Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

DU Feminists Manifesto - brainstorming time - please contribute

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » DU Groups » Women » Feminists Group Donate to DU
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 10:01 AM
Original message
DU Feminists Manifesto - brainstorming time - please contribute
In the thread entitled "How much fuss would we have to make" started by lwfern, she came up with the great idea of creating a manifesto that we can use as a tool to link to or copy and paste from in response to those posts we find objectionable, offensive, sexist.

lwfern's post (lwfern, I hope you don't mind)

Would anyone be interested in working on a DU feminist statement that encompasses what we see as offensive methods of political debate, and WHY we find them offensive? What if we came to agreement on that, and a number of us signed our approval to it?

Then we could do a standard "I find this offensive" post, but link it to our unified statement, rather than arguing it each and every time it comes up, and it wouldn't come across quite so much as a single "thin skinned" woman.

I know it wouldn't be incorporated into the rules, but I still see some potential value in a group of us taking a stand together. Then instead of being weak and thin-skinned, we might be perceived as having some strength. A force to be reckoned with. (Alright, I know I'm daydreaming there, sorry.)


I think it's a great idea and might save some wear and tear on our keyboards as we bang away, on our monitors as we bang our heads, and on our stomachs as we deal with yet another example of hating all things female/feminine/"other." Since I've learned the best way to kick off a great idea is to just start it, I'll start. Caffeine has not yet kicked in so I may do this in fits and starts. :D

Please, jump in with your ideas; great and small, profound and mundane, angry and conciliatory, good and bad, idealistic and pragmatic, and all things in between and beyond. We have some great minds and hearts on these boards. Let's see what we can create when we combine them.

----------------

Whereas words and language have power to create meaning and ideas which have power to create words and language;
Whereas each individual on this planet should (does?) have the right to create their own identity within the larger group;
Whereas each individual's power within a group contributes to the power of the group which contributes to the power of the individual;
And
Whereas all things female/feminine have been defined and codified throughout history as "other," lesser, weaker, "sinful," dangerous, repulsive, dirty, evil, petty, unworthy;
And
Whereas the leftist/progressive/liberal/Democratic ideals purport to be inclusive, diverse, welcoming, all-encompassing and empowering;
Whereas the group can only be as strong as its weakest member;
We find the following words, phrases, language and ideas with their subsequent subtext, to be antithetical to and destructive of leftist/progressive/liberal/Democratic ideals;
And
therefore we, DU Feminists, encourage our fellow DUers to cease the use of and to cultivate their knowledge of the offensive, repressive, and dis-empowering nature of sexist, abusive, oppressive, regressive and destructive language, words, phrases and ideas;

"Cat fight" - usually used to describe passionate debate or argument between 2 or more women; used to degrade the import of the discussion as being unworthy of serious thought or concern. (sexist: because all things female are petty)

"Can't you take a joke?" - usually used in response to an individual's concern that a comment or post was offensive or sexist; implies that the individual concerned does not have the right to express their concern or that their concern is in some manner petty (other forms include: "lighten up," "get over yourself," "get a life," "not this again," etc.) {special note: many women on this board hear these phrases with the word "bitch" implied, for example; "geez, bitch, can't you take a joke?: or "jesus, bitch, get over yourself," and so on.} (abusive: because the concerned individual is being denied their own perspective)

"Bitch" - the context and tone in which it is used and to what purpose, can be extremely negative and offensive. The fact that it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult. (associated phrases include "bitch slap," "make someone his/her/their bitch," etc.) (sexist: because all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

"Whore" - see "bitch" and include the added double standard applied to women and our sexuality in which our sexuality equates with our inherent character and that character is deemed evil, dirty, immoral, etc. The fact that it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult. (associated phrases include "media whore.") (sexist: because all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

"Slut" - see "bitch" and "whore." (sexist: because all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

"Male bashing" - usually used in response to a post in which an individual had the audacity to criticize men/males/boys and/or their actions. A form of hyperbole and duplicitous rhetoric in which the accuser deems the original poster to have included the entirety of men/males/boys because the original poster did not weaken their statement or argument by including confusing and muddying conditional adjectives and statements such as "some" men/males/boys or "I know that it's not all men/males/boys, but..." or "with all due respect to the men/males/boys on this board" and so on. (abusive: because it is used to derail the original content of the post, i.e., deny or obfuscate the OP's message.)

------------------

Okay, I need a break. I'll post more as I think of them, though I hope those here will add their ideas and clean up mine.

Oh, and by the way, to all the single moms, single dads and those who have taken on the role...Happy Father's Day!








Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
noamnety Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
1. Thanks for starting this
I will add one of my pet peeves:

All humans - to include women - deserve to be judged, favorably or harshly, on the merit of their ideas, words, and contributions to society. Reducing commentary of women in the public eye to a critique of their fashion choices or of their body shape objectifies not only those individual women, but also women as a class.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. You bet!
Until someone else comes forward, I'll do what I can, time permitting, to keep this on the front burner within this group. I appreciate as much assistance as possible as I'm preparing to move and start a new job within the next couple of weeks.

Anyone with more time (:D) to commit is more than welcome to take the lead on this.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
3. My kids are going to be
Edited on Sun Jun-18-06 12:44 PM by MuseRider
coming through the door soon so I will add my thoughts to the beginning of this before I leave.

Here is what I would like to see. The Manifesto (Womanifesto?) pinned to the top of our forum. It would provide useful insight to those who would like to learn in a place where they can't start messing with us.

I, myself, would like to use the statement above by lwfern as a blanket response to the offensive posts we do see here. I am sick and tired of fighting with morons who either will not get it because it is threatening or because they use it to make themselves feel powerful. I no longer feel the need to fight or justify myself to them or give them the boost to their ego they need and get by fighting. I would like to see us use that or something similar and then just leave it to them. They will get themselves shut down as they continue to boost themselves and we win without the grief. I know who I am and who you all are by reading you and none of us have to justify one single thing. Everyone has their own way so whatever we all decide to do is A OK with me. For me this would work.

Edit to say thanks to you all
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #3
10. Document name and a question for you...
First, could you point to the part of lwfern's statement above you want included in the document. I'm afraid I'm being fuzzy brained right now. :D

As to a name...hmm, some ideas I have are:

DU Feminists...
- Womanifesto (in this case, the man of manifesto refers to Latin manus "hand," though I completely agree with your idea)
- Declaration on Words
- Constitution
- Proclamation on Words
- Resolution
- Testimony

I'm not getting great ideas this morning. So far, I like yours best.

I hope whatever we call it, this document will ultimately save us all a lot of time and trouble educating these people without having to constantly re-write the same arguments.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
noamnety Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. I rather like Womanifesto
The ones I'd like to stay away from are the ones that relate very specifically to words. Sometimes the problems are language choices (either gender insults, or gender biased positive phrases like "he has balls"). But other times it's a behavior, not a word choice. "I'd do her" is an example of that -it's really the behavior of assessing women's fuckability as an auto-response, rather than the particular word choice.

(It's all words because we're in a forum typing words, but I'm hopeful that made some sense anyway.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Hee hee.
I just finished including a section on the "I'd do her" crap.

I'm doing some updating I was just about to post. I'm really hoping someone will come forward and clean it up.

Ah well, I'll post what I have and hopefully we'll go from there.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
mzteris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
4. Use of the
P word (or C word) as an insult; basically using derogatory slang for a woman's genitalia as an "insult".

Using "sissy" or "cry/throw/hit - like a 'girl' - as an "insult".

Using anything woman/female-like ascribed to a male - as an INSULT!!!

****

True story I'd like to share: my now 12 yo son started growing his hair out a couple of years ago. It's a little past shoulder length now. He's slightly built, small for his age, slim, kinda pixie-ish looking, if you know what I mean. He get's called a "girl" a LOT! He really doesn't mind if it's an honest mistake, but it does tick him off when people do it on purpose.

Last year we went to Taiwan/China - this is when his hair first started getting "really long" - and everyone there called him "mei-mei" (which is Chinese for Little Sister) - he tried to explain in the little bit of Chinese he knew at the time - but one day he says to me, "So what, Mom - it's no big deal. It's too much trouble to try and explain it to them and then they get embarrassed that they called me a girl. Besides, it's not like it's an INSULT or anything to be called a girl!"

I was relating the first part to my freeper rw brother - who is always picking on my son for everything! (being vegetarian, having long hair, being homeschooled, being Buddhist) - and he was like - "I bet he was really ticked off being called a "GIRL". hahahahahaha..." - then I told him what my son said about it not being an insult. My bro couldn't get his head around it. To him, of course it's an insult for a guy to be called a "girl". (Which is totally funny, because his daughter could probably kick his @ss as she has a 2nd degree black belt in karate!)





Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Great story!
Sad world, isn't it? 21st Century technology with attitudes from ancient Rome. I can't quite get my head around the fact that there are still some people who can't see that all-things-female are NOT bad things. Women are not "damaged men." *sigh*

Oof.

I'm trying to block some time today to update what I've already writen to incorporate the suggestions I'm reading here. I'll make sure to include yours, of course.

:D

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
19. Got 'em!
See my post Update2 which incorporates your suggestions at A.5 and A.6. I used some of your language as well.

:D

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kerrytravelers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
5. I love it.
Once it is stickied to the top of the forum, will it be open for comments? I can see the good and bad in that.

Good- we can all add our names.

Bad- the obsene remarks... although that might be good in airing out the dirty laundry that resides here at DU!

Count me in!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. I think, now this is just my opinion,
that we leave it open for comments per DU rules for this group, that is, all can read, only members can post comments. If we want feed back, maybe we can post in the Women's Rights forum or a general purpose forum.

I'd also like to figure a way to make it a living document so that we can incorporate new ideas and thoughts as we encounter them.

One way might be to pin the post to the top of the group here with a link to another site on which we can store the most recent version? Many here have their own websites so perhaps a couple of them would host it. My suggestion would be to limit it to 2 or 3 sites so that the version hosted is the most recent. It can be daunting to make sure all sites are hosting the most recent version.

Just some thoughts I'm having.

I'm relieved to see you're in! As per our conversation in that other thread, I was concerned you might have given up hope. Maybe this project can give us all a little breathing room to fight the other good fights out there and quite having to rehash the same education over and over and over and over and over....

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ismnotwasm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
6. Would we need to alter the response
To the women who feel we should "lighten up"? Probably not, when I think about it. Keep it simple, not getting into a huge flame fest. Some of the offending threads I usually stay out of, such as most Coulter threads. I've taken to calling her Ms. Coulter, if I do venture into one of them. In fact, it's "Ms." any female I'm offended by politically right now. I'd rather discuss behavior and the influence on society. And that is what's important, not how fat or thin, how attractive or not, or any ridiculous sexual speculations.

Any right wing women with any kind of power or influence gets called disgusting, misogynist names, and the name callers feel perfectly justified because they stand for what they stand for. Powerful men on the right get called names as well, but not the consistent use of sexual organs, or sexual status as standard name-calling fodder.

And that's just the political part on this board. Lots of other stuff.

So, let me run to work and think about replies. Generally I just don't respond to that crap, But that is because it was incredibly distracting. I certainly don't mind jumping in on this one though. It would feel very good to make a stand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. In another post, in the thread which was the catalyst for this project
I referred to those women as "women-who-want-to-be-men (...wwwtbm)". I'm glad you brought them into this discussion. Perhaps I should include something in there about the wwwtbm, and the "I'm not a feminist, but..." crowd along with the "I've made it and never suffered any sexism, why can't you?" crowd. Hmm, if you have ideas for wording, please advise. In the meantime I'm going to find some time today to do some adding and editing of my own.

I'm very happy you brought up the whole coulter-as-man crap and reminded me of the posts about katherine harris where the only thing discussed about her is her freaking boob job. Yeah, that's why she's a disgusting person, she's had a boob job. /sarcasm

I'll see what I can get to come out of my head and into the document. Please let me know if you have any specific wording in mind.

Oh, and before I forget, I love your use of "Ms. Coulter." I've noted before my own use of extreme etiquette when using sarcasm. It's a very effective tool. :evilgrin:

:D

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #6
21. I think I've captured the essence of what you said.
Please see my post Update2 and let me know if there's anything you'd like to see changed or worded differently.

Thanks.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
13. Updated - DU Feminist Womanifesto - still needs work - jump in
I changed the format to include numbered entries so we can point directly to the reason said post and/or words is offensive. My brain is not cooperating on this project right now, so please help edit and clean this up as well as add your own additional "words to hate."

