sexism, lets play.

[seabeyond]

[polly7]

1. Really? You're this upset because many people here don't see the Tunisian protests

and brave Femen women using their own bodies, as sexist, meaningless pornification for ogling men?

[IMG][/IMG]

[Melinda]

2. The egocentricism is appalling

And I'm not happy typing those words.

I've learned the best way to survive is to trash threads like this one. Off to do so now.

[arely staircase]

107. that strange feeling that..

[JTFrog]

5. O-61.

Bingo.

[NCTraveler]

12. You get to place a chip on the bingo card. nt

[polly7]

15. Nah ........ but you go for it.

Just seems very odd to see the reaction to braveness and something women have been fighting and dying for - control of their own bodies to do with as they please - in any situation, dangerous or not .... as sexist 'pornification for men'.

Cute little bingo game, but it trivializes what brave women in the real world are actually fighting for.

[JTFrog]

18. B-2.

Double Bingo.

Awesome.

[polly7]

20. Now what an intelligent response. nt.

[JTFrog]

22. G-51.

I bet you can play this game all day.

[polly7]

27. Noooooo. Too boring.

And really, you're doing the fight against sexism ......... which all of us find abhorrent and harmful, no favours by playing victim of it once again just because many people here are standing up for the rights won by women long ago and being used by some very brave women with more to lose and gain than you or I will ever know. Ahhhh ....... somebody disagreed with me on a message board. How sexist.

[HiPointDem]

41. "the fight against sexism" = lol. psyops.

[sabrina 1]

118. She speaks for me and a whole lot of other women. I think we feminists need

to make our own BINGO chart. Since we're playing games with flash cards instead of worrying about some real issues facing women.

[MadrasT]

141. B13.

[Roland99]

39. +1

BTW, guess the OP likes to post and run.

[Phlem]

56. There seems to be more than one person

to beat upon in this thread. If your alone then the rest of her clique will come and trash the shit out of you.

I've been one of them.

Funny, not seeing any of her wrecking crew in this thread.



-p

[Roland99]

57. don't I know it

[Sherman A1]

62. +1

[arely staircase]

109. she probably can't see any of the responses

as she probably has about three DUrs not on ignore.

[LadyHawkAZ]

42. Compliance is protest!

Modesty is feminist!
Your breasts are patriarchy!
War is peace!
Ignorance is strength!
Freedom is...

etc.

Our body our choice, as long as it's the choice I made for you.

[lumberjack_jeff]

48. "Your breasts are patriarchy!"

[Warren DeMontague]

188. "Like Sammy with his..."

Oh, never mind.

[polly7]

95. +1000! nt.

[ZombieHorde]

44. Nevermind, I figured it out. nt

Last edited Fri Mar 29, 2013, 03:22 PM - Edit history (1)

[Scout]

46. "this upset"

ROFL

this is your idea of drama? snort.

[Kurovski]

133. Do you know about the Femen/Amina protest against Tunisian-Islamic oppression and subsequent edicts?

That's seabeyond's trigger here. She was caught and outed trying to out-best and diminish a female protester from Tunisia. Great drama across the board was created by the OP.

So it unfortunately appears that you are laughing derisively at a person for challenging the Original Poster's questionable actions.

You didn't give much info in your post, just leaving us to guess at meaning. Maybe you are unaware of all that went before, which is of course understandable. There is not much info up top about it.

The DU rule about not carrying over events from other threads was a good one, and I can see the wisdom of it. Now we're a big "Lord of the Flies" sociological experiment, which I suppose is a good thing in the end.

[Warren DeMontague]

187. Remember, "if the liberal peen is keen, it must demean!"

Translation: female nudity is only okay in circumstances where no men might appreciate it.

[In_The_Wind]

3. OY!

[pintobean]

4. We need bingo chips

[HappyMe]

6. Oh ffs!

I guess she should have looked into DU to find out what the "proper" forms of protest are. Which would be sitting at home banging away on a computer.

Some people aren't ashamed of the naked human body.

[idwiyo]

51. +1

[UnrepentantLiberal]

53. "Some people aren't ashamed of the naked human body."

[EOTE]

7. How do we decide who goes first?

Is there like a dice or something? Or does it go by ascending order of the number of testicles the players have?

[Adsos Letter]

8. Jury results.

At Fri Mar 29, 2013, 12:21 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

sexism, lets play.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022583864

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

How many times today do I need to see the word FAG?

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Mar 29, 2013, 12:24 PM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Quit trying to game the alert system.

And to answer your question, at least twice. Considering it's in the graphic (which makes a good point) and -your own alert-.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: So?
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I get the alert now that I see the explanation but I think this use of the word fag is OK, in that it is showing what often happens if a male is seen as overly interested in women's issues or women's rights.

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

I was #5.

EDIT: it helps to actually include the jury results...

[EOTE]

13. Can we see? nt

[Adsos Letter]

14. Edited

[EOTE]

17. Thanks... and I agree.

I'm more of a 'sit back with the popcorn' kinda guy myself. No point in ruining the fun for the rest.

[theKed]

25. Careful

Popcorn in a sexism thread will make you a target for misdirected rage.

[EOTE]

26. But that's my favorite kind of rage. nt

[theKed]

28. Then this thread

will please you greatly, no doubt.

[NCTraveler]

9. There are some people here who view it as a game.

It is a minority, albeit a very vocal minority. I really try my best to look past their posts and concentrate on the posters who are looking for serious conversation/education. From reading so many of the posts here I can truly say that I was unaware of a number of the things I did in my life that perpetuated stereotypes. These aren't things that made my life any better, they just were part of my subconscious. People need education on these things and the one step at a time approach is what we have available. Keep beating the drum, and I will keep listening and beating the drum right along with you.

[tkmorris]

10. This isn't helping

[WilliamPitt]

11. Results of Jury Service

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

How many times today do I need to see the word FAG?

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Mar 29, 2013, 12:24 PM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Quit trying to game the alert system.

And to answer your question, at least twice. Considering it's in the graphic (which makes a good point) and -your own alert-.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: So?
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I get the alert now that I see the explanation but I think this use of the word fag is OK, in that it is showing what often happens if a male is seen as overly interested in women's issues or women's rights.

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

[CBGLuthier]

31. game the alert system?

Curious comment. I thought gaming a system would involve cheating somehow and not just an objection to the homophobia used casually for a joke.

If one of the points of this OP is that some things are not jokes then why does the thing use that slur for a god damned joke?

[LittleBlue]

16. Time for popcorn

Could this be... meltdown time?



Oh, and inb4 social activism bingo.

[The Straight Story]

19. I didn't see one for holding open doors (nt)

[Nye Bevan]

21. "How come my wife always makes me kill the spiders in the bathtub"

could be another one.

[zappaman]

23. "How about YOU put the seat back up?" n/t

[Apophis]

24. Sexism posts abound.

It must be Friday.

[opiate69]

29. Yes.. let's play...

[EOTE]

30. This OP went exactly as planned.

All I need is a sassy GIF and I'm golden.

Wait a second...



Bingo!

[opiate69]

32. And to think, I was thinking my day off was going to be nice and quiet....

I guess the Pit Bull wars are over again, and so it's time for the sex wars to fire up.. just in time for Spring Fertility Festival weekend

[EOTE]

34. Posts like these really help the day go by quicker for me.

I get to imagine the despair in the poster's eyes as the result ends up 180 degrees away from what was planned. Rationality and cogency be damned, my opinion must be respected!

[CBGLuthier]

35. well, we did have an attempt at a circumcision "discussion"

but it got cut short.

[opiate69]

36. *rimshot*

[BrainDrain]

38. How Short was it?

wait...wait...wait.....it was soooooo short.......

[theKed]

37. I'm gonna hang in for the full card.

Shouldn't be too long.

[arely staircase]

114. trendy pronoun neoligisms

wins the internet.

[opiate69]

115. lol.. if only I could claim creative authorship of it

[just1voice]

40. Sorry, not cartoonish enough for me to play, LOL

I need to read cartoons or facebook posts in order for anything to sink into my heavily propagandized mindset, LOL!

[Phlem]

43. Ahh Karma

awesome!

-p

[ZombieHorde]

45. I agree "All opinions are equally valide," but a lot of what I read from feminists isn't opinion.

A lot of what I read from feminists is personal experiences and sociology reports. Opinions may be added to those things, but they still stand on their own.

