"I'd hit it"

[bloom]

A rant on Lounge talk. (In light of a deleted thread - here in the FG).

Without seeing it in context - I wouldn't know what they were talking about.

This is supposed to be a compliment (?) that some men say if they like how a woman looks.

I suppose this is what men say to other men when they don't care what women think.

It must be what some men think when they have no chance in hell of being with someone they want to be with.

Libertarian minded men - who think that "honesty"(?) is more important than civility - fight for their right to be rude and clueless.

Some of these guys - may just play the game where they are anonymous and/or just with other men - some kind of "rude club" or something. (Do they enjoy having their "mother" come and chastise them for it?) And then there are those who are openly rude to women wherever....

I don't understand men who expect to be that rude to women AND expect to have women in their lives? And if there are women who know men that are that rude - I don't understand why they would give those guys the time of day - let alone so much as a smile.

[I Have A Dream]

1. It was my thread that was deleted from here.

The original comment is still there. Therefore, I guess I was offensive (even though I said nothing offensive -- it wasn't even a rant) but the man who said it wasn't. :shrug: My thread here just had a link to the thread that I found offensive and said to let the person know if you found it to be offensive. Maybe that was against the rules. If so, I didn't know it.

The phrase makes me want to throw up.

I'm going to stop here, or I'm going to get banned.

[bloom]

2. As I remember

all you did was to mention that there was a thread that we might want to notice and link to a post.


Seems to me people do that all the time - all over the board.


It's odd when the feminist group is so tightly censored.

[I Have A Dream]

3. Yes - in fact I just revised my post to state this. I think that I need..

to be really careful, so I've been trying to word the original post really carefully. I revised my post to which you just responded while you were replying to me, so it pretty much states what you said. Sorry!

Also, I didn't even rant. :(

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

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

[ismnotwasm]

5. I missed that one too

Or, rather I see that type of commentary all the time, but I missed whatever brought this particular subject up.

It's one of those "lighten up" subjects that comes from both men and women. Women will parrot men in the spirit of what they think is "equality"--maybe to some extent it is. But it's frightening the extent men and women refuse, or just can't, recognize misogynist verbage. In a patriarchal world, turn about is NOT fair play.

And "play" is exactly what terms like this are considered. Humorous. Entertaining. Sexually free.
To me, it's just a continuous of sexual bondage. The message is--As a woman, I need to be sexually attractive to have value, to avoid negative comments about my appearance.
I can't wear too much makeup, or not enough. My breasts must be, if not large, perky, and firm. Can't have fat--maybe a little in certain places, but certainly not my abdomen. My skin must be dewy and clear. I can't be middle aged, or old, unless I've had enough "work" done to pass as younger. I have to be careful how I dress. My language should be light, and teasing when discussing my attributes or those of other women. That or fashionably condemning. (Women: Have you SEEN those fake breasts? Men: We don't care, tee hee)

This is all generalization of course. I know lovely men and women can laugh and joke without degrading another human being.
But it starts with language, and what is considered acceptable language.

We can find someone sexually attractive without the mental slasher flick dividing people in a series of body parts. That or objectifing them to the point they might as well be a blow up sex toy.

[I Have A Dream]

6. It was a response to a thread entitled...

"Hot Newsbabe: CNN's Erica Hill. Yowsa!" It just degenerated from there. :(

[ismnotwasm]

9. Glad I missed it

Sounds very, very sad.

[I Have A Dream]

10. It was, and I felt so alone in the original thread that contained the...

statement. Nobody else objected to it and just made jokes in response to my objection. I was really surprised that nobody else found it offensive seeing that this is DU -- a progressive forum.

I wasn't at all rude, although I did use a few choice icons to indicate my state of mind at the time:

:grr::nuke::grr:

[lukasahero]

11. Sorry you were alone there

I actually just tend to avoid threads now that I believe are nothing more than "I'd do her" posts. I've long since learned it's a losing battle here. Heck, even here in this forum the idea that you objected to what was posted has been greeted with the old "it's just human nature" mantra. :shrug:

[omega minimo]

7. That might be called a "rube club"

"Some of these guys - may just play the game where they are anonymous and/or just with other men - some kind of "rude club" or something."

:evilgrin:

I confess to associating (sexist) bigotry with ignorance-- because IT IS.

:yoiks: .....as for deleted posts..........:hide:

[OldLeftieLawyer]

8. And then there are women such as I

and my friends, who've never hestitated to hit on men we found attractive, telling them so in all kinds of words and ways. They love it, they fear it, and most of them don't know what to do. The ones who know how to handle it are the ones worth getting to know.