---------------



Whereas words and language have power to create meaning and ideas which have power to create words and language;

Whereas each individual on this planet should (does?) have the right to create their own identity within the larger group;

Whereas each individual's power within a group contributes to the power of the group which contributes to the power of the individual;

And

Whereas all things female/feminine have been defined and codified throughout history as "other," lesser, weaker, "sinful," dangerous, repulsive, dirty, evil, petty, unworthy;

And

Whereas the leftist/progressive/liberal/Democratic ideals purport to be inclusive, diverse, welcoming, all-encompassing and empowering;

Whereas the group can only be as strong as its weakest member;

Whereas we find the following words, phrases, language and ideas with their subsequent subtext, to be antithetical to and destructive of leftist/progressive/liberal/Democratic ideals;

Therefore

We, DU Feminists, encourage our fellow DUers to cease the use of and to cultivate their knowledge of the offensive, repressive, and dis-empowering nature of sexist, abusive, oppressive, regressive and destructive language, words, phrases and ideas; such as the type included below:

1) "Cat fight" - usually used to describe passionate debate or argument between 2 or more women; used to degrade the import of the discussion as being unworthy of serious thought or concern. (sexist: because all things female are petty)

2) "Can't you take a joke?" - usually used in response to an individual's concern that a comment or post was offensive or sexist; implies that the individual concerned does not have the right to express their concern or that their concern is in some manner petty (other forms include: "lighten up," "get over yourself," "get a life," "not this again," etc.) {special note: many women on this board hear these phrases with the word "bitch" implied, for example; "geez, bitch, can't you take a joke?: or "jesus, bitch, get over yourself," and so on.} (abusive: because the concerned individual is being denied their own perspective)

3) "Bitch" - the context and tone in which it is used and to what purpose, can be extremely negative and offensive. The fact that it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult. (associated phrases include "bitch slap," "make someone his/her/their bitch," etc.) (sexist: because all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

4) "Whore" - see "bitch" and include the added double standard applied to women and our sexuality in which our sexuality equates with our inherent character and that character is deemed evil, dirty, immoral, etc. The fact that it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult. (associated phrases include "media whore.") (sexist: because all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

5) "Slut" - see "bitch" and "whore." (sexist: because all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

6) "Male bashing" - usually used in response to a post in which an individual had the audacity to criticize men/males/boys and/or their actions. A form of hyperbole and duplicitous rhetoric in which the accuser deems the original poster to have included the entirety of men/males/boys because the original poster did not weaken their statement or argument by including confusing and muddying conditional adjectives and statements such as "some" men/males/boys or "I know that it's not all men/males/boys, but..." or "with all due respect to the men/males/boys on this board" and so on. (abusive: because it is used to derail the original content of the post, i.e., deny or obfuscate the OP's message.)

7) Commenting on women's appearance/dress - Used as a weapon of attack against any woman with whom the poster has a difference of opinion. Used to attack the messenger rather than debating the message. Used to obfuscate the merit (or lack thereof) of the words, ideas, actions or contributions to society made by the object of such remarks. Objectifies not only individual women by reducing them down to their body parts, but also women as a class. Implies that said body parts are somehow evil, dirty, immoral, etc. Sometimes referred to as the "fuckability quotient." (Examples include: "I'd do her," "Check out (some physical aspect of a female body)," "She's hot!" "She's ugly (or some other adjective to define less-than-beautiful)", "Progressive women are hotter than conservative women (or some variation thereof)," "Can you believe she'd wear something like that?" "She dresses like a whore/slut/skank/etc." "She's had a boob job") (sexist: because it objectifies women; abusive: because it attempts to silence the message.)

7a) "Mann Coulter" – the implications of this phrase are that:
1 - because a woman looks a certain way, i.e., not "feminine" enough, she is not a "real woman;"
1a – that there is something pathological about not being a "real woman;"
2 – that a person's personality and/or pathology is tied to their appearance and or sex/gender;
3 – that there is something pathological with a person if their physiology does not match their gender identification;
3a – and that subsequently there is something pathological about transgendered people;
4 – That there is something pathological about a man wanting to be a *shudder* woman

8) "Pussy" - equates anything less than a sociologically defined masculinity as weak therefore bad, lesser, unworthy, not tough enough, in short, not "male" enough. Implies that only "masculine" traits are desired or the norm. Accepts the idea that to ascribe anything woman/female-like to a male is an insult. (sexist: because all things female are evil, bad, dirty, etc.)

9) "Sissy" - see "Pussy" also includes such "insults" as "cry/throw/hit like a girl" (sexist: because all things female are evil, bad, dirty, etc.)

10) "C*nt" - derogatory slang for woman's genitalia usually used as an insult. Objectifies not only individual women by reducing them down to their body parts, but also women as a class. Implies that women's genitalia are somehow evil, dirty, immoral, etc. (sexist: because all things female are evil, bad, dirty, etc.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
noamnety Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. few comments
In the second line, I'd go with the more authoritative DOES. (each individual on this planet has the right ...)

It doesn't mean those rights are respected, but it's a basic human right. In theory.

What about organizing this so that it falls into these categories:

1. Derogatory language (would include the current stuff except 2, 6, 7, and 7a)
2. Language used to glorify masculinity (having balls, being "a man")
2. Objectification (item 7)
3. Gender identity attacks (7a) (I love that you included this in here, btw)
4. Dismissal of Critiques of the Patriarchy. (items 2 and 6) And I'd add something to the start of 6 like: Confusing a critique of behaviors and symptoms of a system of patriarchy with a critique of all men as individuals. And maybe add the word feminazi to item 2.

Under item 7, I'd like to add that it's offensive because it assumes women are permanently on a runway to be constantly critiqued as sexual objects, no matter what context they are acting in.

In the same section, I would get rid of this: "Implies that said body parts are somehow evil, dirty, immoral, etc." because sometimes they are critiquing in a "positive" (destructive but favorable) way.

I love that you have the values listed up front, and LOVE this: "to be antithetical to and destructive of leftist/progressive/liberal/Democratic ideals;" YES.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Great ideas and thoughts! Thank you!
And thanks for also pointing out the things you do like/love. I'm a sucker for positive reinforcement. LOL

I will be sure to incorporate your ideas in the next edit. I especially want to make sure I get #2 which I meant to last time but forgot. Erf!

I also very much appreciate you including sentence, format, wording and word structuring suggestings. Let's me focus more on copy and paste and write rather than copy and paste and write and format and grammar and... :D



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Branjor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Great list ....
I guess this would go under "sissy" - an expression I have read in several DU posts - "cry like a little girl".
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. Got it!
Take a look at my post Update2 at A.6 and see if that says it okay.

Let me know any more ideas you'd like me to include.

:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. Update2
Edited on Mon Jun-19-06 08:42 PM by Cerridwen
Whereas words and language have power to create meaning and ideas which have power to create words and language;

Whereas each individual on this planet has the right to create their own identity within the larger group;

Whereas each individual's power within a group contributes to the power of the group which contributes to the power of the individual;

And

Whereas all things female/feminine have been defined and codified throughout history as "other," lesser, weaker, "sinful," dangerous, repulsive, dirty, evil, petty, unworthy, pathological;

And

Whereas the leftist/progressive/liberal/Democratic ideals purport to be inclusive, diverse, welcoming, all-encompassing and empowering;

Whereas the group can only be as strong as its weakest member;

Whereas we find the following words, phrases, language and ideas with their subsequent subtext, to be antithetical to and destructive of leftist/progressive/liberal/Democratic ideals;

Therefore

We, DU Feminists, encourage our fellow DUers to cease the use of and to cultivate their knowledge of the offensive, repressive, and dis-empowering nature of sexist, abusive, oppressive, regressive and destructive language, words, phrases and ideas; such as defined in the categories below:


A. Derogatory Language

1. "Cat fight" - usually used to describe passionate debate or argument between 2 or more women; used to degrade the import of the discussion as being unworthy of serious thought or concern. (sexist: because it endorses the destructive idea that all things female are petty)

2. "Bitch" - the context and tone in which it is used and to what purpose, can be extremely negative and offensive. The fact that it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult. (associated phrases include "bitch slap," "make someone his/her/their bitch," etc.) (sexist: because it endorses the destructive idea all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

3. "Whore" - see "bitch" and include the added double standard applied to women and our sexuality in which our sexuality equates with our inherent character and that character is deemed evil, dirty, immoral, etc. The fact that it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult. (associated phrases include "media whore," "whoring for fill in the name.") (sexist: because it endorses the destructive idea all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

4. "Slut" - see "bitch" and "whore." (sexist: because it endorses the destructive idea all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

5."Pussy" - equates anything less than a sociologically defined masculinity as weak therefore bad, lesser, unworthy, not tough enough, in short, not "male" enough. Implies that only "masculine" traits are desired or the norm. Accepts the idea that to ascribe anything woman/female-like to a male is an insult. (sexist: because it endorses the destructive idea all things female are evil, bad, dirty, etc.)

6. "Sissy" - see "Pussy" also includes such "insults" as "cry/throw/hit like a girl" (sexist: because it endorses the destructive idea all things female are evil, bad, dirty, etc.)

7. "C*nt" - derogatory slang for woman's genitalia usually used as an insult. Objectifies not only individual women, but also women as a class, by reducing them to their body parts. Implies that women's genitalia are somehow evil, dirty, immoral, etc. (sexist: because it endorses the destructive idea all things female are evil, bad, dirty, etc.)


B. Language Used to Glorify a Perverted and Anti-survival Form of "Masculinity"

1. "He's got balls!" - validates the pervasive and destructive idea that only those with the proper physiological equipment are capable of showing great strength or power and frequently used to promote an ideal in which, since women have no balls women are therefore handicapped in a world which values strength and power. Also validates and promotes the idea that "might makes right," in and of itself an anti-survival idea. Can also be used in a "positive" (destructive but favorable) manner, such as "She's got balls!" (sexist: because it it endorses the destructive idea that all things feminine are weak and pathological; destructive: because it endorses and promotes a perverted and anti-survival form of hyper-"masculinity.)

2. "Be a man!" - usually used in discussions in which a poster has questioned a perverted or anti-survival form of "masculinity" and implies that the poster is in some way weak or less than and therefore to be disregarded, ridiculed, or ignored. Can also be used in a "positive" (destructive but favorable) manner, such as "She's the man!" (sexist: because it it endorses the destructive idea that all things feminine are weak and pathological) (sexist: because it it endorses the destructive idea that all things feminine are weak and pathological; destructive: because it endorses and promotes a perverted and anti-survival form of hyper-"masculinity.)


C. Objectification

1. Comments about women's appearance/dress - used as a weapon of attack against any woman with whom the poster has a difference of opinion. Used to attack the messenger rather than debating the message. Used to obfuscate the merit (or lack thereof) of the words, ideas, actions or contributions to society made by the object of such remarks. Objectifies not only individual women, but also women as a class, by reducing them to their body parts. Implies that said body parts are the standard by which women are measured. Sometimes referred to as the "fuckability quotient." (Examples include: "I'd do her," "Check out insert description of female body part," "She's hot!" "She's ugly (or some other adjective to define less-than-beautiful)", "Progressive women are hotter than conservative women (or some variation thereof)," "Can you believe she'd wear something like that?" "She dresses like a whore/slut/skank/etc." "She's had a boob job") (sexist: because it objectifies women and it assumes and validates the idea that women are permanently on a runway to be constantly critiqued as sexual objects, no matter what context they are acting in; abusive: because it attempts to silence the message and the messenger.)

D. Gender Identity Attacks

1. "Mann Coulter" – the implications of this phrase are that:
  • 1.1 - because a woman looks a certain way, i.e., not "feminine" enough, she is not a "real woman;"

    • 1.1a - that there is something pathological about not being a "real woman;"

  • 1.2 - that a person's personality and/or pathology is tied to their appearance and or sex/gender;

  • 1.3 - that there is something pathological with a person if their physiology does not match their gender identification;

    • 1.3a - and that subsequently there is something pathological about transgendered people;

  • 1.4 - That there is something pathological about a man wanting to be a woman

(sexist: because it it endorses the destructive idea that all things feminine are bad, evil, dirty, weak, pathological, etc.)

E. Pompous Negation of Critiques of the Systems of Patriarchy and Authoritarianism

1. "Can't you take a joke?" - usually used in response to an individual's concern that a comment or post was offensive or sexist; implies that the individual concerned does not have the right to express their concern or that their concern is in some manner petty (other forms include: "lighten up," "get over yourself," "get a life," "not this again," "oh, you're one of those feminazis/militant feminists/radical feminists," "word police," etc.) {special note: many women on this board hear these phrases with the word "bitch" implied, for example; "geez, bitch, can't you take a joke?" or "jesus, bitch, get over yourself" and so on.} (abusive: because the concerned individual is being denied their own perspective)

2. "Male bashing" - usually used in response to a post in which an individual had the audacity to criticize men/males/boys and/or their actions. A form of hyperbole and duplicitous rhetoric in which the accuser purposely muddles a critique of behaviors and symptoms of a system of patriarchy with a critique of all men as individuals
because the original poster did not weaken their statement or argument by including confusing and muddying conditional adjectives and statements such as "some" men/males/boys or "I know that it's not all men/males/boys, but..." or "with all due respect to the men/males/boys on this board" and so on. (abusive: because it is used to derail the original content of the post, i.e., deny or obfuscate the OP's message.)




edit: copy and paste left residue

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kerrytravelers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Excellent. You are quite good at writing a cohesive statement.
Kudos to a job well done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. Thank you very much.
I have a couple of university professors to thank for that. They made a point of making me prove my thesis whether it was a research paper, an opinion piece or a "puff" piece. Intellectual laziness was not tolerated. :D

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
noamnety Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #17
24. Almost lost some beer on my keyboard
Excellent edits to incorporate the words Perverted, Anti-survival, and Pompous. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Alcohol abuse! Alcohol abuse!
:rofl:

The Irish part of me is concerned over the loss of good beer, the writer part of me says "Thank you, ma'am. Glad you appreciate my pointed use of adjectives."

