not tolerated here.

[boston bean]

67. Please don't address this here.

This thread is about misogynistic language. They can start an OP for misandry if they like.

Posting those questions in this thread is just derailment.

[MoonRiver]

76. Maybe that is the point. n/t

[Duckhunter935]

83. Sorry but you do not get to tell us

Where and what we can post about.

It is about the hypocrisy of some DU members.

[boston bean]

85. Did I tell you what to do?

Did I tell anyone what to do?

Did I make a request to one particular poster... yes.

[MicaelS]

88. "Misandry"????

We men are often told there is no such thing.

[treestar]

115. Oh, the poor things

Poor men. Discriminated against, used as sex objects by women, treated badly if they gain weight or are aged, making less money, being told they choose all these things - poor men.

[7962]

208. So are you saying none of those things happen?

Probably dont believe a man can be raped by a woman either, right?
Chris Christy is an obvious example of fat jokes right here on DU. Even had its own OP a few days ago

[treestar]

213. It doesn't affect Chris Christie

I would not weight shame him but even those who do aren't stopping his career. An obese female would never be governor despite her abilities. Men are judged by what they do, not how they look. The fact he can get as far as he has says tons.

[7962]

222. How do you know it doesnt affect him? He may be hurt a great deal by it.

Just because he became governor doesnt make it OK. Oprah is one of the richest most successful women in the world, and she got ehre while being very overweight. Is it ok to make fun of her too since she's made it?
It just shouldnt be done to either sex.

People used to make fun of my big nose when i was a kid. I laughed with them because i knew they'd quit if I didnt look like it bothered me. It always worked. But I still was very self conscious about my nose.

[treestar]

233. We're talking about societal effects

He may be hurt, but it doesn't stop him from being governor. There are a few women who get somewhere despite weight - the exception not the rule. They have to overcome some pretty high barriers. Oprah went on a diet publicly, IIRR. It's not like she's immune either, in spite of having overcome the obstacles put in her path.

Fat men do have some loss of credibility, but it's not the same. They are still men. It's not as big an obstacle for them. That's because for centuries they have not been judged on their looks as much. Not nearly as much. For women it's more important to look good than anything else. Men have the luxury of that being secondary.

I'm sure we're going to hear from Republicans about how Hillary is an old hag. Comments on what she wears and so on.

[Zamen]

225. "An obese female would never be governor despite her abilities."

I take issue with that statement.

[treestar]

240. Name a female politician

who is obese along the lines of Christie.

I mean severely like he is, not just "TV fat." Where a woman is called fat for being larger than bone skinny. That's another thing. A woman will be considered "fat" with much less weight. The right is probably already calling Hillary that, and she's merely non-actress weight, not Christie-type obese.

[Zamen]

243. It might just be that obese women are less interested in going in to politics

The idea that an obese woman would never be able to make it due to extra obstacles put up in her way is totally unsupportable.

And of course the right are going to call Hillary that. However, it's not going to make a difference to anyone who doesn't already agree with them.

[treestar]

276. Oh so it's the old choice thing

Obese women choose not to go into politics. I wonder why.

Just like women choose lower paying jobs! And choose older men! And choose to resort to prostitution! It's some of the wonderful choices women have open to them! Women are women and that's what they do. They choose less for themselves every time. It's biology!

[Zamen]

289. It's more plausible

Than leaping to the conclusion that people simply won't tolerate a fat female governer. There's no reason to think that is the case.

[treestar]

298. There's some reason to consider it less likely to happen though

And reason to think a woman with the same weight problem as Christie would figure she should not bother to run.

[Zamen]

304. Less likely, maybe, but that could be for any number of different reasons

Chris Christie is despised by almost everyone, even his own people, so it's obviously his money and connections that gets him where he is, not his gender.

[qwlauren35]

328. Not sure why you say that.

There is documented evidence that there is discrimination against fat people. And we know that there is discrimination against women. So a fat woman has two strikes against her and would have more hurdles to overcome. I'm not saying she couldn't do it, but it would be very hard.

Not sure why you think it's a leap. If you want links to documented evidence about discrimination against fat people, I'll dig it up.

[7962]

293. Maggie De Block, Belgium's most popular politician. Has to be 300lbs

Oddly enough, she's the Health Minister.
But many say she's the front runner to be the next premier

[treestar]

302. Very interesting

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2791369/20-stone-minister-public-health-accused-big-credible-hits-saying-s-s-inside-counts.html

There's that. People are saying the same about Christie, too. I think it would be harsher in the US than in Europe.

Is 20 stone equivalent to what Christie is? She does look "big." It's good to hear, actually.

Belgium's 20-stone minister for public health is accused of being too big to be 'credible' - but hits back saying 'it's what's inside that counts'
Maggie De Block - a former GP - has deflected comments about her weight
Some questioned her suitability for tackling Belgium's obesity crisis
But the widely-admired minister says appearances mean nothing


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2791369/20-stone-minister-public-health-accused-big-credible-hits-saying-s-s-inside-counts.html#ixzz3cP0AAxfj
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

And in a way an obese person would be better for tackling the obesity crisis. They know about it.

[Zamen]

342. You're right

Overweight, elderly men are just having to fight the ladies off.

[lumberjack_jeff]

105. Because anything other than a monologue is misogyny. n/t

[boston bean]

113. No, but to be respectful to what the discussion is about and other persons space.

This is like entering a discussion on race and talking about how bad white people have it.

Would it be possible for just once that threads on misogyny not devolve into how much worse the men have it and us women should be happy as we have no need to discuss this at all, because shit happens to men too.

It's like the whole issue just gets pushed under the rug, because the men have an issue to.

For cripes sakes, why do I have to go through an inquisition on how I feel about male gendered slurs when discussing explicitly misogyny. It is a derailment and nothing more.

Please start your own thread on it. I'll be happy to comment on it there.

[lumberjack_jeff]

119. Sorry, no. The internet is not "your space".

The most obvious rebuttal (i.e. dialog) to the idea that language usage = hatred of women, is to look at the inverse.

There hasn't yet been invented a word, clause or pejorative phrase directed at men that isn't embraced as empowering, clever or witty.

... except the c-word, I suppose.

And as for your "discussion on race"? Caucasian is a race, you can't have a conversation of any transformative value without including the target of that conversation. To do otherwise is simply lecturing and impotent griping.

Women's issues aren't swept under the rug at DU. They ARE the rug.

[boston bean]

129. Did I say it was my space?

No I did not. Space as in a thread that is titled "Misogynistic language", a very serious issue btw, as a space to discuss that issue.

Why are you trying to rebut this thread???? Was there something said against you??

I have no idea, nor do I think I want to understand what you mean by this:

There hasn't yet been invented a word, clause or pejorative phrase directed at men that isn't embraced as empowering, clever or witty.

And no, it is just plain rude to enter a discussion ON race and talk about how bad white people have it.

[Zamen]

148. It's not rude to put things into context

[boston bean]

155. What context is that?

So you enter a room full of black persons discussing how their race faces discrimination and their difficulties.. You proceed to discuss how white men have it bad too... And what about this and what about that, and how come this and how come that...

How do you think people will react to you. Do they have a right to have a discussion on the issue without some white person entering telling them that they got it bad too and get the whole room off on a derailment instead of discussing the issue at hand? And then demand that they discuss that as well?

So, please tell me the context in which that is ok for some white person to barge in on a discussion like that and make it all about white people.

Again, make your own thread. I'll be happy to discuss my ideas and opinions on misandry in a thread about misandry.

Why don't you guys want to start your own thread?

[Zamen]

161. Aren't there special groups for threads where you don't want people barging in?

[boston bean]

174. I wouldn't know.. what do you know about it? nt

[Zamen]

177. I was under the impression that there were certain protected groups

For discussing sensitive issues like race, gender, Israel/Palestine, etc.

[boston bean]

179. good impression. glad your finding your way around.. took me a lot longer than 53 posts.

But you seem to be doing great.

[geek tragedy]

307. You're correct. Will not address the derailers. nt

[boston bean]

309. They have refused to start their own thread... maybe you could start one for them.. LOL

[geek tragedy]

314. Like that time Jon Stewart was misandrist

towards Tucker Carlson and drew widespread condemnation for using a "penis slur." Lol

Funny how such grievances are never affirmatively raised but only in reaction to and to derail discussions of misogynistic language.

Kind of like the whole Men's Rights and misandry nonsense to begin with.

[boston bean]

315. They could use GD/DU discuss their issues

but they seem only content in discussing them right in the middle of discussions of feminism/misogyny.

Funny that.

[geek tragedy]

316. What about the menz? nt

[boston bean]

319. I don't mind having the discussion, it's just that they demand

I discuss it in relation to misogyny.

I have no interest in that. It is not a game, it is not a competition.

I really do believe it is just a derailment tactic, that has served them very well.

[Zamen]

317. That's probably because it's not the slur itself which is the issue

But rather the hypocrisy of people who think it's ok to use one but not the other.

[Duckhunter935]

330. very true

[MicaelS]

92. We know there is a double standard.

The penis slurs abound, and I have not yet seen anyone banned for that. If the same level of constant negative comments were made about female genitalia or breasts, the number of people being PPR would reach into the hundreds.

[Duckhunter935]

141. Yes there is

Some just do not want to admit it.

[geek tragedy]

306. Because they are not as grave an insult.

This is a widely understood fact, only disputed by MRAs and others seeking to minimize the wrongfulness of misogynistic language.

"Dick" simply means "jerk." It does not seek to degrade the target by treating masculinity as something to be mocked.

[Zamen]

321. How is it not as grave?

The C word isn't treating femininity as something to be mocked either. It's simply people using parts of the sexual anatomy to insult each other, something people have being doing in all cultures, all over the world, since the beginning of time. It's innate to the human condition.

