HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » BainsBane » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 23 Next »

BainsBane

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Member since: Sat Sep 15, 2012, 01:49 PM
Number of posts: 29,235

Journal Archives

Here's the deal

Complaining about it in the case of one person and supporting it when the disclosure is against someone he happens to dislike is hypocritical. Opiate69 did what HassenbinSober did, only he searched back months before his term began for no reason other than to stick it to someone he doesn't like, me, and Pintobean supported that because for him this board exists only to cultivate enmity with strangers. No, it does not specifically violate the rules, but as Skinner said, it prompts MIRT members to lose trust in one another. Why should Hassen bin Sober be pilloried for the same thing Opiate did without consequence? If it's bad in one case, it's bad in both. If it's okay in one case, it's okay in both. That Pintobean takes two different positions shows depending on who is dong the disclosing and who is the target shows exactly what he is.

Ten things to End Rape Culture": How to change the status quo

Rape culture exists because we don't believe it does. From tacit acceptance of misogyny in everything from casual conversations with our peers to the media we consume, we accept the degradation of women and posit uncontrollable hyper-sexuality of men as the norm. But rape is endemic to our culture because there's no widely accepted cultural definition of what it actually is. As Nation contributor and co-editor of the anthology Yes Means Yes Jessica Valenti explains, “Rape is a standard result of a culture mired in misogyny, but for whatever reason—denial, self-preservation, sexism—Americans bend over backwards to make excuses for male violence.” But recent headline-grabbing instances of sexual assault, from Steubenville, Ohio, to Delhi, India, are prodding Americans to become self-aware about the role we play in propagating a culture that not only allows but justifies sexual violence against women. Activists Eesha Pandit, Jaclyn Friedman, filmmaker Nuala Cabral and The Nation’s Valenti believe that we can end rape culture. They’ve suggested the following "Ten Things" to end our collective tolerance for violence against women and create an environment that empowers both men and women to change the status quo.

1. Name the real problems: Violent masculinity and victim-blaming. These are the cornerstones of rape culture and they go hand in hand. When an instance of sexual assault makes the news and the first questions the media asks are about the victim’s sobriety, or clothes, or sexuality, we should all be prepared to pivot to ask, instead, what messages the perpetrators received over their lifetime about rape and about “being a man.” Here’s a tip: the right question is not, “What was she doing/wearing/saying when she was raped?” The right question is, “What made him think this is acceptable?” Sexual violence is a pervasive problem that cannot be solved by analyzing an individual situation. Learn 50 key facts about domestic violence. Here’s one: the likelihood that a woman will die a violent death increases 270% once a gun is present in the home Remember, a violent act is not a tragic event done by an individual or a group of crazies. Violence functions in society as" a means of asserting and securing power." . . .

3. Get enthusiastic about enthusiastic consent. Rape culture relies on our collective inclination to blame the victim and find excuses for the rapist. Enthusiastic consent -- the idea that we're all responsible to make sure that our partners are actively into whatever's going down between us sexually -- takes a lot of those excuses away. Rather than looking for a “no,” make sure there’s an active “yes.” If you adopt enthusiastic consent yourself, and then teach it to those around you, it can soon become a community value. Then, if someone is raped, the question won't be, well, what was she doing there, or did she really say no clearly enough? It will be: what did you do to make sure she was really into it? Check out this Tumblr page on enthusiastic consent. . . .

5. Get media literate. Media, like everything else we consume, is a product; someone imagined, created and implemented it. Ask the right questions about who creates media that profits off the objectification of women, especially women of color. Feed your mind and heart with media that portrays women as full human beings with the right to bodily autonomy. Go to FAAN Mail to learn how to "Talk Back" to media creators and browse their Facebook page for alternative artists. You'll not only be healthier yourself, but you'll be simultaneously calling into being a media ecosystem that will be healthier for everyone.

http://www.thenation.com/article/172643/ten-things-end-rape-culture

This is rape culture

and it is very much alive in America and throughout the world.



Funny, you took a completely different position here

MIRT privacy was violated to go after someone you didn't like.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4602340
Though the post he reproduced had nothing to do with an ATA post and you made a point of justifying Opiate69's use of an old thread he hunted up from months before his own MIRT term began.

And the irony of ironies:
95. The hypocrisy is typical.

Here's a hof thread about the sad they had for xulamaude being PPRed.

Now BB's mocking you in hof, which is also typical.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4608796

Once again, your clearly contradictory positions have nothing to do with principal but instead is all about petty personal vendettas and which complete stranger on the internet you decide to dislike.

It truly is remarkable that you can spend so much time reading HOF yet understand none of it.

Nathan the happy dog thinks Pharrell was robbed at the Oscars

Brazilian Carnival

(I posted this in response to another thread but decided to develop it a bit further for an OP)

Someone asked whether carnival in Rio was just an opportunity to objectify women. I answered no, that is not its purpose or primary function.

It is a period in which people relinquish the restraints of daily life to dance, party, and sometimes do what they might not other times of the year. Some have described it, along with soccer, as a sort of opiate for the masses. You should know that the images you see of carnaval in Rio are all from the Sambadromo, a stadium that one must pay to enter. It is a competition by the various samba schools for who does the best presentation. It's a complex social phenomenon that has been written about in a number of books and articles. The queen of carnval is usually a woman of mixed race, what Brazilians call a mulata. The celebration of the mulata during Carnaval belies the ongoing racism (denied by most Brazilians) that elevates whiteness the rest of the year, as evident in telenovelas and magazines where white women represent beauty.

However, carnaval de rua (of the street) is different. That is how most cariocas (residents of Rio) experience carnival. People don't wear the expensive costumes and simply go out on the street to dance, drink, and have a good time.

