History of the use of the word "whore" on DU

[kath]

For quite some time, the word “whore” has been used in a NON-SEXUAL context (i.e., NOT criticizing someone’s sex life - which is a whole other kettle of fish) to describe A)politicians of all genders, B)media personalities of all genders, and C)people who seek the limelight (“attention whores”) of all genders. When applied to politicians the CONTEXT (which matters) is usually referring to politicians seeking money from corporations and banksters.

It gets used quite frequently here on DU, in those non-sexual CONTEXTS, against the above-named groups of people.

To illustrate, entering the word "whore" in the DU "site search" function reveals these, just in the first 7 pages of the search:
https://www.google.com/search?q=Whore&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com&gws_rd=ssl#q=Whore+site:democraticunderground.com&start=0


Rush Limbaugh...Fully Owned Whore of Big Business?

My My Wolf the Media Whore Blitzer

Obama the vote-whore with "ex-gay" at his side


Michelle Malkin: I am not a (paid) whore (this is the thread title. here are some posts in the thread:
20. It is a total waste.
I will never forgive this whore and her pimps for sending my only child to die.
10. well yes but
I think the difference is are they paid specifically to whore for an issue; I agree it is a very fine line since regardless, she does earn her pay being a GOP whore. There is no way these whores can believe half the drivel they write.
7. Well maybe she's not getting paid by the Bushies to whore for them
but she still makes a good living from it.


Prescott Bush was a Nazi-Whore, but his father Samuel was Worse

Decline to Blog for Free, Get Called a Whore

Listening to Dreier whore for BUSHCO, when will he be OUTED?

Paula Zahn - Huge Whore - Interviewing Jane Fonda - Now

Tucker Carlson is a whore. Plus post in this thread: 6. Everyone with more than one brain cell knows he's a whore. nt

KOCH-WHORE Scott Walker INSULTS Bernie Sanders By Suggesting He Isn’t A Real Presidential Candidate

My cat is a fucking attention whore

Proven Climate Whore Willie Soon: "Too Much Ice Is Really Bad For Polar Bears"

Pictures of Judy Woodruff long before she was a fascist Bush whore????

Who is the biggest whore among U.S corporations?

Mike Malloy - Wayne LaPierre Is A Whore

Jackie "Whore" Chan Gets Professional Spirit Award

A list of Famous Attention Whores

Media Whore Diane Sawyer Casts Stones at Madonna

True or False: Cats are the whores of the pet world

Rick Perry: The Best Little Whore In Texas (quoting the title of a Rolling Stone article)

I've Become a Lexis-Nexis Points Whore

Howard Kurtz, Media WHORE

Aasif Mandvi of "The Daily Show" hilariously demolishes Foxbot Koch whore re: Obamacare
Rep. Grayson calls lobbyist "K Street Whore" on radio

TYT: "The Best Little Whore House on Wall Street"

Is the Whore Media reporting about Al Gore being cleared of sexual assault?

Michael Bloomberg, bankster whore

Pataki is a Whore ( no offense to sex industry workers intended)
Then again, what modern day Republican isn't a whore?

Breaux-Lott Leadership Group. PERFECT. A Dem whore and a Puke whore teaming up to lobby.

Giuliani. Whore.

*************************************

The above gives a DU history of the usage of "whore". Going forward into the future: Is “whore” a word that should be forever banned from DU, even when used in a non-sexual CONTEXT about the 3 above-named groups of people, as discussed above? Should a special exception be carved out, such that the word can be used against everyone in those 3 groups (again, **NOT** in a manner critical of their sex lives) *EXCEPT for female Democratic politicians*?


(note to group Hosts – I posted this here, desiring a broad, general DU discussion about the use of this word at DU, not to get into crap going on in other forums (and hoping that others can avoid doing so))

[JoePhilly]

1. If you call a female democratic presidential candidate ...

... a "whore" on this site, your post should be hidden 7-0, and your account flagged for review.

When something like that survives a DU Jury, it suggests that this site has become a fucking joke.

So much for the history lesson.

[DURHAM D]

2. This ...

[greatauntoftriplets]

3. Thank you.

[mcar]

5. Well said

[stevenleser]

7. Is that what this OP is really about? Talk about manipulative.

Sad.

[JoePhilly]

10. Yup ... apparently it's ok to call Hillary ...

... a "whore".

[George II]

34. Indeed - the post in question (from this morning) had no modifying adjective....

....it just came out and said she was a whore bought by Wall Street.

Most of the examples above are along the lines of "attention whore" and "media whore".

[CajunBlazer]

196. I don't think that it is good idea to call Democratic candidate....

derogatory names, whether those names have a sexual connotations or not. Regardless of which of the Democratic candidates wins, he/she will be a lot better choice than any one of the current crowd Republicans candidates. Long gone are the days when the Republican Party presented viable alternatives.

So unless you plan to vote for a Republican come November of 2016, it is not wise to try to belittle the person who might be your ultimate choice for President. On the other hand, if you intend to sit the election out if your choice for the Democratic nominee doesn't win the nomination, it doesn't matter what you think because you would not be bright enough to vote in your selfish self interest.

[Gormy Cuss]

9. Yup. n/t

[Warpy]

11. Context is everything.

If there is no context, yeah, it needs to go because it's purely a sexual slur and has no place on any sort of reasonable discussion board.

However, if it's used in the context of selling one's heart and soul out to a corporate or plutocratic bidder, that is an appropriate non sexual, non pejorative use of the word, which in that context conveys the worst sort of sell out. For instance, I'd have no problem with anyone who said Walker was whoring himself for the Koch brothers.

That's the problem when you start getting into colloquial English, words you might consider bad also have uses that convey some very precise meaning that only uncomfortable language will do.

[JoePhilly]

13. You want "context"??

The attacks on Hillary have been getting nastier every day.

The post in question basically pulled a "Southern Strategy" move, and it's fucking obvious.

They get to call Hillary a "whore", and then claim they don't mean "that kind of whore".

Fuck context.

[Warpy]

20. If you can't stand the heat

stay out of GD-P. I do. Just realize that name calling goes all the different ways there.

Do learn to understand context.

[JoePhilly]

27. Why, I'm not afraid of clowns who post

that kind of shit.

Not am I afraid of their defenders.

Nor will I stop calling them out any time I want.

Maybe you should leave if that bothers you.

[Gormy Cuss]

43. Like the contextual difference of calling a woman a whore and calling a man or institution one.

W was called a chimp frequently when he was in the White House but referring to the current residents that way should not be tolerated, especially here. DU allegedly has community standards after all.

[boston bean]

49. No matter what word comes before or after the verb - whore

it still is referring to someone acting like one.

Which provides all the context that is needed.

As the word does mean something. And it's been used as a derogatory sexist slur for a long time.

