Sexism rears its ugly head

[omega minimo]

Outside this forum, the bully boy wars have heated up again. Howard Dean has titillated the macho "fuck yeah" contingent.

Pinks tutus, sweaty ball licking, two snaps and a thumbs down. Is the only alternative to "wimps" another round of macho overkill?


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1848027&mesg_id=1848027&page=

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[omega minimo]

2. Yep

Are they all afraid of their daddies? :evilgrin: Holding everyone up to this standard, this model of topdogness, of scrotumhood. Do they ever feel that THEY measure up?

[beam me up scottie]

3. DAMN, Omega!

I got so tired of fighting this week, I almost gave up.
It's an inspiration to see you're still kicking ass.

[omega minimo]

4. Can I get a witness?

Comments this week in WR&I and the FG reflect concern about how to respond. What about simply bearing witness, reflecting? What if a thread were a repository for the worst of the crap? This could be that space.

The RULES state how it is, whether it is intermittently enforced or not. We don't have to apologize and we don't have to attack to get the point across.

The truth speaks for itself.

[beam me up scottie]

5. Such a thread would probably get deleted.

We just have to keep illuminating the problem.

FizzFuzz has an excellent idea she posted in the FG.

I won't link to it because I don't want it to get slimed, but in that thread, I posted that I believe most DU'ers would want to know if their words were hurting others.

I would want to know.

Words do have power, it's up to each of us to decide how we should use it.

[omega minimo]

7. and one such as this would not?

"Were the slutbag Bush* twins conceived with fertility drugs?"

:puke:

[beam me up scottie]

8. sigh...

I'm battling it out in that one as we speak.
But so are some DU men, woo hoo !!!
Let's hear it for the boys !

[omega minimo]

6. "Were the slutbag Bush* twins conceived with fertility drugs?"

Top of GD with 27 replies. Doesn't look like that ones goin anywhere anytime soon.......

[omega minimo]

9. First thing tonite gobsmacked opening DU set to "Latest"

Top of the page:

General Discussion: Politics
Borowitz humor: "“I want to make Dick Cheney my bitch.” 

New scripts today have DU Rules link at the top of each page.

[beam me up scottie]

10. I saw that.

In GDP. What the fuck does that have to do with politics?
I guess if someone else is using gender based slurs, it's okay to quote them for laughs. But, since we do post misogynistic quotes from ann coulter, I guess we have to allow them to do the same with others.
Still.
A news story about a mother killing her daughter gets moved to the lounge and that says in GDP ?

WTF?

[omega minimo]

11. The pretend naivete was a nice touch

"Borowitz humor: "“I want to make Dick Cheney my b****.”
on edit: mods, I hope my quoting him doesn't violate our language policy."

.....stupid un-funny un-GDP BS....




Replies to this thread
omega minimo
Response to Original message
1. For your convenience
The new scripts have placed a link to the DU Rules at the top right hand corner of the page.

[omega minimo]

12. WTF

posted in the Religion forum 


"#7. Mike Savage did a killing rant like that and a lesbian teen was brutally
murdered, by thugs that went our to find a gay person and kill them.
Jimmies romp with a Hooker wasn't the crime.. what was really disgusting about it was that she was a really ugly crack whore, when he had the money for a good look'n escort..
he could have saved a lot of embarrassment if he had just got a Fleshlight..
Link> http://www.assholewebsite also available in a stealth container.. looks like a 16oz can , Tiger Tail Ale
this thing is made of a material originally designed for prosthetic devices.. it has the same density as soft flesh.. it needs some proper care, no oils!!! it needs to washed up in gentle dish detergent gently dried and powered with cornstarch.. Commercial lubricants are expensive and 'watered down'.. just get a bottle of Glycerin at Walmart pharmacy.. 16oz will last a year..and it Cheap there.
there are reports that this device.. and it has only 'ONE' moving part... is reported to be better than a real woman.. especially by adjusting the vacuum with the venting cap at the other end..
how do i know all this stuff..your ask?? "The big boys told me"
i believe they have a discount with an AARP card, if your wife is In Menopause.
"and on the 8th day seeing what he had rendered.. god made 'Fleshlight'.
and LADIES the stuff they have for women is better than the real thing too, and it is strap on accessable, for him or her..!!!
all safe sex is better sex..."