[pintobean]

331. Here's the test.

I could, and have, called my father a dick/prick/j.o. ect, both jokingly and in anger. I've never under any circumstances, called my mother a c**t. It would have been much too hurtful. The vast majority of guys would agree with that.

[Blue_Adept]

68. As Buzz would say...

[img][/img]

[treestar]

111. Asshole is nongender specific

As to the others, lol, I don't know any men who would admit to not liking that. I think they may like it. It would show they're "tough."

And men have been the dominant group, so it's no more insulting than "honky" or "whitey."

[mercuryblues]

183. wll then alert on it

when you see it being used. Feel free to start a thread on it. No one is stopping you.

[Squinch]

190. If you find those words demeaning, you should call them out where you see them, just as Boston Bean

has done here with a word she finds demeaning.

I feel pretty certain Boston Bean would be one of the first to back you up if you did so. (That is, if you did so where you see them rather than tossing them in as a "men have it worse than women" argument in a thread about misogynistic language.)

If you find that you are not willing to call people out when they use those words that you list as offensive, do you see what she means when she says it takes some guts to stand up and voice the objection when someone uses a word that you find demeaning?

[progressoid]

502. I know someone named Richard who refused to be called Dick

precisely because of the negative connotation and inevitable childish jokes.

[LostOne4Ever]

26. K&R (nt)

[valerief]

28. It's magic word time!

You Tube
"Lenny Bruce words"

[pintobean]

75. What's magic about it?

The fact that you got away with it, and Skip didn't?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/125512345#post12

[Duckhunter935]

147. Good find

Was there a call by the OP to have this member banned. The hypocrisy is strong around here. And that poster actually used THE word.

[pintobean]

189. It wasn't a find

JT Frog referenced it in the 1000+ post thread, and I asked her for a link. I think it's pretty fucked up that he went into HOF, in that thread, and posted that. It was hidden, and he was blocked from HOF. The OP is a HOF host. It looks to me like he's rubbing their noses in the fact that he got away with it. I have issues with the OP, but trying to label her a hypocrite here is bullshit. She's been consistent on this.

[Duckhunter935]

198. That some are allowed to remain after useing that word and others are not

is wrong. That one is being publicly flogged and the other one is not is wrong. I hate to say but some of these posts allowed in HOF are just beyond what should be allowed.

[pintobean]

207. So he should have been banned?

The difference on the call-outs is that one is an active member and the other isn't. You're smart enough to know that. What do you think would happen if someone started a thread to call for the banning of an active member?

[Duckhunter935]

209. I think both should have been hidden

[Lizzie Poppet]

91. The results are in!

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Jun 7, 2015, 11:20 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I would have to see the post where "he got away with it" to make a fair judgment. Since it has not been introduced into evidence, the charge is disregarded and case dismissed.

Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Now we have to watch videos to find where the "offensive" words are?
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It's fine. You don't get to censor DU so Go fuck yourself, alerter!
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Put down the carafe of whine, alerter.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Links would be helpful; I'm disinclined to make a judgement based on other posts that I haven't seen.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the

[valerief]

118. Ha! Thanks.

[packman]

32. Come on - want a lot of replies use the "C" word

Grab a word certain to set off a shitstorm - "N---", "C---", "F--" , write a few sentences and sit back to watch the replies. 100% certain to be good for at least 10 to 50 responses.

[LexVegas]

38. Those who don't think the c-word is misogynistic don't think the n-word is racist. nt.

[Gormy Cuss]

58. ^^^This^^^n/t

[peasant one]

44. words matter

As I posted in another op:

I sometimes get very angry at posters here---but I try not to bring that anger to my posts. I despise gender specific insults as much as race specific insults---not because I am too sensitive but because those terms are meant to demean others and, in my opinion, they have no place in serious public discourse. Sometimes I think people forget that these terms have a cumulative effect on individuals and society at large. If individuals here would not stoop to these tactics, I think DU would improve tremendously.

[boston bean]

51. Very true. Thank you for your thoughts.

[diamondhead]

48. What's with the asterisk?

Look, I know I just got here and all, but I've been reading through a lot of these threads and this is just really silly. Putting an asterisk in between the words or otherwise tiptoeing around it is unnecessary. You can spell it out, it's OK.

[boston bean]

53. I agree, it is ridiculous.. but I have had posts hidden when deriding the derogatory usage

when I have spelled it out.

The alerters state that my derision to the word, is as bad the misogynistic usage.

So, that is why you will see that from me.

[cwydro]

54. Can we call a guy a

pr*ck or a d*ck?

I've seen both here.

[boston bean]

55. Would it be possible for you to start your own thread.

I would really prefer this one not get derailed.

[Exilednight]

69. He brings up a fair point and dovetails nicely into your OP.

[boston bean]

70. This thread is about misogynistic language.

I've seen enough to know this is derailment. As if we are in some competition.

Can people, please have a moment to discuss this particular issue as it pertains to misogyny?

Is it possible you could start your own thread?

I won't be responding any further to these types of posts in this thread.

[Exilednight]

80. Your silence speaks volumes when someone else brings a valid point and then

Cry "derailment".

I know you're not going to reply, simply due to the fact that you can't do so without being hypocritical.

[hifiguy]

123. That kind of hypocrisy from some here

is so thick it has to be applied with a trowel. Unfortunately it is par for the course, always has been and probably always will be.

[cwydro]

81. I'm actually a she.

I thought it was relevant to the OP because respect should go both ways.

[Exilednight]

135. I sincerely apologize.

[cwydro]

146. Lol...guess what?

I did NOT take it as an insult.

[Duckhunter935]

86. Yes she does

And it seems some are afraid to answer a simple question that points out the hypocrisy allowed here.

[cwydro]

82. Nope.

I'm busy watching tennis.

I assume you do not want to answer my question.

[Buzz Clik]

56. Go ahead. Make my day. Call me a duck.

[RufusTFirefly]

74. Why a duck? Why a no chicken?

My apologizes in advance for any offense this may have caused to Italians, Italian-Americans, or poultry.

[hifiguy]

127. Ats-a no good.

Waddyadoin' there, eh?

[cwydro]

136. Lol!

I love ducks! I have eight of them!

So if I call you a duck, that would be a huge compliment!

[treestar]

121. I think we should not

at least not other DUers.

Seeing it used against people like Huckabee doesn't bother me though.

But men probably don't feel really bad about it or put down. It's sort of like "whitey."

[valerief]

122. No. That would make you a *****. nt

[guillaumeb]

61. Misogynistic speech is hate speech. It is that simple.

Just like racist speech.

What possible dialogue could have taken place when the poster first wrote the message about HRC? The post was not political speech, it was hate speech.

[RufusTFirefly]

72. Google is your friend

The following are all former DU threads.

In Case You Forgot Ronald Reagan Was A Dick
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026084635

My brother is such a dick! (anyone else got insane siblings/relatives?)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x879184

Oh yeah, did I mention that Dennis Miller is a dick?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x329011

Dicks only. Post a pic of a Dick.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x9711473

DON'T BE A DICK: Four Principles of the New Republican Mentality
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x566193

Andy Dick truly is a dick
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x6729396

(TOON) Nixon v Cheney: Who's the bigger Dick?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5483687

14 YEAR OLD BOY BUSTED FOR BEING A DICK!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x4191824

Should the big Dick Cheney show his face in New Orleans...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4685866

HUGO CHAVEZ IS NOT A DICK-TATOR!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1446813

With any luck, we can keep this current thread going right up to election day.

[Duckhunter935]

90. Funny the lack of outrage

The hypocrisy is astounding

[marble falls]

169. If I as a male sufferered from repression and worse historically in the face of a superior....

demographic then I might look at being called a dick differently. Its not the same.

[Zamen]

272. What has anyone suffered historically?

You only suffer what you lived yourself.

[marble falls]

348. Tell that Trevon Martin or Malala Yousafzai. "It had nothing to with being black or a woman."

[Zamen]

351. Why would I tell them that?

[nichomachus]

97. You probably don't want to search on DU and "asshole"

You'd overload the Google. However, be advised that the language police here are very selective.

[RufusTFirefly]

99. Well, at least that's an equal opportunity epithet n/t

[Duckhunter935]

112. True, we all have them

[RufusTFirefly]

117. Interestingly enough, the French word "con" is generally used to mean one....

... even though it literally refers to the word that is the topic of discussion in this thread.

Perhaps it's not surprising that when the French movie The dîner de cons was released in the States, it was translated as The Dinner Game. And when it was remade in English (badly, I might add), its title was Dinner for Schmucks. (By the way, the faint-hearted among us might not want to investigate the etymology of the Yiddish word schmuck.)

[hifiguy]

133. Or "putz." nt

[RufusTFirefly]

139. Yes! Yiddish is a veritable treasure trove of such words. n/t

[hifiguy]

149. I am not Jewish but I love Yiddish

expressions. They sound so evocative. A Jewish friend in law school told me I used more Yiddish expressions than most of his Jewish friends.

[RufusTFirefly]

157. Me neither. And I agree.

Now if only these nudniks would stop kvetching.

[hifiguy]

282. Oy, I know. It's enough to make you meshuggah.

[erronis]

152. Ah, I forgot that wonderful farce (Dîner de Cons)

I'm guessing that most amerloques are still in their puritanical phase of history. They want other people to do what they say, even if they don't follow their own rules.

[treestar]

89. Such a good point

No liberal would accuse black people of being thin skinned and weak for protesting the various words that indicate racism. Yet we still see that women are supposed to put up with this stuff.