[Gormy Cuss]

161. It has a clearly nonsexual meaning in one usage now, namely doing anything for money.

However, when it's used without qualifier to describe a woman it's a reasonable to assume that the usage was sexist, demeaning language.

eta: and calling a female candidate a whore reflexively is a pretty obvious example of that.

[boston bean]

162. I am going to disagree with that.

Because when the word whore is used, the meaning is regarding a woman, it is not mean for men.

Also, the word whore, entails more than just doing something for money. It's synonymous with slut and is and describes a woman who would have sex with anyone, whether they get paid or not.

[gollygee]

164. Every use relies on comparison to the dictionary meaning of the word

That's how metaphors work. When my teenager tells me that her school is a prison, it is a comparison to prison. The meaning of the word "prison" is not irrelevant. "Whore" is a misogynist slur. Calling someone that, including using it in a comparative way, is still a misogynist slur. If we used a racist or homophobic slur as a metaphor, would you see that?

[Gormy Cuss]

174. But it's not a metaphorical use, it's an accepted meaning of the term.

Sure, the principal meaning is the misogynistic one but a separate meaning for venal behavior also exists. Calling someone an attention whore is a venal connotation. Calling someone a whore without qualification is using the sexual sense and in that sense it's calling someone the misogynistic slur. Did the venal meaning evolve from a metaphor? Undoubtedly.

I didn't say that I'm a fan of using the term in the venal sense -- hardly. However, this usage is a meaning of the term.


As for racist or homophobic terms, I can't think of one where this same transition has taken place, can you?

[gollygee]

176. No, it is a metaphor

The term is a sexist slur for a female sex worker, and sometimes just to women in general. But the word is used in this case and in all cases to compare people to female sex workers. They're selling themselves. They're "giving it up" for money. It's not a different meaning. It's a metaphor.

[Gormy Cuss]

179. When it's become one of the accepted meanings of the word it's no longer just metaphorical.

Also, check the etymology of the word and transition in usage. The original sense was akin to sex outside of the bounds of marriage (adultery, premarital sex, and prostitution.) It then became a more derogatory synonym for harlot.

Its use as a term for male prostitutes is also surprisingly old, from at least the 17th century. I haven't found citations on when the venal sense became part of the meaning but I suspect it's 20th century.


But all that said, when a woman is called a whore today, it may mean the sexual or the venal sense and without qualification the former is the assumption. When a man is called a whore, the assumption is that it's meant in the venal sense. Thus there are strong misogynistic aspects still at play here with the term and why it's problematic to use it by itself when describing a woman.

[gollygee]

180. It is used that way as a metaphor

It's an often used that way, but it's still a metaphor and it still only works based on comparison to the dictionary meaning. It's the same as with "rape." People use that as a metaphor in the exact same way, and people understand the metaphor, but it's still a metaphor. Only one thing is literally rape. And only one thing is literally a whore - it is a slur for a sex worker.

[kiva]

195. This is exactly it.

Thanks for verbalizing the issue this way, I think it's a good comparison.

[MADem]

69. Unless the woman is in the sex industry, calling a woman a WHORE is sexist hate speech.

There's no defense for it. It doesn't meet MY "community standards" and I'm not the only one.

Do learn to understand context, indeed--calling a woman a whore never ends well.

Pro Tip: Don't do it. In GD-P, or anywhere.

[melman]

139. So

it's okay to call sex workers whores? Because you say so?

[MADem]

141. No, it isn't "OK" but it stands up to scrutiny as a descriptor, insulting as it might be.

Playing the "because you say so" game doesn't work with me.

[jwirr]

47. "They" I read the post and looked to see if I recognized the name. Did not. But what I did see was

that they poster had 160 posts. Who is "they"? Looks like a troll to me.

[kath]

50. These should be discussed over in GD-P - don't bring it here as Meta.

Let's discuss whether the word should be entirely banned, context-free.

[DURHAM D]

57. To my knowledge no one has suggested banning the word.

This is just your clever little way, as a BS supporter, of supporting the poster who called Hillary a whore.

[JoePhilly]

102. No no ... please feel free to use that word as much as makes you happy ...

... anytime.

Then we can discuss why only blacks can use the n-word and why that's not fair.

After all, this is just another variation of the Southern Strategy.

[MADem]

130. Meta prohibitions only apply to the thread - starting post. We can get as Meta as we wanna be

in the body of the thread--and you can't stop that. People will discuss what they want to discuss.

One could say that dragging a bunch of ancient, out of context threads from the DU archives into a thread starting post as an attempt to justify the rather sleazy use of the word "whore" directed at a female presidential candidate is the ULTIMATE "disruptive META," -- as can be seen based on some of the push-back you are getting here WRT this thread.

[kath]

25. Thank you Warpy.

Are people incapable of reading the OP, with all its examples of the usage of "whore" here? I know reading comprehension can be really poor here, but still...

[Warpy]

33. We have word jumpers and outrage trolls who alert on every word they don't like

irrespective of context, and they don't like a whole lot of words that are in daily usage.

I put them on ignore when I spot them, that helps.

However, if they force the site to get much prissier and more sterile, I'm out of here.

[JoePhilly]

89. Can't take the heat?

Can't recall where I heard that.

[boston bean]

35. At the root of it they still all mean the same thing.

1.

a woman who engages in promiscuous sexual intercourse, usually for money; prostitute; harlot; strumpet.

verb (used without object), whored, whoring.


2.

to act as a whore.


3.

to consort with whores.


verb (used with object), whored, whoring.


4.

Obsolete. to make a whore of; corrupt; debauch

That is what the word whore means.


The words meaning does not change because another word is written before or after it.

Pay specific attention to # 2 above.

[ismnotwasm]

36. Context?

What is the historical context of the word "whore"? Or does context only matter when it's convenient?

[JoePhilly]

38. I read fine.

The context is a democratic site where the attacks on a female democratic candidate have gotten progressively nastier and more personal.

Calling Hillary a "whore" and then claiming you did not mean "that kind of whore" is no different than any GOP use of the Southern Strategy.

It's a way to say something and then act surprised when challenged.

It's a bad sign for DU if that's the new normal.

[gollygee]

39. It isn't an issue of reading comprehension

One of the most annoying distraction techniques is pretending like you think people don't understand you when they don't agree with you.

[m-lekktor]

115. people always do that here...take a metaphor literally

and feign extreme outrage over the intentional misinterpretation.

[Scuba]

148. ...

[pnwmom]

135. There is NO context in which it is acceptable to call a woman a whore.

None at all.

When the word is used against a woman, it contains an extra level of a slur that doesn't happen when it's used against a man.

For anyone who can't tell the difference, it's probably better just not to use the word at all.

[LanternWaste]

193. Rationalizing is everything. In this case, context is simply a pretty box we place our rationalizati

Rationalizing is everything. In this case, context is simply a pretty box we place our rationalizations in.

