Another rhetorical OP questioning bigotry when it's staring you right in the face

[omega minimo]

or jabbing you in the eyeballs, on your first look of the day at the main title page of General Discussion.

After however many DU years, it still shocks and distracts and ultimately, it's a real heartbreaker, as well as a dealbreaker.

DU Rules are very clear:

"Do not post messages that are bigoted against (or grossly insensitive toward) any person or group of people based on their race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion, lack of religion, disability, physical characteristics, or region of residence."

This applies to many areas of bigotry and the one most noticable on the board lately is the issue of race. Even given the wide range of experience and attitudes here, there are far too many self stlyled liberals and progressives and Democrats who don't understand basic concepts of respect.

Sometimes it's just none of your business to disagree with a common form of decency and respect toward others, even if it doesn't suit YOU.

This applies also to privacy and to women's bodies, women's rights and reproductive health.

And because women's bodies used to be -- and still are in some places and in various ways -- the property of man, with no rights;
Because women's bodies are used to sell products and used as products;
Because women's equal work is not considered worth equal men's pay for the same work;
Because religious bigots and political strategerists use women's bodies and lives as a battleground;
Because our own party does not stand strong for women's health/privacy and women's rights over their own bodies;

Because of all these things, the clock has been turned back on the progress of previous areas, on the process of simply respecting others who are different than you, whose concerns may (or may not) be different than yours, whose culture and preferences you may not understand or even agree with...

It's none of your business. It's none of your business unless and until it is. If you want to be part of the solution and not part of the problem, you will show some BASIC RESPECT. QUIT thinking that acting like the macho blowhards on the Right is going to get you -- or your concerns -- anything.

... we strongly advise that our members exercise a little common decency, rather than trying to parse the message board rules to figure out what type of antisocial behavior is not forbidden.

[noiretextatique]

1. happy to be the first k&r

as far as i am concerned, terms like "crying racism" and "playing the race card" are as offense (if not more so) than racial slurs. funny how some so-called "liberals" don't mind using that kind of rw pc language.

[Me.]

2. Don't Know What Set You Off

But I agree with what you've said

[omega minimo]

3. What "set me off": being hit first look at the title page with proof that females are "fair game"

that females are "fair game" for insults and bigotry based on their gender, which DU Rules prohibit.

That females aren't supposed to object.

That females are supposed to accept that because some females don't find certain things personally objectionable, that should serve as an endorsement of bigoted behavior.

That females have to explain over and over and over and not be heard or respected.

That females are invisible, retreat, back away, give up, as do many of DU's people of color and other subgroups.

[Me.]

4. I'm Surprised The Mods Didn't Step In

[omega minimo]

5. That's the heartbreak.

[bliss_eternal]

12. IF

...something is deemed as, "productive discussion" it seems at times they won't. the goal and/or hope being, that someone will "learn something."



usually the only thing learned, is how content some are to remain ensconced in their own ignorance. and how fruitless efforts at "teaching" others is, in such an environment. people have to sincerely want to be "enlightened."

most here, are already convinced of their superior knowledge..........of everything. they aren't here to learn. they're merely here to share the wealth of all the education they've obtained as, "armchair, cyber philsophers."

[omega minimo]

14. What they "learn" is

they can get away with it.

[bliss_eternal]

18. lol.

exactly.

[noiretextatique]

6. i knew this would sink like a rock

[omega minimo]

17. Hate speech trickles down too.

Thanks for your comments.

[emilyg]

7. k/r

[Number23]

8. Kicking. Rec'ing and wishing that this was required reading for some members of this

"progressive" community. Personally, I think the behavior I've seen lately (particularly the anti-Christian, anti-South etc. crap) should have resulted in some public bannings.

You've done yourself proud, Omega. Again!

[omega minimo]

15. Thank you dear Number 23.35734

So many -- and they're here tonight -- of these "Gee whiz" questions.... Gee, if I cross the street when I see a black person do they take it personally?

Gee, when I take a politician's name and use gender slurs because and only because she's a woman -- and doing the equivalent to a male wouldn't be possible, even if I tried, which I wouldn't -- is it okay because she's a Right Wing cartoon character and not a person, so I can insult and demean the entire gender she belongs to with impunity, flaunting DU Rules and patronizing or attacking those who call me on it?