It's play. It's what people do when they're having fun and playing around and just being women, being men. The words they use vary, but it's always the same, and it's always - always - the women who have the upper hand, because, as we all know, men are only "brave" like that when they're in the company of other men.

If a man's rude to a woman, in everyday intercourse, then the woman either lets him have it or wipes him out of her awareness or does something else about it. She does NOT let him get away with it.

If I'd done that, I'd probably be a legal secretary somewhere instead of owning my law firm.

We've got the power, so don't let some idiotic words uttered behind the shield of anonymity cause you to forget that.

[bloom]

12. Power or no

I don't think women (people I know) would say anything that is remotely like this. This conjuncture where some men are saying they are supposedly attracted to a woman at the same time that they are saying something extremely insulting. As if women are "it's". As if sex is rape.

I think it's a disturbing trend if this sort of thing is supposed to be part of the regular lexicon and women are supposed to just shrug and say - "oh well, that's nothing" or worse - trying to do our own variation of the same - to keep things equal or something.

And I think it's one thing to develop a thick skin and ignore the fact there are jerks all over the place - and another thing to allow them a place to spill themselves all over DU. The original thread that alerted feminists to this rudeness was an attempt to "NOT let him get away with it". And that is what this is about.

[I Have A Dream]

13. Your point is interesting. When I posted my objection...

to it, in response to my post, one person posted "But does not expressing an appreciation of a woman's appearance also qualify as objectification? I'm not trying to be a jerk, just consistent."

Basically, it was a no-win situation because if I had objected to the entire thread, they'd have said that I was being overly-sensitive. However, by not objecting to the entire thread, the person's implying that I should have complained about the whole thread if I were being consistent. I basically said that I was trying to be reasonable but there's a difference between expressing appreciation for someone's attractiveness (even if I hate that type of thread) and saying "I'd hit it".

:banghead:

[bloom]

16. I think one thing that is going on

is that more people are exposed to humor that attempts to denigrate women sexually. Maybe it was always there - and now it's out in the open - turn on the Comedy Channel, for instance.

I dropped in on the Chappelle show the other day. I don't watch it as a rule. And this skit that was going on - was all about a guy trying to take a drunk woman home - figuring he would have sex with her since she was drunk. I suppose that could seem funny to some people. That is not funny to me. I'm not saying that it shouldn't be on TV or that people shouldn't watch it if they want - but I am saying that that sort of thing is probably out there a lot and some of us are absorb that sort of thing as humor and some of us reject it.

I don't think that accepting humor that is about denigrating women - jokes about rape and one thing and another - needs to be tolerated - even if some women find it tolerable or even funny.

But for people that don't think it's funny - who see the whole charade as some attempt to put women down (or whatever) - it does put one in the position of being the "unfunny one" or the "intolerable one" - even though it can seem as plain as day that those who engage in that sort of humor are insensitive at best.

There probably do need to be more women turning the tables on the men and showing sexism for what it is as Richard Pryor did for racism.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

14. When you start censoring people

because your interpretation of what they say doesn't match theirs, or mine, or others, I daresay there's trouble afoot.

I do not understand why you equate sexual wordplay with rape, and I do believe that's a dangerous leap to make.

If you're not comfortable with that kind of talk, I would urge you not to participate in it. But, speech is free, and, if you don't agree with how someone expresses himself or how someone perceives herself, that's your call to do whatever you want, except demand that they not say what they're saying.

We're all "its," and we're all in this together, so it's best that we play nice. Not everyone talks like you or I might, and there's room for all sorts of forms of expression. It's the same reasoning as in someone trying to deny a woman her right to do with her pregnancy what she wishes: if you don't approve of abortion, don't have one.

If you don't like what someone is saying, don't read it. Don't listen. But, above all, don't try to censor. Our country is based on free speech, and that's vital, for you, for me, even for the ones you consider jerks - which, by the way, would be me and my female friends.

[lukasahero]

15. And that free speech protects her right to

speak her mind as much as yours.

This argument always cracks me up. People come here to discuss things they don't like and someone comes here to say they shouldn't do that by using the "free speech" argument. Well, free speech works both ways. You have a right to speak as you wish and we have a right to say we don't like it.

"if you don't agree with how someone expresses himself or how someone perceives herself, that's your call to do whatever you want, except demand that they not say what they're saying."