[gollygee]

22. 100% agree n/t

[still_one]

30. That you even have to explain that is unbelievable. It really isnt

Rocket science

Thanks

[ismnotwasm]

32. Exactly

[ancianita]

37. Agreed.

[KMOD]

40. Well said.

Thank you JoePhilly.

This should not be difficult to understand.

[Walk away]

46. Absolutely! But it reflects so poorly on Bernie supporters in general that I am suprised...

they haven't done something about it. As it is, I have now lost all respect for every single one of them.

[jwirr]

52. What are we to do? The poster had 160 posts and I for one do not remember seeing any of these

posts until this one. How do you know he/she is not a troll?

[Walk away]

72. I'm reading this thread of lame excuses by Bernie Supporters...

and it is actually nauseating. If I didn't belong to DU I would have been benignly indifferent to Bernie Sanders but now when I see his logo I assume it's being used by a rude and obnoxious person. You must be so proud of all your friends that are busy making excuses for a likely troll who called the front runner of the Democratic presidential race a Whore!

[DURHAM D]

83. I totally agree with you.

Plus, I love Westies. I didn't know that there is a Westies for Hillary club. That is so cool.

[Walk away]

98. Henry was a rescued Cairn Terrier but I always thought he had Westie in there too.....

I have 3 other adopted dogs but Henry was something really special. He passed away in September. Take a look and see what a great dog he was and why he'll always be in my heart ...

[MADem]

131. Henry was brilliant. I see why you loved him. nt

[boston bean]

155. I watched the vid. He seemed precious!

sorry for your loss!

[ancianita]

204. I am a Bernie supporter who was among all those arguing against the word's use, which, by

the way, WASN'T meant as whore, but in the context of hedge funds associations, still had that double meaning implied. I just didn't want the word's use to open up the door to its use by Republican opponents in the rest of the election with the excuse, "Well the Democrats call her that, too!" -- that's all.

I wanted that word and other gender pejoratives' use suspended for the campaign season, not censored. so juries don't get tied up with the arguability of their meeting TOS.

Let's stop with condemning all Bernie supporters. The claim is just not true.

[Starry Messenger]

58. Wow, what did I miss?

I wish people wouldn't defend gendered slurs against women on DU. Bigotry is bigotry.

[DURHAM D]

73. Here you go...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251455100#post5

A new low point for DU.

But, the OP of this thread took it a step lower by pretending we just needed to have a "conversation" about the word instead of the fact that it was used against the leading Democratic contender. iows - as a BS supporter she was trying to provide cover to a BS supporter.

[Starry Messenger]

120. Ugh. :(

[Agschmid]

74. Yup.

[historylovr]

77. Agreed. That was just wrong.

[sufrommich]

80. + a million. nt

[shenmue]

82. Amen to JP

[quickesst]

90. absolutely right....

...but true talent is the ability to just skim the line, and giving it a feathers touch, but not crossing it. There are quite a few talented people here.🎬

[Recursion]

100. Thank you (nt)

[Blue_Tires]

104. FWIW, the jury system has been a hot mess for awhile now...

[Adrahil]

110. I was on that jury. I was shocked it wasn't hidden. nt

[Cha]

121. Well Done, JoePhilly!

[sheshe2]

122. Exactlly.

No spinning it. That is ugly!

[Tarheel_Dem]

140. ^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^

[irisblue]

146. x 10,000

[Surya Gayatri]

160. A-frigging-men!

[SidDithers]

165. Nailed it...

Sid

[msanthrope]

189. Nailed it in one. nt

[Kalidurga]

201. +infinity

we don't call allies names like that. Even if we don't back Hillary as a candidate she is still a political ally. She does progressive things even if somethings aren't perfect and even if I disagree on some major issues, she is still a Democrat she is still a liberal. I think that those posts should go straight to review if there is a way to do it without it having to go to jury first and they should be banned.

[ZX86]

4. Most interactions with whores have a "happy ending".

The go to word for a bad actor should be switched to "lobbyist".

[Ligyron]

6. No, censorship never accomplishes what it seeks to control

People tend to be even more curious when this is attempted, figure it out and share results widely, so it never works anyway.

With this particular word we just take note of who uses it, how often and in what context.

That usually proves more telling for the user and the one who tattles.

[gollygee]

24. Censorship involves the government making some kind of expression illegal

and no one is suggesting that it become illegal to say the word "whore." Cut the hyperbole.

[LittleBlue]

8. The word "whore" shouldn't be applied to prostitutes anymore

They're honest people trying to get by, not hurting anyone.

The real whores sit in the senate selling their souls, all the while we pretend they deserve respect for their treasonous actions.

[Thinkingabout]

12. Interesting, still not a good reason to show disrespect.

[gollygee]

29. The word is wrong whether used for sex workers or otherwise

It relies upon a particular misogynist meaning. Even using it metaphorically requires a comparison to the original meaning, which is still misogynist.

[demmiblue]

14. Unrec... just delete this meta shite. n/t

[kath]

15. Here's one that didn't show up in the first 7 pages of the search,

calling Sarah Palin a whore:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026154256#post18

18. Isn't every moment...

an awkward moment for the Whore of Babble On?

[gollygee]

21. That should have been hidden too

It's a misogynist word. And in this case it was used about a Democratic candidate, which on Democratic Underground is an additional reason not to use it.

[mercuryblues]

67. I checked

It was alerted on and allowed to stand. Maybe you would like to use another example.

[MADem]

132. That poster just got a post hidden today, surprise, surprise... nt

[George II]

16. I'm sure you're bringing this up now because of the furor over a post early this morning....

....that I alerted, but survived a jury 3-4.

This is the post:

"Wall St. knows that when they buy a whore, said whore usually stays bought."

In that context, it's repulsive and there is absolutely NO defense for it. Are you actually claiming that the post in question is okay, and using other uses of the word (mostly in reference to males!) to justify your defense?

As noted by one of the jurors who voted to hide it, and others in several threads today, there were other ways for the poster to have gotten his point across, he could have used any of those and this forum wouldn't have erupted (almost universally) as it did.

[kath]

18. Can we not discuss the use of this word, in its various CONTEXTS, without getting all

Meta? It is a legitimate discussion. People should take a deep breath.

I recall lengthy discussions over the use of the word "bitch" here in the past.

[George II]

23. Would you be offended if, because of this OP, I called you (obviously not meaning it so DON'T.....

....alert this!!) an "attention whore"?

[gollygee]

42. It is meta

You started it about another post. It's just plain meta. You can't go meta and then complain that other people, when they respond, are going meta.

[Walk away]

51. After this the name Bernie Sanders actually makes me sick. You people have finally...

succeeded in turning your candidate into the last person I will ever vote for. The good news is, the possibility of him winning the primary is zero so I don't have to compromise my commitment to the Democratic party!