[bluestateguy]

110. counter bad ideas and bad words with better ideas and better words

The word is very sexist and revolting.

Counter it with criticism and better ideas and words, not censorship.

If you have to win the argument by way of censorship, then that reveals the weakness of your argument.

[MoonRiver]

120. So you think repulsive, insulting and even sexually aggressive words

against women should be tolerated on a liberal Democratic message board?

[TerrapinFlyer]

142. Yes.

No words should be banned.

"against women"... those words are k: but just not "against women".. right?

Is that the rule you are proposing?

[GoneOffShore]

173. There will be crickets or cries of deflection.

[TerrapinFlyer]

137. Ahhhhh.. the Word Police on DU are here... please post all the words we are not allowed to use.

I have never been offended by a combination of letters.

[RufusTFirefly]

150. There is really only one word we need to focus on:

Respect

Although I would never, ever use the c-word to refer to anyone (nor would I use the b-word, except perhaps as a verb), I think this discussion has spun completely out of control.

Ultimately, we need to respect each other.
If we can do that, everything that follows becomes almost intuitive.

[Rex]

143. "Make no mistake you are judged by your words..."

Exactly.

[Township75]

159. So start with a very good line you wrote...

"Make no mistake you are judged by your words, because they are what one uses to tell us they you are."

If you censor what words people can use, then you can't tell much about their character.

I don't like those words, and also would throw-in d*ck, @sshole, red n*ck, sl*t, etc, but I would rather let individuals have the freedom to use them so I have an idea about their character and if society is making any progress towards voluntarily not using them.

[cwydro]

164. What about tw*t"?

And no, I don't mean twit.

Is that also misogynistic? I am curious.

I've heard that used against men and women.

[marble falls]

175. Thought for today:

http://dilbert.com/strip/2015-06-07

[cwydro]

185. Lol!

Very good!

[Duckhunter935]

165. why was one allowed to stay?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125512345#post12

Why is this poster still a DU member and actually used the full uncensored word?

Selective enforcement and hypocrisy are not a good thing IMO

[boston bean]

171. You will have to direct your question to admin on that.

It's not like MANY women here (& men) haven't asked for more stringent guidelines and enforcement on this.

[mylye2222]

166. If the OP is reffering to NYC_SKP's recent ban...

Well he used that word in RESPONSE to the troll.

[GoneOffShore]

176. And he didn't even use the actual word.

A spoonerism, granted, but not the actual word.

Apparently there were other issues in play, but the language police won that round.

[Duckhunter935]

180. and another active DU member

has used THE uncensored word and is still active and posting.

[GoneOffShore]

187. And so it goes.

As I've said before: The Sisters and Brothers of the Church of the Easily Outraged and Perpetually Offended are legion on DU.

Possibly even bigger than Anonymous.

[H2O Man]

283. jury results

On Sun Jun 7, 2015, 02:02 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

And so it goes.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6794711

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Now that we have accepted that women are being silly, not wanting to be called the c word. The men on DU has established their right to call us the c word. We are being dismissed with the "Church of the Easily Outraged and Perpetually Offended". I get this wont be a hide. We do not think calling a woman the c word should be hidden. Still, I dare to send an alert.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Jun 7, 2015, 02:11 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No one who uses "c-word" should expect to get a hide for their alert. BTW, the Church of the EO and PO is routinely used to describe many professionally outraged groups. Leave it alone
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: You "get this wont be a hide"? But you alerted anyway.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't see the problem with the post. (I haven't read it in the context of the thread. But, on its own, it seems like part of the nonsense that passes for meaningful discussion on DU:GD.) -- H2O Man

[GoneOffShore]

334. Thank you. And, as a friend always says, end scene.

I've been watching the back and forth on this for a week.

And I would say that the amount of energy devoted to it would power Las Vegas for a year.

It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.

Added on edit:

Maybe we should petition to have GD renamed the Ouroboros Forum.

[BainsBane]

379. The term is meant to insult

That is its only purpose. If one did not mean to offend, they would choose a different word. It has a clear meaning, not one some people later determine because they want to excuse bad behavior. I'm sorry that you don't find bigotry an outrage. Clearly you do not share the commitment to human equality that the OP and some others do and you instead choose to promote the privilege of a select, entitled minority. That is precisely how power and inequality are perpetuated. Language signals how people see the world. NYCSkp made a mistake. What is more offensive to me is that so many who pretend to be liberals defend bigoted slurs, thus promoting a system of inequality that benefits the few at the expense of the many. It shows that the concerns some have raised about a politics that excludes the voice and concerns of the majority is alive and well. The language, and most importantly the unyielding defense of language, shows a clear intent to exclude. I find inequality in all its manifestations outrageous. I believe human beings are all equal and worthy of respect. I used to think that was a core believe to anyone who claimed to be a liberal. I have learned that is sadly not the case, which is precisely why many do not feel they can count on a self entitled minority to see to their rights, when they have made clear repeatedly that they see them as less. I find it outrageous that people claiming to be liberals show an ideology identical to the right when it comes to gender (and often race). I find this exclusionary politics for the few and by the few offensive.

NYCSkp was PPR'd by the administrators, but we once again see that feminists and women are scapegoated. His banning is a mere pretext for the performance of power and privilege that is at the heart of restorationist, reactionary politics. I also find it unfortunate, but not at all surprising, that those targeting feminists lack the courage to confront the administrators responsible for the banning. That the go to position is to scapegoat women speaks to the very mentality that leads one to use and defend such words. Scapegoating is often what those lacking the courage to confront power do.

You are indeed outraged, only it is not by bigotry. You instead are outraged that women are demanding to be treated with respect. Your outrage is that we do not stay in our place, the same outrage that leads people to insult a presidential candidate with the foulest word in the English langauge one can use toward women. To pretend the intent it to do anything but degrade and offend doesn't pass the smell test.

The sisters of perpetual outrage are also outraged by the system of inequality that leads 20 percent of women to be raped in their lifetimes and more subject to domestic violence. We are also outraged by the fact that only 4 percent of rapists are convicted. We are also outraged by SCOTUS decisions allowing private companies to treat us as less under the law. We are told all of those issues are less important than the white male bourgeoisie cares about, just as bigotry against us is ridiculed. We are told that equal pay for equal work and EEOC regulations are unimportant. The clear message is that those issues are less because we as human beings are less, which is precisely what that bigoted term conveys.

You go ahead and ridicule bigotry against half the population. Treat is as a joke, just as the right does. But don't for a second think we are going to sit back and do your political bidding, affirm your privilege and promote your interests while you ridicule ours. You and your like-minded friends have demonstrated that you are not our allies, and you do not seek to create a better society based on inequality. So you go ahead and try to carry out your political reform for the few and by the few. You will not succeed, and statements like this and the patronizing attitude shown toward other subaltern groups demonstrate why. Don't expect me to give a flying fuck about your job when you take my equal rights as a joke. I will not be supporting the white male middle-class and upper-middle class' efforts to take the country back. In fact, I will do everything in my power to dislodge the gender, race, and class privilege the self-entitled believe is their birthright. I am making the erosion of white male supremacy my mission.

Thank you for convincing me that I cannot count on men, or women similarly oriented in ideology, to uphold my rights, that even when they claim to be on the left they are fully capable of being every bit as dismissive of my rights and my humanity as any right winger. You have convinced me that gender does in fact matter in a political candidate. The ongoing effort to exclude more and more Americans from the body politic has been going on for sometime, but his scapegoating is the last straw. I will look after my own rights because it's pretty clear the rest of you have no intention of doing so.

Now I shall change my sig line.
.

[Zamen]

382. Insulting and offending people is not the same as bigotry

[uppityperson]

385. Sometimes insults are bigoted though. People use bigotry to insult but not all insults are bigotry

Most cats have fur, but not everything with fur is a cat.

[Zamen]

386. Sometimes, but not in this case

[uppityperson]

389. Yes, it was misogyny, a form of prejudice and the action of writing it made it into bigotry

Many definitions of bigotry include the necessity of an action. Prejudice is the thought, bigotry is the action.

Bigotry per wiki

In American English, the term can be used similarly; however, it can also be used to refer to intolerance towards a group of people in general based on their group characteristics such as race, religion, national origin, gender, disability, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status.[3][4]

Misogyny per many dictionaries : dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women.

[Zamen]

392. There's no evidence of any dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice

Against women in this case. Just dislike of one individual who happened to be a woman.

[uppityperson]

394. Insulting someone with a prejudicial, misogynistic term = bigotry.

[uppityperson]

400. Using a perjorative slur, female based, is showing contempt specifically against women

Misogyny per many dictionaries : dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women.

[Zamen]

401. It's showing contempt against the specific woman it was directed at

If it was directed at all women, then maybe, but in most cases it's directed at an individual woman.

The fact that a word is female based isn't misogynist in itself. We use gendered pronouns and nouns all the time.

[uppityperson]

403. by using a female based pejorative slur.

[GoneOffShore]

492. Well bless your heart. TL/DR

Because BS. And so much PoMo thought in one place.

[TeeYiYi]

258. It's about context...

Crass gender slur directed at the wife of a republican vs. crass gender slur directed at a respected democratic female contender during primary season.

One earned a hide while the other earned a ban.

If you can't stop yourself from referring to Hillary Clinton as a c*nt, regardless of how cleverly you couch the slur, you probably won't survive the heated 2016 presidential election on DU.

TYY

[RufusTFirefly]

184. Oh come on! Don't spoil things. We're on a roll here! n/t

[nichomachus]

181. Maybe we need to reconsider putting a woman in the White House

If women are a special class, for whom we have to use gentler language than we use for men, then they are not politically equal.