[The Straight Story]

47. Ya know Sea, you spend a lot of time attacking the very people on your side

Always trying to demean them and show they are wrong and ignorant and you are right and know better than them.

We are never pure enough - and if you want to understand why people get snarky take a step back and look at how you engage others.

You ride feminism like a bull through a china shop here smashing everything in your path and ridiculing nearly every person you can on the subject outside your own little echo chamber (or bubble in reference to last election).

When folks post ops about blatant sexism, I did twice today, you don't utter a peep because they didn't do something to outrage you enough or if you do chime in it is about how people here probably endorse it and don't care and want to keep women down.

Instead of bringing allies to your cause you alienate people to the point they don't even want to talk about it because you will berate them.

Everyone but you and a few here are sexist it seems and want to keep women down - always on the attack when the very people you are spending a ton of energy attacking are on the same side but never in a way good enough for you.

I don't want to talk about sexism ever here. Because no matter how one tries to discuss it you and some others will shred them and try to tell them they suck and only you get it and know and understand it.

You hurt the cause on DU more than you will ever help it by lashing out all the time at progressive folks the way you do.

[EOTE]

49. Awesome post. This should be an OP. Thanks! nt

[zappaman]

54. +100! n/t

[The Straight Story]

59. I find this funny - she attacks people all day long

And yet this went to a jury and you are telling me I am rude and uncivil?

Go on, take a look at her in pretty much any single thread on DU and get back with me.

[Hayabusa]

92. I find it funny that it got a tie.

[zappaman]

63. Good jury! n/t

[EOTE]

64. Funny. I think irrationally calling large numbers of liberals who support equality

sexist and pigs to be rude and uncivil. And I also believe that starting retaliation threads featuring a gallery of penises (penii?) because some people here support the Tunisian protests to be insanely juvenile (hell, infantile is probably a better word). But maybe that's just me.

[EOTE]

67. Let me get this straight.

A poster eloquently calls out the OP for her hypocrisy and her incessant attacks on good people. He does this without one single personal attack. You attack that poster, saying his post is "rude and uncivil" and I tell you about the ACTUAL "rude and uncivil" things that this other poster did and you accuse me of playing "she did it first".

TSS attacked no one. If you disagree with what he has to say, you can use grown up words and explain why you believe so.

There is a hostile environment here, alright, and who's creating it isn't who you think it is.

[opiate69]

68. Yup.. ever the victim.. it's never their fault... and if you point out their incivility,

you get the ridiculous "tone argument" canard tossed back at you. They somehow manufactured an alleged "logical fallacy", and now can point to it at will to excuse their abhorrent behavior.

http://sjwar.blogspot.com/2012/07/the-problem-with-social-justice-fandom.html

[zappaman]

69. Same shit

different day.

[EOTE]

72. Yeah, that pretty much covers it. nt

[EOTE]

71. TSS's argument isn't "she did it first" it was "why are you attacking good people?"

He's pointing out that every single one of the OP's posts is about how the men of DU are sexist. That's ludicrous and it doesn't matter what pretty bow she attempts to put on it, it's simply not true. There were three of these posts just today and each of them failed miserably. MISERABLY. DU overwhelmingly does not believe that way. Yes, such a hostile environment to women here when so men here are called rape apologist and misogynist for holding views which are well to the left of the general population. Some people simply aren't happy unless they're a victim.

[RetroLounge]

79. and you lost that alert. Bummer huh?

or not. You could have either gloated or whined.

Please, proceed.

RL

[RetroLounge]

85. Oh, I'm sure TSS appreciates your free schooling of him

What ever would he do without you?

Gloat or Whine.

Please proceed.

RL

[opiate69]

86. "It was a tie!!"

[EOTE]

90. That's almost as good as "she did it first!"

These threads are a hoot.

[The Straight Story]

91. Hope I would learn something?

"like maybe not doing it again"?

Where is your concern when it comes to the person I was talking about and their attacks here on DU?

Do you think I posted what I did out of the blue for no reason? How many others, thread after thread here and previously in Meta, said basically the same thing?

You have a lot of good folks here concerned about issues like feminism and would be more than happy to have discussions about it but they get ran roughshod over and over time and again by a few and told they are basically sexist and equated with abusers and the rw.

I and others are a little sick of it and will call it out when we see it. We want to be able to have adult discussions on an issue and time and again get spammed by a few telling us we all suck and have no idea what we are talking about.

I have learned something - that the discussion here on DU is less about the subject some say they want to discuss and more about fellow progressives not being pure enough. Constant questioning of motives, telling men they are bad and don't care about women or women's rights when they actually do.

We may not agree on some finer points, but that does not make us misogynist jackholes who want to keep women down. It is possible to not agree and not be haters. But you would not know that from some posters.

One would think coming here to DU that all us progressives on the board are a bunch of women haters who just want women to stay in the kitchen - and yet many on this board care deeply about the subject and want to work together. Yet a few want to divide us and focus on us more than the issues.

And I have also learned that there are others who want to continue to keep DU divided into men and women and drive a wedge between us because they care more about complaining about each other than finding solutions.

[Phlem]

97. This might explain some behavior

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125518391

But I'm with you Straight Story and am deftly sick of it already.

-p

[EOTE]

143. Misandry is a far greater force on this board than it is in the general population.

Perhaps a number of good DUers are sick of its rampancy here when they don't need to face it other places.

[EOTE]

80. His response to you? You mean this one?

"And yet this went to a jury and you are telling me I am rude and uncivil?

Go on, take a look at her in pretty much any single thread on DU and get back with me."

The horrors! I don't know how you'll get through the day after having been attacked so!

TSS did absolutely nothing alert worthy.

[EOTE]

89. You go on and on about this "hostile environment" then cryptically tell me to read his response

to you. A response which is as benign as they come. What am I looking for, exactly? No need to tell me to read another post, you can just tell me. It seems to me that your agenda is showing.

[BainsBane]

122. the OP Is about sexism

It doesn't mention DU or you by name.

I can't help wondering which misogynist views are to the left of the general population? I must admit to being entertained by the fact you think that Democrats can't be sexist. I don't know anything about your own views, but the fact you take this thread personally tells me you're defensive about something.

[EOTE]

142. This is about the OP's persistent attack on good DUers.

Believe that women should have control over their own bodies and should be able to do what they want with them? Misogynist! Why do you want to hurt women? Many DUers take nearly every one of the OP's threads personally because she CONSISTENTLY ATTACKS DUers with her posts. What is so hard to understand about that? And when she doesn't get the desired results from one of her ignorant posts, she starts another one and yet again gets the same results. The great majority does not have the same hateful view as the OP, check out her many, many failed OPs and that's very plain to see.

[sibelian]

139. "I did not personally attack TSS I characterized his post"

The distinction you are drawing between your conduct and his only exists to benefit your attempts to manage perceptions. One of your options, on reading TSS post, was to afford him the permission to criticise that you claim for yourself. You chose not to, but the only apparent reason for this was to oppose him.

His post was perfectly civil. What it wasn't was what you wanted to hear.

"From my perspective as a woman, there is a hostile environment here and it is towards women."

I suspect that is a perspective you have decided benefits you to maintain, not a perspective you have arrived at through observation.

[sibelian]

138. He was absolutely correct on all points. nt

[Vinnie From Indy]

61. +1

Cheers!

[JTFrog]

74. More tone bullshit.

A big round of high fives. ^5

[opiate69]

75. And.. there it is again..

Fuck civility, tact and diplomacy, eh???

http://sjwar.blogspot.com/2012/07/the-problem-with-social-justice-fandom.html

the "tone argument" or "tone policing": why social justice warriors act like assholes
Any suggestion that Warriors try to be polite is called “tone policing” or “making the tone argument”. To Warriors, anyone who suggests being polite is a “concern troll” or “derailer” who wants to weaken their discussion. The “tone argument” is cited by people of all hues and genders who think their issue gives them the right to be rude. It means “I don’t have to be polite; you do.”

Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Rosa Parks, and Fannie Lou Hamer would’ve rejected the tone argument in an instant. I like Brother Malcolm’s take best. He said, ”Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery.”

Because Warriors have enormous difficulty grasping simple ideas, I'll spell that out: So long as no one puts their hands on you, be polite.

[JTFrog]

76. From Mr. tact and diplomacy himself.

GMAFB.