[OldLeftieLawyer]

17. It wasn't my speech the OP protested

I was just addressing the issue raised in the original post.

As you see, I said nothing about specific speech or that uttered by specific individuals, such as the poster who was upset with what someone said somewhere else.

Now that you've conceived a circular argument where there is no dispute, where will it from here? In fact, it's nice that we agree. There's far too much worthless anger in the world.

Added:

Oh, and thank you for backing up my contention that free speech is for everyone. I share your amusement. I mean, just look at what's evolved. It's funny.

[bloom]

18. And it was censorship

of the feminist forum that inspired me to write the OP to begin with.

I think you have a valid viewpoint. I don't share it. But maybe insensitivity does help people to be successful. Maybe we should all insult each other more. Not give a rip.


What do you think?

[OldLeftieLawyer]

23. I think almost all viewpoints are worth considering;

the obvious ones - the racists, the sexists, the complete idiots like the KKK - are not.

I believe that the matter of insulting people just might be a sign that you need to get something out of your system, and I think there's not much you can do about it. So, if you feel better, I'm glad.

In a medium such as this, censorship is such an arbitrary and often irrational and unfair process, I'm not sure I'd give anything I see here much credibility.

[bloom]

19. P.S. So what do you think

is an equally offensive thing to say about men whom you find attractive as them saying "I'd hit it".

Because I really don't know. If I'm going to insult them equally - I need some suggestions - we might have to brainstorm this.


also:

Whatever phrase should contain, "Dehumanization, superiority, and condescension all in three tiny words."

(summed up by bigbigtruck http://www.livejournal.com/users/ginmar/591795.html?thread=16970419 )

[OldLeftieLawyer]

24. More?

Well, hell, I've said whatever I wanted to to men I found appealing, and my words never failed me.

See, you and I differ on the meaning of "I'd hit it." I find it inoffensive and you find it offensive. So, of course we're going to process the comment differently.

What I find much more interesting is your equating that kind of comment with rape. That's what interested me from the beginning, having prosecuted rapists and seen what it means in an up-close setting.

[bloom]

25. This post put the phrase in an interesting context (RE: spam usage)

I decided to see how the phrase was being used... And while some may mean it in fun - I think the phrase is meant to be offensive - and that those who use it know it. And yes - I think that rape is part of the context.


Monday, April 14, 2003
xxxHARDCORExxxBLOG ALL-NITE ASS SPANKING ACTIONxxx
So the number of porno spam I normally receive in a day seems to be going down (no pun intended). I served it a strong blow (pun intended) yesterday when I changed my email preferences. It would seem that someone "borrowed" my domain name and made up email addresses with it so he/she could log in to porno sites. I'm glad the spam is gone. It was rather depressing to see the message "21 unread messages" only to realize that 19 of them were ads for enlarging my penis or visiting some cheerleader's spank-me site.

Call me a bad feminist if you will, but I wasn't really bothered by the content. Yeah yeah yeah, exploitation of women, subjugation, objectification blah blah. I'm not supporting the dehumanization of people or the prostitution of what should be a private and plesant exchange, but well, at least the sex industry doesn't pretend to be something it's not. The spirituality and senualtiy of sex died long ago. Webcams aren't to blame. And I'll admit that there's part of me that's greatly intrigued by porn's portrayal of sex. I wouldn't say it's liberating or particularly exciting, but I would say that it's damn revealing of our culture's (and perhaps our species's) inability to make sense of sex. Is it biological? Is it power? Is it something else?

And I find the language use especially poignant. So much agression and curtness. Not much embedding or complex noun clauses (it would seem). There also seems to be a heavy use of semantically rich verbs and a lot adjectives and adverbs. Of course, I haven't done a real corpus analysis, and I've only read the email spams, and I'm referring to some of the more rauchy ones I've recieved lately (e.g., "I'd hit it...2 times!" "Tight Anal-Asian Sluts," "Nasty Blondes-Giant Jugs," "Incest for you!", and my personal favorite title: "Tight Teen Dildo Shoving Part-4" - kinda makes you wonder what happened in parts 1-3). So my analysis may not be complete. And then there's the creative use of punctuation. Take "Y.o.u.n.g. b.o.y.s. b.a.r.e.l.y - h.a.r.d a.c.t.i.o.n !!!..." for example. Why all the periods? Does the period denote hardcore ass action more than oh say the colon? Are periods supposed to make me hot, because they don't, sorry. And wassup with all the Xs? Do the writers go out of their way to find words for which they can replace a morpheme with a giant X (or XXX - if it's really swank).