"Response to Reply #7
8. Do they have a model
That can nag and get a headache?"


:puke::puke:

[beam me up scottie]

13. Makes me proud

of my atheist morals.

[lukasahero]

14. Lovely.

Yes, that bears so much relevance to the OP, doesn't it? Thanks for the heads up.

[omega minimo]

15. Ugly Heads up

:thumbsdown:

[omega minimo]

16. "She was a whore. Alrighty then. put out "

June 15 General Discussion

 Jun-15-05 09:11 AM   #105 
   She was just a REPUgnant whore   
Jun-15-05 09:41 AM   #110 
   She was a whore. Alrighty then.  put out 

[put out]

34. Did you read the rest of the post?

Please do. I was certainly not condoning nor excusing the poster to whom I replied. My point was completely different. I'm sorry if someone didn't get it. I don't call women whores based on how they look or how they say they vote and I don't appreciate being quoted out of context. It was not sexist, how I replied; just the opposite.

Please read, next time.

My edit, I hope I am misunderstanding you. It's pretty distateful to have one's post used as an example of misogyny, when the text was anything but.

[omega minimo]

35. I apologize. Thought that was part of the post, not a screen name!

One reason posts like this are objectionable is that they prevent some DUers who might otherwise be interested (like me) in continuing to read.

Sounds like you were quoting the other poster. "I don't call women whores based on how they look or how they say they vote and I don't appreciate being quoted out of context." It's not about how you use "whore" or what the context is. Thing is, if folks would respect the Rules, the issue wouldn't even come up and you wouldn't be repeating someone else's shite.

Many here at DU don't feel we need to be smacked in the eyeballs by language that is prohibited by the Rules (based on respect).

It downgrades the thread and DU. It breaks DU Rules. It alienates people and segregates the discussions. It creates the impression that people are ignorant and don't know how to discuss without being crude (clearly you have more to offer than that-- and I missed the opportunity to read it).

Thank you for calm comment. Sorry I inadvertantly put your screen name here.

[put out]

36. It is all O.K. The screen name is polite for

pissed off. I really didn't intend it to mean much else.

And, friend, I think we may think some the same. I really didn't mean to put you out; I stepped over bounds. I do not like women being denigrated. I am glad to see some others who don't like it either.

And you are fine for pointing this out, as far as my influence goes. That would be, not much.

[omega minimo]

37. LOL Your words more influential than you may think

"I do not like women being denigrated. I am glad to see some others who don't like it either."

If we had less denigration popping up all over DU every day, there would be more folks at the digital table together, to communicate ideas and collaborate solutions to the challenges we face.

The minority who insist on their right to gender bigotry are detrimental to the greater DU community (and the Dems).

Also, if the Rules are applied consistently, then if something comes up that is disruptive or freeperish, DUers may ask "What is this person DUing?

:smoke:

Then there's that BushCo. end-of-the-world-thing, but in the meantime, DU boils it down to R-E-S-P-E-C-T.

:evilgrin:

[omega minimo]

17. "No, the bitch will get over it."

Wed Jun-15-05 09:30 PM
27. No, the bitch will get over it.
...this uppity Republican bitch's feelings are the FARTHEST thing from my mind. I would lose ZERO sleep over her.

[omega minimo]

18. "To be blunt, blond white chicks who go missing get covered..."

Thu Jun-16-05 07:02 AM Original message
"To be blunt, blond white chicks who go missing get covered...
Some say missing minority cases ignored (poster comment: Gee, ya think?!?)

"To be blunt, blond white chicks who go missing get covered and poor, black, Hispanic or other people of color who go missing do not get covered," said Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Washington-based Project for Excellence in Journalism. "You're more likely to get coverage if you're attractive than if you're not."