:rofl:

Since I too, am sitting here enjoying a quaff of a "gift of the Goddess"...

:beer: :toast:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-19-06 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #14
22. Got 'em!
See my post Update2.

I also borrowed some of your language and wording. ;)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ismnotwasm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #13
35. Excellent
Do we need to add any details about hot button issues, such as pornography? My personal stance is that I don't mind porn. What I object to is sexist, misogynist porn, and since I've never viewed any other kind, (And I've seen my share) I continue my objections. I do NOT want to "invade people's privacy" or stomp on their first amendment rights. (I'm actually trying to protect my own.)
When feminism and fundamentalism get compared on this issue it's annoying to say the least. I'm not a writer, so I don't know how to put it. Eh, it can fit under the male-bashing, patriarchy stuff, I guess.

ANY inference that a woman Slept/Sucked her way to the "top"--however it's worded. I'm sure it's happened with both sexes, but a successful women immediately gets put under the spotlight on this one, in any profession. I don't care if it's a right wing women.

There is "street" lingo, that's quite common, and gives the appearance of being less offensive because the spelling has been altered, but it means the same thing:

Bi-Yach (so stupid I could cry),Ho, skank, douche bag--usually referred to males of course. Animal names for physical appearance although this is used for men and women. "Cow" comes to mind. Certain phrases, "Bitch-slap" "gold-digger"

ANY Racist/Race inferred specific names-- squaw, thugette, sometimes these pop-up when you least expect it from people you don't expect it from.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #35
41. I'm making some additions now - watch for an "addition" post
I've included some on porn - touchy subject so I hope I've handled it to people's satisfaction.

I'll edit in your suggestions to the Update2 document. I'll post that a bit later as I've been working on the additions rather than editing the "original."



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Branjor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #13
38. Say...
Instead of "Womanifesto" - sounds funny to me - how about Manifesta?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ismnotwasm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. LOL
I Like that. Reminds me of Feminista.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. Oooo, now there's a good idea. - off-topic comment below
I just noticed the picture of your "little one." I reminds me very much of my boy "Bandit." He was a lhasa-poodle mix long before that became a popular "breed." He was the product of a fence jumping poodle and a "for-breeding-purposes-only" female lhasa.

I sure do miss him. Your picture made me smile to remember him.

:D

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Branjor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #40
46. Thank you...
That's my boy Jordi (?1988-2004). I saw him stray and rescued him in 1998. He was a totally devoted and loving friend to me for 5 1/2 wonderful (but too short) years until his death from a Rimadyl reaction in 2004. I miss him every single day. I am glad his picture made you smile and remember Bandit! :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Scout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #38
43. Manifesta ... that could work!
I also prefer that to the Womanifesto suggestion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
noamnety Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #38
52. Manifesta is catchy
rolls off the tongue a little easier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BlueIris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 02:52 AM
Response to Original message
26. I...don't even know where to start. First: I'll pass.
For a lot of reasons, mainly that I find it virtually impossible to agree with everyone here claiming to be a feminist on any kind of a majority of points, opinions or perspectives on feminist issues at any single time. To me, the idea of compiling a manifesto that we could all somehow manage to generally support is ludicrous. Additionally, it smacks of a snide, seventh-grade attempt to make certain posters here who don't conform to a one-size-fits-all approach to embracing and promoting feminism feel excluded, inferior and less enlightened. I can't wait to enjoy the snotty attitude I'm sure some of you will start to effect when I decline to use whatever talking points wind up in this monstrosity, in favor of relying on my own individual responses to misogynist posters, constructed to rebut the specifics of offensive posts. Which is another thing--this concept reeks of obnoxious groupthink, conformist absolutism and laziness, all things I personally detest, not to mention that it fails to take into account the fact that considering the average brain size of your typical anti-feminist around these parts (read: very small), if the manifesto is longer than about fifteen words, it isn't likely to resonate with them or motivate them to stop advertising their sick prejudices against women. Good luck, I guess, but I think this exercise is pointless and insulting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
lukasahero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 08:30 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. You could have just said no thanks or not joined in
Your insults to the people and their efforts here are uncalled for. Talk about making someone feel "excluded, inferior and less enlightened".

PS - Before you comment on my "snotty attitude" simply for disagreeing with you, note that I have not otherwise participated in this discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Scout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #27
28. well, the OP did ask for this:
Please, jump in with your ideas; great and small, profound and mundane, angry and conciliatory, good and bad, idealistic and pragmatic, and all things in between and beyond.

Note that I have not otherwise participated in this discussion. UNTIL NOW...
I like the idea, but please don't call it a "Womanifesto" ... that will just get you laughed at and dismissed, and then some idiot will try to pretend that feminists want us to use words like "personholecover" to be gender neutral.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #28
31. Ya, I'm of two minds about the title...
But then I frequently see too many "sides" of an issue. LOL

I agree with what you say about Womanifesto inducing laughter and derision while at the same time it's precisely because it would cause laughter and derision I think we should use it to "make a statement" while at the same time...

And FYI, a good substitute for "manhole cover" is "access cover" as it doesn't mangle the language too painfully. Though it did catch the attention of the engineers and architects when I used it throughout a plan design document.

:evilgrin:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #26
29. Thank you for your input. Another "monstrosity" for your perusal.
I'd like to address your concerns as you noted them, as others here may have the same concerns and may not have, as yet, responded to my requests for input about this project, its form and content.

For a lot of reasons, mainly that I find it virtually impossible to agree with everyone here claiming to be a feminist on any kind of a majority of points, opinions or perspectives on feminist issues at any single time. (emphasis added for reference)


1. I'm not sure where in the document I wrote that "we" must, have, or do agree with every single point in it.

I will hazard a guess that perhaps it is that I used the phrase, "Therefore, We, DU Feminists, encourage..." Perhaps I should use in its place "Therefore, We, some of the feminists at DU," or "Therefore, We, a few of the feminists at DU," or I guess I could just claim it as mine and say "Therefore, I, Cerridwen who claims to be a feminist here at DU," but quite frankly, I don't think those versions carry quite the impact. I even discarded the idea of using "Therefore, We, the DU Feminists," as I did not presume to speak for all the feminists in this group and I thought the word "the" would imply such.

Please accept my apologies if that was not, in fact, the offending phrase. I find it difficult to address vague criticisms.

2. "everyone here claiming to be a feminist" - I presume this means you are the keeper of the definition of "feminist?" Very cool. I, myself have never quite been able to get an exact definition of feminist which I feel is accurate. I'd love to hear yours.

To me, the idea of compiling a manifesto that we could all somehow manage to generally support is ludicrous.


Absolutely! Here are some other examples of absolutely "ludicrous" "public declarations of principles, policies, or intentions, especially of a political nature."

Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions
The Declaration of Independence
The Bitch Manifesto
and of course,
The Equal Rights Amendment

Though I'm not sure "ludicrous" is the adjective I would use.

Additionally, it smacks of a snide, seventh-grade attempt to make certain posters here who don't conform to a one-size-fits-all approach to embracing and promoting feminism feel excluded, inferior and less enlightened.


Again, I'm not sure where in the document you found a requirement that we all conform. I'm not sure how compiling a list of words, phrases and language which can be used to save typing to rebut sexist posts; listing the most common and explaining why we find them sexist, is a statement that we conform to a "feminist code." Nor do I understand how explaining such will make others "feel excluded, inferior and less enlightened;" especially as the intent is to enlighten and include in the discussion, those who may not know or who may not have thought of a particular perspective.

I can't wait to enjoy the snotty attitude I'm sure some of you will start to effect when I decline to use whatever talking points wind up in this monstrosity, in favor of relying on my own individual responses to misogynist posters, constructed to rebut the specifics of offensive posts.


1. "snotty attitude I'm sure some of you will start to effect" - An effective rhetorical "preemptive" invalidation of any response not in alignment with your own thoughts and is therefore in some manner, petty? unworthy? A disingenuous use of rhetoric usually quite effective in causing the responder to be more concerned with and defend how they will be perceived rather than thinking to address the issue at hand. Although I prefer to think of some of my replies as more "snarky" than "snotty," well, in this case, "snotty" it is. Of course, you could also use "uppity," "feminazi," or my all time favorite of which I've frequently been accused, "bitchy." I'll take "bitchy" for a thousand, Alex.

2. "I decline to use whatever talking points wind up in this monstrosity,..." - It may come as a surprise to you, but I did not, nor do I have, any intention of monitoring individuals' replies to abusive posts to see if they use this document or not. I don't even have a complete list of the members of this group, nor any intention of creating one. Had you not made such a point to say so, I don't know that I, or anyone else would notice your use or lack thereof, of this document.

3. "...in favor of relying on my own individual responses to misogynist posters..." - The existence of a document to use as a tool does not preclude you, or anyone else, or even myself, from "relying on my own individual responses to misogynist posters." I believe it is a personal choice. To use, or not to use, that is the question. Just as in all choice issues, there is the presumption of, well, choice. Because abortion is available to you, does not mean you must have one. Because you are able to have a child, does not mean you must have one. However, having options is kinda nice.

Which is another thing--this concept reeks of obnoxious groupthink, conformist absolutism and laziness, all things I personally detest, not to mention that it fails to take into account the fact that considering the average brain size of your typical anti-feminist around these parts (read: very small), if the manifesto is longer than about fifteen words, it isn't likely to resonate with them or motivate them to stop advertising their sick prejudices against women.


1. I modeled this document on a couple of other examples of "obnoxious groupthink, conformist absolutism and laziness,..." including:

Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions
The Declaration of Independence
The Bitch Manifesto
and of course,
The Equal Rights Amendment

I study a bit of history and I figured if it was good enough for Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the "founders" of the US, Joreen of The Bitch Manifesto, and Alice Paul, this bit of lazy "groupthink" might be good enough for us as well.

2. "...the fact that considering the average brain size of your typical anti-feminist around these parts (read: very small),..." - 1) I presume ignorance is the result of a lack of knowledge rather than stupidity; 2) I do not underestimate my opposition; and 3) I won't play to the "least common denominator." I will leave those assumptions and actions to the corporate media and their ilk.

3. "if the manifesto is longer than about fifteen words, it isn't likely to resonate with them or motivate them to stop advertising their sick prejudices against women." - as you may have noticed, I am not always succinct. If I have something to say and someone chooses to read it, they will read it. If they have no interest, they won't. In the meantime, I've made an effort to educate or elucidate an idea, concept or perception. I will have done my part to lead someone to knowledge. What they do with it is their decision. They might even accidentally learn something or begin to think a new thought.

Good luck, I guess, but I think this exercise is pointless and insulting.


Thank you for your rather begrudging well wishes. I will add my own rather begrudging apologies that you find this idea insulting as that was never its intent. As to whether or not it is pointless, I presume everyone here will decide on their own if it will be a useful tool or a waste of time. Fortunately, as I am the one spending my time, it should not negatively impact the time commitment of others unless they choose otherwise.

Now, a note of sincerity. Seriously... I sincerely appreciate the opportunity you provided me to take my "debating skills" out for a walk. I've held them in mothballs for a while and it feels good to have "aired them out" a bit. Thank you. It is also liberating to get my "bitchy" back.

Finally, in spite of what the length of this post may imply, I have no personal stake in whether we use this document or not. I've enjoyed writing it and interacting with others who've contributed their ideas to it and making the effort to create a collectively defined statement. I won't consider it to have been a waste of my time as I will use it on one of my blogs; available to any and all who wish to use it, of course and with appropriate credit given to those co-authors who've contributed to it, should they so desire.

I'll keep working on this as my time and interest allows. Use it. Don't use it. A hundred years from now, who will care?





Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
lukasahero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. "someone chooses to read it, they will read it"
I always read your posts. I look forward to them.

Thank you for pursuing this. I have watched with pride as it develops although I have not had time to participate.

When this DU Feminists Group was formed, it was formed with the intent of becoming a place to collectively discuss and work towards actually doing something to change the situation, not just to be a safe place to bitch about things. This is the first real consolidated effort in that regard and it has been gratifying to watch. Thank you for your efforts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. You're welcome and thank you.
You just reminded me of 2 very important reasons "we, feminists," come together to create change.

Many of us don't get or give enough "attagirls" and "attaboys" in our everyday lives. Sometimes working within a group means our efforts are noticed and appreciated. We can see we are not alone. We, feminists, seem to understand this and are frequently adept at saying so. Thank you. I too, enjoy your posts. I've been grateful for them during times I couldn't participate.

Coming together as a group can be the most effective use of our valuable time and resources. Each takes a turn as their time allows. We can make an impact far and above what we may do individually. Individually we have much to offer. Collectively, we have limitless potential.

I've seen/read you out there "fighting the good fight" during times I've not been able to participate. Now I have some time and I'll do what I can; until the next time when others can continue on.

Thank you for your kind words and for reminding me why it is and what it is I am doing here.



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
noamnety Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #29
34. One constructive comment and some thoughts
We could say "We, the undersigned Feminists ..." out of consideration to those who consider themselves feminists here but don't feel a need for a unified statement against the use of words like whore, slut, or random comments like "I'd do her" on DU. That way, if you aren't the undersigned, it's very clear it doesn't speak for you, and it only adds one word, and in a way that doesn't feel as much like a clumsy disclaimer.