So in sum, while I am glad to be getting less invites to watch girls have a slumber party or grannies get it on with horses, I may miss the academic and intellectual curiousity the spam evoked. I like to kill the fun of things through science. Did I ever tell you about my great plan to get a job at the Grotto (the local porn shop) to do research? I want to see how bland and dry I can make buying a dildo, just to see what happens. And I'd like to see if I could say things such as, "Is noise a concern, and do you plan on sharing this with your partner?", "No, I'm sorry, we're out of the tiger print vibrators," or "We have matching butt plugs in just your size" without giggling.
posted by Meredith 11:02 AM nada

http://www.ideophone.com/blog/2003/04/xxxhardcorexxxblog-all-nite-ass.asp

[OldLeftieLawyer]

29. Sorry

I read it twice, and I simply don't understand what the writer is saying.

I still don't understand what led you, in your OP, to equate whatever this post said with rape.

That's some seriously bad writing, though.

[bloom]

30. I think the writer

may have been trying to say something like this (but maybe not) - which I was associating with the phrase - because of the usage in the porn title:

"Porn is the direct result of culturally-mandated misogyny. When the glazed, bloodshot eyes are poked out of the “male gaze” and women are accorded fully human status, rather than sex class status, by our oppressive patriarchal culture—i.e., never— pornography will cease to exist."

http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/



This quote - as I posted in #22 - may explain what I'm getting at (with the rape association):

"As my old friend from Jersy used to say, I'd hit it, and then push her down the stairs."


Which is that the phrase implies to me - what I hear - is that the person would have sex whether the woman said yes or no - that that is irrelevant to the discussion and to the situation. I know you can think that I'm reading too much into it. But that is what I hear.

And what this post really gets to - is that the woman is really dehumanized - like so what if you discard her by pushing her down the stairs after you had sex with her whether she wanted to or not.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

32. Sorry (again),

but I had some great whores and various sex workers as clients, and they never considered themselves "dehumanized" or "victimized." They were some of the best clients I ever had, along with biker gangs, who always paid their bills even before they were mailed out, who showed up when they said they would, and who had - possibly - the healthiest view of life and the world that I've ever seen.

It's all about choice. Women do what they want to do. I'd no more try to shut down women who want to sell their bodies than I would anyone who objected to them doing just that, because, when you come down to it, it's all about choice - just like Roe v. Wade.

Speech isn't rape. Men and women can post all they want online, they can talk as dirty as they want, innuendo included, in person, and they can say whatever they want in each other's presence. A man says something like what you quoted in my presence, and he gets a hard whack that's delivered repeatedly and forcefully, all without violence, but making a point. If he doesn't get it, he's gone.

Rape is real, and it's hardly comparable to a man saying something incredibly stupid. We all - men and women, boys and girls - have our moments of bravado. For instance, you wrote about how to be successful by being insulting, and that was a perfect example of false courage - just like the quote about pushing a woman down the stairs.

See?

Anyway, I'll just say that I still don't understand the leap. If you're not familiar with actual rape cases, and I sure hope you're not, I'd urge you to volunteer with a local Rape Crisis Center, or any organization that could set you up as a friend to rape victims in Emergency Rooms at hospitals. It's quite an education.

Nice discussing this with you.

[bloom]

33. I never said

that the words were rape.

But if someone were to say that they would enjoy doing violence to me - I wouldn't like it. And that is how I see it.


You also have your way of being condescending which I've noticed in a lot of threads. Maybe you are deaf to condescension. Maybe that is a good trait to have (so when men speak in a condescending way it wouldn't bother you - you don't hear it) - I'm trying to be open to the possibility.

To me it sounds like you are trying to say that you are so experienced and you assume that I am not. As if not having prosecuted rapists - I wouldn't know obnoxious language when I hear it - or am incapable of interpreting it for myself.


P.S. If your argument was NOT that women should speak in the same obnoxious manner in which some men (I'd hit it) speak and that nobody should be bothered by any of it - then I guess I missed your point.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

34. Condescending?

That's your word, and since you need to take this to a personal level - again - I'll leave it with wishing you well and all the best.

[bloom]

35. and the same to you....

whichever way you meant it.

:yoiks:

[ismnotwasm]

36. Yikes!

I'm glad you've been exposed to the "dark side" since that is where I come from. The majority of "whores and sex workers" I've known (It's a lot) ARE not happy people. (What kind of lawyer are you? Bless you for taking on these clients--they need a voice, and there are many laws that need to be changed to make their lives better)
I've been around bikers my entire life. The good, bad and the ugly. I have NO illusions about the sex worker industry or bikers for that matter. With your experience, I'm sure I don't need to go into detail.