[jwirr]

55. Because of a 160 post idiot? Are you sure he/she is a supporter of Bernie? The trolls come to DU

to make trouble - are you sure what this one was doing?

[DURHAM D]

59. Yes "she" is a Bernie supporter. nt

[demmiblue]

65. It is a Clinton supporter sock who claims to be a Bernie supporter...

just to make Bernie and his supporters look bad.

All kidding aside, you have a very good point. People take things said by newbies as gospel. More to the point, they like to use it as ammunition.

[jwirr]

75. Yes, I do not know for sure who the poster was - as I said I did not recognize the name. But when

I went in as I said I looked to see how many posts because my first thought was - troll. I also thought that it was going to get used against us.

[demmiblue]

78. I'm sure it will be used ad infinitum. SOP, for some. n/t

[Walk away]

81. I guess the threads filled with Bernie supporters defending the use of the word....

is fine with you. Not with me. I will never forget that it's ok with Bernie's group to call a woman a whore and that it's excused my them en masse. Disgusting!
And that jury might as well just wear a "I'm for Bernie" sign. No reasonable person would ever condone that post. Any person who would vote to "leave" a post like that is an embarrassment to the Democratic Party. It's not only here, it's starting all over the internet and I believe there is going to be a backlash that will tarnish your candidate.

[demmiblue]

84. You have no idea what I think... I would have voted to hide. Nice try, though. n/t

[Walk away]

91. It's refreshing to hear of a Bernie supporter who it's so blinded by their...

adoration of Bernie and vehement hatred of Hillary that they would even admit that it was a vile post. You surely are an outlier!

[George II]

87. I think the reference was to the OP here, justifying the use of the word.

[Blue_In_AK]

99. Oh, please...

You obviously weren't a supporter of Bernie Sanders anyway.

[Walk away]

111. I never claimed to be a supporter. Most Democrats aren't.

But at least I had some respect for him and planned to support him if (by some incredible chance) he won the nomination. But this sexist crap really taints him. If you don't think the behavior of his supporters affect how other Democrats feel about him, I assure you that it does. I want nothing to do with him after this. He doesn't say much about woman's rights and maybe there really is some reflection on the people who surround him.

I belong to a fairly large group of women who blog together about politics. When I tell them about this tomorrow they will be pretty pissed off too.

[Blue_In_AK]

118. I've been a Democrat and a woman for a long time,

(almost 69 years) and I AM a supporter and don't perceive him as sexist (or racist) at all. I'm not confident, given the Clinton machine, that he will be our nominee, but I'm going to stick with him until he's out of the race. If I have to vote for Ms. Clinton, I will, but yet again I will be casting my vote with serious reservations.

[Walk away]

158. Please, my mother brought me into the voting booth when she cast her vote for JFK...

just being old and a woman doesn't excuse anyone from associating with and apologizing for sexists. Women marry and stay with abusers all the time. Many of the spend their lives excusing people who belittle their sex.
Bernie Sander's supporters are starting to seem a tetch anti- women these days. But hey! "Feel the burn" if you don't mind a woman being called a whore by your group of friends! Now that they passed this jury and the other Bernie supporters have largely given it their stamp of approval, they can do it all the time here at DU. Won't that make this a jolly place?

[Bluenorthwest]

206. Here is you calling a woman a whore on DU. How can that be? It's like, hypocrisy almost!!!!

Walk away (7,705 posts)
2." Anything for publicity! The whole family are gigantic attention whores...I'll believe her if she goes away and get's a productive job and life, and never bothers anyone ever again."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2334014

So you attack Blue In AK with all that verbiage about a word you yourself deploy in public against specific women. You say "if you don't mind a woman being called a whore by your group of friends!" but it's not hard to find quotes of you calling women whores to amuse your own group of friends.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2334014


So what are your actual metrics? You get to call some women whores but others can't? Is it about the target or about the speaker? Why is it ok when you do it but a world ending calamity when others do it?

[Walk away]

207. I called the entire family attention whores. The leader is a man.

Last edited Thu Apr 14, 2016, 03:01 PM - Edit history (1)

But if you insist that it is the same then I will apologize for calling the family of the head of the Westboro Baptist Church "attention whores".

It was wrong of me.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1107&pid=101277

[Igel]

17. Not a new usage.

It was a perfectly fine metaphor in 1611 when the KJV was released. That's 404 years ago. Geneva Bible, same thing, 1566 (so 449 years ago). Not Wycliffe's version.

Did I miss some flame war over the use of this word? Gee. So many wars, so little ... interest.

[gollygee]

31. Yeah that must make it OK because there's no misogyny in the Bible.

/sarcasm.

[gollygee]

19. Bullshit

"Whore" means something. Any way it's used relies on a comparison to that meaning. There is no way around that. It is misogynist. It is absolutely 100% complete bullshit that the post wasn't hidden.

[kath]

44. So it is misogynist even when it is applied to male politicians, male media figures and male

"attention whores" and is not referring in any way to their sex lives, promiscuity, or anything else sexual? How does that work???

So you would argue that the word should never be used here at DU in any CONTEXT whatsoever?

[gollygee]

54. The word is misogynist

And any way it's used relies on that misogynist meaning. Yes, it does not belong at a progressive place like DU. We also shouldn't use homophobic, racist, or any other slurs, no matter the context.

[ancianita]

63. In other contexts its meaning is mistakenly conflated with 'prostitute'.

"Prostitute" is a word that's preferable to me for economic contexts. It has the connotation of "sellout," which involves money. I learned in high school that the difference makes "whore" more a sexist pejorative since the male world has less respect for those who give sex away (females and male whores) than for those who set a transaction cost on 'it' which implies at least the respect of transaction...that's another argument...

This discussion is not about censorship, because we know very well why "nigger" is never used in any acceptable context. The toxic undercurrent gets people riled and the users love that bullshit more than they love truth or justice, even

If DU is going to talk in campaign and economic contexts -- the world of 'equals' -- about selling out The People's interests for personal gain, I'll fight against seeing 'whore' when a woman is running for office. It wasn't 'cleanly' used with Palin and I'm sure it won't be used as such about Hillary Clinton, either.

I'd rather read 'sellout' for pejorative talk about any woman public figure. I got more to say but will stop. This mobile typing kills me...

[kath]

70. Okay. Thought provoking. Perhaps "whore" should not be used at DU, but "sellout" or "shill" used

instead when discussing selling out The People's interests for personal gain.

I'm not sure that "prostitute" is a preferable word for economic context, but will ponder that. I had thought that BOTH whores and prostitutes did it for money, but am happy to be corrected on that if mistaken.

[BooScout]

53. Thank you n/t

[Jamaal510]

147. I wish I could say I'm surprised

that posts like that survive alerts here, but then I'd be lying.