^5!

[opiate69]

78. Hey.. I'm not running around accusing people of logical fallacy - which btw isn't actually one -

then using it to retroactively excuse bad behavior.

[JTFrog]

81. GFY.

Good for you.

^5!

[opiate69]

82. Clever...

really...



And.. right back at ya, Junior...

[HarveyDarkey]

88. Hey, juror #6, you're supposed to read the thread

Mail Message
At Fri Mar 29, 2013, 07:25 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

GFY.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2586533

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Again, with his little passive-aggressive way of saying "Go Fuck Yourself"...

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Mar 29, 2013, 07:40 PM, and the Jury voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: It seems to me someone needs to grow a thicker skin.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Perhaps the poster meant to write, "Go fuck yourself", but poster didn't write that.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Frankly I'd hide the whole damn thread, but this example is no worse than a lot of others here.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: What an infantile complaint.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: I did not even look at who was arguing what. When I saw Go Fuck Yourself, that was enough to vote to lock, irrespective of subject matter or stance.

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

[Phlem]

98. +1

-p

[Phlem]

99. nice reply

when you don't have anything else there's the ever popular G*Y.

And here I thought you had all the answers to everything.



-p

[RetroLounge]

77. +1000

RL

[winter is coming]

93. badvocacy: support of a position that's indistinguishable from trolls trying to discredit it. n/t

[lumberjack_jeff]

155. +1 n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

186. Classic.

[2ndAmForComputers]

96. I am now convinced that person is not, has never been, and will never be a feminist.

The exact opposite in fact.

I've been thinking that for a long time, but demeaning that brave woman was the last straw.

[BainsBane]

103. who made you king and decided you get to determine what is a feminist?

Let me guess, a y chromosome? What brave woman? If you're talking about the Tunisian woman, she didn't attack her. She attacked sexists who oppose women's rights at every turn and then get all excited about pictures of breasts. It was pretty obvious that had nothing to do with support for women's rights because they don't support basic human equality.

Oh right, you were the one you heard about threats of rape and death against Adria Richards and asked where you could contribute to the fund of the guy fired. If only Adria Richards had tweeted pictures of her breasts, then she might be seen as fit to breath air.

[ElboRuum]

160. Well, actually.

If you claim to be a feminist, and work against and undermine the efforts of other feminists, are you a feminist?

I prefer to let other people's words speak for them, and really, every label has a definition, a minimum requirement for proper application. For a 'feminist' this would entail support for people trying to draw attention to the feminist cause, not just here, but around the world. When a person spends so much time undermining other people's views and efforts on what is or isn't feminism or whether he/she approves of activity taken in its name, it isn't about feminism anymore, its about the ego of the person taking the umbrage, pure and simple. Not content to act positively in the realm of feminism, she, through her words on this board, has actively demonstrated contempt for feminists who don't follow her narrow view of what appropriate action in its name is, nor give appropriate primacy on her narrow view what "true feminism" really is.

She, like so many second wavers, have expressed nothing but contempt for the values of those who followed, as evidenced by her posting (I believe in another thread) of a cartoon strip casually dismissive of third wave interpretation of feminism. So she reaps what she sows. And that, I believe anyway, is how it should be.

I am not going to stand in judgment of sea's feminist "street cred". I'll let her words speak for her. And what they are saying of late has caused me to wonder (as I'm sure its crossed the minds of many others): does she really care about the rights of women, or is she just acting in self interest of her own interpretation of feminism, propping up the edifice of her own philosophical view at the expense of feminism itself?

[BainsBane]

161. I have not seen her done any of what you charge

and I find it interesting that a bunch of men think they get to determine who is a feminist. I think what you really hate is a woman who dares to challenge your BS. From what I saw, she didn't attack Amina at all. She observed that a bunch of men who oppose feminist causes every turn fawned all over a woman who showed her breasts. I noticed the same thing.

[LadyHawkAZ]

169. Not just once but several times

Amina and all of FEMEN. Not just attacking men- attacking the protesters as pandering to them.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022583041#post9
this is how effective these women are. they strip down using nudity to get attention and PERFORM for the men and their crude, degrading jokes and giggles flashing their camera and that is as far as it gets.

these women are used for a tool, just as womens sexuality is held up as a tool for men in all things.

these women do damage to womens movement in many ways. and the men recognize this, hence continual OPs on it to put du women in their place.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022583041#post42
right. doing exactly what men expect of women. to pornify them. and when they do this in front of bersoluni to make a point and he laughs, leers, snarks, degrades and puts women using their sexuality in place, really accomplishes a whole lot but give the pig what he wants.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022583294#post11
men are angry.... that so many womens voice is being heard. this is the tool they use, ....
womens sexuality, to try and put the wimminz back in their place. we are having too much CONVERSATION using our brain, and that is not our place. strip down now, so the men can be comfortable in their superiority. we are seeing a continual stream of OPs that are going after women, using womens sexuality to try and shame us.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022583294#post31
gives the cretins what they want.... To ogle and degrade. point and so fuckin obvious i do not get anyone pretending otherwise. i would really like to see who actually created the org thinking probably a man. seems pussy riot was thought up by two men with issues using women to get their message out. yea.

^(as I understand it, the bit about Pussy Riot is inaccurate)

Hopefully that makes the backlash a little clearer.

[2ndAmForComputers]

171. Thank you Elbo and LadyHawk for having more patience than I do to spell things out.

[LadyHawkAZ]

172. Not by much. n/t

[BainsBane]

177. Yes, it does

Thanks for providing the link. Obviously I disagree in the sense I don't believe it's appropriate to pass judgment on other women's means of political expression. I do agree, however, that men who typically oppose women's rights have fawned all over women engaged in this kind of protest. I don't like the way Seabeyond expressed her disagreement with Femen, but I suspect she is not far off in terms of male reactions to the protest.

I hope these protests have some success. I also very much home Amina remains safe, and I hope the same for Adria Richards--who a number of men here have consistently vilified and showed absolutely no concern for the swarm of death and rape threats against her.

[LadyHawkAZ]

180. I don't agree with what Richards did

but the threats against her were so far out of line they're past the horizon.

[BainsBane]

182. agree

Or rather I can say I would not have acted the same way, mainly because I don't Tweet and think it's stupid to put your work business on the web. But I'm not in her situation, and I realize that none of us know very much about the actual incident, the people involved, or matters in their work performance that might have led to being fired.

It disturbs me that in that whole discussion so many kept insisting that those threats were irrelevant to the conversation. That entire issue was for me about the public reaction, and I found it disturbing. I can't help but notice a stark contrast with Amina.

[LadyHawkAZ]

216. I can state with a fair amount of certainty

that I wouldn't have acted the same way regardless. At most places I have worked, her actions in publicly shaming the guys would have likely resulted in her also being fired. HR departments exist to handle complaints like this; the public shaming was extremely unprofessional. Particularly as she used the same Twitter account at the same time during the same conference to also tweet a penis joke- the same thing she was complaining about. I think she earned her termination fair and square, but the Internet reaction went well over the top. Threats are never OK.

[BainsBane]

223. I think if we are to respect Amina

we should also respect Adria. I can say with certainty that I wouldn't have done what either did, but then I'm not in their situations. That guy's behavior violated EEOC law, which is probably why he was fired. Two guys from same company were telling jokes. Only one was fired. There has to be a reason for the difference, probably in their work records.

Most companies have procedures for launching harassment claims. If someone were fired at your place of employment for launching such a complaint, the employer would be in violation of labor law and subject to legal suit. Richards did not work at the same company as the two guys, so she Tweeted their comments to the conference managers. I failed to see if what they said was so inconsequential, why the Tweet should have even mattered. Both things can't be true. Either the comment was unimportant or it was actionable. Clearly the man's employer thought it was the latter.

What is most interesting to me about these two incidents is the public reaction, as I've already discussed.

[LadyHawkAZ]

224. I would agree it sounds like their employers were looking

for a reason to get rid of them. Otherwise both guys would have been fired, rather than one.

And I learn something new every day- for some reason I had gotten the impression that they worked for the same company. Derp on my part.

[ElboRuum]

178. Sure you have.

You just either A) won't admit it, B) wouldn't characterize it as such, or C) are particularly fine with it because... well who knows? Any of those three things don't amount to much to me because I have stated a simple fact. It's there for everyone to see in many threads to interpret as they see fit, as I have here.