A couple of of my very good friends are married to bikers and wear the "property of" so and so vest. Intelligent women, who take no shit.

Yet I have to admit I would never, ever wear anything that designated me "Property" of a male. Or female. Or God. Maybe I'm just rebellious?

I was talking to one of my biker friends. We were talking about that shirt---You know the one "If you can read this, the bitch fell off"
She said "I have one. I says "If you can read this, the bitch got her own"
A long time, hair in the wind can fix her own bike biker, raised by bikers, who can be some the most misogynist assholes I've ever seen, or some of the most enlightened men and women I've had the pleasure of meeting.

Why I NEVER followed that lifestyle is because my early experience was the misogyny part. Biker Old ladies were put on the street as drug addicted prostitutes. Very young women were passed around as "sweethearts" Selling meth to 12 year olds. Finger banging female doberman pincher puppies to "break them in" And worse.

I understand what you're trying to say. But I don't agree about language. I have very salty language, and I do "play"-- I just know the difference between misogyny and play. I never let a man discuss the body parts of a women in a degrading fashion without a little education. Since I have a strong personality, and Do know how to play, I can get my point across without offending. Usually, unless my intent is to offend. But not all women know how to draw boundries. And some wonder why, in this day and age, we still have to.

I know you were making a point about something else, language and rape. It's just I never underestimate the power of language.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

37. A Renaissance woman.........

That's what you sound like.

Sure, bikers are real "studs" who do this woman-degrading thing, and there are women who live to join up with those guys. I have no idea why they want it, but, hey, it's about choice.

And, sure, they were on their best behavior around me because I held - for a short while - their well-being and liberty in my hands. They were enormously respectful and never misbehaved. Plus, they, like my whore clients, paid up front in cash.

I had a lot - a LOT - of women come to me for legal representation when they were beat up by their husbands. I laid down three rules before we went any further (which was going to cost a lot of $$$), and the first was that she had to file for a legal separation immediately, and, if she wished, file criminal charges against him, or, if she thought the relationship was salvageable, to enter counseling with her husband.

The second rule was that, if counselling wasn't going to take place, she had to either get him out of the house (that was my job) or she had to move out (that was her choice.)

The third rule was that if she chose to do neither of these things and just continued to live with the man who beat her up (not for the first time), she'd have to find another lawyer to represent her, because I couldn't.

In my thirty years of practice, do you know how many took that advice they were paying handsomely for?

None. Zero. Not one.

Only two were killed by their abusive husbands. It was a small percentage, but it's a percentage, nonetheless.

After all my years as a litigator, and now, as a published novelist (HarperCollins) and a screenwriter, I, too, am very aware of language, and I agree that it's powerful in ways that so many people don't quite grasp. But, it's the using of language as a shield behind which some people hide in order to advance their own, ill-conceived and indefensible agendae that put me off and leave me grieving for the women who returned to the husbands who would beat them to death and the women who lack the courage of their own convictions, the inability to own their own beliefs, and who try - and fail - to make someone else wrong so that they can feel right.

I'm in favor of seizing the power, owning it, and using the hell out of it until it screams for mercy.

Finally, I'm glad you didn't go in that biker direction.

[ismnotwasm]

43. LOL

Me as well, me as well. (that last part) I have to admit, I cringe every time I see that "property of" bullshit, even though I'm very aware it's a choice, and it's actually considered an honor for a woman in that world.

I have a friend who worked as a court advocate for abused women. She went out of her way to put together a restraining order package a few times for me for women I knew who, in moment of clarity, were ready to leave their situation. Very few followed through, for a variety of reasons. It's was a horrible experience, to watch them go back, helpless to do anything.

I do my best, as a woman who is unafraid to speak of women's rights and issues to bring it up in a non-threatening way to (especially) young women who have been exposed to degrading language over and over again until they think it's "Ok". (And young men, if I get a hold of them) Sometimes it's more about education than choice. Or just given permission to tell someone to fuck off, that is NOT ok, NOT acceptable if behavior Or language happens that they are uncomfortable with.
And That they don't have to pretend to be something they're not.