[Iggo]

26. Meta!

[hunter]

28. KelvinMace scolded me for that years ago...

... and he was right

[hobbit709]

41. Another words have magical powers thread.

[Gormy Cuss]

45. White privilege. n/t

[pintobean]

56. I thought it was the music that has magic power

[BooScout]

48. Geeeee....

A whole separate thread to try and justify misogynist attacks on Clinton in GDP....and with an oh so noble disclaimer to not get crap going on other forums. Alrighty then.

[guillaumeb]

60. I have used the word whore when referring to politicians who give every appearance

of voting based on contributions. Given that the word can be used as a noun and a verb I feel that it is acceptable language. "To whore" means to do an action for money. It also obviously has a sexual connotation, but even then there are examples of males and females giving sex for money or other favors. But as numerous commenters have mentioned, context is everything.

I also think that referring to Donald Trump as a publicity whore is perfectly acceptable. Again, context and venue is the key here. I represented people as a union representative for 33 years and never used the word, but in the context of the grievance procedure or other venues where I represented people the word would have been inappropriate.

Should DU be a site where every word must be scrutinized for its offense causing potential? And if so, what descriptive words will be banned?

Can I use the phrase "fat cat", or will that be seen as a slur against some people?

I recently posted a clip of a singing pig in response to a comment about teaching a pig to sing, and was promptly accused of insulting people.

Where does the thin skinned, quick to take offense behavior stop?

[OKNancy]

61. So, if I called Sanders a whore for the gun industry, that would be ok with you?

Although it's not mentioned in the OP, this thread is an obvious reference to: http://upload.democraticunderground.com/1251455100#post5

I appreciate all who called out the poster, especially the Sanders supporters.
But it is wrong. Everyone knows the reason the post was left was because of politics and because it was about Hillary.

[kath]

64. Meta

[boston bean]

71. You have got to be kidding...

Now I see this is a very transparent attempt at disruption.

[PeaceNikki]

168. This whole thread is meta starting with your OP.

[gollygee]

170. Don't be a hypocrite.

You can't start a meta thread and then complain when other people reply that they're being meta. The whole conversation is meta. It's unreasonable to expect people to reply to your thread without talking about what you're talking about.

[kath]

62. So - the general consensus is that posts containing the word "whore" should always be hidden

here, no matter the CONTEXT, because anyone who uses it IN ANY CONTEXT, is being misogynistic?

If so, then it should probably be stated in the TOS.

(there was a time when use of the word "bitch" would cause a post to be deleted, but it seems that is no longer the case)

[MADem]

66. You can find people using the "B" word and the "C" word in the DU archives, too.

Community standards have EVOLVED here, and obviously SEXIST content is not tolerated.

Calling a woman a WHORE is just not cool. Enough people have said so. It's not an issue where you want to plant your flag.

[tammywammy]

68. Who, other than you, suggested an outright ban on the word "whore"?

Or is this just some made up BS?

[DURHAM D]

85. Made up by a BSer. nt

[tammywammy]

86. That's what I figured

Or so partisan in their support of a candidate they refuse to acknowledge calling Hillary a whore is despicable.

[ancianita]

107. Bullshit. I'm a Bernie supporter on the jury who's been arguing against the use of that word.

[tammywammy]

112. I thought it was clear I was referring to the OP in my post

[Cleita]

76. I was led to DU from a website called Media Whores that no

longer exists, but I wish still did. The word nanny problem that has arisen on DU doesn't improve the website. The word nannies will condemn any word that may have a feminine reference but doesn't necessarily refer to a woman. For instance the word referring to a female dog will be alerted on even when the poster is only referring to a dog.

[stevenleser]

93. The folks who ran that website were not misogynists and would not approve of folks calling Hillary

a whore and would be sick that anyone attempted to use their website to try to justify that.

[Cleita]

94. Where in my post did you get any reference to Hillary?

[muriel_volestrangler]

95. That post gives some context for what started the current argument

Hillary was called a 'whore'. Not a 'media whore', either:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=455232

[Cleita]

96. So? I didn't call her that.

I was saying that using the word in modern parlance often means someone who has sold out their principles for money or other gain, not a prostitute in the narrow sense of the word. Just because some other person called her a whore, you can't accuse me of it. You will never find a post of mine calling Hillary that.

[muriel_volestrangler]

97. The thread isn't about what you have said

It's about someone else calling Hillary Clinton a whore, and a jury letting that stand. The reply to you never said it was about what you say. No-one has accused you of it.

[JTFrog]

124. That poster loves to make it all about her. n/t

[JTFrog]

126. Oh, gonna berate me again because I dared tell about being raped and beaten?

You're a fucking class act.

[Cleita]

127. I thought I offered to talk to you, privately, off line about that.

I was prepared to apologize to you if I was wrong, but you refused because in your own words you wanted it all out in front. So I doubt your sincerity.

[MADem]

134. If the "media whores" they were talking about were FEMALE broadcasters, you'd have a problem with it

and so would everyone else. The use in that post wasn't like "attention whores" or "publicity whores" ... it was on the lines of "bought and paid for."

When the word is aimed at and targets a woman, it doesn't mean the same thing. It's dicey even when the attention/publicity qualifiers are used.

There was a "too clever by half" sense that was evident in that post and one could smell it from a mile away.

[olddots]

79. we run out of nuance

What we feel expressed in words is compressed like audio and video is now .This compression destroys fidelity in life .Fidelity is getting lowered and know one complains unless they have witnessed it .
The word whore is a diagnosis or a steriotype , is Wolf a sex worker or a media whore ? We know he isn't a sex worker .Identity slang to prove a point , geek , jock , fox , hunk or what ever we love speaking like this but it belittles us as it makes us feel part of something that is superior .

[valerief]

88. I didn't know it was considered today to be just a sexual term. People

who sell their bodies are prostitutes. Whores are unscrupulous sellouts, bastards who'd sell their children for a quick buck. You know, most politicians.

[MADem]

181. It's not "just" a sexual term. But one does not have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind

blows.

That post was a 'sotto voce' slap. And it was obvious. That's why people from all corners of progressive/liberal thought on this board, even those who don't support Clinton's candidacy, have spoken up and objected to it.

[LuvLoogie]

92. "We ask. You decide"

[etherealtruth]

101. I would no sooner use that word than I would use ...

... any other racial, gender, ethnic, religious, or sexual orientation slur.

Some like to call it 'word policing" or cutely like to refer to 'magical words" .... words have power. We have the power to make DU a welcoming community to a diverse group of people .... yet we do not seem willing to police ourselves to make sure that gender, racial, homophobic,.... epithets are not used when they have deeply offensive and personal meanings for a diverse group.

I like to think of it as civility and community.

[ancianita]

109. Amen to that.

[MisterP]

103. heck, there's a whole island of them apparently!