As far as "defining" feminism, no intervention on my or anyone else's part is required for this. It is, as they say, what it is. What you don't get to do is redefine it for personal or philosophical expedience.

Yes, she did attack Amina. She did it by going after people who supported her actions. And whether she or you are prepared to admit it or not, in so doing, she set herself in opposition of stated feminist purpose. Oh maybe not YOUR purpose, maybe not SEA'S purpose, but definitely the purpose of feminism on the grander scale. It was a blatantly solipsistic, ego-feeding pursuit of an ongoing vendetta against those in this place that won't toe the line with her brand of sex-negative, male-negative feminism. Whether that be men, or third-wave feminists, or whomever else she perceives as an enemy.

As far as BS, I invite people to call it out when they see it, but to whit, you might go and look at just WHO is in opposition to both your and sea's tirades and finger wagging. DU is generally applauding Amina's actions and taking your ilk to task for your typical deflections and derailing. That, I'VE noticed.

Nothing I've said is bullshit. Granted it is my opinion, and thus not inerrant fact, of course, but it is based on facts very publicly in evidence, and therefore not bullshit. Claiming it is in some attempt to deflect legitimate criticism of someone's words and actions is a transparent act of rhetorical desperation by someone who apparently feeds at the same poisoned philosophical trough as the person she's defending.

Have a nice day.

[BainsBane]

181. Someday maybe I too can be omniscient

and presume to know what's in everyone else's head. Alas, I am only human and have no God-like powers.

I actually saw it when LadyHawkAZ provided the links.

Of course men on DU are applauding Amina's actions. She showed her breasts. And besides she's overseas, where it's safe for men to claim they support women's causes because it has no impact on their own lives. That a bunch of men who show their antipathy for feminists and women in general at every turn applaud this particular protest tells me their interests are voyeuristic. I expect few know anything about what she was protesting. I've seen a lot of posts about evil Muslims and little interest in understand Algeria.

These same men have no problem with the threats of death and rape against Adria Richards and says she deserves everything she gets. So pardon me if I don't buy this sudden conversion to carrying about the lives of women when they are so completely indifferent to violence against women in the US and directly hostile to basic requirements like EEOC laws in the workplace. That some of these same men taunt rape survivors for kicks, insist that women don't really mean no when they say they don't want to have sex and that 13 year old girls bear responsibility for being raped by 37 year old men, and then tell women we shouldn't post about rape in public forums leaves me less than impressed with their sudden conversion to feminist causes. I guess I missed the memo specifying that an Algerian woman's life is worth more than those of American women.

[ElboRuum]

197. If you think...

...that men on DU are applauding Amina's actions because she showed her breast, you know nothing. If you think that men on DU have no problem with threats of death and rape against Adria Richards, again, you know nothing. In fact, for someone who understands so little, you do quite a lot of talking. Where I'm from, that's called "talking out your ass".

Omniscient? Pfft. I'd settle for awake.

You know what Bane, I look FORWARD to the day you are omniscient, because then you wouldn't be making these horrendous errors and I wouldn't have to make a full time job out of correcting them.

Have a nice day.

[BainsBane]

200. I can only go by what I read

and what they themselves say. When they continually claim the threats against Richards are irrelevant and point to her as the evil person, they make themselves clear. They continue to belittle her, knowing full well the threats she has faced. When men who oppose feminist causes in every other instance fawn all over Amina, they make themselves clear. That, of course, is not all men. But it is a vocal and persistent group.

[ElboRuum]

203. Your mistake...

...is thinking that getting some guy fired for a comment made between him and some other guy in a off-the-cuff private conversation that you had nothing to do with is feminism, (even though that person is a frakking hypocrite, guilty of using much of the same terminology in her own tweets and making the same lameass jokes) and that in so doing you've struck a blow for the feminist cause.

In a pig's eye.

But we aren't quite done yet, are we? The same takes her case to the internets only to find that her efforts were not received with the rah-rahs that she'd hoped. Personally, I think she was wrong in doing it, because now some guy is out of a job and the only reason I can fathom for such a puerile act is a desire for attention, to remain relevant. Many feminists, not your brand, but others, kind of think that's a bit of a dick move from what I read as well.

The reason why I think Richards is a joke and Amina is the real deal?

One's doing what they do for ego and in a very negative and arguably counterproductive manner, and in such a fashion to promote, not feminism, but herself. In fact, I'm sure that this little stunt was at least in part done to further her own image and extend her relevance beyond its allotted 15 minutes.

The other one is doing it for the rights of women in a part of the world where such acts are incipiently dangerous, and therefore risking her very life. One of these people I have respect for, the other I don't. Are you seeing a pattern here? I would suspect that this disrespect for Richards is shared by many, especially when juxtaposed to Amina, who should be a reminder if not an outright lesson in what ACTUAL COURAGE looks like.

I belittle Richards actions, even though she may have faced threats for them. Sure she does not deserve to be threatened, but her actions DO deserve belittlement because they were the act of what apparently is a childish mentality and done for the purposes of self-promotion. It would be intellectually dishonest to dismiss the case for that.

Let's put it in these terms. If Richards had been in that photo, carrying a placard rather than being topless, in that part of the world hostile (and I do mean hostile) to female expression, and Amina had been topless recording two nerds tossing off the cuff remarks to each other. It would be Richards who would have had my respect and Amina my contempt.

Is that clear enough for you? I don't speak for anyone except myself and my own limited observations on this, but I get the sense that this is generally the direction the wind is blowing.

[BainsBane]

209. one is EEOC law

which clearly you resent. You can support Amina's protest because she doesn't infringe on what you apparently perceive is men's god-given right to sit around making jokes on work time. That her act took place in a context of chronically hostile working environments for women in that field and repeated rapes at their conferences is of course meaningless, as is the fact that Richards life is in danger too. The difference is you don't think her life has value. You applaud Amina because you can externalize her concerns as part of a foreign world that fits the media stereotypes of Islam that you've been inculcated with in order to promote endless American war in the region. Amina standing up for her rights doesn't affect your life. Having to treat women as equal human beings in the workplace evidently makes you furious, even though labor law requires employers adhere to such policies. The fact that 1 in 3 women in this country are subject to battery and rape again doesn't merit a mention from you. Only evil Islam threatens women. When American women are raped and killed, it just isn't the same is it? So what if more women are killed in domestic violence than in Algeria. You can't attribute that to an external Islamic other, so you'll just ignore that inconsequential loss of life.

Thanks for illustrating my point so perfectly.

[ElboRuum]

219. Questions of degree are lost on you.

"You can support Amina's protest because she doesn't infringe on what you apparently perceive is men's god-given right to sit around making jokes on work time."

Oh, yes, this is precisely it. You've got me so pegged. Why don't you tell me what else I think?

"That her act took place in a context of chronically hostile working environments for women in that field and repeated rapes at their conferences is of course meaningless, as is the fact that Richards life is in danger too."

Oh, yes, I clearly see it now, yes, Richards life is in danger so similar to that of Amina, and hostile first-world work environment and culturally enabled homicide are so the same thing.

"You applaud Amina because you can externalize her concerns as part of a foreign world that fits the media stereotypes of Islam that you've been inculcated with in order to promote endless American war in the region."

So, THAT'S what I think, right, and all of these cut-off noses and death threats against female children attending school in the Islamic world are all just media hype for drone attacks and whatnot. Got it. Things never happen like that.

"Amina standing up for her rights doesn't affect your life."

Actually that's not entirely true. She's shown me what a real feminist is. That has affected my life greatly.

"Having to treat women as equal human beings in the workplace evidently makes you furious, even though labor law requires employers adhere to such policies."

Actually, I rather enjoy the idea of women being equal in the workplace, but since you know me better than I know myself, clearly I must be furious. Thanks for the correction.

The fact that 1 in 3 women in this country are subject to battery and rape again doesn't merit a mention from you. Only evil Islam threatens women. When American women are raped and killed, it just isn't the same is it? So what if more women are killed in domestic violence than in Algeria. You can't attribute that to an external Islamic other, so you'll just ignore that inconsequential loss of life.

Oh, I get it now. Attention to women's rights elsewhere in this world takes attention off of women in this country, who are CLEARLY so MUCH more in need of attention such that we can spare NOTHING AT ALL to take a moment and applaud this woman's courage.