Working in the nursing field, however I get to hear a lot of single young women who seem confused, or they resent the behavior of men they meet. Evidently, "players" or "clingy" men are the biggest offenders. I've actually heard "Where do I meet a decent man?" (I always say, well if he's a half drunken idiot in a bar who's dated half the women there, he's probably a bad choice--Just to put things in perspective) These are mostly middle class women, who choose nursing some because they "wanted to help people" or "I've always wanted to be a nurse" many of whom haven't been exposed to how bad it can get.
I like to bring up the feminist opportunities in nursing. It's fun, because it's definitely not seen that way, but the history of nursing reflects, in many ways feminist growth, if looked at realisticly.

Yet, we work on a transplant unit, so we see the results of poor life choices, addictions, mental illness, odd family dynamics, co-dependency in men and women every day. It's quite an education in itself caring for these people, and at some point you choose compassion,and sympathy (in my case empathy) or become judgemental--which we are all guilty of at times. The ethical dilemma's are there every work day. It's a very rounding experience for these young nurses, where ever they go on from here, they are stronger women for it.

[Hello_Kitty]

44. It took me longer to get to where you are but I got there too

10 years in the Navy and 8 more in a male dominated tech field. For years I thought if I tolerated the disrespect and maybe even joined in on the 'joking' a little, the guys would think I was cool and maybe leave me alone. I was wrong. Give some guys a little leeway and they try to push the envelope as far as they can. Eventually it got to the point where I just got so damned sick and tired of smiling sweetly and trying to change the subject when some illbred moron tried to 'flirt' with me by telling dirty jokes or made a degrading comment about another woman or women in general. I figured what I'd been doing wasn't working so I might as well just tell them how I really felt about what they were saying and let the chips fall where they may. If they didn't like me anymore, if they thought I was a bitch, oh well. They clearly didn't respect me anyway so I didn't have much to lose.

Since then I've developed a reputation where I work as a woman who is not to be messed with. I can pretty much shut an idiot down with merely a disdainful look. And you know what? My popularity hasn't suffered a bit! To the contrary, the idiots fall all over themselves trying to win my approval and the rest think I'm the bomb.

So definitely I agree that a women can command respect when we behave accordingly. Unfortunately, we don't teach our girls to do that. We teach them to be "nice" and accomodating :puke: . Some of us are like you who learned early and some are like me who learned later from our mistakes. And some never learn.

I also totally agree about the power of language. If it wasn't important we wouldn't be on a liberal discussion board complaining about tinpot fascists who rose to power mostly due to catchy phrases and slogans. I mean come ON, if you say something over and over people believe it. And what do we hear about women? Over and over....

[bloom]

20. "The Death of Sexism and Other Myths" (ie. "I'd hit it")

http://ilyka.mu.nu/archives/025496.html

[bloom]

21. On being a Male Feminist (from Ginmar):

There are so few genuine male feminists, that it's easy to fake it and get lots of feminist gratitude. The onsloughts women face are so casual and unending that sometimes we get grateful just for the cessation of them. But to be a genuine male feminist, you've got to do more than just not be offensive.

If you're a genuine male feminist, you're going to have to make some hard choices, most of them revolving around male privilege. You can't hold onto that while throwing in your lot with the downtrodden and despised female half of the human race. That would set you up above them and make you some kind of leader, someone with more power. Feminism is all about eradicating the power of men to dominate. To be a feminist, you're going to have to experience what we go through. The only way to do so is leave male privilege behind.

Contrary to popular opinion---or self justification---male privilege is in fact something you can get rid of. It's really simple. Make it clear that you side with women, that you believe them, that you trust them. Do it to your friends, your family, your buddies. They'll dump you like a hot rock. You've sided with the losers. You've gone over to the other side. You're a traitor. It must be for the pussy, right? Right? Those are some of the responses you'll get. You'll lose friends.

In fact, you should abandon friends who won't listen to you. For starters, your real friends should respect you enough to believe that you're sincere. For another, if you have friends with disgusting opinoins about women, those opinoins should bother you if you're a feminist. Sexism and hatred of women are not little irritating personality traits, like being a wee bit late for everything, like telling obnoxious jokes and liking B movies. Sexist beliefs are an endorsement of the belief that women are so less worthy than men that they're entitled to fewer rights and must in fact make up for the disgusting nature of their gender by being humble and useful all their days. That's okay with you? You're not a feminist....

http://www.livejournal.com/users/ginmar/591795.html?thread=16970419

[bloom]

22. And then you have this:

"As my old friend from Jersy used to say, I'd hit it, and then push her down the stairs."


http://www.fredschoeneman.com/archives/001206.html

[Lars39]

Did you catch the timing of 2 threads today?