   Replies to this thread
 
Thu Jun-16-05 07:06 AM
Response to Original message
2. I'd like to see them comment on who doesn't get covered
rather than hear more "missing blond girl" comments. Seems hateful, and rather cruel to the families of these missing women, to belittle and objectify them, when what we are really upset about is the media, not the women.
Why don't these people say missing minority people get covered less, than "blond white chicks" get covered more?

Thu Jun-16-05 07:21 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. "Some say missing minority cases ignored"
"Some say missing minority cases ignored" is the actual title of the article (I chose that quote as an attention getter for DU)

-------"SOME SAY MISSING MINORITY CASES IGNORED" IS THE ACTUAL TITLE OF THE ARTICLE (I CHOSE THAT QUOTE AS AN ATTENTION GETTER FOR DU)"--------

Response to Reply #6
10. This is flamebait and so is the use in the media, which you acknowledge
is intended to grab eyeballs.
""Some say missing minority cases ignored" is the actual title of the article (I chose that quote as an attention getter for DU)"
Using a monosyllabic derogatory slur against females gets the juices flowing, don't it!
This new meme dissing women has now infected DU and shows up in threads with no context-- "just" another slur. Anyone who hasn't seen these sensationalized pseudo-journalistic puff/hit/pieces doesn't know WHAT this is supposed to mean.
We have enough challenges on DU getting smacked in the eyeballs with all the old, standard cliche slurs against women. Why do you want to introduce and reinforce new ones?
BTW-- don't you feel just a bit smarmy allowing yourself to be manipulated with such obvious BS sensationalism? Less valid in any sense than a healthy interest in the Michael Jackson verdict.
This new slam against "attractive only" "blond white chicks" is intended to be divisive and direct male anger at women AND IT SUCCEEDS.

Response to Original message
5. Did he actually say "chicks"?
Oof. He needs to work on his vocabulary.
(I'm not complaining about the message, but for cripes sake - he's a professional speaking in a professional capacity, and he should damn well sound like one.)
alternatives:
woman
women

Response to Original message
8. On the front page of usatoday.com too.

Thu Jun-16-05 07:40 AM
OP Response to Reply #8
9. GOOD. I've been so tired of Congress and our Gov't looking
so disproportionately white and rich -- once we get the press to notice this country is a melting pot -- maybe we can get our government to look representative of it's people!

Thu Jun-16-05 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. So you think scapegoating women is a step forward?

[omega minimo]

24. Replies from playbook: Obtuse, condescending, projecting "you're angry"

OP
"To be blunt, blond white chicks who go missing get covered... Some say missing minority cases ignored (poster comment: Gee, ya think?!?)
 
Response to Original message
2. Why don't these people say missing minority people get covered less, than "blond white chicks" get covered more?

Response to Reply #2
6. "Some say missing minority cases ignored" is the actual title of the article (I chose that quote as an attention getter for DU)

Response to Reply #6
10. This is flamebait and so is the use in the media, which you acknowledge is intended to grab eyeballs.
This new meme dissing women has now infected DU and shows up in threads with no context-- "just" another slur. Anyone who hasn't seen these sensationalized pseudo-journalistic puff/hit/pieces doesn't know WHAT this is supposed to mean.
We have enough challenges on DU getting smacked in the eyeballs with all the old, standard cliche slurs against women. Why do you want to introduce and reinforce new ones?
This new slam against "attractive only" "blond white chicks" is intended to be divisive and direct male anger at women AND IT SUCCEEDS.

Response to Reply #10
13. I reserve the right to disagree with you.
I used a quote taken directly from the article because I knew it would attract more readers than the anemic "Some say..." headline so often used and disregarded as if it's an opinion piece. This article contained facts.
And no, I don't feel smarmy, used, or manipulated for bringing the topic before more eyes so that people can decide for themselves how they feel - and I can only HOPE that they will actually take the time to read the article instead of judging it's content on any titles and snips that I provide.
Your anger at me for posting what was written is misplaced and might be better directed at the person using the phrase that so angers you.
And by the way, perhaps it's my era or else attending too many dances in Philadelphia in my youth but I'm sorry, I don't consider the word 'chick' a "monosyllabic derogatory slur against females" any more than I would be offended by the word 'dude'. I'm just not that militant right now I guess.
Peace, Sister.