If we can call a man a dick (a gender-specific body part), but we can't call a woman a @@@@ (a gender-specific body part) because of the sensitivity of women to language, women may not be ready for doing battle in a male-dominated world.

So either ban all body-part language for everyone -- dick, asshole, and @@@ -- or ban none of them.

[Duckhunter935]

194. I tend to agree

Lets just treat everyone equal. Of course the polite and considerate thing to do is not use any of those words. I just do not care for the hypocrisy.

[hifiguy]

301. Excellent point

I have a rich and colorful vocabulary for expressing contempt that doesn't include certain vulgarities, including the one leading to this ridiculous kerfuffle.

[treestar]

210. FFS so ignore all of history

pretend we are all equal. And now you are pretending a woman is not "ready" for the WH because we object to gender insults for all women. Marvelous. Oh and I guess Obama would not like to be called the N word, so he wasn't ready to do battle with white men. Wonderful.

It is not part of doing battle for the WH to have these terms used against people from an oppressed group. You're saying essentially Obama or Hillary should be OK with those words because that's what white men do to prove they are tough or to test other people to see if they are tough enough and in any event, that the white men get to determine the standards for toughness.

And dick is not equivalent any more than honky is equivalent to the N word.

[davidn3600]

290. Why does history matter?

Are you suggesting we need to set up special classes and categories of people because of the sins of our ancestors?

If Hillary is elected, then any disagreement with her or insult against her would be viewed as "sexist" because she's part of an oppressed group? Is that what you are saying? That women need special protections and special privileges?

Male politicians are insulted, made fun of, and criticized on a nearly constant basis. Female politicians better be ready for the same treatment. Otherwise, politics probably isn't a good career choice.

[still_one]

212. Inane false equivalecy. Just look how women are viewed historically up to today

and they are treated as second class citizens

Even the analogy you gave is mostly used by men. Women in some circles are viewed as sexual objects, who can't do math or science, and "should stay home and be barefoot and pregnant"

[TeeYiYi]

219. Are you serious?...

Try calling Obama a n*gger and see how far it gets you.

It's about respect.

TYY

[gollygee]

237. Women are an OPPRESSED class

and your solution is even greater oppression. Yeah, you're really liberal. /sarcasm

[Zamen]

359. How so?

[nadinbrzezinski]

234. By now it should be clear

That you hardly speak for all. (I expect this to be alerted as well)

[boston bean]

239. It should be pretty clear by now that actually a lot of people agree with me.

but thanks for posting.

BTW, I was sent those jury results... I can't believe that you called me that..

[nadinbrzezinski]

242. I did not call you a thing

I said you came to mind when that scene played. Hardly an insult but since it is DU it proved the point, beautifully so.

It should also be crystal clear that many agree with me and Sabrina. Don't worry, this place has a reputation among issues oriented people on the web. It is not precisely stellar or progressive.

[boston bean]

251. uh huh.. it's there for all to read...

You talk about bullying and you do something like that....

I'll tell you what's not stellar or progressive.. is you calling me that word in the oh so clever way you did so.

[nadinbrzezinski]

260. My apologies you took your advocacy as an attack

I know better than to even address you anymore. It is precisely a waste of my time.

[boston bean]

277. Please do me a favor and never post to me again as you say, after what you called me in your

oh so clever way.

It was obvious to everyone, and I just don't need that. Thank you.

[zappaman]

250. Unbelievable that a poster would think calling another poster

That would be acceptable.
Great hide!

"This is not a conversation that can be had here because of folks like you.
But you were the other person I was thinking off as that word left the mouth of one of the characters."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026792887#post48

Not cute and certainly not adorable.

[nadinbrzezinski]

257. I am sorry that you missed why it came up to my mind

which is that the discussion here over the term, and her advocacy to it, brought her to my mind

Go ahead and once again, alert on this post.

That hide proved exactly what some of us have been saying, which is a beautiful thing

[zappaman]

266. Oh, I got what you were saying and so did the jury.

Not cute.
Not adorable.

[nadinbrzezinski]

299. Whatever dude

duddette

It was indeed a beautiful thing

I locked it because I know exactly what people like you would do in a thread I was locked out off.

Which is hardly cute, or adorable.

[R B Garr]

390. You just posted a few days ago that you IP ban people from your blog.

What's up with that? You obviously understand offensive postings, vulgarity, and obscenity to the point that you would block people from posting. It makes no sense that you don't understand that same concept here. No sense at all.

[nadinbrzezinski]

397. I am sorry, once again

that this is confusing. Given the recent ahem... discussions, and the role of the OP in them, her name immediately came to my mind as that single line of script was said on the big screen. It came as one that is rather muscular in stating the offensiveness of the language.

I am sorry that people insist in misreading this. Of course it is also telling as to why this place cannot be taken seriously.

At my site the snide attacks, such as spell flames, questioning of credentials, sh... things like that, have earned an IP Ban to a few folks. I had one person call a regular poster all kinds of names in a post... that post never saw the light of day. Due to both Democratic Underground and The Conservative Cave, that site is manually moderated. So those posts will not get though.

But as I said, I am sorry, that this will continue to be misunderstood. I should have expected that. It is the walking on eggshells we are all now familiar and expected to do here.

Now if you do not mind, I have elections to cover in Mexico. Not that I will bother posting any of that here. The only way it might be of interest is if I included a few choice words.

[boston bean]

407. That is utter baloney.

You make a post telling people that if they are easily offended by the C word, to not see the movie SPY. Which apparently has some character saying c*nt over and over and over again.

Then you post directly to me that when that character is saying that word over and over again that I am a person that came to your mind.

Disgusting... please stop trying to make excuses for it. An apology would be nice, but apparently that will not be forthcoming.

[nadinbrzezinski]

409. My apologies that I was not clear in stating that you were rather muscular

and made the case that the word should never, ever if at all in any context, should be used. That includes a hollywood script



Now back to the elections, really... and for multiple reasons, mostly since DU does not really care about issues, or foreign affairs, won't be posted here. That was proven beyond a shadow today.

So off to serious stuff.

They are on a news break, adds, need to pay the bills

[boston bean]

410. Except that wasn't what was being conveyed I presume.

Was the character stating something I was saying?

You said the mere mention of the word brought me to your mind.

You apologize for what you feel is me misunderstanding.... weak, and sad.

[nadinbrzezinski]

411. It was, I am sorry for lack of clarity

I suppose that at this point it is up to you to either accept that or not.



But that is what I MEANT. I guess, I should know, since I wrote it... but perhaps I am not aware of what I meant.

Regardless this place proved that it really cares little for issues. So will be read for the comedic value it has anymore.

[boston bean]

413. I'll consider the apology, as I don't buy the excuse/explanation

here were your exact words to me, which I do believe were cleverly calling me the c-word:

This is not a conversation that can be had here because of folks like you.

But you were the other person I was thinking off as that word left the mouth of one of the characters.

This may not be an issue for you, but I can only imagine your response if someone had something you do find offensive to you.

I think I'm being pretty level headed about the whole thing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

415. I am going to avoid walking on egg shells with you

from now on... while you are not going on Ignore, nobody is, I don't intend to address you much either. Less you misunderstand me again. And quite honestly, I prefer to deal with issues... now really, back to the elections. (Which once again, unless I posted the thread with a few choice words, will sink, so won't bother with it here, never mind we have folks missing, gun play and dead people... who cares? It is not in the US)

[boston bean]

417. Yes, nadin, you are the victim here.....

I am the one who done did you wrong...

[nadinbrzezinski]

418. If that is YOUR INTERPRETATION that is fine

but that is an example of why I need to walk on eggshells.

And since I don't want to walk on them, let's stop wasting our time here. Becuase that is all we are doing.

[boston bean]

419. You sure are good at trying to make someone else be at fault.

You said it. You can own it.

I've done nothing to you. I did nothing to you to enter your mind the moment some movie character starts to repeatedly say the word c*nt. That is all on you.

[nadinbrzezinski]

421. Nope, just pointed out a reality

We need to walk on egg shells, because the wrong tone of voice will be used to say people mean what they do not.

And I hate walking on egg shells. That is what you are going to have to own out of this discussion, that some of us will apologize for lack of clarity, but will from now on walk on egg shells. This is what you want anyhow. So that is what you get.

[boston bean]

422. cute and clever.. again..

[nadinbrzezinski]

424. Not cute, nor clever, the way I feel

What you are doing is denying the feelings of others. I shall own (as I already have) that you felt insulted for my lack of clarity. I even apologized for it, acknowledging YOUR FEELINGS.. You could own, I do not expect you, that you are creating an environment where some of us, not just me, but I am speaking for myself, feel that in your case we need to do this. I will not presume to speak for others, but more than a few folks have written words to this effect over the last what is it now, 72 hours?



This environment is also making this a place where real issues are not discussed.

As I said, back to real issues. This is life and death, not that matters, since it is not the United States. (Nor will post a link here)

[boston bean]

426. blaming me again for something you did... nice.

why don't you just stop.

[nadinbrzezinski]

429. I am not blaming you

I am stating a case.

[boston bean]

431. right the case for the reason I came to mind the moment

someone repeatedly starting saying the c-word on a movie screen.

[nadinbrzezinski]

432. I already clarified the point

we are not going down that road again.



Look, I owned my own lack of clarity. What you do at this point, is for you to decide, not me.

Have an excellent day.

[pintobean]

414. You're a published author and "Reporter, editor, and wonk."

Clarity is your business. Everybody knows what you meant.

[nadinbrzezinski]

416. Except aparently me

which is amazing. You do read my mind... you also not going on ignore... though I find you boring

[gollygee]

423. You're a newspaper reporter and you post here under your own name?

No newspaper I wote for for would have been OK with that. Maybe things have changed since I stopped doing that work.