The one about the German video couple and right on the heels of that one, a thread posted about a woman killed by her cross-bow wielding husband. Just a bucket of laughs.:puke:
I didn't even know where to begin on the second one. :(

[bloom]

28. I just saw the first one

I don't usually hang out in the lounge - but having had the child custody thread moved there - I was noticing some of the other posts more.


I didn't think my thread belonged there - mostly because I took the question seriously and just about anything is reduced to laughs in the lounge.


I think some people were taken by surprise in the German thread that people were posting who didn't think it was funny.

[Lars39]

31. There was a good turnout on that thread.

I think some of the regulars didn't have their usual back up, though.

[I Have A Dream]

26. That's so sad.

:(

[bloom]

27. yes

that post especially sums up the vileness of the phrase - and where it is so easy for it to lead. (women being "it's" and all.)

[bloom]

38. Just to be clear...

There is a collision in a way - on message boards like this - between woman (and others) who would like to be in environment that includes them instead of excluding them and others (which could include women) who like to see themselves as unbound by convention.

I think we are all bound in some way or another. Someone posted yesterday all of these expectations that men have for themselves - so they can maintain their coolness or whathaveyou. So it's not like when men (mostly) use offensive terms or insist on using offensive humor that they are really outside of convention or the social norms. They are trying to do the cool thing.

"International Rules of Manhood"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=4573305&mesg_id=4573305

I think that "I'd hit it" is part of the rape culture, the porn culture, the culture where young women become obsessed with being objects. (see: "I'm a hot chick!" What the F*** does this mean...?) Where the cool thing for men becomes saying a phrase that suggests that the man lives outside of convention - but which has become a fairly conventional thing to say - among men. Enough so to stay on the board.

In my readings about the rape culture - it comes up that quite a larger percentage than you would like to think would rape a woman if he knew he wouldn't be caught. I assume that what they mean is if the women were passed out and wouldn't be able to identify him, where he was guaranteed that he wouldn't be caught or held accountable - where there wasn't any struggle involved - he would have sex with the woman lying there.

And that is what the phrase implies to me. That the man is thinking of the woman in a braindead state - that if she were to lie there and let him do his thing - not that they would have any sort of mutual connection or pleasure - no - in his fantasy it would be all about him - and when he was done he would leave (or if really didn't like her to begin with - and could get away with it - he would push her down the stairs - just to do it - to show his contempt - just to make sure that he didn't leave any sort of impression that he thinks of her as a person or anything).

It's not like it's a phrase a man would say to a woman and expect anything positive to happen. But it does imply an aloofness from women - not being bound by being or doing anything deemed acceptable to women - and if anything the cool thing is to be unacceptable/anti-social.

----

And at the same time - I am open to the concept that women being too bound by conventions where they have to be nice - conventions that keep them from competing, etc. - could be detrimental to ones career. But that is a whole 'nuther story IMO.

[I Have A Dream]

39. Hi, bloom. I'm sorry to say that I saw several people use the term...

again last night in the Lounge. I have to say that when I see a poster use it, I lose whatever respect I have for him. (I haven't heard a woman say it; I don't think that it would be applicable for a woman to say it, actually.)

One thing that recently hit me is that I've gone to "visit" Free Republic a few times in the past to see what's going on over there. A couple of times, I saw our picture threads being critiqued by them. They very explicitly made it clear which women in the thread they'd "hit". They were insulting the woman to say that they wouldn't "hit it". Now we as women have something else that we need to be aiming for in society's eyes -- women should want to be "hittable". Actually, Free Republic was the first place that I saw the term, and I thought that it was par for the course because, of course, they'd see women that way. I was appalled to see it starting to be acceptable here at DU and it was people like us who needed to "lighten up". :(

The interesting thing is that I'm not against people talking about sex in posts; I just don't want women to be insulted in said posts. To me, that phrase is totally insulting, and I don't see that ever changing. A man who uses this term will lose my respect -- end of story. It's now a deal breaker for me in terms of whether I can see him as someone who is on the side of women -- if he uses this phrase, in my eyes, he's equivalent to a Freeper at least in this respect.

I also want to thank you for putting so much energy into this thread. To me and, obviously, to you, this is a distressing development in terms of language that's deemed acceptable in our society at large and here at DU.

[bloom]

40. The Freeper angle could be just the thing.

If whenever we see it we point out that they are acting like Freepers - that could do something. Maybe they are freeper/disruptors anyway - who would like nothing better than to start a gender war.