[Orrex]

105. Whore you asking?

Sorry--I mean, who're you asking?

[notadmblnd]

106. Censorship? Is this the most important issue you can think of that needs to be dvocated for?

Here at DU or anywhere else? Seriously? You think the owners of this site need you to tell them and the rest of DU what should be acceptable and what should not be? Why do you even care?

[ancianita]

113. Toxic language in the name of the 1st Amendment creates toxic environments for campaigns.

When you care about adult civil discourse and engage in it, you refuse to stoop to the gutter politics of your opposition. There's plenty of that on the way from our opposition.

[notadmblnd]

116. And what does that have to do with censoring language on DU?

This is childish by both those throwing shit into the pot and by those eating that shit up. There are more important issues that need to be advocated for.

[ancianita]

117. A toxic language environment in politics is downright indecent. Don't pretend otherwise.

This was an effortful OP, reviewing word use contexts and asking about further productivity of its continued use.

While you sound pretty high ground in approach, you can be sure none of us are talking to DU owners, but DU members remind each other about all kinds of stuff and to that end the owners set up a alert and jury system to do just that.

I dare you to use "nigger" in any context when referencing the president. If you don't then you understand how the same will hold when using "whore" in any context referencing Hillary Clinton.

So people can fucking well use all the motherfucking passion they want on DU, but they goddamned well are not going to use easily twistable bullshit sexist dog whistle language during this campaign.

If you're all about calling it censoring, thin skinned touchiness or any other fucking labels, you can still respect that decency should be the overall spirit of speaking about our party's candidates, or our cheap shot opponents will claim we're no better than they.

[notadmblnd]

183. You dare me? What, are we in the 5th grade here?

See what I mean about being childish over this? We are adults and if you don't like something that is said- alert or ignore it. Yes we do have a damn good jury system and it works very well. But don't start in with "we need to censor language here" because I don't like how the jury voted. Be a grown up and move on.

This is a political website, but from what I observe, there are very few of us that spend time advocating for any important political issues outside of this site. I think there are more important things to advocate for than the language that is used here. And if the only place that some people do advocate for- is censorship here, and not in other areas of media, then you are all being disingenuous and are simply doing it to exercise control over others while here.

[ancianita]

190. This political website by adults who don't use childish talk. I advocate suspension, not censorship.

Don't tell me what I mean. I was the 5th juror who explained that the poster who got a pass shouldn't be allowed the sexist dog whistle of that pejorative against a Democratic candidate. That's in line with terms of service for this political website.

I agree that the jury system works damned well, and I intend to use it against all users of the word "whore" in ANY context that references Hillary Clinton. And I'm a Bernie Sanders supporter here.

[notadmblnd]

194. What you said to me is childish.

You dared me to do something. In fact, I'm surprised you didn't say "double dog dare you".

I also did not presume to tell you what you meant. You are the only one guilty of presuming to tell others what they mean in this discussion. Further more, I don't care if you are juror 1 or 7, you're upset because the post did not get hidden. So be the grown up that you claim to be and move on to your next alert of some one who uses a word in a post that you don't approve of. If censorship of democratic web sites is what you have made your life's work, then move power to you. I'm certain that you can be proud of the work that you do here and that it will make a huge difference in this world when people only use words that you approve of on DU.

Have a good afternoon.

[ancianita]

198. I did presume to tell the poster that not clarifying what he meant left his words interpretable

as a dog whistle, opening up the site to much more demeaning talk by sexist denialists who could then proclaim anyone's 1st Amendment rights to engage in "whore" talk referencing a female Democratic candidate. Those who were against the jury decision spoke with the same spirit.

Sure we can trust each other to have to account for use of female pejoritives. But why waste so much time as a political website doing that. The work of any participant in DU is to promote candidates or reveal their flaws, not to dog whistle. The consensus of the jury was that the context of the poster's "whore" use was acceptable to let stand. I accept that. Others, including me, decided that such a word could be, intended or unintended, a dog whistle that provokes more sexist, toxic talk that's hostile to female candidates and their female supporters.

Go ahead and promote all the free use of language that you want. I don't. It's political judgment, not censorship. If you can reconcile all such labels here with the site's Terms of Service, you'll be giving the same lecture to all the other jurists who've historically voted to hide such language on the juries that you've said do a "damned good job."

[notadmblnd]

199. Don't twist what I said into "promote all the free use of language." I am against censorship

Being against censorship is entirely different than advocating for the free use of language here. So, stop that right now because I will not play those childish games with you.

Obviously what was posted and alerted on was not deemed a violation of TOS as the jury allowed it to stand, which is why you are here complaining about it. And no, I don't spend my day here looking for posts of fellow DU'ers to alert on or complain about, so I think it would be rare that I would have occasion to give the same lecture.

I do think the juries do a damned good job so I'll stand by that. Sorry if you don't.

[ancianita]

200. As a juror I'll say you're welcome. I have a daily 99% chance of being on one for a reason.

I make the case to suspend a particular word's use for good reasons, as well. Your 'childish' label shows what's twisted. If you want to keep digging, go ahead, have the last word.

[notadmblnd]

203. Yes, I've been a donating member in the past also

You have a good evening.

[ancianita]

108. No one resurrected "nigger" when Obama ran, and no one's using "whore" while Clinton runs.

Bernie supporters themselves KNOW that Bernie himself would find the use of this word despicable in any context during this campaign. During this campaign. We heard the "n" word used in so-called 'innocent' news contexts and we came to know more about what the racist dog whistle is. And so it is for "whore."

DU must not blacken the integrity of Bernie supporters by using sweeping condemnations about their justifying its use in contexts. I've used it, too. but other words are really more accurate.

You'll be very sorry when opponents claim that you all used this word when they get into general election campaign mudslinging, and you know it. So stop, already.


I'm not about censoring. I love to swear for emphasis, but not to sling shit at anyone.

I'm all about suspending the use of words that incite double meanings and hatred when used in any context during this campaign period.

DU people, let's show some dignity, decency and act as if we have some semantic range.

[KMOD]

119. Are the DU hosts asleep?

Lock this crap up for the META that it is.

Do we really need to discuss whether or not it's appropriate to call HRC a whore.

This is a freakin' no-brainer.

So Kath went through the effort to find an argument to act like this is ok.

DU is moderated by a jury of our peers. Some of our peers seem to want to be granted the right to call women whores.

To that I have to ask, what the hell is wrong with you? Really? This is what you want to hang your hat on?

You want to demand the right to call women whores and at the same time consider yourself a progressive?

WTF?

Of all the issues going on in our world, you are worried about your freedom to call a woman a whore? Are you fucking for real?

How freakin' petty are you. Your priorities are not only way over the line wrong, they are embarrassing to most folks.