Oh WAIT. I'm not even going to ASK rhetorically and bat my digital eyelashes gee whillikers, cuz I looked up in the dicktionary and it said what I wanted it to say about what I was going to say anyway.

Golly gee.

Anti Christian, anti South, anti common sense, anti common courtesy, anti "PC."

And the "Is it racism?" stuff about our President? Come on. There comes a point, where it's undeniable. I've been one who hesitates to think that's all there is to it --

(and been pained by posts from some here, including you and Frenchie Cat, who really call it that, pained for your sake, that it appears that way.....)

-- aware that there are many factors of opinion on this president and administration...... then, the recent insanity of the MegaDittoheads, the undeniably racist sloganeering and epithets (as much as I avoid the hate media, I learn about it online) and then something "innocuous" happened.

I was at a cafe patio, seated next to two white women in their 60-70's. They were talking about art and travel, teaching. One was beginning art instruction at the nearby community college. They were nice, in the way that women that age were conventionally trained to be. That is not a knock or endorsement, it's a description.

The teacher mentions the beginning of classes, logistics, crowding, chairs, assistants: "and a young black woman who comes in to help."

?

It's not a knock or an endorsement, either, but WHY is it worth mentioning? For no reason whatsoever. It was a description. But why?

It struck me as the kind of "innocuous" or commonplace, unexamined racism that is part of white privilege. The person didn't mean it as a slight or anything at all. Yet it is a way to identify and separate The Other, in unconscious and unnecessary terms.

That was what really clinched the Obama question for me. I grew up in diverse cities and schools -- I don't look at Obama and think 'BLACK PRESIDENT!!!!!!!' Maybe Martin's "content of their character" mantra is what I grew up with, with his children (and one reason OM can be such a tough ass on these matters..........)

It clinched it. I don't think all of any assorted criticisms regarding the O administration are racist or race based. However, there is much more of predominance of that particular, insidious detraction and distraction involved than I wanted to believe.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

9. Hit alert.

If you hit alert and the mods don't delete it, there's a pretty good chance you're wrong.

[Raineyb]

10. I would not go so far as to say that. I'll leave it at that. n/t

[omega minimo]

16. I can't read the comment. I'll leave it at that.

[bliss_eternal]

11. not necessarily...

...it could mean it was an oversight on the part of the mods.
it could mean the mods on duty "that moment" didn't deem it necessary. but mods at a later time may see the post in a different light (and delete it).

some have had things deleted successfully, after taking it to an admins. (when it was previously overlooked by the mods).

[Karenina]

26. I hardly think so...

[FrenchieCat]

13. K & R

[BlooInBloo]

19. I have no idea what you're talking about, but just saw "7 Most Inappropriate Products For Children"

many of which relate to "women's social role".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/14/the-7-most-ina...

Some have made their way to DU, but not all.

Absolutely astonishing that these were able to get through all the mangerial layers and end up in stores.

[omega minimo]

20. Excuse me, it's time for my warm salt water gargle and nasal rinse. I'll be back.

[omega minimo]

28. better now

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[omega minimo]

27. you just said

in a thread on racism, what I said in this OP.

[knixphan]

21. K&R

[NOLALady]

22. K and R

[Brewman_Jax]

23. K&R

[ismnotwasm]

24. I was just thinking on something like this

Not about DU specifically but how woman are perceived generally. This morning, My husband just told me a story about a man he used to know on the CB around 25 years ago. He said "That guy would leave the mike open you could hear him beat his wife in the background" I said "no-one did anything?" This led to an interesting conversation and an 'aha' moment for my husband, who hated the guy, but didn't 'do anything' either.


Anyway we started talking, and my husband made the comment that he thinks that behavior is not as common these days. I told him that you can visit any army base and learn about wives getting beat on a regular basis. We talked just a bit, about the fight women have had to do for basic human rights, like the right not to get the shit beat out of you.

Sitting from a place of ignorance and privilege is no excuse for staying ignorant, and letting privilege dictate behavior.

[omega minimo]

25. Well put, ismnotwasm

"Sitting from a place of ignorance and privilege is no excuse for staying ignorant, and letting privilege dictate behavior."

[omega minimo]

29. yet another