[nadinbrzezinski]

427. Yeah a lot has chanced since you did that

for starters we do not chase if it bleeds it leads. Used to be known as the police beat, but that's ok. These days, it almost feels that is what most media does.

I even own it. We mostly do policy, and other serious stuff, as well as the procedural closures by CALTRANS. A few wanted from the Sheriff's...

[gollygee]

430. I didn't do police beat for very long

Mainly municipal news and features.

[nadinbrzezinski]

448. We do quite a bit of that

I read the budget. I can even tell you that Comicon is a line item in the budget.

Not that I intend to post about comicon here either.

It is fun, but...

[Kali]

456. ah another post telling us stupid, ungrateful peons what you won't post about

you sure tell us that often, we must be REALLY fucking slow that you need to repeat it so much.

[nadinbrzezinski]

460. Nope

just no interest on my part to post what will sink, unless i put a few choice words.



And I do not intend to do that. You can check on that from CNN... it does make it national

[zappaman]

461. Yes.

As always.

[R B Garr]

433. "So those posts will not get though." sic. Wow, that sounds worse than here if it's

"manually moderated."

So people apparently have to "walk on eggshells" on your site? What's up with that?

On your site, the manual moderation is okay and should be understood, but here it's some onerous "clique," as you describe it, who is suppressing you. Still makes no sense, and it sounds hypocritical or like double standards.

[nadinbrzezinski]

435. Only if you intend to tell me

that "my 5 year old writes better than you." Which people have

Or the every so popular, "you are a insert B word here." I am not going to allow that on

Or the ever so popular, with this member that "you are an insert racist slur here, lover."

See, I am walking on eggshells. It is DU.

And no, that is not going to get through. Sorry. If you want to get IP banned, just try it.

[pintobean]

443. Eggshells are crunchy.

[nadinbrzezinski]

447. Of course they are

crunch, crunch, crunch But it is what it is.

[R B Garr]

444. See, I hate to tell you this, but you've just destroyed any real objections

you purport to have over word usage/vulgarity/obscenity. You are giving specific examples of what it would take for you to censor someone on your site, yet you refuse to accept that those same standards can and should be applied here.

It makes no sense if you continue to argue that there is not a need for language standards on an internet website. Of course there are. So it seems like you're more interested in keeping the "clique" mantra going than in admitting that site owners can and will take steps to moderate offensive content.

[nadinbrzezinski]

446. Well, you are free to your opinion

the sad part is that it is because of PARTISANS on both sides.

And I did not argue there is no need for standards. But as as DU is concerned, there are no standards. The standards is whatever flies during the electoral season. This is an old tradition. We have purges every few years and people are purged for the smallest of offenses, if they are on the wrong side.

And at this point, it is just comedic.

[R B Garr]

453. That's quite an unfair characterization of what really happened, which is

why it's difficult to take the accusations of partisanship seriously when the most recent event had to do with controlling or moderating offensive content. It had nothing to do with "cliques" or partisanship when you remove yourself from the situation and observe it as you would do yourself on your own site.

No one should have to endure those insults you printed above, so it's good you disallowed them. It's really not a partisan issue or comedy to not want to be called the b-word or the c-word or stupid, etc. It's just common sense and common courtesy.

[boston bean]

458. cognitive dissonance, it's an amazing thing....

[R B Garr]

516. Yes, it looks that way.

The double standards are amazing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

459. I got no idea how long you have been here

but purges and silly seasons are traditions of this place. This is part of the collective history of DU... and one of the ugly parts of that history.

If we all saw the equal enforcement of rules, perhaps many of us who have been here for a long time, would not be truly laughing at the whole situation if we were not familiar with that history.

He should have been given a time out, becuase that is the level of enforcement when people have been used that word. And the time out, would have been a hide, to be consistent with the past... but if you are going to ban somebody for using those words... fine, be consistent and ban people for the use of that and worst. This is why it feels as if it is targeted.

The best known of these purges is the great gay purge, I think of 2009. It really got bad.

Every election this happens. So at this point, it is silly season, now with more spleen, and the unofficial opening of the great purge of 2016.

I know that at this point I really watch what I say here. And I also know I have a bunch of people trying hard to get me to answer to their barbs. I have a designated bully crew. There are reasons for that too. It is not a flaw, it is a design feature.

The OP has all the right in the world to believe what she believes. But somebody else pointed out how this looks. At the risk of getting banned, I have been told by people on the front lines, from working class background that the fixation on just language, makes them have quite a bit of disrespect for people like her. I really do not think she is receptive as to why, so will not bother with that..

The first time I was told this, in the field, my reaction was WHY? I just went, what the hell is going on? But the people I talk to don't see the language as a large issue. Why? It does not put food on the table, It does not get them hours. It does not deal with the issue of rape in the work place (or colleges for that matter). It really does not.

And somebody else pointed it out to her. Many women I know, no longer even try to discuss welfare reform on DU. I am not talking for them, but I have noticed this pattern. They no longer bother with eduction either. We no longer bother with these extremely large issues. I posted earlier in the day, (and it was locked as I predicted, part of the problem) that we really cannot talk issues, and we need to walk on eggshells.

So at this point, DU is highly entertaining.

Hell, I will not post the live blogging from the Mexican election on DU. There is zero interest. Or at least this has been made utterly clear by a few folks. That diminishes the discussion and the site. But that is the choice of the dominant voices. So right now it is what it is.

And I will continue to watch what I say.

[R B Garr]

515. Wow, that's a boatload of stuff. I don't want to get into a rock-paper-scissors

thing with you about everything you laid out, and who am I to deny your reality that these things happened the way you said they did or to deny your observations.

I'll just say that what I've seen is not that issues can't or won't be discussed, it's just that more often than not, people are discussing/attacking other DU'ers and would rather attack and dismiss them personally than discuss any issues. Issues get derailed with personal vendettas on a regular basis. I first started noticing it after that Meta forum was closed down, and apparently things spilled out into the other forums. You, yourself, claim quite often that this forum is beneath your lofty journalistic standards, so that's going to invite some blowback which explains what you experience here, not so much a lack of issue discussion.

Anyway, it still sounds like you're making the SKP issue about partisanship, which you have no way of knowing, so maybe that's more a reflection of your own partisanship...? I'm not all that familiar with SKP except for his incessant postings about Clinton that were becoming quite irrational and obviously drew attention. It sounds like he has a shot of returning if he makes his case, though. Lots of people like him, which is a good thing.

You have a great day.

[nadinbrzezinski]

521. It is partly about it

I am sorry you can't se that.

But it is. Now we are in silly season: now with more spleen. And the official start to great purge if 2016.

Perhaps you will notice, perhaps not. And for god sakes my candidate is big money, not any of the clowns on both sides running. We just cover it.

[zappaman]

522. I don't think the Democrats who are running are clowns.

I like them all.

[nadinbrzezinski]

523. Correct.

Whoever wins in an oligarchy is a figure head. and anybody who expects significant changes in things like foreign affairs is dreaming. It matters, it is debatable how much, in internal policies.

I just find it highly amusing at this point

And this place is extremely entertaining as well. I suspect for very different reasons than what you see here.

[pintobean]

261. Thought she was being clever about it.

She was not.

[boston bean]

263. Yeah, the OP deleted what she was referring to, but we all know

it was about a movie that must have said the c-word a bunch of times. the movie SPY??

And nice to know how she thought of me while that word was flying out of that characters mouth.

[zappaman]

273. It was a poor attempt at being insulting and nasty.

So was NYCSkips.
The only difference is he directed it to a Democratic nominee and she directed it at a poster she disagrees with.
Both unacceptable, IMO.

[Glitterati]

245. Not that this simple fact ever stopped them

or ever will.

[hifiguy]

308. It's like arguing with the fundies about the age of the earth.

They just KNOW. Evidence to the contrary is dismissed at the start and never responded to.

[Glitterati]

311. LOL, yeah

like my fundie sister actually arguing with me that Moses lived to be 800 years old.

Doesn't have to make sense to the "true believers." It just IS.

[DustyJoe]

278. just another word for the taboo list

It's a little confusing.

It's a word 2 guys call each other in jest or seriously.

It's a word 2 females can call each other *ie caught my grandaughter 17 on her xbox playing a game yelling 'you c**t' at another grandaughter, I got on her only to be told to chill out that's how they talk to each other*

So it's another word that can be used sometimes, but has 'rules' like the N word is okay between some. But use the N word or C word at the wrong time, wrong place, wrong person, wrong conditions then be prepared to reap the whirlwind. So it's probably another word best to add to the taboo censored word list as not to anytime offend the addressee or someone in range of the word no matter the context it's used.

[IdaBriggs]

287. Opinion vs Fact: My opinion is that you are attempting to make a larger point

about the courage it takes to stand against "cultural norms" that denigrate and insult women.

Unfortunately, it appears that you are a member of a social sub group on DU that behaves in a borderline rude and/or abusive way, with a "ganging up" style that frankly reminds me of some bad high school movies featuring "mean girls". Multiple examples are available in this thread already.

I do not feel defended, supported or even liked by you. I do not appreciate the tone of many of your supporters. I do not want the issues of equality, social justice, or even common courtesy to be confused with the manners frequently displayed by the self-proclaimed "feminists" on this board.

I am a woman. I support equal pay issues, right to choose, freedom from abuse - you name it, and I am there.

Unfortunately, just like "decent Christians" wince when compared to members of the Westboro Baptist Church, I find proclamations of "courage" about misogynistic language usage in this context (we both know this is about the latest discussion with NYC_SKP a catalyst) disingenuous at best.