On the larger issue, I did something like this during the 2004 campaign. I got tired of arguing the same points over and over and over again. So after a while I started making a list of my standard answers to standard stupid shit people would post - the usual right wing misinformation. So, for example, if I was arguing online with someone, and they brought up that Kerry voted to eliminate Marriage Penalty Relief for married taxpayers, I didn't have to research it and retype it each time the issue came up. I could just go to my file and copy and paste the response:

From Bush's website "In 1998, Kerry Voted Against Eliminating Marriage Penalty Relief For Married Taxpayers With Combined Incomes Less Than $50,000 Per Year, Saving Taxpayers $46 Billion Over 10 Years. (S. 1415, CQ Vote #154: Rejected 48-50: R 5-49; D 43-1, 6/10/98, Kerry Voted Yea)"

The actual amendment is about a Tobacco Trust Fund, with some language thrown in about marriage penalties for good measure. From the amendment that Senator Kerry voted to table:

(1) In general: Except as provided in paragraph (2) and notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the amount credited to the National Tobacco Trust Fund under section 401(b) of this Act for any fiscal year shall be reduced by the amount of the decrease in Federal revenues for such fiscal year which the Secretary of the Treasury estimates will result from the amendments made by this title. The Secretary shall increase or decrease the amount of any reduction under this section to reflect any incorrect estimate for any preceding fiscal year.

(2) Limitation on reduction after fiscal year 2007:

(A) In general: Except as provided in subparagraph (B), with respect to any fiscal year after fiscal year 2007, the reduction determined under paragraph (1) shall not exceed 33 percent of the total amount credited to the National Tobacco Trust Fund for such fiscal year.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r105:2:./temp/~r105KFROFg::
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=105&session=2&vote=00154


I researched it and thought out the response, one time. I posted it probably a dozen times during the course of the election. I suppose you could call me intellectually lazy because I didn't come up with an original response each time. But I considered it efficient. I prefer to spend my time considering new issues, not researching the same one again and again.

I ended up putting that file online, because I don't always post from one location - I wanted access to it at different places. The unanticipated outcome was that others started using it as a resource. I meant it to just be for my own purposes, but at one point I was getting a few thousand hits a month, (including from Al-Jazeera!) which was crazy because it had no formatting, no design to speak of, no advertising. Just blah blah blah a bunch of talking points for me to use as needed. That's how I found out about DU, by the way. Had never heard of it, and I started seeing it in my referrer logs, because people here were using me as a resource.

My point in all this is that I would never discourage someone from researching or posting their own thoughts in a thread - why on earth would I? Dialog is the basis of sites like this. But also I see a purpose, when a standard answer is repeated again and again, of having a compiled resource to refer back to. It's efficient for me (and we could get into philosophical arguments over whether efficient = lazy), but more importantly it has the potential to become a resource for others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #29
48. Here's a short cut idea....
Whenever we run into a sexist poster, we could just post a link to the SCUM manifesto!

That'll keep 'em busy for a while...lol.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #48
50. Oooooooo, I like the way you think.
:evilgrin:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ismnotwasm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 06:25 AM
Response to Reply #48
53. Oh, dear God that's funny!!!!
I'm sitting here giggling at 4:30 in the morning. (Almost bedtime, I work nights) Good thing I'm not drinking anything, It'd be all over my keyboard.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #53
56. Every now and then,
I feel the need to re-read the SCUM Manifesto. Her anger is certainly something to behold.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ismnotwasm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #56
67. It's a good read
I try to explain it to certain women. (they would never take the time to read the whole thing) They get this look-- it's funny because it's not a complete rejection, but a "I can't believe someone actually said that" kind of look.
And you're right-- It's good to read now and again. It's like climbing a mountain and breathing sharp, cool air. Difficult, painful but invigorating.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
noamnety Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #53
61. I couldn't read it
because I am drinking something. Had to close the screen for now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #48
55. You just gave me an idea....
Watch for it.

:evilgrin:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ismnotwasm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #26
36. Awww
I understand what you're saying but everything must have a beginning. There is no "one size fits all" feminism, but I find usually certain things in common with women and sometimes men, who actually call themselves feminist. This includes sex workers, no matter what my opinion of the sex industry is. I can find commonality if I try.

So I encourage this exersize. DU as a whole might even notice or care, It a left-leaning political board, with a broad spectrum of folks, but it's good to get things out on the table, talk about what's going on, what feels ok what doesn't. It's not going to shake the world, and it will do some hearts and minds a little good.

Also, I don't eat my young.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
benevolent dictator Donating Member (765 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #26
37. I agree. We should just get rid of the Bill of Rights, too
since it's ridiculous to form a cohesive convenient document to list our rights in.

You don't *have* to reference this thread when correcting other's misogynistic language use, but it is there if you want it.

I don't see how it's any different from having a "party platform." I mean, of course there are a lot of different view points in the Democratic Party, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to compile "a manifesto that we could all ... generally support." You don't have to agree to every last comma and period to "generally support" something. Everyone who identifies with the Democratic Party at least "generally supports" some basic ideals, and if we write them all down and discover you only agree with 8 out of 10, well, wouldn't you say you still "generally support" what's written?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-20-06 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
30. Buried in my other long post is a summation. Here it is...
Finally, in spite of what the length of this post may imply, I have no personal stake in whether we use this document or not. I've enjoyed writing it and interacting with others who've contributed their ideas to it and making the effort to create a collectively defined statement. I won't consider it to have been a waste of my time as I will use it on one of my blogs; available to any and all who wish to use it, of course and with appropriate credit given to those co-authors who've contributed to it, should they so desire.

I'll keep working on this as my time and interest allows. Use it. Don't use it. A hundred years from now, who will care?


For those who don't care to read through my long winded post to find if there was anything of interest to them, the above is ultimately how I feel about this project.



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
42. Proposed additions to the as yet unnamed document
Edited on Wed Jun-21-06 12:57 PM by Cerridwen
I'm not quite sure what we want the scope of this to be. I'm writing mosly from my own list of pet peeves and incorporating others' suggestions as they are presented.

Proposed additional categories.

------------------



F. The Bandwagon Argument

1. "It happens to men, too" - used as a conditional to legitimize an act which is perpetrated by men against women in significantly higher numbers than than when "it happens to men, too." Frequently used to imply that feminists are uncaring or "selfish" or that a poster is denying what is a legitimate claim though it is not the topic of discussion. Used to dilute or derail the debate.


2. "Woman do it, too" - used as a conditional to legitimize an act which is perpetrated by men against women in significantly higher numbers than than when "women do it, too." Frequently used to imply that feminists are uncaring or "selfish" or that a poster is denying what is a legitimate claim though it is not the topic of discussion. Used to dilute or derail the debate.


3. "I'm a humanist" - used to promote the idea that feminists and feminism are elitist, narrowly focused, or an exclusive club and that feminist ideals are nothing more than a selfish attempt by a few women and men to promote an agenda which will take rights for themselves at a cost to others' rights. Denies and obscures the comprehensive nature of feminism.


4. "All feminists are/believe/do/think fill in negative stereotype" - implies a form of "groupthink," or "hive mentality" within the feminist movement as though the women and men of the feminist movement are incapable of independent thought. Sometimes used to catapult anti-feminist propaganda or an anti-feminist writer as indicative of the "feminist" movement. {editor's note: Anyone who thinks "all feminists think alike" has obviously never been in a room with 2 or more feminists in their life.}



G. Anti-Feminist Propaganda

The intentional and the unintentional use of anti-feminist rhetoric used to "catapult the propaganda" that falsely portrays feminists and feminism in a negative, sometimes pathological, light. Many of the falsehoods listed below have been repeated so frequently for so long they have become "common knowledge;" though they have unfortunately become common, they are not knowledge as they are falsehoods usually created to discredit feminists and feminist ideals.

1. "Feminists want to outlaw porn" - usually used in a debate to define feminists as "frigid," anti-sex, "man haters," cold, sexually repressed and so on. Is also used on occasion to equate feminists with neo-con religious fundamentalists as an added insult. Will sometimes include an incomplete quote of Catherine MacKinnon's anti-pornography legislation. "1. "Pornography" means the graphic sexually explicit subordination of women through pictures and/or words" and does not include the rest of the line which states: "that also includes one or more of the following:" followed by a list of depictions of women in pornography with which many might actually agree. Click here for the full text of Mackinnon's definition of pornography within the anti-pornography legislation which she proposed.


2. "Feminists believe all sex is rape" - implies a form of "groupthink," or "hive mentality" within the feminist movement as though the women and men of the feminist movement are incapable of independent thought. "MacKinnon claims the first reference... surfaced in the October 1986 issue of Playboy. ..., the statement (which had previously been attached to feminist Andrea Dworkin) was made up by the pornography industry in an attempt to undermine her credibility. It became inextricably linked with MacKinnon's name after she began working with Dworkin in the early 1980s to write model anti-pornography laws." Full story.


3. "Women's libbers burned their bras" -

  • 3.a. the use of the word "libbers," as was the case with the use of the word "suffragette" in its time, was devised by the media and women's rights opponents of the day, to ridicule and denigrate women who spoke out in an "uppity," "strident," "shrill" and "unlady-like" manner. "Dyke," "man-hater," "lesbian," "castrating bitch," "ice queen," and "dragon lady" are other examples of epithets which are used against feminists. {special note: most feminists today have healed their own homophobia and are no longer "cowed" by the use of "dyke," "lesbian," and *wink*wink*"Oh, you're one of those."}


  • 3.b. "the bra burning incident" - "That's a myth. It was the time of draft-card burning, and some smart headline writer decided to call it a 'bra burning' because it sounded insulting to the then-new women's movement. We only threw a bra symbolically in a trash can." (emphasis added) Full story.


4. "Abortion clinic," "Abortion doctor" - the subtext of these phrases is that all women's health clinics and all OB/GYNs associated with them are "killing babies." They are "intellectually dishonest" and obfuscate the wide range of "non-controversial" services provided by many women's health care clinics and our doctors and are frequently used as justification, following passage of anti-choice legislation, to shut down clinics which provide contraception, emergency contraception, family planning advice, sex education, pap smears and/or other gynecological exams, breast exams, etc.


edit: punctuation and spacing and c&p issues
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #42
63. Regarding #4 about the Abortion Clinics...
maybe we should say something about why these clinics are necessary....Irresponsible Ejaculators.

If we didn't have these, we wouldn't need those. I'm just saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #63
64. ^^^^^^^^^^^^ speechless
:spray:

:rofl:

:evilgrin:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
44. Updated full version - and a question
Edited on Wed Jun-21-06 02:46 PM by Cerridwen
This is the full document which includes my proposed additions and the ideas contributed by everyone. If I missed your idea, please let me know.

Question: Shall I spell out c*nt in the final document? It's not final yet, so there's time to discuss this. My inclination is to spell it out; so long as DU rules and admins approve.

Editors and fellow grammar and spelling nazis ;): now's a great time to check my spelling, grammar and typing skills. :D Please, pay special attention to my punctuation as I have "over-comma-fication" syndrome which sometimes results in "under-comma-fication" as I attempt to overcompensate. Oof!

----------------------

A DU Feminist's Manifesta on Language


Whereas words and language have power to create meaning and ideas which have power to create words and language;

Whereas each individual on this planet has the right to create their own identity within the larger group;

Whereas each individual's power within a group contributes to the power of the group which contributes to the power of the individual;

And

Whereas all things female/feminine have been defined and codified throughout history as "other," lesser, weaker, "sinful," dangerous, repulsive, dirty, evil, petty, unworthy, pathological;

And

Whereas the leftist/progressive/liberal/Democratic ideals purport to be inclusive, diverse, welcoming, all-encompassing and empowering;

Whereas the group can only be as strong as its weakest member;

Whereas we find the following words, phrases, language and ideas with their subsequent subtext, to be antithetical to and destructive of leftist/progressive/liberal/Democratic ideals;

Therefore

We, the undersigned DU Feminists, encourage our fellow DUers to cease the use of and to cultivate their knowledge of the offensive, repressive, and dis-empowering nature of sexist, abusive, oppressive, regressive and destructive language, words, phrases and ideas; such as defined in the categories below:


A. Derogatory Language

1. "Cat fight" - usually used to describe passionate debate or argument between 2 or more women; used to degrade the import of the discussion as being unworthy of serious thought or concern. (sexist: because it endorses the destructive idea that all things female are petty)

2. "Bitch" - the context and tone in which it is used and to what purpose, can be extremely negative and offensive. The fact that it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult. (associated phrases include "bitch slap," "make someone his/her/their bitch," etc.) (sexist: because it endorses the destructive idea all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

3. "Whore" - see "bitch" and include the added double standard applied to women and our sexuality in which our sexuality equates with our inherent character and that character is deemed evil, dirty, immoral, etc. The fact that it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult. (associated phrases include "media whore," "whoring for fill in the name.") (sexist: because it endorses the destructive idea all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

4. "Slut" - see "bitch" and "whore." other examples of anti-female epithets in this vein include: Bi-Yach, Ho, skank and douche bag. The fact that they may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when they are used against males it is precisely because of their anti-female associated meanings that they considered such a powerful insults. (sexist: because it endorses the destructive idea all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

5."Pussy" - equates anything less than a sociologically defined masculinity as weak therefore bad, lesser, unworthy, not tough enough, in short, not "male" enough. Implies that only "masculine" traits are desired or the norm. Accepts the idea that to ascribe anything woman/female-like to a male is an insult. (sexist: because it endorses the destructive idea all things female are evil, bad, dirty, etc.)