It does seem like the term should belong to freepers and their ilk. Being such an anti-feminist/anti-women sort of remark.

Make them try to defend it on human terms. I don't think they could.


Have you been alerting? Do the mods just leave it up?


(you're welcome)

[I Have A Dream]

41. The first poster (which was what started this for me) only had...

a few hundred posts. However, the posts yesterday were from established DUers. :(

I did alert on the first post because I really didn't think that it would be deemed as being acceptable by the DU rules. In the alert, I basically said that I felt that it was inappropriate on DU. My alert was ignored, people made jokes in reference to my post there expressing my feelings about the phrase, and my post here linking to it was deleted. I didn't alert on the others.

I wonder how we complain to the DU Powers That Be. There are so many other offensive phrases that people would never get away with using here -- why should this be different just because it's about women rather than a racial/religious group? Until there's an official DU policy deeming it unacceptable, it will be up to individual moderators to decide.

[bloom]

42. Skinner would be the one to email

[e-mail]


Probably the sooner the better - before it's gets to be normal.

[CornField]

45. That phrase is used quite often when passing a joint (marijuana cigarette)

Perhaps my skin is thick, but I didn't even look twice at the "I'd hit it" comment because (back in the day) it was commonplace as folks shared their herbs.

??? -- just offering up a different perspective

[Hello_Kitty]

46. Kind of an apt analogy if you think about it

A joint is something you'd "hit" for pleasure. It's a commodity that you would use, enjoy, and then it would be gone and forgotten. That's what the commenter is reducing a woman to when he describes her thusly. An ephemeral consumable.

[CornField]

48. Is it our job as women in today's society

to police all the potentially offensive comments out there? I think one of the reasons why so many men get angry about "feminists" is that they always see feminists attacking, striking out against this or that. Why are we angry with the guy who would say "I'd hit it" while not batting an eye at the woman who does things to obviously produce the "I'd hit it" response.

Now, before this conversation goes over the deep end, I'm not trying to say that women who dress and/or act in a certain way are not used and abused by men. But can we honestly look at the woman in that photo and disagree that she dressed in that fashion for the sole purpose of producing the "I'd hit it" response? Perhaps some of our dismay and frustration must also be placed on such women.

In short, is it demeaning behavior if the woman in question worked to produce the outcome?

[Hello_Kitty]

49. How had she "worked to produce the outcome"?

From what I saw she was dressed as a professional newcaster. What are you saying? That just for being attractive a woman deserves to be regarded as a walking fuckhole?

Christ, we just can't win! Compliance with the beauty standards renders you less than human, while noncompliance renders you a failure as a woman.

[CornField]

50. Whoa... my mistake... I thought you were discussing a different thread

I'll go see if I can't find the link to the one I was referring to...

Here it is: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=4572337&mesg_id=4572337

The first reply in the the thread was "I'd hit it" -- which has since been deleted by the mods.

I'm sorry, I thought this discussion was about the Jessica Simpson thread. I didn't even see the news anchor one.

[bloom]

51. Before I even started posting on this

I googled to see what came up. There is a very helpful site: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=i'd+hit+it&r=f

that gives a variety of definitions. Including the one you mentioned (see def. # 16).

It also includes "Announcing you would straight up stuff a bitch."


If people want to come to DU and talk like that I think we should do whatever we can to laugh at, demean, ridicule, and even throw dehumanization back in the face of anyone you uses such a phrase.

I'm glad to hear such a post got deleted. The mods had been letting it slide.

[StellaBlue]

47. I always find it useful, in cases like these

to replace the woman-subject and make it a racial thing. As in, if white people said about a few of a line-up black people, approvingly, "I'd hit it" - would that be offensive? I'm not sure how to make this analogy work for "I'd hit it". I guess the only thing that comes to mind would be some plantation owners comparing bills of sale for different black humans, and deciding which ones to invest in. ?

Anybody see how this can be helpful? I find that very often men who consider themselves 'liberal' are not at all 'liberal' when it comes to women's rights and women's experience. They just want to shut us up. And this seems acceptable, largely, even here on DU. So I have to ask, if this was a RACIAL issue instead, if these men said, openly, that their opinions were innassailable and inherently not inoffensive because they are WHITES SPEAKING, wouldn't there be an outrage? Of course there would. What's the difference? And women as a group have been oppressed much longer and much more systematically and insidiously than black people as a group. Black women doubly.

What's wrong with most men? Nevermind, pointless question... just pointless. I've given up.