Swinging the blade of rhetoric at someone who has previously never displayed a penchant for MRA issues, and with interpretation subject to reasonable varying opinion is a waste of time that detracts from fighting against people who actually want to diminish women.

If you think NYC_SKP is someonewho doesn't belong on this board because of his ONE POST, congratulations - EarlG agreed with you. If you think he is a bad person who isn't an ally, well, that shows the level of discernment you bring to the conversation.

If you think *I* am not a supporter of feminist causes, again, that goes to your perceptions.

But please be clear: I really believe many of your public stands do more harm than good to the fight for equality and justice.

And I do not want Hillary Clinton in the White House again for reasons I have already discussed at length. I would love to see her on the Supreme Court where I think she would be an astounding and amazing Justice.

[hifiguy]

324. That, Ida, is one freaking brilliant post.

[GoneOffShore]

340. Thank you Ida.

Great post.

[Zamen]

344. Summed it up perfectly

[Prism]

373. I believe the 8th Amendment prohibits this post

Because that thoroughly gorgeous scorching was cruel and unusual!

This thread isn't mystery. She and others didn't like the response they got from tons of women in your OP. So she made her own, gone fishing with the swarm.

I'm playing a quiet game with these threads now, silently asking in my head, "How many women can these posters ignore in the name of women?"

Turns out, an awful lot. An awful lot.

[840high]

493. +X100

[marym625]

525. Brava!

[qwlauren35]

291. I remember in

Inside Man when the Jodie Foster character was called that. She smiled and owned it. Because she had the man "by the balls" and all he could do was call her names.

So, I think men who use it are desperate. To hurt, to belittle. Because it is SO ugly. It's one of the few words that gets me punchy. I'm numb to ni**er. I hate it, but when my own people use it, I can't punch them. I want to SPANK them for being so immature. Because I see use of Ni**er as immaturity in not knowing its roots, and thinking that it can be turned around in an era where it still has the original derogatory meaning. So now we have some people using it for cameraderie, and others using it derogatorily, and then trying to sneak an excuse in that we use it, so why can't they. Argh.

But back to the c*** word. I am black and I am a woman. So I hate both words. Why do I hate one over the other? Maybe because I sense less hatred from white women, but I am wary of men. Men who would use the word C*** think so little of women, that I have to wonder if they would stoop to rape. And it is not as simple as nipping it in the bud. You cannot just return blow for blow because there is no corresponding word for men. There is no word that degrades men. They don't permit it.

So, c*** is a fighting word for me. I would slap a man who used it to my face if I could. He would be reported to HR in a work setting, and I might try to have him sued. Because a man who would use that word is probably a sexual predator, or at least one who routinely sexually harrasses women.

I sit here furious and sick.

Men, know, if you use that word, you have revealed yourself as despicable in my eyes and unworthy of respect.

[boston bean]

296. Excellent post.

Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts.. They are right in line with mine!

[DrDan]

353. misogynistic language has no place here - use of that word deserves significant consequences

that has never been a secret.

Regardless of post count, membership at the cool-table, how well liked one is, there are consequences for that behavior.

It was not a single incident. This poster has clearly stated his intention to push the limits. This time, he went beyond.

[Zamen]

355. How is it misogynistic language?

[DrDan]

356. cute

[Zamen]

357. It's a simple enough question

It might be offensive, but I don't see how it's misogynistic.

[undeterred]

358. Its perfectly ok to call someone a "douchebag", however.

That is misogynistic language, but its always been part of the DU lexicon. Object to it and you will be ridiculed.

There is no consistency about what is acceptable and what is offensive.

[boston bean]

363. I don't particularly like douchebag either...

I don't particularly like the word bitch either...

Mostly, when used in a derogatory fashion against anyone because when used in that way, it is at the least sexist and sometimes misogynistic. However, there are usages for bitch that I do not find to be either sexist or misogynist. I realize some disagree with me and I understand their point.

But those two words aren't on the same level to c*nt. Which in my mind is misogynistic slur in all contexts, except for when discussing it's misogynistic meaning.

[undeterred]

405. Agreed.

Its like the N word for women.

[Zenlitened]

412. Hold on, wait. You need to start at the beginning:

What are words? In fact, what are letters? Are they shapes? Or sounds? Sound-shapes?

What are they for? Can anyone really know? I'm just a poor, puzzled misogyn-- um, I mean, obvious tro--- uh, I just so sincerely wish to understand!

/grim sarcasm

Seriously folks, the OP's point couldn't have been simpler or more clear. But in case it actually was too complicated for you somehow, try this:

Don't use that word.

You're welcome.

[boston bean]

454. That made me giggle...

thanks for that!

[Zenlitened]

477. Happy to lend a giggle. :)

[daredtowork]

425. The Feminazis

Back in the 90s feminism lost a lot of it's political traction for women as well as men because rightwing talk show hosts represent them as "feminazis" quibbling over every little word.

While it's true that words are loaded with meaning and historical context, and that we are contributing to misogyny when we allow gendered words to be used in demeaning ways - I think it's a mistake to keep harping on the C word here. As many have pointed out, DU juries are extremely permissive about insulting language and expect the recipients of blatant insults to "not be thin-skinned". There is a group of women on DU who think it makes feminists look brittle and petty to make a stand on the C word when so many other words slide by.

The eternal vindications of NYC_SKP's banning begins to seem like protesting too much.

I agreed with the banning though I'm not a Hillary supporter, and I'm especially not a fan of what I see as her feminist opportunism. The reason I agreed was because NYC_SKP took it beyond the "word crime" in the headline. He went into crude detail in the body of the post that gave TMI about what was on his mind at the time, and that convinced me that the comment was sleazy and sexist and deserved to be banned.

Just harping on the C word, right or wrong, is going to take everyone back to the 90s grouching over political correctness and put Feminism back on Time's list of words they want to ban from the English language. It's better to treat these problems in their entire context.

[boston bean]

428. I feel bad for people who fall for right wing tropes.

and then on top of it allow it to control the conversation.

[daredtowork]

434. Rightwing tropes created the Tea Party

I agree the knee-jerk "political correctness" argument is almost always wrong, but when something is working for your opponent, you have to stand back and ask yourself, "why?"

In this case, I've seen a lot of people who are getting their dander up about NYC_SKP's banning being a politicized thing because the "after party" is making it look like a politicized thing. Some of these people would normally recognize misogyny in a heartbeat. It's not because they wouldn't recognize misogyny if you showed it to them - it's because you're narrowing Hillary's brand of feminism down to use of the C word.

Instead of feeling sorry for people like me, who at least agrees with the NYC_SKP call, shouldn't you be worrying why feminism suddenly seems to be such a tough sell on Democratic forum?

[boston bean]

462. What is working for the tea party? Bigotry??

I think people should be asking themselves as well, why it is such a tough sell here.

I don't think it's for any reason you have mentioned.

[daredtowork]

463. hmm, I don't think you realize how you sound

I appreciate you probably think that you are conveying how gendered language can be used as a weapon, and that's an essential tool of misogyny. I understand the power of that weapon - after welfare and SSI, my number one likely scuffle on DU is with an MRA.

The way you're treating it (and I'd like to make this a collective "you" referring to the way-too-many posts on this topic), though, comes across as harping. Is this the way you want to represent Hillary's feminism?

[boston bean]

464. I think the last word coming from someone who says they understand

the issue would be harping.

How about we stick to the issues. I did not insult you personally.

I have spoken to your points.

[daredtowork]

465. I agree with you - how does that insult you personally?

I even spelled out I was using a general "you" to refer to the multiple postings on this topic.

What I'm trying to get you to realize is that representing Hillary's feminism in such a narrow way doesn't do her (or feminism) any favors. I guess that's not going to sink in.

[boston bean]

466. I am responding to denials, excuses, and derailments.

and in some cases outright sexism and misogyny. I've been doing it all day. It's not just me talking about this to myself.

I don't really think Hillary gives a shit about my plight here with this particular issue. LOL. I for sure don't think she would ever agree with the tea party.

Also, I don't think she would disagree with the points I've made.

[daredtowork]

467. Very Well Then: Your Services Are Needed in This Thread

Nye Bevan said the same thing NYC_SKP did in the same way. See the link in my comment.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6796300

Go forth and take a hard line on your issues!

Here's a direct link to Nye's C word comment if you don't want to do the click-through to look it up.

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2483614

[boston bean]

468. You now want me to go back to a thread in 2013...

I don't have the energy left in me today... ask me tomorrow I might get a second wind.

[daredtowork]

469. The wrongness of misogyny has changed since 2013? LOL. nt

[boston bean]

470. No it hasn't and since you joined in 2014, you really wouldn't know

about anything prior to that.

needless to say, it's been an issue for quite sometime, it's not something new, and admin has not been very helpful in making this a misogyny free zone. Go into the feminists groups and ask. We all banded together asking for a strengthening of the TOS and enforcement of it. It fell on deaf ears.

That isn't my fault now, is it?

[daredtowork]

475. It's not a question of enforcement back in 2013

The problem is that a bunch of Hillary supporters have made a very big deal over this particular "clever use" of the C word. Bernie supporters questioned whether NYC_SKP would have been banned if he was a Hillary supporter. I suggested it was wise to back off. Now Nye Bevan is here providing an example.

I'm not the one who came up with the Nye Bevan example. Now since you have decided to push the matter, how strongly do you feel about pursuing it now? Are you going to write OPs lecturing Nye? Bernie supporters are watching and muttering.

[boston bean]

478. That you think my motivation is due to hillary versus Bernie is just flat out false.

You want me to go back in time and have discourse with someone over a two year old post. Again it was a problem then it is a problem now. I don't condone. I despise it. What more do you want me to do about an ongoing issue that's been occuring since I joined.