Thanks for illustrating my point so perfectly.

I could say the same to you, you've just made the case for feminism, insofar as it has been represented by sea and now yourself, as being little more than an ego trip.

[BainsBane]

225. .............

[ElboRuum]

237. Typical.

You've got nothing. right backatcha.

[libodem]

215. yep

[nadinbrzezinski]

101. I wish I could recommend THIS POST!!!!

[BainsBane]

104. the fact is if you can't support human equality

You aren't on our side. The Adria Richards thread, along with the rape threads, proved to me the number of misogynists on this site is far greater than I could have possibly imagined. I suppose by on women's side you mean pro-choice (never mind that I've seen you post anti-choice propaganda). But if one doesn't support equality in the workplace or acknowledge the seriousness of violence against women, how does that leave them on our side? If the only kind of women's protests they think are acceptable is when a woman takes her clothes off, that's not support for feminist at all. If they insist that women don't face real sexism and violence, they aren't on our side at all, or at least not on my side. If you insist women have to behave a certain way to be acceptable, that's not supporting women's rights. Seabeyond calls out bullshit when she sees it, and it's so thick around here she doesn't touch the surface.

I would like to know how exactly you think you are on the side of women?

[The Straight Story]

108. Well....

"You aren't on our side." - "I would like to know how exactly you think you are on the side of women?"

"now, we do not get the rape and death threats. not allowed. but, they push the nastiness as far as they can and create it as a hostile environment as much as they can, for a site with minimal rules. "

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=18551

(ie, folks here WOULD say such things and the only thing holding us back are the rules)

And some of us are too dumb:

By past performance it is highly unlikely that post was made for 'discussion' but rather for shits and giggles of the MRA kind.

not saying he IS. just saying there is a fair amount of MRA shit here, and maybe some of them are too dumb to even realize that.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=17949

I am damn well on the side of women, just not willing to put up with - day in and out - people attacking those who are on the side of feminists getting their asses chewed by a few here.

You care about the issues facing women?? Then engage people here in a way that is not busting their ass all the time.

A small, few, folks here are looking to find fault in everyone they can here on issues we all care about and are concerned about.

You said: "I would like to know how exactly you think you are on the side of women? "

I am on their side because I don't treat allies like shit and make all the issues about them. Where the hell have you been on many other threads in GD except to bash fellow DU'ers for not being pure enough for you and others.

There is a contingent here whose sole purpose is to attack fellow DU'ers and not talk about the topics at hand.

I am on the side women, but not on the side of those who want to belittle their allies and tell them they are stupid and that the only reason they don't get death and rape threats here are the terms of service.

Why don't you and others try not being so rude and condescending to others here and instead talk about the issues instead of how we are all the problem?

You shun the very people who want to help on issues and demean them and tell them they are stupid, don't get it, etc.

I can have more intelligent discussions on reddit, fark, and even freaking 4chan than I could here on women's issues - mainly because a few here kick the asses of people who care about the issues women face so that they can continually play the victim here on DU - or maybe because they really believe we are all really stupid. Not sure which is worse.

[BainsBane]

110. so you support certain kinds of women

who speak in ways you find appropriate. On what issues do you support them?

The threads that have most concerned me of late are on rape and Adria Richards, not because I care about Ms. Richards is particular but I care about the misogynistic backlash against her.

You assume I know you are one my side. I do not know that at all. You haven't specified a single issue. Perhaps there are some. But men here don't get a pass just because they are Democrats. In truth, I see no difference between Republicans and Democrats when it comes to rape and how they treat women. I know of no study that says Republicans are most likely to rape or beat their wives, or that they are more likely to oppose EEOC laws in the workplace, which so many men here actively oppose.

So what I see above is your assertion that I'm supposed to believe you are on my side--I'm not sure why--or you would be on my side if I only knew how to speak like a woman is supposed to? I don't believe I have ever called you stupid or anything close to that. If you have evidence, please provide it.

[The Straight Story]

113. And it continues

" In truth, I see no difference between Republicans and Democrats when it comes to rape and how they treat women."

You see, that is one of the problems you and others have here when we want to have a discourse on issues relevant to women and their rights.

Constant attacking and telling people they don't get it. We are no different than republicans and how they treat women?

Why are you here on DU if you believe that?

I have over 40,000 posts and quite a few of them have been about women and how they are oppressed in our society - and yet me and others are seen as the enemy because we don't always use the language you and others do and we don't always agree on some things.

Where the hell were you on those posts? Where were you when I have posted about the atrocities of war and how it harms people, usually women, in Iraq and Afghanistan?

You hole up in a group and wait to pounce on people here. Instead of joining discussions that could advance women's rights the world over you focus instead on what people here might say and sit around in a group complaining about the people here on DU.

So much time and effort is spent on outrage over fellow posters the real issues get pushed aside. The enemies become all of us here.

Your crusade here is not women's issues - it is chastising the posters here for not caring as much as you do. You don't want to talk, you want to berate. Some live to find a reason to get pissed off and yell at their fellow posters here.

And then you get upset when called on it.

[BainsBane]

116. I did not attack you

You expect me to proclaim you superior based on no information. The only attacks I see here are the ones you are levying against me. If you have information that rape and domestic violence is based on party affiliation, I would be interested in seeing it. Pointing out that I don't know of evidence that is the case is not attacking you. Nor is not seeing you as inherently superior because you happen to post on this site. I can only go by what I read. No, I don't see you as superior to my Republican brother-in-law. What evidence do I have that is the case? I've never heard him denounce a woman's right to choose as you have. So he's up one in that book. I know you are far to the right of the Democratic Party on guns, while he supports an assault weapons ban and the President's other gun proposals. I know in three posts you can't name a single issue on which you support women's rights. Yet you expect me to see you as inherently superior.

The only person doing the attacking here is you. 4% of my posts are in HOF. The majority are in the ordinary forums. You someone think I should pay homage to you for posting on thread and appear in your court by responding to your threads. The fact is I have responded to a number of your threads. Yet you continue to insult me but still are unable to name a single issue on which you support women's rights. I wouldn't think that would be so difficult for someone who claims to be an ally.

[Threedifferentones]

148. How about you point to a right he is not in favor of? He once spoke against the right to choose?

You're gonna need to link that because I know DU pretty well and I cannot recall a single debate over abortion rights. We all agree on that, and anyone who does not gets flamed, reported, TSd.

I think I know why so many fellow feminists are irritated by seabeyond's tirades. We are absolutely in favor of reproductive rights, we think rape is as horrifying and disgusting as any violence or atrocity ever committed. We know that a person should be judged on ability and character, that anyone should be able to make full use of their talents regardless of sex or skin color. We get filled with rage whenever we read about a stronger person oppressing a weaker one, and we know full well that a husband or boyfriend abusing the woman in his life is one of the most frequent forms of such oppression.

Can you explain to me why the same crew of posters talks frequently about the supposed passivity of liberal men while going weeks and weeks without mentioning the billions of conservative women who are actively working against their own rights? Here's a hint, if you say it's because men make those women conservative you are not what I would call a feminist. Feminists acknowledge that women have agency and choices, and that men learn gender roles from their families and cultures just like women do.

Do you understand that abuse of women by men is just one among many equally abhorrent trends of violence and domination? In other words, do you understand that even before feminism a rich woman had more power and freedom and comfort than all those multitudes of male slaves? Or have you ever studied how many white women in the 20th century supported the oppression of blacks even as they campaigned for their own rights? This point is especially useful for seabeyond.

I've lurked here for many years and read this forum every day. What is telling about seabeyond's posting is not what she says but what she does not. Give her half a chance and she will go off about how pretty much every man every where (besides hubby of course) offers no help to any women. But, in all the threads which illustrate or discuss racism or extreme poverty and the exploitation of a working class...NADA. In all the threads about religion she will mention a fundy's views about women but not any of their other craziness. Is this justified because as a woman that is what affects her life the most? In that case we men would be justified in ignoring it because it does not directly affect us.

So, why should I assume she is on my side? Here in Nashville I regularly socialize with a loose community of hispanic people I came to know in my years landscaping. Sometimes in our conversations I meet people ignorant of our laws and their rights as workers, and I help them as best I can. Since they are poor pretty much all of them work regardless of age or sex, and I do what is in my power to help people without thinking about those factors. Get that? We truly see all people as equal, so we judge based upon individual circumstances, and we see all people in need as equally deserving.