I have never spent carnival in Rio, but I have in Salvador. There carnival is entirely street. Bands move through the main avenues and people listen and dance free to charge. One can pay some money (nothing like the cost of Rio carnival) to dance within a carnaval bloco (like Olodum, Ile Aye, Ara Ketu, Banda Eva, etc.) but you can enjoy carnival every bit as much if not more without paying.

The other thing to understand is that Brazil is far more sexually open that the US, and women are more empowered in many ways. Certainly objectification exists, but it's different. Women who dress in ways we might consider provocative in the US are not viewed negatively as they are here. Nor is there the kind of blame attached to women who have sex that there is here, at least in urban areas. I expect rural areas are far more traditional.

Videos from carnival in Salvador.

This is from an official tourism page. While it gives a good sense of what street carnival is like, it focuses on more white faces that one would typically see. Salvador da Bahia is a city where the great majority of the population are African in ancestral origin, as the city was the economic center of sugar production and slavery in the early period of Portuguese colonial rule.



This is a link to a YouTube channel with videos of this year's carnival, from this Sunday.

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLjtuvQ17A2DO3Lh-wqIGh853XCSXTkZiQ

Olodum, probably the best know of the Bahian blocos, from carnival 2012.



An interesting thing to observe is that recent videos show that women are now performing in Olodum, which was not the case when I was there in the 90s.

Now, one could certainly argue that the way Brazilian carnival is presented to foreign audiences objectifies women, but that is not the same as saying that is the purpose of carnival itself.

Once again we are back to the crime of besmirching the name of your favorite troll




(Thanks to the superior intellect of Opiate69 for correctly the spelling of a mere mortal.)

New Poutrage: da Bear opens da doors

&feature=player_detailpage


Heart attack ensues:

AHHHHHH, save mankind from the matriarchy of doors!




Stolen from RBStevens


"A small group" is responsible for all that ails DU

So we are told. Reactionary men could happily live in a world where no one ever suggested to them that they should treat woman as human beings rather than mere objects of lust of rage, if only for a few radical fringe feminists on DU. How many times have we heard everything here is the fault of a "small fringe group"? The comment reveals profound self-delusion. They want to ignore key issues about equality and inclusivity to make it all about a few feminists on this site. Only they are railing against practices that have been standard in every public place for decades in this country. They act like they never before heard there was anything objectionable about posting pictures of bikini babes in public places. They act like they never heard about the concept of a hostile environment before it was raised here recently. They deceive themselves by insisting that only a few loud-mouthed feminists care about such issues, even while posting in a thread with over 177 Duers expressing disapproval of the hostile environment engendered by such pics. They do so knowing that Skinner locked one such thread and instructed the GD hosts to allow no others. Yet it's all because of HOF members, despite the fact that they couldn't get away with any of that stuff in any public space anywhere in this country and haven't been able to for decades.

So what's going on here? Why do they so resent progress? Why do they refuse to consider the concerns of anyone but themselves? Why to they respond cruely to someone who shares a hearbreaking story of repeated rape from a very young age? Why do they systematically refuse to consider the testimony of victims of child abuse, legal rulings and evidence, and repeat the lies generated by the publicity machine of a wealthy, accused pedophile? Why is it they insist on telling people of color they are just too touchy when they point out the obvious--that stereotypical meals of fried chicken and watermelon are purposefully racist and do not "honor" African American culture. To deny the voices of feminists and people of color in articulating what they find offensive represents a clear determination that some see those groups of Americans as unworthy of basic respect or the same rights afforded to white men.

The "small group" didn't post the T and A pics. A small group didn't post the callout threads and posts in GD, all placed for the explicit purpose of creating drama and belittling the views and lives of those they see as entirely without value. One member of the small group did post Dylan Farrow's testimony, and that was an outrage. To consider the views of a woman was an anathema and triggered a meltdown by one particularly angry member. Many others simply refused to read her testimony or the court record showing Woody Allen's entire story was a lie because they didn't want facts to get in the way of their determination to defend an accused pedophile, who's victim was only a girl, hardly anyone who mattered. A member here who expressed a heartfelt story of her own assault was called a liar, insulted and ridiculed, even though what she described happens to millions of girls and boys across our nation. What this small group does is raise the viewpoints of human beings whose lives some consider entirely insignificant.

The fact is we are dealing with some very angry people who hate progress more than anything else. They despise the fact that they are expected to treat others as human, that they can't insult women as b and cs at will (even though they do and juries let them get away with it). Yet the fact that someone might object to their determination to treat women as subhuman is to them an outrage. We see an increase in use of racial slurs, and now we see them attacking LGBT members as loud-mouthed "crusaders" who would be better off keeping their mouths shut. To them, the only ones entitled to speak are themselves and those who support them. Anyone who questions their privilege and suggests that equality does matter is to be attacked and deligitimated at all costs. They personalize the issues to make it about a few HOF members, a few uppity African Americans, and a few LGBT "crusaders" because they won't examine what they are really trying to establish: white, heterosexual male supremacy. They seek to establish in a little corner of the internet something that exists no where offline in the USA. They do so precisely because they so despise the progress of the past half century and they especially resent members of subaltern groups who insist that we too are full citizens entitled to all the same rights, opportunities, and respect that straight, white men enjoy. All of us they so resent on DU could disappear tonight and their lives would not improve in the slightest. They will still live in a society that seeks to expand rather than retract civil rights. They will still live in a world where they have to compete based on merit, education and experience, rather than mere accident of birth. Yet they make it all about a "small group" because they refuse to confront the issues of equality and inclusivity that they are so determined to fight against.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 23 Next »