Really that is just ridiculous. I have told you my point of view and have had it likened to harping.

You go and fight the issue of misogyny with that poster from 2013. However Im not convinced it is the misogyny that interests you but instead to further some ridiculous point that skips banning was because he was a Bernie supporter.

Thanks for making that clear. I've wasted time and thought in this sub thread.

[daredtowork]

479. I don't want you to go back in time: Nye Bevan posted a current thread

And, interestingly, it's a Hillary campaign thread. Here it is:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6796300

You were offended when I asked you to back down on the narrow stance you took in this OP. Now I'm challenging you to follow through with it. Be my guest. Work out the ramifications for yourself.

[boston bean]

485. Yes you do. You have my blessing. Please help.

[daredtowork]

487. Lecturing on indirect allusions to the C word is your mission, not mine. nt

[boston bean]

489. Oh so you don't really care. Why the demands then.

What is the real point of them.

[daredtowork]

504. It's up to you

I'm not demanding anything.

You're the one who made a big deal in your OP.

Follow through. Don't follow through. Do as you please.

[boston bean]

505. I will thanks for allowing me that. Nt

[beam me up scottie]

451. What I'm seeing is a lot of whining about not being able to use slurs with impunity.

I hear the same arguments from racists who are enraged because they can't use the n-word at work:


But they use it all the time on each other

But they call us ________

But I have a friend who doesn't think it's offensive

But you're being oversensitive, it's just a word

But freedom of speech, this is Amurka!!1!




It's not that difficult folks.

If you know a certain word is used as a slur and is extremely offensive to many of your fellow liberals, why use it?

If you don't use it or want to use it, why complain when someone else does and gets censored?

[tammywammy]

452. +1 n/t

[NanceGreggs]

481. The C-word ...

... is just a word.

If it is offensive because it reduces all women to a body part, then the use of "prick" or "dick" reduces all men to a body part. And yet those words are used all the time - here and in real life.

Yes, I will repeat that - it is just a word. It may be offensive to some, but its usage does not carry any more weight than other words that some find offensive. Its usage does not change minds about how all women are to be perceived any more than referring to a man as a "prick" changes anyone's mind as to how all men are to be perceived.

And the fact that the C-word is commonly used in other countries/cultures with a completely different meaning attached thereto speaks for itself.

I am NOT, and never will be, defined by what others choose to call me. Give me equal pay for equal work, equal opportunity to advance myself in my chosen career, equal rights across the board, and stay the fuck out of my vagina. THOSE are the things I care about, for myself, my daughter, and all other women. How you choose to refer to me is of no consequence - but my rights ARE of consequence.

It is the intent behind words that matters. I'd rather be called a c**t outright (and I have been) than be referred to as a "there-there little lady", "a bless-her-heart mouthy female", or a "woman who doesn't know her place." Those terms often amount to the C-word, and couching that word in more "acceptable" language doesn't change the intent by hiding it behind more politically-correct terminology.

Believing that telling others that refraining from using a certain word is "combating a mindset that is all to prevalent and one that is harmful to women," is beyond naive. The attempt to ban certain words - or books, films, art, etc. - does nothing to change minds about anything.

[boston bean]

482. Did you read the op?

[NanceGreggs]

486. Uh, yeah ...

I thought actually quoting from it would be a dead giveaway that I'd read it.

Apparently not.

[boston bean]

488. Of course not because your summarization of the meaning of it

Didn't fit or represent content. I don't find it naive at all to understand that word convey a bigoted mindset that is harmful in the way you describe. Why you latched onto it like it was an infringement of some right one has is beyond me.

[NanceGreggs]

494. But that's the point.

It IS my right to use whatever words I choose to use, just as it is everyone else's right to do the same.

What words YOU consider to be "conveying a bigoted mindset" are up to you, and it is your choice to use them or not accordingly.

It is not, however, up to you to decide what words others should find offensive, or in what context, or to what degree.

Why you think telling others not to use certain language is NOT an attempt to infringe on THEIR rights is beyond me.

[boston bean]

495. I don't think I told anyone in this thread what words to use.

I told them how they would be perceived by most women. I know of no woman who likes to be called a c*nt. That is my truth. And I'm pretty positive it is true for most women. You feel differently... Ok.

Please don't put words in my mouth. And also maybe take your own advice and refrain from telling me what I can say. Even when I never said what you are saying I did.

[NanceGreggs]

499. And I know of no man ...

... who likes being called a "prick" or a "dick".

I never told you what you can or cannot say. I merely pointed out that you don't speak for ALL women, and you are not the final arbiter of how things are "perceived" by most women.

I personally don't know of anyone - male or female - who "likes" being called stupid, ill-informed, brainless, idiotic - or any number of things. "Liking" being called one thing or another is a pretty low threshold and, in the great scheme of things, is neither here nor there.

So saying that "I feel differently" about what women "like" to be called is rather childish a response - and a classic case of putting words in someone's mouth.

[boston bean]

500. Nance you know something you are so off base about me

i dont disagree with much of you say regarding this this is what I am getting at. However discussing the usage history and why it is harmful to women is not word policing or telling people what word to use

It is expressing a valid opinion.

Maybe where a difference is you don't see the word and its usage as harmful as I do. And I can and will try to convince people as you can see in this thread why it I feel it is so. Men do not face the same culture women do regarding these issues. That doesn't mean they can't be insulted. But misogynistic terms carry with it bigotry within the culture which effects politics and laws and our opportunities.

I'm not committing some grand crime or infringing on anyone's rights by stating this.

I do feel though that others are infringing on mine by trying to shut me up with allegations of being a word policed or a censor.

[NanceGreggs]

506. I understand where you're coming from.

And you have every right to express your opinion on the matter. As do I.

But I do have a problem with "let's not use certain words because of how they might be perceived". Words are words - and even the most innocuous terms can "be perceived" as something not intended nor conveyed. At the same time, some words convey a specific meaning that is fully intended - and expressing that meaning in no uncertain terms is often far more honest than using more "politically correct" terms that serve to couch true meaning behind cutesy phrases that "won't offend".

What it comes down to is that eliminating "words" does not eliminate the thoughts behind those words. The suffragettes were not called "ball-busting bitches" in the polite society of the day - that doesn't mean that that's exactly what they were thought of by many. And you and I have the vote today - as a result of a full focus on RIGHTS and little concern for what words were bandied about, crude or otherwise.

I am for EQUAL RIGHTS and EQUAL TREATMENT - and claiming that the word "c*nt* is somehow more offensive than words like "prick" or "dick" just doesn't cut it. You can't argue that one reduces a woman to a body part while arguing that the other two don't do exactly the same thing where males are concerned.

It is what it is. And pretending that it's okay, because men don't face the same issues is a cop-out.

Women have been, and continue to be, denied their rights by a certain faction in this country. And whether they are called certain names, or identified by certain words, has nothing to do with it. It is the mindset behind those words that needs to be changed - and eliminating certain phrases from our national vocabulary isn't going to change the thinking behind those words.

[boston bean]

513. I'l revert back to words are what we use to identify someone who

does feel a certain way. Which in turn stands up the system of oppression.

Again, my entire post was it was not about the word but the meaning behind it and how one can identify a misogynist or a racist.

[NanceGreggs]

530. Oh, I get it now.

You "can identify" people who "feel a certain way" because the words they choose "stands up the system of oppression".

Quite the magical power you have there.

What about when you see the word "c*nt" used by someone from a country/culture that does not ascribe the same meaning to it that you do? Are they all misogynists? Or do your magical powers allow you to immediately "know" whether they are or they aren't?

What it comes down to is this: Ascribing misogyny to everyone who uses words you don't like is a form of passive oppression. You are telling people that their choice of language defines them - according to YOUR rules, as opposed to their own.

You take it even further by insisting that the use of certain words "supports the system of oppression", which is utter nonsense. Words do not cause, lead to, nor support oppression - actions do, legislation does, the acceptance of certain behaviour does.

I may have missed them - but I don't remember any OPs from you on the topic of using words like "prick" and "dick" - words that reduce a man to his genitalia, in the same way the C-word does. Do you think the use of those words has "stood up a system of oppression" against men? Because those words have been in wide usage for a very long time - and men don't seem to have been "oppressed" by their usage at all.

[boston bean]

533. Yes it doesn't take a rocket scientist.

Read my word very carefully in the OP and get back with me once you figure it out. I've tried explaining a bunch of times to you to no avail. But what you are saying I am saying is wrong.

[NanceGreggs]

534. I have quoted your OP ...

... as well as your replies to me.

You can "explain" yourself over and over - the fact remains that you said what you said.

You're the one arguing that words matter ...

[GoneOffShore]

496. Nance, you're trying to use facts and logic. You're not in touch with the feelings.

And those feelings would censor Joan Rivers, Fannie Brice, Gracie Allen, Emma Goldman, Lenny Bruce, George Carlin, Walt Whitman, Mark Twain, George Gershwin, et. al.

[diamondhead]

497. The C word here is CONTEXT

Because it speaks to the irrational fear I'm seeing around here right now that everybody has in talking about the word without actually using it.

The word is cunt. You can spell it out. Typing out "The C word" or C*nt or C-nt or C*unt does not change the MEANING of what everybody is saying, because right now I'm using the word cunt in a CONTEXT that does NOT demean anybody, because I'm speaking ABOUT the word itself like everybody else around here who seems to have gone off the deep end over the banning of some guy who apparently didn't even type it out.

Here is another C word: Child. That is what everybody is acting like right now: A fucking child.

[marym625]

514. Well said, Nance

I think this is the first time we've agreed.

I applaud the post. Thank you for saying in one post what I couldn't seem to get across in 20

[Puglover]

524. Beautifully said.

THIS should be an OP..