[JTFrog]

123. That rec list is hilariously unsurprising. n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

129. What, not a whore? - Othello Act 4 Scene 2 William Shakespeare

[LuvLoogie]

143. No, not. You are deceived by treachery

and your own insecurity. It's quite tragic.

[tomm2thumbs]

133. in the case of this video, it was the center of the issue, and should probably be allowed

I don't think any hard-fast rule will cover any and all applications of a word which has double meanings depending on how the context is used.

[TerrapinFlyer]

136. The Word Police have arrived

NO WORDS SHOULD BE BANNED ON DU. PERIOD.

George Carlin is rolling in his grave...

[KMOD]

137. Right on man.

Let's call women whores. It's the progressive thing to do.

[TerrapinFlyer]

138. You can call a woman anything you want... it helps point out who is on the wrong side

When you start banning words... you might as well ban the 1st Amendment.

STOP TRYING TO CENSOR DU!

And by the way, I am a Hillary supporter!

[KMOD]

142. Calling a woman a whore is something you should have learned was wrong by age four.

[TerrapinFlyer]

145. Right!

Because there are no female media whores.... correct?

More self-appointed word police.... go back and study free speech 101

[B Calm]

191. Bingo!

[pnwmom]

144. The words "whore" or "prostitute" should never be used to attack any woman,

even a woman politician, even if we hate her guts.

When a woman is attacked with this word, the slur contains a whole level of demeaning, sexual nastiness that doesn't come into play if the word is used against a man.

If you have a problem treating men and women differently with respect to the use of this word, then it's better not to use it as an attack word at all.

From the National Organization for Women:

http://now.org/blog/want-to-insult-a-powerful-woman-call-her-a-prostitute/

Want to Insult a Powerful Woman? Call Her a Prostitute

NOW’s Analysis: The discussion by Beck and his co-host, Pat Grey, about the kind of “prostitute” they think Landrieu is was quite lengthy, detailed and highly offensive. First they offered the right-wing claim that Landrieu accepted a “bribe” as if it were proven fact. The conversation included these delightful nuggets: “you’re not at Motel 6 with this, no . . . this one comes to your Four Seasons hotel room and does it right . . . you might even think she’s the wife of the CEO she’s coming in on the arm of.” Rush Limbaugh followed up on his show the same day, saying that Landrieu “may be the most expensive prostitute in the history of prostitution.”

So what’s wrong with equating politicians with prostitutes? After all, it’s a quick and vivid way of accusing legislators of selling their votes (and presumably their principles) for money. Countless political cartoons have portrayed supposedly greedy and ethically-challenged politicians in fishnet stockings and garters. Since when did this amusing metaphor hurt anyone?

The problem is, the accusation conjures up an image almost exclusively of women — typically streetwalkers, but sometimes high-class escorts like Beck describes. Also, the term seems to flow so easily off the tongues of men seeking to degrade successful, powerful (perhaps “uppity”?) women. Not long ago Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fl.) called Linda Robertson, an adviser to Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, a “K Street whore,” and he was rightly criticized for doing so. Whore, prostitute, hooker — it’s time to retire these sexist terms that only encourage our society to see women as commodities to be bought and sold.

[madokie]

149. I don't think I've ever used the word here

I remember the time when some called me one so I'm a tad sensitive to it's use.

[boston bean]

150. How the fuck is this thread not META? I've had similar ones locked when trying to discuss why a

certain word is sexist/misogynistic and point to its usage on DU.

But ones that get left open are arguing for its usage... WTH, this place is upside down and ridiculous to the extreme!

here is one shining example... a post regarding a banned member using the c word....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026783277

[pintobean]

159. That was a grave dancing thread.

[boston bean]

163. Oh, all grave dancing threads are locked? Uh no they are not.

Unless it happens to be when the banned person turns out to be a sexist misogynist.

That's the message I got.

Thanks for pointing that out.

[pintobean]

166. You seem to be able to find that message a lot.

Yours wasn't the first. From what I've noticed, only one is usually allowed.

[boston bean]

167. point me to some others that were gravedancing. You're good with the search button.

[pintobean]

173. cyberswede's thread was a day before your's

1084 replies, not locked. It was the original. You participated in that thread quite a bit, grave dancing and calling SKP a troll.

[boston bean]

175. SKP was banned. My thread was a positive thread regarding the actions taken.

Sorry to see that is what is deemed META. Since it wasn't complaining, it was a happy, joyous thread, pointing out something that I found to be a very good action.

I guess you can't find what you call grave dancing threads locked, why? because they aren't meta. It's not discussing a DU member and grave dancing isn't complaining about a decision.

Still, my post was a response in the positive in support of admins decision. It was not grave dancing.

[pintobean]

177. Pffft

[boston bean]

178. ha!

[boston bean]

172. Also, it was a postive post about an action taken on DU. It was not

a grave dancing thread.

But since you think that would be a reason to lock, please proceed with providing the links requested.

[Phentex]

169. Does not follow any of the criteria in the Statement of Purpose...

none. So who knows why it can't be locked?

[Vinca]

151. I don't think any word should be banned on DU.

It's not the letters strung together, it's how they are used.

[boston bean]

154. Ok, but those that use them words in the context of misogynistic/sexist/racist/homophobic

slurs, ought to be banned.

[Vinca]

156. Exactly.

[boston bean]

157. It would certainly cut down on the usage and make this place feel much more welcoming

to many women who don't want to participate in a place that allows it.

And in this case a jury did allow it. More quick bannings by admin may bring about more jury decisions to hide.

Lead from the top, not the bottom, in other words.

[Smarmie Doofus]

152. When they got nothing.....

this is where they go.

i.e. the pc language route.

Don't worry about it, don't even break stride.

Amps up the adrenaline, feels good but is paradoxically an admission of defeat.


BTW: This is what *really* hurts:

>>Hedge Fund Titans Choosing Hillary Clinton Over Top Republicans>>>

The header of the OP of the thread in question.

The "whore" professed outrage is an effort to change the subject.

It's what they do.

[boston bean]

153. You know when it is I think a person has "got nothing"

is when they call a democratic female candidate for President a whore.

That's when I think a persons got nothing.

[H2O Man]

171. Strange OP/thread.

I've read through this a couple of days in a row, and was likely correct in opting not to respond to the OP or comments that have followed.

I'm not offended by words. However, I do not respect those who seek to offend groups or individuals by intentionally using words that insult or belittle them.

Context is everything. In the context of our society, there has long been a cultural bias that associates the word "whore" with females. Hence, there are very few examples of where the word can be used to describe individuals -- especially females -- that are not "loaded."