Response to Original message
8. On the front page of usatoday.com too.

Response to Reply #8
9. GOOD. I've been so tired of Congress and our Gov't looking so disproportionately white and rich -- once we get the press to notice this country is a melting pot -- maybe we can get our government to look representative of it's people!

Response to Reply #9
11. So you think scapegoating women is a step forward?

Response to Reply #11
12. I know that wasn't directed at me, but I don't know what you mean by that.

Response to Reply #11
14. Wow. You're really upset about something - I just don't know why you're directing it at me. I have no idea how your response fits my comment.



:smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :kick:

Clueless and condescending, accusing of "you're angry" "you're upset" "I don't know what you mean" " I have no idea how your response fits my comment"

So do we bother? Do we educate? Do we repeat and clarify what we have already said? Do we Kick a thread that is boneheaded to begin with? How many tries to you give to a potential dialogue?

"Your anger at me for posting what was written is misplaced and might be better directed at the person using the phrase that so angers you."

Guess what? You ARE using the phrase! You SAID you are using it to GET ATTENTION! You are perpetuating this new diss on "attractive, white, blond women" for not only being VICTIMIZED but additionally DEMONIZED for being "attractive, white, blond women"! How lame is NOT GETTING THIS?

I have already come upon one poster throwing in "until the next dead white woman story comes along" into a thread with no context. The MEME has infiltrated. What more needed to be said, in how many different ways, for the OP to get the concept? "I reserve the right to disagree." That's fine, disagree away. But first TRY TO FUCKING COMPREHEND.

Thank you.

[BrklynLiberal]

19. Testosterone affects brain cells in a very negative way.

Cognitive functions are impaired. Empathy, sympathy and co-operative behavior are impeded.(There are exceptions, of course)

It takes a lot of work and effort to overcome the cave man impulses.
Big cars, big guns, big cigars, big wads of cash, trophy wives....all non-verbal ways of saying, "MINE IS BIGGER THAN YOURS".

I think that sending out other peoples' children to get killed in war is also a version of that primal instinct that prevails in the animal world to kill the offspring of other males.

[omega minimo]

20. So why in gawdz name do some DUers think "balls" are the answer?

Oh-- I get it. It's like the brain telling the brain that its the smartest organ in the body.

Well, how do we communicate effectively with the teste-impaired?

If "empathy, sympathy and co-operative behavior" are susceptible to (gender-based) chemical levels in the body, does that explain the difference between a realistic awareness of the presence and needs of others vs. the chuckle-headed tunnel vision of megalomania?

:evilgrin:

More and more behavior these days seems to go straight back to the caveman days.

By the way, is all the bluster automatically neurotic when the individual already knows how big his own really is?

....:wow:
:bounce::bounce:

[elshiva]

21. LOL! grrrrrr!

[omega minimo]

22. So men AND women are psyched out

women internalize underestimation



men externalize SUPERSIZE ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :spray:

[elshiva]

23. Great observation!

[omega minimo]

25. Some of us are innies

Some are outies


:evilgrin:

[elshiva]

26. LOL!

True except for hermaphodites!

[omega minimo]

27. Talk about cliche bashing!

innieoutieoutieinnie

:hide:

[elshiva]

28. hehehehe!

[omega minimo]

29. It's the Right to Privacy, stupid

Upheld by the Supreme Court. Who told you "there's a law against it"?


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3881410&mesg_id=3881410

[omega minimo]

30. "Can the Dems stop stepping on their collective dicks?"

Second thread I opened today.

The title was "Howard Dean Slams Conyers DSM Participant." Pretty important.

The first line of the Message was: "Can the Dems stop stepping on their collective dicks?" Pretty repellant.

DUers who choose to be crude to make a point may miss the point and lose the eyeballs. They self-select their audience to those who are also crude and leave the rest of us supposing the thread will be a knee-jerk waste of time.

They do themselves a disservice by downgrading their own style and appearing ignorant/boring.