6. "Sissy" - see "Pussy" also includes such "insults" as "cry/throw/hit like a girl" (sexist: because it endorses the destructive idea all things female are evil, bad, dirty, etc.)

7. "C*nt" - derogatory slang for woman's genitalia usually used as an insult. Objectifies not only individual women, but also women as a class, by reducing them to their body parts. Implies that women's genitalia are somehow evil, dirty, immoral, etc. (sexist: because it endorses the destructive idea all things female are evil, bad, dirty, etc.)


B. Language Used to Glorify a Perverted and Anti-survival Form of "Masculinity"

1. "He's got balls!" - validates the pervasive and destructive idea that only those with the proper physiological equipment are capable of showing great strength or power and frequently used to promote an ideal in which, since women have no balls women are therefore handicapped in a world which values strength and power. Also validates and promotes the idea that "might makes right," in and of itself an anti-survival idea. Can also be used in a "positive" (destructive but favorable) manner, such as "She's got balls!" (sexist: because it it endorses the destructive idea that all things feminine are weak and pathological; destructive: because it endorses and promotes a perverted and anti-survival form of hyper-"masculinity.")

2. "Be a man!" - usually used in discussions in which a poster has questioned a perverted or anti-survival form of "masculinity" and implies that the poster is in some way weak or less than and therefore to be disregarded, ridiculed, or ignored. Can also be used in a "positive" (destructive but favorable) manner, such as "She's the man!" (sexist: because it it endorses the destructive idea that all things feminine are weak and pathological; destructive: because it endorses and promotes a perverted and anti-survival form of hyper-"masculinity.)


C. Objectification

1. Comments about women's appearance/dress - used as a weapon of attack against any woman with whom the poster has a difference of opinion. Used to attack the messenger rather than debating the message. Used to obfuscate the merit (or lack thereof) of the words, ideas, actions or contributions to society made by the object of such remarks. Objectifies not only individual women, but also women as a class, by reducing them to their body parts. Implies that said body parts are the standard by which women are measured. Sometimes referred to as the "fuckability quotient." (Examples include: "I'd do her," "Check out insert description of female body part," "She's hot!" "She's ugly (or some other adjective to define less-than-beautiful)", "Progressive women are hotter than conservative women (or some variation thereof)," "Can you believe she'd wear something like that?" "She dresses like a whore/slut/skank/etc." "She's had a boob job." "What a cow!") (sexist: because it objectifies women and it assumes and validates the idea that women are permanently on a runway to be constantly critiqued as sexual objects, no matter what context they are acting in; abusive: because it attempts to silence the message and the messenger.)
  • 1.a. "She slept her way to the top" - used to promote the idea that women are incapable of succeeding without using their bodies and sex. Denies that the targeted woman is intelligent, talented or skillful in anything other than the "womanly arts" of seduction and/or sex. The fact that it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult.(the same stereotype when used in the context of marriage is "gold digger" and "trophy wife.")

D. Gender Identity Attacks

1. "Mann Coulter" – the implications of this phrase are that:
  • 1.1 - because a woman looks a certain way, i.e., not "feminine" enough, she is not a "real woman;"

    • 1.1a - that there is something pathological about not being a "real woman;"

  • 1.2 - that a person's personality and/or pathology is tied to their appearance and or sex/gender;

  • 1.3 - that there is something pathological with a person if their physiology does not match their gender identification;

    • 1.3a - and that subsequently there is something pathological about transgendered people;

  • 1.4 - That there is something pathological about a man wanting to be a woman.

(sexist: because it it endorses the destructive idea that all things feminine are bad, evil, dirty, weak, pathological, etc.)


E. Pompous Negation of Critiques of the Systems of Patriarchy and Authoritarianism

1. "Can't you take a joke?" - usually used in response to an individual's concern that a comment or post was offensive or sexist; implies that the individual concerned does not have the right to express their concern or that their concern is in some manner petty (other forms include: "lighten up," "get over yourself," "get a life," "not this again," "oh, you're one of those feminazis/militant feminists/radical feminists," "word police," "PC Police," etc.) {special note: many women on this board hear these phrases with the word "bitch" implied, for example; "geez, bitch, can't you take a joke?" or "jesus, bitch, get over yourself" and so on.} (abusive: because the concerned individual is being denied their own perspective)

2. "Male bashing" - usually used in response to a post in which an individual had the audacity to criticize men/males/boys and/or their actions. A form of hyperbole and duplicitous rhetoric in which the accuser purposely muddles a critique of behaviors and symptoms of a system of patriarchy with a critique of all men as individuals
because the original poster did not weaken their statement or argument by including confusing and muddying conditional adjectives and statements such as "some" men/males/boys or "I know that it's not all men/males/boys, but..." or "with all due respect to the men/males/boys on this board" and so on. (abusive: because it is used to derail the original content of the post, i.e., deny or obfuscate the OP's message.)


F. The Bandwagon Argument

1. "It happens to men, too" - used as a conditional to legitimize an act which is perpetrated by men against women in significantly higher numbers than than when "it happens to men, too." Frequently used to imply that feminists are uncaring or "selfish" or that a poster is denying what is a legitimate claim though it is not the topic of discussion. Used to dilute or derail the debate.


2. "Woman do it, too" - used as a conditional to legitimize an act which is perpetrated by men against women in significantly higher numbers than than when "women do it, too." Frequently used to imply that feminists are uncaring or "selfish" or that a poster is denying what is a legitimate claim though it is not the topic of discussion. Used to dilute or derail the debate.


3. "I'm a humanist" - used to promote the idea that feminists and feminism are elitist, narrowly focused, or an exclusive club and that feminist ideals are nothing more than a selfish attempt by a few women and men to promote an agenda which will take rights for themselves at a cost to others' rights. Denies and obscures the comprehensive nature of feminism.


4. "All feminists are/believe/do/think fill in negative stereotype - implies a form of "groupthink," or "hive mentality" within the feminist movement as though the women and men of the feminist movement are incapable of independent thought. Sometimes used to catapult anti-feminist propaganda or an anti-feminist writer as indicative of the "feminist" movement. {editor's note: Anyone who thinks "all feminists think alike" has obviously never been in a room with 2 or more feminists in their life.}


G. Anti-Feminist Propaganda

The intentional and the unintentional use of anti-feminist rhetoric used to "catapult the propaganda" that falsely portrays feminists and feminism in a negative, sometimes pathological, light. Many of the falsehoods listed below have been repeated so frequently for so long they have become "common knowledge;" though they have unfortunately become common, they are not knowledge as they are falsehoods created to discredit feminists and feminist ideals.

1. "Feminists want to outlaw porn" - usually used in a debate to define feminists as "frigid," anti-sex, "man haters," cold, sexually repressed and so on. Is also used on occasion to equate feminists with neo-con religious fundamentalists as an added insult. Will sometimes include an incomplete quote of Catherine MacKinnon's anti-pornography legislation. "1. "Pornography" means the graphic sexually explicit subordination of women through pictures and/or words" and does not include the rest of the line which states: "that also includes one or more of the following:" followed by a list of depictions of women in pornography with which many might actually agree. Click here for the full text of Mackinnon's definition of pornography within the anti-pornography legislation which she proposed.


2. "Feminists believe all sex is rape" - implies a form of "groupthink," or "hive mentality" within the feminist movement as though the women and men of the feminist movement are incapable of independent thought. "MacKinnon claims the first reference... surfaced in the October 1986 issue of Playboy. ..., the statement (which had previously been attached to feminist Andrea Dworkin) was made up by the pornography industry in an attempt to undermine her credibility. It became inextricably linked with MacKinnon's name after she began working with Dworkin in the early 1980s to write model anti-pornography laws. Full story.


3. "Women's libbers burned their bras" -
  • 3.a. the use of the word "libbers," as was the case with the use of the word "suffragette" in its time, was devised by the media and women's rights opponents of the day, to ridicule and denigrate women who spoke out in an "uppity," "strident," "shrill" and "unlady-like" manner. "Dyke," "man-hater," "lesbian," "castrating bitch," "ice queen," and "dragon lady" are other examples of epithets which are used against feminists. {special note: most feminists today have healed their own homophobia and are no longer "cowed" by the use of "dyke," "lesbian," and *wink*wink*"Oh, you're one of those."}


  • 3.b. "the bra burning incident" - "That's a myth. It was the time of draft-card burning, and some smart headline writer decided to call it a 'bra burning' because it sounded insulting to the then-new women's movement. We only threw a bra symbolically in a trash can." (emphasis added) Full story.

4. "Abortion clinic," "Abortion doctor" - the subtext of these phrases is that all women's health clinics and all OB/GYNs associated with them are "killing babies." They are "intellectually dishonest" and obfuscate the wide range of "non-controversial" services provided by many women's health care clinics and our doctors and are frequently used as justification, following passage of anti-choice legislation, to shut down clinics which provide contraception, emergency contraception, family planning advice, sex education, pap smears and/or other gynecological exams, breast exams, etc.


-------------------------

edit: note to self: if asking for opinion, sometimes it's good to include my own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
noamnety Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #44
47. petty grammar patrol
Some acknowledgment of deliberate circular language might be in order:

Whereas words and language have power to create meaning and ideas which, in turn, have power to create words and language;

Whereas each individual on this planet has the right to create their own identity within the larger group;

Whereas each individual's power within a group contributes to the power of the group which, in turn, contributes to the power of the individual;


A lot of "facts" in these sentences - just a suggestion for rewording:

2. "Bitch" - ... The fact t That it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult.

3. "Whore" - ... The fact t That it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult. (associated phrases include "media whore," "whoring for fill in the name.") (sexist: because it endorses the destructive idea all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

4. "Slut" - same



3. "I'm a humanist" - used to promote the idea that feminists and feminism are elitist, narrowly focused, or an exclusive club and that feminist ideals are nothing more than a selfish attempt by a few women and men to promote an agenda which will take rights for themselves at a cost to others' rights. Denies and obscures the comprehensive nature of feminism and the very existence of patriarchal oppression.


G. Anti-Feminist Propaganda
5. "Feminists are Manhaters" - uh I dunno what to write about it, but I swear I don't hate all men. :) thoughts? Maybe that's not something that is an issue on DU anyway, not sure if I've even seen the accusation here. I have on other boards.

Also, we don't have anything about rape, which could include blaming the victim for her behavior (dress, drinking), joking about rape (to include prison rape), or acting as if rape only happens by strangers (assuming risky behavior = going out to a bar, when so many rapes occur at home, by people we know).

And hey, this is an amazing piece of work here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #47
49. Thank 'ee, ma'am. That's just what I was looking for.
Watch for changes in next update (coming soon to a bulletin board near you. eek. weird mood tonight.)

Thanks for the reminder to include rape and that whole nightmare. Will see what I can come up with.

I'll incorporate your suggestions in the next version.

Thanks, so much.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 03:54 PM
Response to Original message
45. Another question
Edited on Wed Jun-21-06 03:56 PM by Cerridwen
I'm asking over here because I don't post in the "Women's Rights" forum enough to be a "known quantity." Also, since it's an open forum I don't care to incite a bloodbath from trolls, posers and other "I've got nothing better to do with my life so I'll go piss off the feminists" types.

Are there feminists who post in the "Women's Rights" forum (or other forums) rather than here, who you think would like to contribute to this project?

If so, please point them to this thread so I can include their input. If they're not a donor and aren't able to post here, perhaps you'd be so kind as to post their suggestion for them; include their name, please, as I'm putting together a paragraph acknowledging those who've contributed, which will be included in the final document if we decide it's appropriate. If they'd rather remain anonymous, that's fine, too. As Virgina Woolf wrote "Anonymous was a woman."

Oh, and if you have an idea but don't care to post publicly, I'm happy to accept suggestions in my DU inbox.

Thank you.




Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-21-06 11:05 PM
Response to Original message
51. Thanks for doing this.
I think it's about time that DU had something like this. Unfortunately - a lot of people (men and women) are not getting the message about this sort of thing (from the culture at large - as if :eyes: ) - and a lot of people might be persuaded - with a coherent message.

It beats flaming people over these things.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #51
54. Something your post made me think of...
"a lot of people might be persuaded - with a coherent message."

And perhaps if they see the scope of damaging language, they'll start to get an idea how pervasive and insidious anti-woman sentiment is. Wouldn't that be a "kick in the pants?" :D

I'm glad to do this. This crap has bugged me for decades.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
57. Ver.4.-w/rape & adds. inspired by femrap (H.4) and ismnotwasm (G.A.)
6/22/06 version - rearranged to include "rape" in place of "higher" importance, a little clean up and re-wording for grammar and sentence structure.

I'm still looking for feedback on grammar, spelling, punctuation, and "readability."

Thanks.