As a modern man I lack even the "benevolent" form of sexism, but the same cannot be said for people who make post after post calling for more aid exclusive to women.

Seabeyond is a prolific poster with a distinct style of writing, so she stands out in my memory. It often seems she is on her own side, not ours, and now the same can be said of you.

[BainsBane]

183. From someone who has done nothing

but attack individuals in threads today and not articulated a single substantive point of disagreement.

[BainsBane]

167. All I have seen

Is his anti-choice propaganda. I have not seen him speak out in favor of choice. I vividly recall an image he posted proclaiming that more "people" (or perhaps it was "children&quot are killed every year by women having abortions than by guns. He did so within a couple of days of the Sandyhook massacre. I saw him claim he was pro-choice immediately after posting that propaganda, but I found that an odd contradiction. I can't imagine anyone who was pro-choice would post such a thing. Even I, who have always seen abortion as an unacceptable choice for myself, would dream in a million years of approving of such an image.

If you have a question about what someone else has posted, take it up with them. I am not a mind reader. Nor do I know hers or any other members entire posting history.

As a modern man I lack even the "benevolent" form of sexism, but the same cannot be said for people who make post after post calling for more aid exclusive to women.

Really? You must be a marvel. We live in a patriarchal society. I can't imagine any of us are free of sexism (or racism or xenophobia). But you appear to be superior to all, especially a feminist you don't like.

I actually know a fair bit about slavery. I have a Ph.D. and research field in the area. Do you know that women were enslaved as well? They were also raped as a matter of course; that was part of their enslavement. Additionally, more people live in slavery today than at any point in human history, and the vast majority of them are women. Slavery was and is a horrific institution, but that has no bearing on this discussion.

I don't know if Seabeyond is on your side. Is there some reason she should be? Regardless, you really need to ask her. I can only speak for myself.

[The Straight Story]

212. Really? Seriously? Ok - let me show you

I get called a libertarian on this board because I preach your body, your choice all the time.

From smoking in bars, to motorcycle helmets, to abortion.

Your body, your choice is not just some little thing used for one issue - it is about all of us having choices.

Look up Smoking with my username and you will see me say time and time again that people being able to choose what bar they want to go to is part of the whole mantra of your body, your choice that I 100% support.

I don't just support it on abortion but I actually, truly, believe in the core ideal it represents.

And that is about people not being controlled by others, across the board, and that affects both women and men.

[BainsBane]

193. Reproductive rights

Is a key one. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2078487

[EOTE]

158. Surely you remember all those democrats talking about how women rape so easily...

that there are "legitimate" forms of rape and those never result in pregnancy. As I recall, Democrats paid dearly for those comments during the 2012 election. Oh wait...

We're told over and over again that we're just as bad as they are and they totally don't understand why we "little menz" get so upset from the benevolent feminists on this board who simply want us to see their point of view.

[EOTE]

157. Like the OP supports certain kinds of men.

As in the ones in her family. What a fucking joke. If you're going to harangue people on this site who go through great lengths to explain their positions, you should at least read their posts.

[BainsBane]

174. I did read his post

and I still haven't seen a single issue where he supports women's rights, other than his mention of some posts about Afghanistan and Iraq. I think it's easy to support causes that have no bearing on one's life, but if those same people object to women's efforts in the US to establish equality in the workplace, political sphere, or culturally, I don't have a lot of respect for their views.

I am not the one leveling attacks her. The Straight Story chose to do that, and he chose to respond with more attacks.

[Katashi_itto]

105. +1000

[theKed]

106. The "must read" post of this latest barrage

in the Sexism Wars. Well done, sir.

[BainsBane]

125. I know

It's totally unreasonable that we don't accept that men are exempt from sexism purely because they post on this site. So what if they get their kicks by ridiculing rape victims. They vote Democrat and that makes them special. Who cares if they don't support EEOC laws and see threats of death and rape incidental in comparison to the egregious crime of a woman's Tweeting what a man says in front of her. They haven't called for repealing women's suffrage yet, so we need to shut up and be grateful for what we have.

[arely staircase]

126. ic

DemocratIC

[BainsBane]

127. only as an adjective

[arely staircase]

129. and democrat is a noun

not an adverb

[BainsBane]

130. I know

An adverb wouldn't make sense in that sentence because it would signal how one votes rather than for whom. Actually what's going on is the preposition is missing: vote (for) democrat(s) would be the grammatically correct construction.

[arely staircase]

134. and the common (mis) usage is democratic is as an adverb

democrat as anything but a noun often reveals more than the user intended.

[BainsBane]

135. Oh really?

If you have a charge to make, say so directly.

That I know basic grammar makes me a right-winger? What you obviously missed is that the word WAS used as a noun.

[arely staircase]

136. nope "They vote Democrat and that makes them special."

that is an adverb - describing the verb "to vote." and I have no charge to make, only an observation.

Incorrectly capitalizing the verb doesn't fix it.

lol

[BainsBane]

137. Wrong

As I already said, vote democratically indicates how they vote, through a democratic process. It doesn't indicate for whom they are voting. An adverb is not at all the proper use in that case. A noun is. That noun should have been the object of the preposition, but I left the preposition out. Given this is a website and not a publication, it doesn't quite rise to the level of a crime. Using an adverb in that sentence would say absolutely nothing.

I am not gong to write illiterately to compensate for those with a halting command of English grammar.

Grammar police are always irritating under the best of circumstances, but nitpicking in demonstratively incorrect ways as a proxy for a disagreement with the content of my post is particularly weak.

[arely staircase]

146. Right. I'm sure you'll be more careful next time.

eom

[BainsBane]

164. If you ever summon the courage

to address me on a point of substance, let me know. In the meantime, I suggest The Chicago Manual of Style or a grammar book.

[EOTE]

153. This thread should clear things up.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1659321

Pay attention to posts 2, 6 and 7. "Vote Democrat" is the term republicans use. "Democratic" also indicates how one votes, as in for the Democrat who is in the Democratic party. It's an adjective, which makes sense here because as you noted above, "democratically" pertains to the process. It makes no sense in that case putting a noun after the verb.

[BainsBane]

165. I know grammar very well, thank you

Whatever someone writes in another thread has no bearing on the basic structure of the English language.

[arely staircase]

166. "Vote Democrat" is the term republicans use.

yep. it sure is.

[arely staircase]

111. "and only you get it and know and understand it."

it is like feminist Gnosticism.

[MADem]

121. +1,000 !!!! Very well said, indeed. nt

[Demo_Chris]

147. + >9000!

[BainsBane]

192. Anti-choice propaganda

Posted by The Straight Story. Everyone should see what a great ally of women this particular poster is:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2078487

[The Straight Story]

195. Nope - was pointing out what others were saying

But nice try - how about you spend a little time trying to debate me on things instead of telling people how you think they feel on issues?

Along with racism, homophobia, bigotry against those with mental or physical disabilities, and overall the keeping down of the masses by a few.

Some threads I have posted on this got pretty wild and a ton of replies - from sexist men like big boobs to the ford ad as two examples (both from websites I have in my bookmarks tool bar and read several times a day).

Both of those exposed sexism.

Now it has been said by some, or at least implied, that I posted such things simply to piss off people. And also that I don't care about these issues - in part because I don't always agree on certain wordings.

But it is the tactics mainly. And then I got to noticing certain things. And just like those who notice things about me and want to bring them to light all over the cause of feminism I thought perhaps I would do the same.

I posted some stories today, as I often do, from the sites I frequent.

One was on the use of mannequins
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022594370

I have also posted about Rachel Corrie.

Also :
About the rapes and executions in Iraq:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022594424

Sexist judge:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022582947

You can hear a pin drop in those threads so loud you would need earplugs.

---------------- Ok, I could go on and on, but let me get to the point here.

We have three groups here on DU with the label Feminists.

Go look at all three.

On two of them you see good stories and posts about women the world over being screwed over by the jackholes in power.

You will see folks wanting to bring awareness to the issue and expose the problems.

And in the last group you will see mostly posts about DU itself and the people here. People complaining others don't get it. Don't care. Don't want to talk about it how they want to talk about.

The folks in the last group you won't see a lot of making posts in the other two groups.

Problem here is that there are many, many, people who care about the treatment of women in the world - as well as other groups - but there are some who say they are feminists who want to spend all of their energy attacking their allies instead of bringing to light news articles exposing how women are being screwed over (and again, want to add, not just women).