Do they do us a favor by warning up front that this will be macho VENT rather than a thoughtful discussion?

:bounce::bounce:

Don't they notice that some of the biggest "balls" in Congress belong to WOMEN?!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Fri Jun-17-05 10:53 PM
Original message
Howard Dean Slams Conyers' DSM Participant
Can the Dems stop stepping on their collective dicks?

[omega minimo]

31. "They're like rapists who use condoms.....(n/m)"

OP
Is the MSM trying to set up Dems by saying "everyone knew Bush lied?"
 
6-18-05 07:23 AM   #48 
      They're like rapists who use condoms.....(n/m)  

[omega minimo]

32. "you said rape twice...I like rape"

Original message
Where are all the white women at?

1. look what i've got!
Image

Response to Reply #1
2. I just spent ten minutes looking for a pic like that!
Thank you, Mr. Vice President!

3 & 4 must have been deleted but this remains:

Response to Reply #2
5. you said rape twice...
I like rape

[omega minimo]

33. "Were they ALWAYS corporate whores"

Within 5 minutes of logging in:

Thread title: "Question for the Historically Adept:
When and how did the Republican party go from being the Party of Lincoln to being the Party of Corporate Greed?"

"Were they ALWAYS corporate whores"

I don't go lookin for this. It pops up ever here on a thread where the OP self-selected a certain level of interest/adeptness..... newbie may not know/care about the Rules on "media whore."

NOT using crude and Rule-breaking language would create more interest for this poster and possible MORE USEFUL LANGUAGE AND IDEAS TO WORK FOR CHANGE rather then fling poo.

[omega minimo]

38. This thread documents examples of degrading posts

Posts degrading to women and to the men who disrespect; degrading DU's potential for discussion and violating DU rules.

Posts that provide examples of what we deal with and object to; examples that show how language segregates and excludes "The Other"-- in this case, women.

Posts that show how casually the bigotry against women is still delivered, when other means of bigotry would be yanked in an instant or never posted.

This is to bear witness, not to identify or blame. Maybe we can all learn sumthin.

I inadvertantly included a screen name that appeared as part of a post. The person replied here and the exchange was reasonable.

There are a lot more important issues today, it would seem. If sexism remains unaddressed, it will continue to impede progress on those issues. If it smacks women and cool men in the eyeballs on DU, we lose interest and go away.

Dems need us.

:evilgrin:

[omega minimo]

39. "Maybe next time he’ll grow bigger ones"

In a thread about Dick Durbin.

So-- only people with balls read DU, only people with balls count? Another poster self-selects his audience.

If the metaphor was about skin color and he said, "Maybe next time he'll get a shade lighter" it would never fly.

Seems so regressive.

[omega minimo]

40. Lovely

From a Dick Durbin thread

"To compare GITMO to the Black Hole of Calcutta might not be as effective, because so many Americans couldn't find Calcutta on a friggin map anyway, and think it's some porn movie or something."

[elshiva]

41. Good to document this, but please use links!

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[elshiva]

45. Uggh! puke!

:(

[omega minimo]

46. Massaging the Misogyny

Good, rollicking, insightful, varied discussion. What more could you ask for?

Results!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3945852

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bloom]

51. P.S.

I think the intent of the post was to seriously take on the idea of the question being asked in the first place. I agree the the thread title was inflammatory for being restated again - as if the question is being asked - again.

To move it into the lounge is to not take seriously the problems of domestic violence and misogyny in this country.

[omega minimo]

52. Yes, inflammatory thread titles are used often

Titling with an offensive phrase to attract eyeballs to a OP/post is BOGUS, whatever the context of the message.

I get your point-- however, if someone's true intent is to point out an issue, they would not reinforce the problem by repeating the offense in a title.

As we all know, if this were a matter of repeating racist phrases in a title, expecting them to be validated by the context of the message-- it WOULD NEVER LAST ON DU FOR A MINUTE.

Discussed here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4045655&mesg_id=4045888

:hi:

[Lars39]

50. I think the response received was predictable for that forum,

and the mod knew it. FWIW, the mod in question did a lot of controversial lockings also during this time period.

[omega minimo]

53. Is "beating women" Lounge talk?

If it is, does that infect DU and diminish "respect"? I just wanna look at the grown-up Forums without eye pollution that breaks the bloody Rules. Thread titles matter.

Here's a discussion with response from A mod, not sure if it was THE mod.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4045655&mesg_id=4045888

[Lars39]

54. Nothing is sacred in the Lounge.

I had my eyes opened on that after the "dead baby" jokes thread.:puke:
And yes, this attitude spills over.

[omega minimo]

55. "Yes, the attitude spills over."

There was a semantically narrowed and philosophically challenged thread last week on how the "intention" behind usage of a word was pre-eminent, over any "history" or other association. (Clearly the historic word "bullshit" applied there-- the case was argued from a mechanical perspective with human experience treated as incidental and theoretical :puke: i.e. an articulate argument for a morally- and socially-stunted position).

The "intention" behind "wake up having beaten a woman" apparently belongs in the Lounge then. Admod has the discretion to delete or suggest retitling a thread, rather than packing more shit in the Lounge....

:smoke: on edit: never saw this before:
went to link for the discussion mentioned here-- 12 of the threads I bookmarked last week were deleted.

[Lars39]

56. That's what I found interesting...

that the mod didn't butt in and suggest a title change, but seemed to stick around, glossin.

[omega minimo]

57. ...and preening

I wanted to ask if he wears that syntax in the shower.

.................

Turns everything into a joke. Har de har har.

[omega minimo]

58. Rape "jokes" in Articles & Editorials

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x138099

[omega minimo]

59. "Is Howard Fineman having second thoughts about whoring for the WH?"

"Is Howard Fineman having second thoughts about whoring for the WH?"

This is a thread title on the topic page. Why is the Rule on "whore" not honored? Why is that too much to ask?

“members should avoid using racist, sexist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted terminology. This includes gender-specific terms such as "bitch," "cunt," "whore," "slut," or "pussy," and terms with homophobic derivation, such as "cocksucker," which are often inflammatory and inappropriate. One common exception is the use of the phrase "media whore," which is permitted.”

[Iris]

61. drives me crazy.

and is one reason I don't contribute to DU. No star for me, thank you.

[omega minimo]

60. "12. they are trying to distract from their own whoredom related to lying"

12. "they are trying to distract from their own whoredom related to lying

about Iraq. It's that simple. They are still Bush's whores."

[omega minimo]

62. Whore you kidding?

Okay, this is weird. Serendipity has intervened. I was about to post on Ugly Head this story of today’s revelations about DU Rules and stopped by a thread about healing the DU divide between “conspiracists” and “skeptics.”

I thought these words were amazing, as they echoed a vision of an egalitarian mutual effort, unmarred by divisions, disruptions:

“I am very very glad to see someone of middle ground try to heal this rupture in our lines....As long as things remain for the most part civil and non threatening and or maligning, DU can be a great force of a think tank.....In fact by our network of left leaning websites we have carved several notches into the proverbial bedpost...."

I couldn’t resist-- I just had to ask: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4106480&mesg_id=4107783

He goes on: "To me this is the real gold of DU, learning how to unite and work together has always been the vast Lefts most gaping problem. This thread could stand as a good first step in both sides having respect for eachother as compatriots and partners in trying to bring some good back to this world, not just our country... though that is undoubtedly where we should begin.”

Someone else responded with glowing praise and more of “That Vision Thing”-- but I had to wonder. Are these guys talking to each other as they craft the future? Do men on discussion boards imagine that they are mostly talking to men?

The big problem with bigoted language on DU is that is renders women invisible. And has even made them leave, or retreat, or create a “safe” place to remain on DU..... not conducive to "a good first step in both sides having respect for eachother as compatriots and partners in trying to bring some good back to this world."

Then I open Ugly Head and here’s a response to the “whore” posts:

Iris #61. "drives me crazy.
and is one reason I don't contribute to DU. No star for me, thank you."

:evilgrin: :evilfrown:

After the discussion this morning on the linked thread, I want to thank the folks that showed up and also Admod for allowing it to stand long enough to learn something.
______________________________
“Good Morning, whore you today?”

“Admod: please continue with your "best efforts" to moderate.
DUers and frurkers: Don't try to get away with "cheapening the quality of discourse for everyone else."”

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4098959
------------------------------------------------------

I’m apologize. I thought that DU Rules represented established guidelines and consensus opinions ALREADY! I didn’t understand until FINALLY today that everyone has a different opinion about language usage and that the Rules are just sort of THERE. It’s up to the Mods to decide if someone “colorful” has gone too far.... otherwise, MIND YOUR OWN BEESWAX.

When I read the DU Rule “...members should avoid using racist, sexist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted terminology. This includes gender-specific terms such as "bitch," "cunt," "whore,"...which are often inflammatory and inappropriate. One common exception is the use of the phrase "media whore," which is permitted”

.....I thought that meant that the term “whore” was inappropriate and inflammatory and the use of the phrase “media whore” was a permitted exception.

I thought that “whore” and “otherwise bigoted terminology” were slurs that didn’t belong in DU’s context of “Respect”-- I thought that discussions over whether slurs were “gender specific” or “in context” or with “intent” were irrelevant. I thought DU Rules had already established the criteria.

One person replied on the thread, concerned about losing eyeballs:
“if we're sitting here shooting at each other over every conceivable insult to be taken from every conceivable turn of phrase we're turning some people off with the circular firing squad and entertaining the rest of the world who thinks this is all we do.”

-- “We’re turning some people off” is my concern as well. Turning a lot of people off with bigoted language. I thought we had the Rules to back us up.

My concern was misinterpreted by someone else:
“In this case, omega can say "everyone! don't say 'whore' in any context, it cheapens the discourse! It offends people! It makes us look bad!" and if ANYONE has any disagreement, omega can say "oh so you are ok with cheapening the discourse, offending people, and making DU look bad?"”

-- Um, no.... I thought it was DU Rules. Ultimately, disruptive, divisive slurs are counterproductive to the goals of DU and the Democratic Party. It’s a bigger picture than petty bickering.

“If I have to change the way I think and talk to be a plain vanilla version of what ONE person thinks is appropriate, then I would not be me and we can't have that.”

-- Um, no.... I thought it was DU Rules. One person would not presume, unless they were a “relative newcomer” instructed to Alert or refer to DU Rules on bigoted language.

And there were some other voices:

“Thanks for the reminder, I understand and appreciate  your concern. When I see gutter language and profanity used to buttress a point of view I'm a little put off by it also.”

“...It offended me...I can't speak for anyone else, plus I know chances are that no action would be taken. I try not to get worked up over this stuff because it doesn't do any good and I would be accused of being overly sensitive or something.

There is a certain amount of hypocrisy that goes along with it. People would be up in arms if race was being handled in a joking manner.”

And here we have the Slippery Slope, the reason that I posted about the rampant abuse of “whore” in Titles lately:

“ If Media-whores is allowed, I dont see the problem with these usages.”

So. Slippery Slope. Foot in the door.

Good luck, everybody.

[omega minimo]

63. "Faux News has hit a brand new level of whoring and viciousness lately"

THREAD TITLE

"Faux News has hit a brand new level of whoring and viciousness lately"

[Iris]

64. Here's a nice one on why it's "ok" for a professor to post that his best

student is "so hot I could barely focus on the other students" on a public forum.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4140154

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bunny]

67. I have absolutely fucking had it this week!

Where are they crawling out from? What a bunch of morans.

[omega minimo]

68. The same rock they turned over to find Rove?

:hide:

Cheney's undisclosed location?

If we turn on the light, will they scurry back to their dank hidey-hole?

[Bunny]

69. We can only hope, huh?

;)

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[omega minimo]

71. Vile pig

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4824544&mesg_id=4824544

[Name removed]

72. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Moderator]

73. Locking

Calling out of DU members is not allowed.