----------------------

A DU Feminist's Manifesta on Language


Whereas words and language have power to create meaning and ideas which, in turn, have power to create words and language;

Whereas each individual on this planet has the right to create their own identity within the larger group;

Whereas each individual's power within a group contributes to the power of the group which, in turn, contributes to the power of the individual;

And

Whereas all things female/feminine have been defined and codified throughout history as "other," lesser, weaker, "sinful," dangerous, repulsive, dirty, evil, petty, unworthy, pathological;

And

Whereas the leftist/progressive/liberal/Democratic ideals purport to be inclusive, diverse, welcoming, all-encompassing and empowering;

Whereas the group can only be as strong as its weakest member;

Whereas we find the following words, phrases, language and ideas with their subsequent subtext, to be antithetical to and destructive of leftist/progressive/liberal/Democratic ideals;

Therefore

We, the undersigned DU Feminists, encourage our fellow DUers to cease the use of and to cultivate their knowledge of the offensive, repressive, and dis-empowering nature of sexist, abusive, oppressive, regressive and destructive language, words, phrases and ideas; such as defined in the categories below:


A. Derogatory Language

1. "Cat fight" - usually used to describe passionate debate or argument between 2 or more women; used to degrade the import of the discussion as being unworthy of serious thought or concern. (sexist: because it endorses the destructive and false idea that all things female are petty)

2. "Bitch" - the context and tone in which it is used and to what purpose, can be extremely negative and offensive. That it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult. (associated phrases include "bitch slap," "make someone his/her/their bitch," etc.) (sexist: because it endorses the destructive and false idea all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

3. "Whore" - see "bitch" and include the added double standard applied to women and our sexuality in which our sexuality equates with our inherent character and that character is deemed evil, dirty, immoral, etc. That it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult. (associated phrases include "media whore," "whoring for fill in the name.") (sexist: because it endorses the destructive and false idea all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

4. "Slut" - see "bitch" and "whore." other examples of anti-female epithets in this vein include: "Bi-Yach," "Ho," "skank" and "douche bag." That they may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when they are used against males it is precisely because of their anti-female associated meanings that they considered such a powerful insults. (sexist: because it endorses the destructive and false idea all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

5."Pussy" - equates anything less than a sociologically defined masculinity as weak therefore bad, lesser, unworthy, not tough enough, in short, not "male" enough. Implies that only "masculine" traits are desired or the norm. Accepts the idea that to ascribe anything woman/female-like to a male is an insult. (sexist: because it endorses the destructive and false idea all things female are evil, bad, dirty, etc.)

6. "Sissy" - see "Pussy" also includes such "insults" as "cry/throw/hit like a girl" (sexist: because it endorses the destructive and false idea all things female are evil, bad, dirty, etc.)

7. "C*nt" - derogatory slang for woman's genitalia usually used as an insult. Objectifies not only individual women, but also women as a class, by reducing them to their body parts. Implies that women's genitalia are somehow evil, dirty, immoral, etc. (sexist: because it endorses the destructive and false idea all things female are evil, bad, dirty, etc.)


B. Exploiting Rape to Vilify Women

1. "She asked for it" - not always stated outright, frequently implied. All statements place responsibility for the actions of a rapist on the shoulders of the women/girls who men rape. (see G. The Bandwagon Argument for why this section says specifically "men rape women.")
  • 1.a. "she shouldn't have gotten drunk/high," - perpetuates the destructive and false idea that men are incapable of controlling their "monstrous sexual appetites" and will "fuck anything" (denying the humanity of women who men rape) and also makes an assertion that men have no responsibility nor will take responsibility for their own "monstrous sexual appetites."

  • 1.b. "she was dressed like a ho/skank/whore/slut, etc." - perpetuates the destructive and false idea that men are incapable of controlling their "monstrous sexual appetites" and holds women responsible for controlling men's "monstrous sexual appetites" even though men, apparently, can't.

  • 1.c. "she shouldn't have been there in the first place," or its inverse, "what was she doing there in the first place?" - perpetuates the illusion that all rape is "stranger rape," and since men are incapable of controlling their "monstrous sexual appetites," "should" live their lives avoiding the places in which our lives take place; such as, the privacy of our own homes; at a party with friends whom we trust; the parking lot at the grocery store or work or a club or...; the playground with the kids; walking to and from work, school, the bus, the train; riding the bus or train or driving in our car; camping; family outings or family gatherings; or...anyplace that is not inside the illusionary safety of our homes.

  • 1.d. "Women/girls need to take responsibility for their safety," - perpetuates the destructive and false idea that women have the sole responsibility to control men's "monstrous sexual appetites" and that we forget that responsibility at our peril

  • 1.e. "If she had been smart..." or its inverse "If she hadn't been so stupid..." - perpetuates the destructive and false idea that men rape only "stupid/slutty/whorish" women and that all women who men rape are "stupid/slutty/whorish."
2. "Boys will be boys" - perpetuates the destructive and false idea that men begin to lose control over their "monstrous sexual appetites" at or near puberty and that they have no responsibility to learn such control.

3. "Date rape isn't as bad as 'violent rape'" - not always stated outright, frequently implied. Perpetuates the destructive and false idea that rape is just sex that got a "little out of hand." Denies and obfuscates the violently emotional toll rape has on women/girls regardless of presence or absence of physical evidence. Implies that women's emotional health is less important than not only her physical health, but in the "grand scheme of things."

4. Rape as "comedy" material; a source of jokes and amusement of the "it'll never happen (hasn't happened) to me so it's not important," and the "if it's inevitable, just lay back and enjoy it" crowds - used to deny the violent emotional and/or physical impact rape has on a girl's/woman's "sense of Self" and her, forever changed, place in the world. Denies and obfuscates that When a man rapes a woman or girl, he has not perpetrated just one violent act against one woman. Rape can irreparably change the entire course of a woman's life and those whose lives intersect hers. Thereby illuminating the "attraction" of using rape as a weapon of war. Rape is NOT funny.

(sexist, abusive, destructive: because the statements above remove all responsibility from rapists.)


C. Language Used to Glorify a Perverted and Anti-survival Form of "Masculinity"

1. "He's got balls!" - validates the pervasive and destructive and false idea that only those with the proper physiological equipment are capable of showing great strength or power and frequently used to promote an ideal in which, since women have no balls women are therefore handicapped in a world which values strength and power. Also validates and perpetuates the idea that "might makes right," in and of itself an anti-survival idea. Can also be used in a "positive" (destructive but favorable) manner, such as "She's got balls!" (sexist: because it it endorses the destructive and false idea that all things feminine are weak and pathological; destructive: because it endorses and perpetuates a perverted and anti-survival form of hyper-"masculinity.")

2. "Be a man!" - usually used in discussions in which a poster has questioned a perverted or anti-survival form of "masculinity" and implies that the poster is in some way weak or less than and therefore to be disregarded, ridiculed, or ignored. Can also be used in a "positive" (destructive but favorable) manner, such as "She's the man!" (sexist: because it it endorses the destructive and false idea that all things feminine are weak and pathological; destructive: because it endorses and perpetuates a perverted and anti-survival form of hyper-"masculinity.)


D. Objectification

1. Comments about women's appearance/dress - used as a weapon of attack against any woman with whom the poster has a difference of opinion. Used to attack the messenger rather than debating the message. Used to obfuscate the merit (or lack thereof) of the words, ideas, actions or contributions to society made by the object of such remarks. Objectifies not only individual women, but also women as a class, by reducing them to their body parts. Implies that said body parts are the standard by which women are measured. Sometimes referred to as the "fuckability quotient." (Examples include: "I'd do her," "Check out insert description of female body part," "She's hot!" "She's ugly (or some other adjective to define less-than-beautiful)", "Progressive women are hotter than conservative women (or some variation thereof)," "Can you believe she'd wear something like that?" "She dresses like a whore/slut/skank/etc." "She's had a boob job." "What a cow!") (sexist: because it objectifies women and it assumes and validates the idea that women are permanently on a runway to be constantly critiqued as sexual objects, no matter what context they are acting in; abusive: because it attempts to silence the message and the messenger.)
  • 1.a. "She slept her way to the top" - used to promote the idea that women are incapable of succeeding without using their bodies and sex. Denies that the targeted woman is intelligent, talented or skillful in anything other than the "womanly arts" of seduction and/or sex. That it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult.(the same stereotype when used in the context of marriage is "gold digger" and "trophy wife.")

D. Gender Identity Attacks

1. "Mann Coulter" – the implications of this phrase are that:
  • 1.1 - because a woman looks a certain way, i.e., not "feminine" enough, she is not a "real woman;"

    • 1.1a - that there is something pathological about not being a "real woman;"

  • 1.2 - that a person's personality and/or pathology is tied to their appearance and or sex/gender;

  • 1.3 - that there is something pathological with a person if their physiology does not match their gender identification;

    • 1.3a - and that subsequently there is something pathological about transgendered people;

  • 1.4 - That there is something pathological about a man wanting to be a woman.

(sexist: because it it endorses the destructive and false idea that all things feminine are bad, evil, dirty, weak, pathological, etc.)


F. Pompous Negation of Critiques of the Systems of Patriarchy and Authoritarianism

1. "Can't you take a joke?" - usually used in response to an individual's concern that a comment or post was offensive or sexist; implies that the individual concerned does not have the right to express their concern or that their concern is in some manner petty (other forms include: "lighten up," "get over yourself," "get a life," "not this again," "oh, you're one of those feminazis/militant feminists/radical feminists," "word police," "PC Police," etc.) {special note: many women on this board hear these phrases with the word "bitch" implied, for example; "geez, bitch, can't you take a joke?" or "jesus, bitch, get over yourself" and so on.} (abusive: because the concerned individual is being denied their own perspective)

2. "Male bashing" - usually used in response to a post in which an individual had the audacity to criticize men/males/boys and/or their actions. A form of hyperbole and duplicitous rhetoric in which the accuser purposely muddles a critique of behaviors and symptoms of a system of patriarchy with a critique of all men as individuals
because the original poster did not weaken their statement or argument by including confusing and muddying conditional adjectives and statements such as "some" men/males/boys or "I know that it's not all men/males/boys, but..." or "with all due respect to the men/males/boys on this board" and so on. (abusive: because it is used to derail the original content of the post, i.e., deny or obfuscate the OP's message.)


G. The Bandwagon Argument

1. "It happens to men, too" - used as a conditional to legitimize an act which is perpetrated by men against women in significantly higher numbers than than when "it happens to men, too." Frequently used to imply that feminists are uncaring or "selfish" or that a poster is denying what is a legitimate claim though it is not the topic of discussion. Used to dilute or derail the debate. An in-depth view of the insidious nature of this remark, see Why I Write Not of Men posted by White Bear at Bitch Ph.D..

2. "Woman do it, too" - used as a conditional to legitimize an act which is perpetrated by men against women in significantly higher numbers than than when "women do it, too." Frequently used to imply that feminists are uncaring or "selfish" or that a poster is denying what is a legitimate claim though it is not the topic of discussion. Used to dilute or derail the debate.

3. "I'm a humanist" - used to promote the idea that feminists and feminism are elitist, narrowly focused, or an exclusive club and that feminist ideals are nothing more than a selfish attempt by a few women and men to promote an agenda which will take rights for themselves at a cost to others' rights. Denies and obscures the comprehensive nature of feminism and the very existence of patriarchal oppression.

4. "All feminists are/believe/do/think fill in negative stereotype - implies a form of "groupthink," or "hive mentality" within the feminist movement as though the women and men of the feminist movement are incapable of independent thought. Sometimes used to catapult anti-feminist propaganda or an anti-feminist writer as indicative of the "feminist" movement. {editor's note: Anyone who thinks "all feminists think alike" has obviously never been in a room with 2 or more feminists in their life.}

5. "Not all men do/think/act fill in the blank" - used when a woman or man has the "audacity" make a declarative statement rather than placating the reader with conditional words such as "some," "not all, but" "with all due respect," and so on, when writing about traits, actions, ideals which have traditionally been associated with a perverted and anti-survival for of "masculinity." It is usually an attempt to deny the existence of patriarchal systems of domination and their horrible impact on women and men. (abusive: because it is used to divert and/or silence the message.)
  • G.A. Jumping Off the Bandwagon

    • "I'm not a feminist, but..." - usually followed by a list of women's rights for which many feminists, female and male, now and throughout history have fought for, were imprisoned for, have had their lives destroyed over, and who have died for. Dishonors the long history of struggle from which we, women and men, have benefited. Usually used to distance herself from the myths that feminists are: humorless (F.1.), frigid (H.1.), manhating and/or angry (H.4.) or pathological (listed throughout). Corollaries include: "I'm a feminist, but I love/like porn/sex/men" (subtext: but not one of "those" feminists (H.1., H.2., H.4., G.4., F.2. and throughout), use by women of destructive and sexist language because "I'm not that sensitive," "It's just words," "I'm not like that," "It doesn't mean anything," "I've never taken it that way," etc. usually as an attempt to distance the poster from "those women" and to show how "unlike" "those women" the poster is. Validates the destructive idea that language has NO power. Validates the usage of destructive language since "women do it, too" (G.2.). Denies and dishonors the long history of struggle as mentioned above.

H. Anti-Feminist Propaganda

The intentional and the unintentional use of anti-feminist rhetoric used to "catapult the propaganda" that falsely portrays feminists and feminism in a negative, sometimes pathological, light. Many of the falsehoods listed below have been repeated so frequently for so long they have become "common knowledge;" though they have unfortunately become common, they are not knowledge as they are falsehoods created to discredit feminists and feminist ideals.