[chervilant]

484. Be Impeccable with your Word,

the first of the Four Agreements by don Miguel Ruiz, richly illustrates your assertion that words have meanings:

The word is not just a sound or a written symbol. The word is a force; it is the power you have to express and communicate, to think, and thereby to create the events in your life.

** SNIP **

The word is the most powerful tool you have as a human; it is the tool of magic. But like a sword with two edges, your word can create the most beautiful dream, or your word can destroy everything around you.

Distilled to its very essence, our condemnation of the c-word, and myriad words like it, is an adjuration to recognize the damages and constraints imposed on all of us by the socio-cultural construct we know as The Patriarchy; the construct that relegates males collectively to a position of dominance and power over, and females collectively to a position of subservience and powerlessness. This hierarchy demeans and delimits our entire species, and I long for the day we can evolve beyond it.

Those among us who defend the use of sexist and misogynistic words, and those who persist in using such words, act--unwittingly, perhaps--just as we've been socialized to act within the Patriarchy. For some, it's "normal" or "innocuous" to use such words, to demean women cavalierly, because "that's just the way things are." For others, self included, using such words is definitive--and the pathetic individuals who persist in so doing remind me of just how much more work is ahead of us.

For many of us, acknowledging how patriarchy has shaped our beliefs and our behaviors is overwhelming, a tangled pathway into the abyss of cognitive dissonance. Just as most of us don't want to be labeled racists, so too do most of us deny being sexists or misogynists, verbal (and behavioral) evidence to the contrary. I have to remind myself of this each time someone assaults me with their words. They are pitiable individuals.

I'm sure you know all this, but I felt the need to post it. I recognize and applaud your courage, bean. I'm sure you are aware that the louder your detractors whinge, the more obvious it is that your OP strikes a nerve.

[tularetom]

490. "…in a derogatory manner…"?

Do you honestly believe it is possible to use that word in anything but a derogatory manner?

[boston bean]

491. When discussing the word itself and why it is misogynist.

That would be the only example I could identify.

[morningfog]

498. When you use the "*", leave out the "u". Don't write the word.

[Beacool]

508. I'll accept a woman being called the "C" word on this board the day that it's acceptable

to call an AA the "N" word. In other words, never.

Why is any racist remark immediately condemned, while an equally offensive name used against a woman is deemed acceptable?

That includes cutesy remarks like calling Hillary a "B" on the title line and then typing "bastard" on the text line. Also, the now infamous "cunning stunt" comment that caused the banning of one poster. Sexist terms used against women should not be allowed on a progressive board. The fact that some people need to be reminded of it is depressing.

[Jamastiene]

519. Because even though they tell us we already have equal rights,

we are still considered VERY unequal in every way. Most men are the most insulted if they are compared to a woman. They lets you know how they view women, as less than them. They let us know how they really feel about women if they are ok with using misogynist language like that. They can try to wiggle and squirm their way out of it, but that they consider it the ultimate insult to be compared to a woman lets women know exactly where we stand among men, well below them. I'm just glad there are a few good men in the world too, because an awful lot of men are still very sexist toward women. Some women are just as bad toward other women as well. It's awful in either case.

[Beacool]

529. Notice that most of the insults against men are really against women.

SOB is an insult against a man's mother.

Bastard, implying that his mother was of lose morals and procreated out of wedlock.

There are far more derogatory names to describe women than there are to describe men.

[Jamastiene]

538. Exactly.

When men want to insult another man, he calls him something to do with either women or calls him gay. Homophobia, transphobia, and many other hatreds are rooted in misogyny. Misogyny is hatred toward women, but try getting those who defend it to see that. They refuse to see it, or at least refuse to admit it. I think they do know and are doing what they have always done because they know they can. That is why it continues.

You would think more women in positions of power would finally teach them to quit belittling women and demonizing women, but it seems to make them think they should be able to be even more obnoxious in their misogyny.

[tanbrown]

539. yes and...

how about all the words of contempt:

A pussy (vagina) is a weakling or coward.
A sissy (sister): same thing.
Teenage boys mock their male peers by addressing them as "you girls" or "Ladies."


Note the sad difference between the sexes:

At a young age, girls are socialized to say that boys have cooties, are weird or gross - kinda like aliens - but they aren't taught to look down on boys. No girl ever calls another girl "you boy!" or "you penis!" to indicate contempt.

Boys, meanwhile, learn that femaleness is something despicable and worthy of scorn and disrespect. It's synonymous with weakness, fearfulness, cowardice, being beaten, being worthless, being the lowest of the low.

By some of the responses here, it seems that those little boys have a hard time unlearning their contempt, even when they grow up and call themselves progressive.

That's not strange. What's strange is that many of them seem deeply unwilling to examine their attitude. When it's pointed out to them, no matter how gently, they tend to bare their fangs and screech like cornered animals.

[Hekate]

509. 'In the Guild,' said the Fool, 'we learned that words can be more powerful even than magic.'

'What is the meaning of all this?' the duchess demanded.

'Witches, I suspect,' said Lord Felmet.

'So,' she said, smiling grimly. 'Still they defy you?'

The duke shrugged. 'How should I fight magic?' he said.

'With words,' said the Fool, without thinking, and was instantly sorry. They were both staring at him.

'What?' said the duchess.

The Fool dropped his mandolin in his embarrassment.

'In – in the Guild,' said the Fool, 'we learned that words can be more powerful even than magic.'

'Clown!' said the duke. 'Words are just words. Brief syllables. Sticks and stones may break my bones—' he paused, savouring the thought – 'but words can never hurt me.'

'My lord, there are such words that can,' said the Fool. 'Liar! Usurper! Murderer!'

The duke jerked back and gripped the arms of the throne, wincing.

'Such words have no truth,' said the Fool, hurriedly.

'But they can spread like fire underground, breaking out to burn—'

'It's true! It's true!' screamed the duke. 'I hear them, all the time!' He leaned forward. 'It's the witches!' he hissed.

'Then, then, then they can be fought with other words,' said the Fool, 'Words can fight even witches,'

'What words?' said the duchess, thoughtfully.

The Fool shrugged. 'Crone. Evil eye. Stupid old woman.'

The duchess raised one thick eyebrow.

'You are not entirely an idiot, are you,' she said. 'You refer to rumour.'

'Just so, my lady.' The Fool rolled his eyes. What had he got himself into?

From Wyrd Sisters, by Terry Pratchett

[tanbrown]

537. Thanks

I'll never forget the moment in residency when a fellow resident - a guy I liked, as much as I could like anyone in that hellhole of bigotry - referred to the one and only female attending as a "cunt".

I stood there while the roomful of male residents laughed. It was so sexist, so unfair - she was a tough woman but most of the male attendings were far worse, and got respected for their prima-donna ways. But I said nothing. I played the good little Uncle Tom, fitting in, because the price of speaking up was so high. I was already the butt of jokes, already branded a feminazi, lesbian, and man-hater because i had tried to protect female patients and colleagues from some far nastier stuff. I couldn't afford to die on this little hill, defending this other woman. (Who, after all, had already survived her own residency.)

It was not the dark ages. But it was a tiny backwater of medicine - UT-Chattanooga, 1991. Only four female interns had been admitted to surgical residencies - more than most years - but two had already been scapegoated, humiliated, and hounded out. The one female Ortho resident, a third-year, was also thrown out after breaking off her engagement to her chief res.

Hearing Steve call Dr. M a cunt - that was one of the smallest and most insignificant pinpricks of misogyny I experienced at UT-C. Compared to most of the stuff that went on there - stuff you wouldn't believe - it was next to nothing.

So why did it burn me like acid on flayed skin?

I think people - like me - who hate the word "cunt" don't hate it as a stand-alone word floating free in space. We hate it because we've been shoved up against walls by the kinds of guys who use it. Me, I watched my father use that word against my mother while he choked her. I went through college hearing frat guys use it to describe me and other girls who didn't sleep with them, as well as girls who did. The word is a symbol - no different from a swastika or the Confederate flag or the flag of ISIS.

Flags don't hurt anyone and neither do words. Why should we have a problem with "cunt"? Why should the Jewish fraternity at Berkeley care about the swastikas frequently painted around campus? Why should a black person mind a doodle of a burning cross on the bathroom wall? Gosh, it's not like anyone's lynching us! It's just words, pictures, flags, no big deal!

Here's what many don't seem to understand:

If the worst thing that women suffered at men;s hands was the word "cunt," the word wouldn't bother me at all.

I wish that all I (or any woman anywhere) knew of misogyny was a few nasty epithets thrown by men. Really. Imagine such a world! Imagine equality and respect, no coercion inside the family, no violence on the streets, no religious leaders preaching about women's submission and men's rule, no father smashing the plates while my mother shakes; no guy on the train grabbing my breast and smirking as he gets out, no colleague pinning my arms over my head "for fun" because I outscored him on the in-service exam, no girls sold into slavery in every damn country including ours, no headlines about rape, woman-beating, or wife-murder in the newspaper, no fundamentalist husband shouting his right to control my movements, my clothes, my spending.

I want to wake up in a world where women's only problem from men, is that angry men sometimes yell "You cunt!"

So - all you progressive, good-hearted people of DU, I extend to you an invitation. Let's work to make that fantasy-world a reality. Once you've helped me do that, I promise you can call me a cunt all you want, and I truly won't mind at all.

Deal?

[boston bean]

540. Excellent post! Thank you so much for sharing!

I love your last paragraph!

So - all you progressive, good-hearted people of DU, I extend to you an invitation. Let's work to make that fantasy-world a reality. Once you've helped me do that, I promise you can call me a cunt all you want, and I truly won't mind at all.