From health care to poverty, religious nut jobs, abortion laws, drug wars, regular wars sucking away our money and kids into oblivion, - no, to some the problem is your fellow posters who care about those issues and spend day in and out exposing corruption and abuse of power that affects all of us.

Dongles. Holding open doors. Naked women. Those may be what you see as the biggest and most terrible things going on but those of us who get around in the news would call those 'first world problems' - if a woman being raped and tortured could trade places with someone at a conference hearing a joke I am damn well betting she would.

So spend your time on such issues, I am sure women the world over being oppressed and beaten/raped/murdered are happy that you want to expose how evil some men are on DU because they didn't get as pissed off as you over dongles and doors while not even taking the five damn minutes it would take you to post news articles covering their plight.

You could do both like many others do of course. But you choose only one.

[BainsBane]

196. You won't engage

and the post was hidden. You didn't explain it as anything other than what it was, and given your affection for guns, why do you think anyone should take it as anything other than on face value? You might have described it, but you chose to post it. That kind of thing leaves an impression.

Apparently you think posting articles is a great contribution to the cause of equal rights. If everything you post is a reflection of your inner values, why doesn't that apply to the anti-abortion, pro-gun propaganda?

I responded to the rest of your points in your locked GD thread. Apparently all you care about is people responding to your OPs. There are several threads at the moment that are about rape and domestic violence, and you haven't shown the slightest interest in them.

How wonderful you support women's rights in far off lands. When I see you do so in the US where they actually has some impact or your life and where you can actually affect change, I'll be more impressed. Quitting misrepresenting the doors bullshit would be a small thing you could do, but you're too heavily invested in a fiction you and others have created. When you invent stories to try to trivialize women's issues, how can I possibly see you as an ally?

The dongles issue is about EEOC law and threats of death and rape against a woman, which you show how little you care about by trivializing. If only Adria Richards had bared her breasts rather than Tweeting, she might be worthy of continuing to live on this planet. The right to be safe from violence and work in a non-discriminatory atmosphere is really basic. No one who can't support that is any ally of mine, particularly when he spends much of his time arguing for gun proliferation.

[The Straight Story]

198. Funny, that same image was posted later by someone

and folks saw it for what it was. Probably a few 'fans' alerted on me posting it but not others.

"The dongles issue is about EEOC law and threats of death and rape against a woman"

Cute. Folks condemned those threats - but that is what some wanted to make it all about - even though people condemned such things.

When folks talked about her doing certain things it was all 'ooooh you hate women!"

How about you and the folks in HOF spend a little more time posting stories and discussing them about those working hard for the cause instead of spending all of your energy attacking them?

Maybe because a few just like to spend their time and energy attacking fellow progressives and not talking about the actual problems women and others face.

[BainsBane]

201. I was continually told the threats were irrelevant

That the point was Richards was evil and "got a man fired." Never mind that his employer made the decision, but the point seemed to be to keep the narrative as simple as possible to paint her as evil. But even now knowing of those threats, you continue to trivialize her circumstances. If you don't care about EEOC laws and instead trivialize a woman's basic right to be safe from rape and violence, how can you possibly be my ally? We obviously have very different understanding of what progressive means. For me it is centered on a belief in human equality and the sanctity of human life over property, privilege, and gun proliferation. Those are core areas on which we do not agree. You assert you are an ally, yet I don't see you support the issues I care most about.

I didn't see the other thread with the abortion image. The difference might have been the poster took time to explain the context, but I'm only speculating. It could also have been down to something as simple as the particular jury pool. I can't imagine what would possess any "progressive" to post such a thing.

[The Straight Story]

204. Ok

Don't have a link to the other thread but it was posted as a stand alone op, mine was a reply to someone about the rw idiots on FB.

I don't trivialize the threats against her, but those are a separate issue.

I can condemn those, and do. I can also say I think she went a little overboard in how she handled the situation and reacted.

That does not mean I don't care about women's issues - and that is the real point here. Folks getting told they are sexist, don't care, want to keep women down when they don't agree on every little thing.

Those same folks, like myself, can spend hours day finding stories to post, researching things, all in hopes of helping us all out and then have people slam us for not agreeing over the reaction to a joke.

They want to define people over a few simple posts or reactions - all the while staying silent when they post other things that help their cause.

How about a 'hey, awesome thread, thanks for exposing how women are treated'? Nope. Cause that does not involve drama.

It is always about beating down your fellow posters for not being outraged as much as you are about things.

I am outraged over the drones in yemen and them covering up for the US when we killed civilians. And the continuing contracts for military stuff in Afghanistan past 2018 which I researched and posted on.That my friend is going back to Afghanistan for a year.

But I don't think people who don't agree at the same level I do are haters and don't care.

When a group spends more time attacking people here and complaining folks don't care enough than they do actually focusing on the issue and ways to solve it and exposing the problem one has to wonder about their true motivations.

[BainsBane]

226. I haven't beaten you down at all

You attacked Seabeyond and me. You are the one you chastised me for not paying court to your threads. Your persecution complex, accompanied by incessant attacks, is boring. I have spent far more time in this discussion that it warrants. Truthfully, I don't care what you are or aren't "outraged" about. Your views have no relation to me or my life.

[cherokeeprogressive]

199. 6-0 Leave.

[Comrade_McKenzie]

50. Just like in the religious books that warns followers that society will denounce its teachings...

Clever.

[Sissyk]

52. You just proved this is an

on-line game for you! Do you hand these out in real life?

[sabrina 1]

119. That's all it is, a game. And it makes women look bad.

Petty, childish, weak and haters of men. If this were the women's movement I would not be a feminist. Thankfully it is, as you say, nothing but a game to them.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

55. Snork

[Prism]

60. Well, it is Good Friday. N/t

[11 Bravo]

65. Cool! It's a game now?

I have a mom, sisters, and nieces. Should I tell them that the ostensibly progressive wing of the Democratic party now thinks it's a fucking game?

[BainsBane]

132. What are you talking about?

[EOTE]

144. Take a look at the history of the OP's posts and you'll begin to see a pattern.

The Straight Story sums it all up very well up thread. This person is not interested in furthering feminism or progressivism, she's solely interested in demeaning others. It's a pathetic game and a very large contingent of DU is utterly sick of it.

[chervilant]

229. And, yet

here you are...

[d_b]

94. you poor thing you k&r

[EOTE]

149. Yes, poor little thing. K&R

The more people who see these vacuous fails the better. I hope these OPs stay visible for a good, long time.

[Kurovski]

102. Every argument you enter ends up as a game. The game is the replacement for discussion.

We've all fallen into that shithole, and that's why it's best to just stay out of it.

Defensiveness is not discussion. not from any group.

This is the same self-convinced dismissive-ness the second wave dumped on my LGBT people for decades, and the stink still rises off some.

And we still fought for equality for everyone, while the worst of the second wave fought for their own narrow interests, their likes and dislikes, as we can still see today.

it's the reason the third wave was created, they brought the movement back to life.

[EOTE]

150. +1 nt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

112. I think you need more attention than this board can provide for you. n/t

.

[BainsBane]

131. If you don't like a thread, you can skip it

It's not necessary to insult the poster. Clearly a lot of people see a point to this thread, since it's gotten 39 recommendations.

[EOTE]

151. Or... we can respond to it and tell others why we find it so incredibly ignorant.

This IS a discussion board, after all. Or are only certain people allowed to speak out and the rest have to shut up? Just so you know, I recommended this thread as well. I'm sure a lot of people who feel the way I do did as well. I also kicked the thread a few dozen times. I want as many people to see the OP's impotent, hateful hit and running as possible.

[JVS]

162. Or we can take a page from some people's book and respond to threads we don't like by starting...

several threads of our own to re-direct discussion to our own liking.

[BainsBane]

179. If you have a point

Why not? That would, however, require being able to articulate a point.

Or you could play the telephone game that folks did with the door remarks and invent an entire meme and falsely attribute it to "radical feminists." That's a tried and true method.

[BainsBane]

168. okay, so what is ignorant about the image above?

I hear many of those statements all the time. You wouldn't be a might bit touchy because you happen to use some of them yourself?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

154. Thanks for the reminder

But as you've already seen, I went another route--the one that reminds the OP in the smallest of ways that she's detracting from the quality of the site with this repeated pattern. Do continue to give me pointers, though. I kind of new to all this, and I could use your unmatched posting expertise.