1. "Feminists want to outlaw porn" - usually used in a debate to define feminists as "frigid," anti-sex, "man haters," cold, sexually repressed and so on. Is also used on occasion to equate feminists with neo-con religious fundamentalists as an added insult. Will sometimes include an incomplete quote of Catherine MacKinnon's anti-pornography legislation. "1. "Pornography" means the graphic sexually explicit subordination of women through pictures and/or words" and does not include the rest of the line which states: "that also includes one or more of the following:" followed by a list of depictions of women in pornography with which many might actually agree. Click here for the full text of Mackinnon's definition of pornography within the anti-pornography legislation which she proposed.

2. "Feminists believe all sex is rape" - implies a form of "groupthink," or "hive mentality" within the feminist movement as though the women and men of the feminist movement are incapable of independent thought. "MacKinnon claims the first reference... surfaced in the October 1986 issue of Playboy. ..., the statement (which had previously been attached to feminist Andrea Dworkin) was made up by the pornography industry in an attempt to undermine her credibility. It became inextricably linked with MacKinnon's name after she began working with Dworkin in the early 1980s to write model anti-pornography laws. Full story.

3. "Women's libbers burned their bras" -
  • 3.a. the use of the word "libbers," as was the case with the use of the word "suffragette" in its time, was devised by the media and women's rights opponents of the day, to ridicule and denigrate women who spoke out in an "uppity," "strident," "shrill" and "unlady-like" manner. "Dyke," "man-hater," "lesbian," "castrating bitch," "ice queen," and "dragon lady" are other examples of epithets which are used against feminists. {special note: most feminists today have healed their own homophobia and are no longer "cowed" by the use of "dyke," "lesbian," and *wink*wink*"Oh, you're one of those."}

  • 3.b. "the bra burning incident" - "That's a myth. It was the time of draft-card burning, and some smart headline writer decided to call it a 'bra burning' because it sounded insulting to the then-new women's movement. We only threw a bra symbolically in a trash can." (emphasis added) Full story.
4. "Abortion clinic," "Abortion doctor" - the subtext of these phrases is that all women's health clinics and all OB/GYNs associated with them are "killing babies." They are "intellectually dishonest" and obfuscate the wide range of "non-controversial" services provided by many women's health care clinics and our doctors. "Saving babies" is then used as to justify closing clinics which provide vital "women's" health services such as, contraception, emergency contraception, family planning advice, sex education, pap smears and/or other gynecological exams, breast exams, etc.

4. "Feminists are 'manhaters'" or its corollary, "Feminists are 'angry'" and the placating versions "I don't hate men, but..," "I love men, but..." - used to imply that if the poster in question, would only "learn to love men," read that as "get laid" or "get a man," rather than "hating men" or "being angry" read that as "instead of being a frigid bitch," the poster would "be cured of her pathology," read that as "remember her 'place' as chattel." Used as a tactic to imply the poster is pathological because she is "angry" or because she "hates men." The men and women who accuse a poster of "hating men" because the poster has criticized or commented on a sexist or abusive post, could perhaps put their defensive outrage in perspective by reading any version of the S.C.U.M. Manifesto to see what angry, manhating looks like. Its author, Valerie Solanas, took her angry, manhating to its logical and extreme conclusion as depicted in I Shot Andy Warhol.





-------------------------
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
lukasahero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #57
58. Typo alert
I was just reading through and found that I think you left out a word. (It's awesome, btw.)

"controlling their "monstrous sexual appetites," "should" live their lives avoiding" I think there should be either a "woman" or a "we" before the "should".
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #58
59. Thanks! Got it on my copy for next update.
Like this:

"she shouldn't have been there in the first place," or its inverse, "what was she doing there in the first place?" - perpetuates the illusion that all rape is "stranger rape," and since men are incapable of controlling their "monstrous sexual appetites," women "should" live their lives avoiding the places in which our lives take place; such as, the privacy of our own homes; at a party with friends whom we trust; the parking lot at the grocery store or work or a club or...; the playground with the kids; walking to and from work, school, the bus, the train; riding the bus or train or driving in our car; camping; family outings or family gatherings; or...anyplace that is not inside the illusionary safety of our homes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #57
60. Section and subsection numbering cleaned up and
standardized in my copy ready for next version.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-22-06 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #57
62. Inserted addition to rape section - don't know how I forgot this part
4. "She's lying" or its inverse "the alleged rapist is innocent until proven guilty (implies "she's lying")" - perpetuates the assumption that sensational accusations of "false reports" of rape that appear in the corporate media, a) are false rather then "unprovable" in a "court of law," b) are indicative of the actual ratio of false to "provable" reports of rape, c) that the ratio is accurate in the number of "false" accusations to actual number of rapes d) that all acts of rape are reported and provable in a court of law and e) "proof" that women are a bunch of "gold-digging, money grubbing, liars". Further insults women by denying our credibility on a board whose members will "judge, try and 'hang'" a republican or a pedophile with never a though of "innocent until proven guilty" and whose members protest loudly and vociferously that the "media cannot be trusted!" Perpetuates the idea, that when a woman files a charge of rape, she is "guilty until proven raped."

5. Rape as "comedy" material; a source of jokes and amusement of the "it'll never happen (hasn't happened) to me so it's not important," and the "if it's inevitable, just lay back and enjoy it" crowds - used to deny the violent emotional and/or physical impact rape has on a girl's/woman's "sense of Self" and her, forever changed, place in the world. Denies and obfuscates that When a man rapes a woman or girl, he has not perpetrated just one violent act against one woman. Rape can irreparably change the entire course of a woman's life and those whose lives intersect hers. Thereby illuminating the "attraction" of using rape as a weapon of war. Rape is NOT funny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 09:58 AM
Response to Original message
65. Full document - I'm performing a link test
Edited on Fri Jun-23-06 09:58 AM by Cerridwen
6/23/06 version - inter-document link test - testing to see if links within the document to each section work. Links can be used to navigate the document; i.e., can link to specific section.

This version reflects typo fixes, numbering and labeling fixes and added language in section B.

edit: spelling

----------------------

A DU Feminist's Manifesta on Language


Whereas words and language have power to create meaning and ideas which, in turn, have power to create words and language;

Whereas each individual on this planet has the right to create their own identity within the larger group;

Whereas each individual's power within a group contributes to the power of the group which, in turn, contributes to the power of the individual;

And

Whereas all things female/feminine have been defined and codified throughout history as "other," lesser, weaker, "sinful," dangerous, repulsive, dirty, evil, petty, unworthy, pathological;

And

Whereas the leftist/progressive/liberal/Democratic ideals purport to be inclusive, diverse, welcoming, all-encompassing and empowering;

Whereas the group can only be as strong as its weakest member;

Whereas we find the following words, phrases, language and ideas with their subsequent subtext, to be antithetical to and destructive of leftist/progressive/liberal/Democratic ideals;

Therefore

We, the undersigned DU Feminists, encourage our fellow DUers to cease the use of and to cultivate their knowledge of the offensive, repressive, and dis-empowering nature of sexist, abusive, oppressive, regressive and destructive language, words, phrases and ideas; such as defined in the categories below:


A. Derogatory Language

1. "Cat fight" - usually used to describe passionate debate or argument between 2 or more women; used to degrade the import of the discussion as being unworthy of serious thought or concern. (sexist: because it endorses the destructive and false idea that all things female are petty)

2. "Bitch" - the context and tone in which it is used and to what purpose, can be extremely negative and offensive. That it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult. (associated phrases include "bitch slap," "make someone his/her/their bitch," etc.) (sexist: because it endorses the destructive and false idea all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

3. "Whore" - see "bitch" and include the added double standard applied to women and our sexuality in which our sexuality equates with our inherent character and that character is deemed evil, dirty, immoral, etc. That it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult. (associated phrases include "media whore," "whoring for fill in the name.") (sexist: because it endorses the destructive and false idea all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

4. "Slut" - see "bitch" and "whore." other examples of anti-female epithets in this vein include: "Bi-Yach," "Ho," "skank" and "douche bag." That they may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when they are used against males it is precisely because of their anti-female associated meanings that they considered such a powerful insults. (sexist: because it endorses the destructive and false idea all things female are evil, bad, mean, etc.)

5."Pussy" - equates anything less than a sociologically defined masculinity as weak therefore bad, lesser, unworthy, not tough enough, in short, not "male" enough. Implies that only "masculine" traits are desired or the norm. Accepts the idea that to ascribe anything woman/female-like to a male is an insult. (sexist: because it endorses the destructive and false idea all things female are evil, bad, dirty, etc.)

6. "Sissy" - see "Pussy" also includes such "insults" as "cry/throw/hit like a girl" (sexist: because it endorses the destructive and false idea all things female are evil, bad, dirty, etc.)

7. "C*nt" - derogatory slang for woman's genitalia usually used as an insult. Objectifies not only individual women, but also women as a class, by reducing them to their body parts. Implies that women's genitalia are somehow evil, dirty, immoral, etc. (sexist: because it endorses the destructive and false idea all things female are evil, bad, dirty, etc.)


B. Exploiting Rape to Vilify Women

1. "She asked for it" - not always stated outright, frequently implied. All statements place responsibility for the actions of a rapist on the shoulders of the women/girls who men rape. (see G. The Bandwagon Argument for why this section says specifically "men rape women.")
  • 1.a. "she shouldn't have gotten drunk/high," - perpetuates the destructive and false idea that men are incapable of controlling their "monstrous sexual appetites" and will "fuck anything" (denying the humanity of women who men rape) and also makes an assertion that men have no responsibility nor will take responsibility for their own "monstrous sexual appetites."

  • 1.b. "she was dressed like a ho/skank/whore/slut, etc." - perpetuates the destructive and false idea that men are incapable of controlling their "monstrous sexual appetites" and holds women responsible for controlling men's "monstrous sexual appetites" even though men, apparently, can't.

  • 1.c. "she shouldn't have been there in the first place," or its inverse, "what was she doing there in the first place?" - perpetuates the illusion that all rape is "stranger rape," and since men are incapable of controlling their "monstrous sexual appetites," women "should" live their lives avoiding the places in which our lives take place; such as, the privacy of our own homes; at a party with friends whom we trust; the parking lot at the grocery store or work or a club or...; the playground with the kids; walking to and from work, school, the bus, the train; riding the bus or train or driving in our car; camping; family outings or family gatherings; or...anyplace that is not inside the illusionary safety of our homes.

  • 1.d. "Women/girls need to take responsibility for their safety," - perpetuates the destructive and false idea that women have the sole responsibility to control men's "monstrous sexual appetites" and that we forget that responsibility at our peril

  • 1.e. "If she had been smart..." or its inverse "If she hadn't been so stupid..." - perpetuates the destructive and false idea that men rape only "stupid/slutty/whorish" women and that all women who men rape are "stupid/slutty/whorish."
2. "Boys will be boys" - perpetuates the destructive and false idea that men begin to lose control over their "monstrous sexual appetites" at or near puberty and that they have no responsibility to learn such control.

3. "Date rape isn't as bad as 'violent rape'" - not always stated outright, frequently implied. Perpetuates the destructive and false idea that rape is just sex that got a "little out of hand." Denies and obfuscates the violently emotional toll rape has on women/girls regardless of presence or absence of physical evidence. Implies that women's emotional health is less important than not only her physical health, but in the "grand scheme of things."

4. "She's lying" or its inverse "the alleged rapist is innocent until proven guilty (implies "she's lying")" - perpetuates the assumption that sensational accusations of "false reports" of rape that appear in the corporate media, a) are false rather then "unprovable" in "a court of law," b) are indicative of the actual ratio of false to "provable" reports of rape, c) that the ratio is accurate in the number of "false" accusations to actual number of rapes d) that all acts of rape are reported and provable in a court of law and e) "proof" that women are a bunch of "gold-digging, money grubbing, liars". Further insults women by denying our credibility on a board whose members will "judge, try and 'hang'" a republican or a pedophile with never a though of "innocent until proven guilty" and whose members protest loudly and vociferously that the "media cannot be trusted!" Perpetuates the idea, that when a woman files a charge of rape, she is "guilty until proven raped."

5. Rape as "comedy" material; a source of jokes and amusement of the "it'll never happen (hasn't happened) to me so it's not important," and the "if it's inevitable, just lay back and enjoy it" crowds - used to deny the violent emotional and/or physical impact rape has on a girl's/woman's "sense of Self" and her, forever changed, place in the world. Denies and obfuscates that When a man rapes a woman or girl, he has not perpetrated just one violent act against one woman. Rape can irreparably change the entire course of a woman's life and those whose lives intersect hers. Thereby illuminating the "attraction" of using rape as a weapon of war. Rape is NOT funny.

(sexist, abusive, destructive: because the statements above remove all responsibility from rapists.)


C. Language Used to Glorify a Perverted and Anti-survival Form of "Masculinity"

1. "He's got balls!" - validates the pervasive and destructive and false idea that only those with the proper physiological equipment are capable of showing great strength or power and frequently used to promote an ideal in which, since women have no balls women are therefore handicapped in a world which values strength and power. Also validates and perpetuates the idea that "might makes right," in and of itself an anti-survival idea. Can also be used in a "positive" (destructive but favorable) manner, such as "She's got balls!" (sexist: because it it endorses the destructive and false idea that all things feminine are weak and pathological; destructive: because it endorses and perpetuates a perverted and anti-survival form of hyper-"masculinity.")