The one area of discourse where I have read it used accurately and almost exclusively to men is in the context of esoteric religious/spiritual writings. These are those writings that have to do with the higher meaning of the basic teachings of the enlightened men and women in human history. For example, in what are known as the "ten commandments" (or "original instructions" in other cultural settings), we find "you shall not commit adultery." Now, that means just what it says, of course. But it also has a higher psychological meaning. In today's society, for an easy to understand example, we see the mega-churches, in which the "leaders" seek riches, wealth, fame, and power. Hence, they are "whoring after false gods."

I'm comfortable with it, in that limited context. But it would be a rare DU discussion that does so.

[kath]

182. Been thinking alot about this thread since yesterday

I'm not half as good a writer as many here on DU, but here goes

The word "whore" has been used frequently and for a long time to describe politicians - who even in this day and age are mostly male - in the context of them being bought-and-paid-for by wealthy donors. It is clearly understood that when someone says that "X politician is a whore for Wall Street" or "Bush and Cheney are whoring for Big Oil (cough - Cheney's secret energy meetings - cough)" that they are not implying that the politician sold his/her *body* to Big Oil or whomever (the original, sexual context of "whore" to describe females, and a sexist usage) but rather that they have sold their political influence. It has been used so often and for so long in this way that it seems, to me at least, to have been pretty much "defanged" of its original sexual and sexist connotation *when used to describe politicians*.

Skeevy male politicians with big influential donors are, and have been, called whores all the time. Politicians have historically been males, by a large majority (this is thankfully changing), and we are used to hearing them called this name. When a woman enters the male-dominated political world, should she expect to be called by the same names as the men if she is doing the same sleazy things? Or should there be a double standard, where the women are offered special protection and are shielded from the name "whore" (in the political sense, quid pro quo for donors, etc., NOT the sexual sense)? I tend to hate double standards, which usually tend to benefit males. This double standard, though, shielding only female politicians from the W word, would in a sense benefit women rather than men. I still don't like it.

So, if we shouldn't use the W word in the political sense for female politicians, then we shouldn't be using it for male politicians either. But then what phraseology should we use? "A whore for corporations" gets the point across in a few short words. "Bought and paid for"? "Shill"? "Sellout"? "Influence peddling"? Something else? Perhaps we should correct DUers when they use the W word in the political sense against ANY politician, male or female, of any political party. When we do so, what phraseology should we suggest they use instead?

(This would benefit from another draft or two, but I am a painfully slow writer and have no time for that today. This at least gets the gist of my thoughts across, I hope.)

[tblue37]

184. This is what I posted yesterday when someone labeled Hillary thus:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=457005

Using the term "whore" to refer to a female candidate is offensive, even if you would have used the same word for a male candidate you feel has sold out to the big banks. It is like using "thug" to describe a black man you consider violent or criminal. Even if you would use the same word for a white person, your use of it would be racially insensitive and entirely inappropriate.

Good rule of thumb: don't call Hillary Clinton a whore. It is an ugly and misogynistic word to sling at a woman.

[Adrahil]

185. "Whore" is inescapably sexual and misogynist.

IMO, it is not appropriate.

I suggest we use the term "mercenary" instead. It suggest the same "service for money" relationship without the heapin' helpin' of misogyny.

[Zorra]

186. Reality: It's important that we carefully monitor our language when speaking

of Secretary Clinton on DU, because the fact is that anything you say that can be taken out of context will be taken out of context.

You will then have a post alerted on, and very posssibly brought before an unreasonable, partisan, extremely subjective jury that will hide your post with little or no objective consideration whatsoever.

It's not a good, or just, thing, but it is the reality of DU.

[wyldwolf]

187. I find it interesting 'progressives' use gender-demeaning terms at all.

[MFrohike]

188. This is a really stupid thread

If the language police could pay a bit more attention to the actual events of the world and their country and the 1st amendment fundamentalists could find more effective ways to advance their arguments than internet slap fights, that'd be great. Or, everyone could fight over the absolute meanings of words all day and get huffy and smug.

[LanternWaste]

192. We certainly do try to rationalize our dramatic lack of empathy in odd little ways...

We certainly do try to rationalize our vulgarity and our dramatic lack of empathy in odd little ways...

[CajunBlazer]

197. I don't think that it is good idea to call Democratic candidate....

derogatory names, whether those names have a sexual connotations or not. Regardless of which of the Democratic candidates wins, he/she will be a lot better choice than any one of the current crowd Republicans candidates. Long gone are the days when the Republican Party presented viable alternatives.

So unless you plan to vote for a Republican come November of 2016, it is not wise to try to belittle the person who might be your ultimate choice for President. On the other hand, if you intend to sit the election out if your choice for the Democratic nominee doesn't win the nomination, it doesn't matter what you think because you would not be bright enough to vote in your selfish self interest.

[Bluenorthwest]

205. CajunBlazer OP about Bernie:

CajunBlazer: "He will be described as a communist who adopted his current political stances from reading the writings of Marks, Lenin and Trotsky. Such attacks will stick better than you think.

All you have to do is used google, to see what is coming Sander's way:

Bernie Sanders Lived Off Unemployment, Couldn't Get a Non-Government Job Bernie Sanders can only exist when being paid by taxpayers.

Excerpt: "We're told that "He read Marx, Lenin and Trotsky." Like them, he wasn't big on working. Marx lived off Engels. Sanders lived off Uncle Sam." and it gets worse.

Even a relatively complementary article in Politico: Bernie Sanders Has a Secret
contains the phrase: "He read Marx, Lenin and Trotsky"

No I am not implying that just because someone is well read that he is communist,far from it, but I won't be the one painting the picture. It could be very nasty:

From an article: THE REAL BERNIE SANDERS
"Far from being an "outsider", Sanders is a dyed-in-the-wool pro-Fed and pro-Israel Marxist from Ben & Jerry's commie-pinko-hippie Vermont. Sander's fake "populism" is that of the Jewish rabble-rouser on a soap box, a la Leon Trotsky (Russia), Emma Goldman (United States), Rosa Luxemburg (Germany) and Bela Kun (Hungary)."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251941346

You sling more mud and name calling invective than any other DUer. In 2008 you slung that mud at Hillary, now at Bernie so basically you have smeared the entire Democratic line up of 2016. That's fucked up nonsense.

[nadinbrzezinski]

202. I posted the evoution of just one term this mornig

political whore. I think I am safe to use it here, and not resort to magical word.

The term has pretty much been normalized by media types, and even by regular people, When we are doing politics, hard core, we hear these two terms together often. If my computer got insulted easily it would be blushing regularly from the recordings we get.

You are trying to hold back a linguistic shift. Ban the words, might work for a little while.

But these uses are now common place and common language, and I promise you, they will be used with politicians of both parties and at all political levels by their political enemies. That is the damn reality check. You can try to censor, but I do not believe it is going to work, because you are going to see it in articles increasingly, as in news articles.

By the way, what other language do you want to censor? Is there a list? Perhaps it is my now very jaded and cynical age... but trying to ban words rarely works, if ever.