[BainsBane]

170. It would seem to me

that if you have an issue of substance you should articulate it rather than engaging in a personal attack. If you don't articulate why you see a problem, your post says nothing other than you don't like Seabeyond, which as far as I can see has no bearing on the discussion.

I and a good 42 other recommenders see a lot of truth in this OP. I hear some of those same excuses all the time. Perhaps you would do well to look over the card think about whether you find yourself saying any of the above excuses?

[sibelian]

140. We're doing our best!

It's so exhausting!

[Warren DeMontague]

117. Who knew Bingo could be so much fun?

Gee, and to think it used to be considered a game for doddering old people with nothing better to do than yell incoherently at the walls.

[CokeMachine]

120. Oh it's you again.

After the ass whoopin' you got I thought you may have noticed the world doesn't revolve around you.

It's your story, you are doing a great service to your cause. Maybe if you'd have actually responded in you flame thread I'd actually try to understand what your problem with men is. It's getting harder to believe you actually support your cause.

Happy Easter!!

[EOTE]

152. We're clearly dealing with an attention starved masochist here.

How else can you explain the infantile OPs seemingly solely designed to offend and stir up shit and then the utter refusal to respond to anything in her various threads. I would suggest trolls are at work here, but most of the trolls I know are somewhat literate.

[Warren DeMontague]

190. In other breaking new news, Kennedy shot, Normandy Beaches stormed, and Roman Empire has apparently

collapsed.

[Le Taz Hot]

123. Spot. On!

K & R

[liberal_at_heart]

124. I'm sorry seabeyond. We just see things differently. I still consider you a feminist, but I have to

disagree when you claim some aren't feminist enough because they don't fit your definition of feminism. I'm grateful to have you in the fight. We just fight in different ways.

[BainsBane]

128. What definition of feminism is contained in this OP?

The bingo card is a collection of common phrases used to discount feminists and charges of sexism.

[Puglover]

145. Trashed

[snooper2]

156. I'll take freedom of speech!!!! for $200

Alex, oh, I mean Seabeyond?

[quinnox]

163. seabeyond, I'm also trashing your thread, and I gotta say

it is becoming a habit lately. I don't know what has been up recently with your postings, but damn.

[2ndAmForComputers]

173. "recently?"

[treestar]

176. It is just a list of things right wing sexists say

Why all the personal attacks on the OP?

[LittleBlue]

184. Because blatant shit-stirring is obvious

People on this forum have brains.

[treestar]

185. How is it that?

It is true enough. Sexists say all those thing. I would think we'd all agree.

[chervilant]

230. And, apparently,

thin skins...

[arely staircase]

189. yes, it is brilliant

make a list of things you don't want people to say, declare them all (and admittedly some really are) to be sexist. then shut down debate by hollering B-3 or whatever!

of course i am being sarcastic about the brilliant part - given that it seems to have alienated and or/ammused more people than it impressed.

[treestar]

221. I don't see anyone saying "don't say those things"

Just that those are the things oft repeated by sexists.

[arely staircase]

235. no you are just labeled a sexist if you do

and like I said, some of them inarguably are sexist, but many are not. it is a clear attempt to chill debate - an ill conceived, poorly executed and totally and comically ineffective one. but that is what it is. consider me in the non-alienated, but amused camp.

[winter is coming]

191. It's a piece of ring-and-run flamebait that should have been locked as Meta sniping. n/t

[treestar]

222. What's so inflaming here?

Is it not true that sexists say these things.

[theKed]

194. How is this

still here, yet The Straight Story's entirely more thought-provoking thread locked so fast you might get whiplash?

[Go Vols]

202. I wonder the same.

[redqueen]

205. This is a funny picture about all discussions about sexism everywhere on the net.

Not a sniping piece of meta garbage meant to divide DU feminists.

Funny how certain parties are back at that game again, so soon.

[The Straight Story]

206. Well it is posted here now - so how about you address what I posted

Instead of trying to dismiss it as you say others do about things?

[theKed]

207. Snark pictures - yes

Words and discussion - no.

I think I've got it.

[redqueen]

208. Read the part about "whining about DU" again.

You still seem to be failing to understand what that means.

You do know that meta being gone doesn't mean meta threads are now allowed in GD, right?

[theKed]

210. Are you seriously of the opinion that

THIS is NOT whining about DU? ...Seriously?

[The Straight Story]

213. Not whining about DU, but about some posters here, like folks in HOF do

both here and their.

Sucks when people give back what is handed out now doesn't it?

There is a contingent here who keeps trying to tell the people of DU we suck and don't care about the rights of women.

They did it a lot in Meta and try to couch it here coyly in GD with threads such as this one.

You should be all for this discussion - after all it is the people here on DU that seem to be the problem. We just don't care enough or don't want to talk enough about the issues the way others do.

[Warren DeMontague]

227. The funniest was seeing some of meta's biggest "customers" go on and on about a "happy dance" when

it disappeared. Blithely oblivious to the ironic fact that they were likely a big chunk of the iceberg that sunk the ship in the first place.

As, no doubt, was I. But I fully admit I wallowed in that stink-swamp. I thought airing this shit out was better than trying to pretend it didn't exist. I can see why admin got rid of it, but I'm not so disinenuous as to run around DU going "yay yippee thank god it's gone" while simultaneously starting endless threads trying to recreate it in GD.

But you're right. For some people, the main function of showing up seems to be

1) an endless effort to "educate" the rest of the place, followed by --->
2) surprise that people resent being continually told, like errant preschoolers, that they need education and correction... and finally --->
3) that resentment is used as further "evidence" of the widespread "problem" which must be, of course, "educated and corrected". ----> 1)


It's a beautiful, self-perpetuating cycle, and I'm fairly well convinced that it's NEVER going away, no matter what anyone does or doesn't do.

[sibelian]

228. Perfect description of the problem.

It's not discussion. It's a LOOP.

[Gormy Cuss]

211. Because TSS's OP was clearly Meta, not GD.

Meta's closed so there's no place for it now. GD hosts can only judge an OP on whether it fits the SOP and their judgment was it did not.

[The Straight Story]

214. True enough, but it stands here in this thread as I reposted it here

So we can have meta discussions within threads if we start a thread about something else.

I would argue this very thread itself is a meta discussion, and I am sure the OP meant it to be so, but didn't say it outright.

[Gormy Cuss]

217. And that means that now your post is/was only subject to jury review, like any other in-thread post.

As to whether this OP was meant to be Meta, there's no direct evidence of that and hosts can not lock it based on what someone thinks it's about.

[theKed]

218. And yet this, a clearly Meta thread,

remains. And I ask...why?

[Gormy Cuss]

220. Because juries aren't hiding enough posts

and no one from admin has seen fit to kill it.
Hosts can't act based on anything other than the OP.

[chervilant]

231. Let's have a little Socratic detour, shall we?

(Before we begin, let's try to avoid sarcasm and derision, please.)

1) Has anyone posting herein above seen the remarks on seabeyond's faux bingo card elsewhere on DU?

2) Has anyone posting herein made any of these remarks?

3) Do you think these remarks are sexist?

4) Do you think any of the remarks are misogynistic?

5) Do you think ANY DUers are sexist?

6) Do you think any DUers are misogynists?

7) Do you think anyone can post a derisive response to this OP, then label it (or its author) "shit-stirring"?

8) Has it occurred to anyone the irony inherent in whining, criticizing, deriding or belittling this OP?

9) Do you think seabeyond posted this OP to encourage DUers to recognize some of the sexist remarks made on other threads these past few weeks?

10) If seabeyond is such a heinous, hateful, and disrespectful DUer, why hasn't she been TSed?

(Just fyi, good post, seabeyond! 222 responses, and counting! The anger and defensiveness do not diminish your success in motivating ongoing discussions about sexism and misogyny! I hope that we will see less of both among our DU brethren!)

[snooper2]

232. We'll clean up this dongle of a message board yet!

[Katashi_itto]

233. Great yet another thread by the OP. Her title says it all: " lets play" It's not a cause for her.

It's all a nasty game to the OP. Look at any of the OP's past posts. There is a pattern here.

[Odin2005]

236. Can I steal this? the MRA idiots on Reddit need to see this.