2. "Be a man!" - usually used in discussions in which a poster has questioned a perverted or anti-survival form of "masculinity" and implies that the poster is in some way weak or less than and therefore to be disregarded, ridiculed, or ignored. Can also be used in a "positive" (destructive but favorable) manner, such as "She's the man!" (sexist: because it it endorses the destructive and false idea that all things feminine are weak and pathological; destructive: because it endorses and perpetuates a perverted and anti-survival form of hyper-"masculinity.)


D. Objectification

1. Comments about women's appearance/dress - used as a weapon of attack against any woman with whom the poster has a difference of opinion. Used to attack the messenger rather than debating the message. Used to obfuscate the merit (or lack thereof) of the words, ideas, actions or contributions to society made by the object of such remarks. Objectifies not only individual women, but also women as a class, by reducing them to their body parts. Implies that said body parts are the standard by which women are measured. Sometimes referred to as the "fuckability quotient." (Examples include: "I'd do her," "Check out insert description of female body part," "She's hot!" "She's ugly (or some other adjective to define less-than-beautiful)", "Progressive women are hotter than conservative women (or some variation thereof)," "Can you believe she'd wear something like that?" "She dresses like a whore/slut/skank/etc." "She's had a boob job." "What a cow!") (sexist: because it objectifies women and it assumes and validates the idea that women are permanently on a runway to be constantly critiqued as sexual objects, no matter what context they are acting in; abusive: because it attempts to silence the message and the messenger.)
  • 1.a. "She slept her way to the top" - used to promote the idea that women are incapable of succeeding without using their bodies and sex. Denies that the targeted woman is intelligent, talented or skillful in anything other than the "womanly arts" of seduction and/or sex. That it may now be used to denigrate males does not attenuate the fact and does in fact, illuminate that when it is used against males it is precisely because of its anti-female associated meanings that it is considered such a powerful insult.(the same stereotype when used in the context of marriage is "gold digger" and "trophy wife.")

E. Gender Identity Attacks

1. "Mann Coulter" – the implications of this phrase are that:
  • 1.a. - because a woman looks a certain way, i.e., not "feminine" enough, she is not a "real woman;"

    • 1.a.1. - that there is something pathological about not being a "real woman;"

  • 1.b. - that a person's personality and/or pathology is tied to their appearance and or sex/gender;

  • 1.c. - that there is something pathological with a person if their physiology does not match their gender identification;

    • 1.c.1. - and that subsequently there is something pathological about transgendered people;

  • 1.d. - That there is something pathological about a man wanting to be a woman.

(sexist: because it it endorses the destructive and false idea that all things feminine are bad, evil, dirty, weak, pathological, etc.)


F. Pompous Negation of Critiques of the Systems of Patriarchy and Authoritarianism

1. "Can't you take a joke?" - usually used in response to an individual's concern that a comment or post was offensive or sexist; implies that the individual concerned does not have the right to express their concern or that their concern is in some manner petty (other forms include: "lighten up," "get over yourself," "get a life," "not this again," "oh, you're one of those feminazis/militant feminists/radical feminists," "word police," "PC Police," etc.) {special note: many women on this board hear these phrases with the word "bitch" implied, for example; "geez, bitch, can't you take a joke?" or "jesus, bitch, get over yourself" and so on.} (abusive: because the concerned individual is being denied their own perspective)

2. "Male bashing" - usually used in response to a post in which an individual had the audacity to criticize men/males/boys and/or their actions. A form of hyperbole and duplicitous rhetoric in which the accuser purposely muddles a critique of behaviors and symptoms of a system of patriarchy with a critique of all men as individuals
because the original poster did not weaken their statement or argument by including confusing and muddying conditional adjectives and statements such as "some" men/males/boys or "I know that it's not all men/males/boys, but..." or "with all due respect to the men/males/boys on this board" and so on. (abusive: because it is used to derail the original content of the post, i.e., deny or obfuscate the OP's message.)


G. The Bandwagon Argument

1. "It happens to men, too" - used as a conditional to legitimize an act which is perpetrated by men against women in significantly higher numbers than than when "it happens to men, too." Frequently used to imply that feminists are uncaring or "selfish" or that a poster is denying what is a legitimate claim though it is not the topic of discussion. Used to dilute or derail the debate. An in-depth view of the insidious nature of this remark, see Why I Write Not of Men posted by White Bear at Bitch Ph.D..

2. "Woman do it, too" - used as a conditional to legitimize an act which is perpetrated by men against women in significantly higher numbers than than when "women do it, too." Frequently used to imply that feminists are uncaring or "selfish" or that a poster is denying what is a legitimate claim though it is not the topic of discussion. Used to dilute or derail the debate.

3. "I'm a humanist" - used to promote the idea that feminists and feminism are elitist, narrowly focused, or an exclusive club and that feminist ideals are nothing more than a selfish attempt by a few women and men to promote an agenda which will take rights for themselves at a cost to others' rights. Denies and obscures the comprehensive nature of feminism and the very existence of patriarchal oppression.

4. "All feminists are/believe/do/think fill in negative stereotype" - implies a form of "groupthink," or "hive mentality" within the feminist movement as though the women and men of the feminist movement are incapable of independent thought. Sometimes used to catapult anti-feminist propaganda or an anti-feminist writer as indicative of the "feminist" movement. {editor's note: Anyone who thinks "all feminists think alike" has obviously never been in a room with 2 or more feminists in their life.}

5. "Not all men do/think/act fill in the blank" - used when a woman or man has the "audacity" make a declarative statement rather than placating the reader with conditional words such as "some," "not all, but" "with all due respect," and so on, when writing about traits, actions, ideals which have traditionally been associated with a perverted and anti-survival for of "masculinity." It is usually an attempt to deny the existence of patriarchal systems of domination and their horrible impact on women and men. (abusive: because it is used to divert and/or silence the message.)
  • G.A. Jumping Off the Bandwagon

    • "I'm not a feminist, but..." - usually followed by a list of women's rights for which many feminists, female and male, now and throughout history have fought for, were imprisoned for, have had their lives destroyed over, and who have died for. Dishonors the long history of struggle from which we, women and men, have benefited. Usually used to distance herself from the myths that feminists are: humorless (F.1.), frigid (H.1.), manhating and/or angry (H.4.) or pathological (listed throughout). Corollaries include: "I'm a feminist, but I love/like porn/sex/men" (subtext: but not one of "those" feminists (H.1., H.2., H.4., G.4., F.2. and throughout), use by women of destructive and sexist language because "I'm not that sensitive," "It's just words," "I'm not like that," "It doesn't mean anything," "I've never taken it that way," etc. usually as an attempt to distance the poster from "those women" and to show how "unlike" "those women" the poster is. Validates the destructive idea that language has NO power. Validates the usage of destructive language since "women do it, too" (G.2.). Denies and dishonors the long history of struggle as mentioned above.

H. Anti-Feminist Propaganda

The intentional and the unintentional use of anti-feminist rhetoric used to "catapult the propaganda" that falsely portrays feminists and feminism in a negative, sometimes pathological, light. Many of the falsehoods listed below have been repeated so frequently for so long they have become "common knowledge;" though they have unfortunately become common, they are not knowledge as they are falsehoods created to discredit feminists and feminist ideals.

1. "Feminists want to outlaw porn" - usually used in a debate to define feminists as "frigid," anti-sex, "man haters," cold, sexually repressed and so on. Is also used on occasion to equate feminists with neo-con religious fundamentalists as an added insult. Will sometimes include an incomplete quote of Catherine MacKinnon's anti-pornography legislation. "1. "Pornography" means the graphic sexually explicit subordination of women through pictures and/or words" and does not include the rest of the line which states: "that also includes one or more of the following:" followed by a list of depictions of women in pornography with which many might actually agree. Click here for the full text of Mackinnon's definition of pornography within the anti-pornography legislation which she proposed.

2. "Feminists believe all sex is rape" - implies a form of "groupthink," or "hive mentality" within the feminist movement as though the women and men of the feminist movement are incapable of independent thought. "MacKinnon claims the first reference... surfaced in the October 1986 issue of Playboy. ..., the statement (which had previously been attached to feminist Andrea Dworkin) was made up by the pornography industry in an attempt to undermine her credibility. It became inextricably linked with MacKinnon's name after she began working with Dworkin in the early 1980s to write model anti-pornography laws. Full story.

3. "Womens libbers burned their bras" -
  • 3.a. the use of the word "libbers," as was the case with the use of the word "suffragette" in its time, was devised by the media and women's rights opponents of the day, to ridicule and denigrate women who spoke out in an "uppity," "strident," "shrill" and "unlady-like" manner. "Dyke," "man-hater," "lesbian," "castrating bitch," "ice queen," and "dragon lady" are other examples of epithets which are used against feminists. {special note: most feminists today have healed their own homophobia and are no longer "cowed" by the use of "dyke," "lesbian," and *wink*wink*"Oh, you're one of those."}

  • 3.b. "the bra burning incident" - "That's a myth. It was the time of draft-card burning, and some smart headline writer decided to call it a 'bra burning' because it sounded insulting to the then-new women's movement. We only threw a bra symbolically in a trash can." (emphasis added) Full story.
4. "Abortion clinic," "Abortion doctor" - the subtext of these phrases is that all women's health clinics and all OB/GYNs associated with them are "killing babies." They are "intellectually dishonest" and obfuscate the wide range of "non-controversial" services provided by many women's health care clinics and our doctors. "Saving babies" is then used as to justify closing clinics which provide vital "women's" health services such as, contraception, emergency contraception, family planning advice, sex education, pap smears and/or other gynecological exams, breast exams, etc.

5. "Feminists are 'manhaters'" or its corollary, "Feminists are 'angry'" and the placating versions "I don't hate men, but..," "I love men, but..." - used to imply that if the poster in question, would only "learn to love men," read that as "get laid" or "get a man," rather than "hating men" or "being angry" read that as "instead of being a frigid bitch," the poster would "be cured of her pathology," read that as "remember her 'place' as chattel." Used as a tactic to imply the poster is pathological because she is "angry" or because she "hates men." The men and women who accuse a poster of "hating men" because the poster has criticized or commented on a sexist or abusive post, could perhaps put their defensive outrage in perspective by reading any version of the S.C.U.M. Manifesto to see what angry, manhating looks like. Its author, Valerie Solanas, took her angry, manhating to its logical and extreme conclusion as depicted in I Shot Andy Warhol.


-------------------------
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
foxeyes2 Donating Member (123 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #65
73. My thoughts
I see a couple of potential problems with this idea.

First if someone is a first time poster or relatively new to the group it can be construed as an attack on them personaly and publicly. In my opinion that is not a good way to educate people.

Secondly I think that it is so long and full of legalese that a lot of people will either not read it all or will just blow it off and not get the point that is trying to be made.

In my opinion posting this could cause potential allies to leave the group.
So my suggestion would be that posters be contacted privately and in a gentle manner be educated.

I also have problems with G5. I disagree with the entire assertion that if someone says "not all men" that it is denying the fact women are discriminated against or to silence the message. In my opinion this will turn off male allies as well as F2 because it is possible for someone here to "bash" men in a way that has nothing to do with women's issues or feminism.

This is just my thoughts and opinions. You can agree or disagree with them. I am not going to spend time debating them as then I would be accused of derailing the topic. Please just about what I have said. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-23-06 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
66. Links to be tested
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ismnotwasm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-27-06 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #66
68. You done good
A lot of work went into that, and as I was reading it, I found it soothing in an odd way to have all that laid out on the table. It's wonderful starting point. Any one of those thoughts or ideas can be taken and turned into a full discussion, if we chose. And the links are great.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-17-06 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #68
70. Thank you for saying so.
Edited on Mon Jul-17-06 07:58 AM by Cerridwen
I agree. I found it very cathartic to write. All the arguments and ideas that have been rumbling around in my head for years finally coalesced into one comprehensive statement. It gave me a chance to examine why it is some of those things make me grind my teeth when I read them or hear them.

Even if it's never used, it's been a welcome process for me. Maybe others will find it equally as helpful.



edit: spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
noamnety Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-28-06 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #66
69. Damn good, yes!
I should have come back to say that, instead of letting it be assumed.

Humbled and impressed here!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cerridwen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-17-06 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #69
71. I agree - this was a great idea you had! :D
Edited on Mon Jul-17-06 08:04 AM by Cerridwen
I'm glad I was able to implement your idea in a way that you are happy with. As I said in my post (just up thread) to ismnotwasm, writing this had a "calming" effect on me. Not calm as in "all's right with the world" but as in now I've put words to and invested some time and action into clarifying my previously "scattered" thoughts and emotions about why and how language effects me.

Thank you for giving me this opportunity to write from my passion.

:yourock:





edit: spelling and grammar
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
benevolent dictator Donating Member (765 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-23-06 03:12 AM
Response to Reply #66
72. Whatever happened to getting this pinned to the top?
It's so hard to find way on the 5th page or wherever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Sep 20th 2025, 04:17 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » DU Groups » Women » Feminists Group Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC