2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIf you're reduced to complaining about a temp tribute in a logo...
You've already lost. You just don't realize it yet.
And by the way, why can we not mention this about Bernie given that it's objectively true? Please explain. TIA.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/bernie-sanders-1972-essay-rape-fantasy-surfaces-article-1.2240379
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)Clinton supporters complained or agreed that the said logo was not cool as well.
It had nothing to do with Bernie.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)And possibly several other things. LOL!
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)Apparently they "lost the election " too, according to you.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Links?
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Does it make sense to you? Please explain.
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)Thread trashed.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Thanks for letting me know. LOL!
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)about rape. Sadly as it turns out, quite the contrary as obviously at that age he could bore readers to death even after tossing in an otherwise-gratuitous prurient element to grab their attention. He himself equally obviously had no interest in it, since he immediately moved on to the real issue.
I do not believe the rape sentence illuminates the character of the man today and feel honest people should not be trying to use it as a weapon. Sure, those for whom political discourse is all about attacking the "other side" make a habit of this behavior, but should others copy them just to needle them back?
IMO, this is a defining question about defining behaviors.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts).... about women's rights and issues. I don't believe people really change to that extent as they age. You don't accidentally spout off those kinds of beliefs. They come from within.
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)Or was that conveniently left out so as to mis-characterize his position? I mean, I certainly hope you don't believe that Sanders believes that raping women is okay, do you?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)They're just recycling old memes because it's easier than discussing issues.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)My GOD this Bernie Sanders is a monster.
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)And replaced with a single-payer system.
Bernie "The Monster" Sanders advocates this position as well. How barbaric!!!! And how can he hate women????? Women are good people!
George II
(67,782 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)I do think the outrage about is is hyperbolic at the least, but I do agree with the few, more temperate Sanders supporters about this logo modification.
I absolutely believe that Hillary and her campaign meant no disrespect at all to such a great and iconic figure. I do fully believe that the intent was good, and absolutely no disrespect was meant. I absolutely do believe that the few that are trying to assert that the intent was to put Rosa Parks at the back of the bus are ridiculous, insulting, and outrageous, and shame on those posters for even thinking that way.
However, I do agree with them that this wasn't the right way to portray Rosa Parks. The intent may not have been meant to be disrespectful but I do feel it was. Putting out one of the photo's that Hillary has had with her would have been a better choice imo.
mythology
(9,527 posts)It was a dumb move, but nothing in the end.
George II
(67,782 posts)....which was already and done with days ago. I didn't see any civil rights activists (INCLUDING Sanders) complaining about it. John Lewis, who DID march with MLK, apparently didn't have a problem with it.
The only people who complained about it were right-wingers and Sanders followers. And the only people still whining about it are doing so probably because that's about all they can grasp onto at this point.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Better to say "Goldwater Girl", about a WOMAN who was not old enough to vote for AUH2O.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)If the truth must be hidden it must be pretty damning. That's all I can think.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)No way! Ewww! 
They hide it cause it made them say eww, too!
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Could not finish it. But I think they hide it whenever it comes up because they want to pretend he doesn't really think like that.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Writers write what is inside of them. I can write terrible things. If I wrote it, it would be in the horror category or true crime.
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)And you'd rather believe everything else, no matter the basis in reality, and so out-of-character of Sanders? I mean, is it easier to fathom that Sanders believes in raping women, or that this was more than likely a poor attempt at dark satire? Which do you think is more in line with reality?
George II
(67,782 posts).....but those WERE his words.
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)Something so out-of-character for Sanders, and you'd rather believe he advocates raping women?
Wow.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)They decided now would be a good time to run with it again.
Recycling old smears, it's all they've got.
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)... from their, what I could only assume, is their hatred for the man. It boggles my mind.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I would say all of them but you never know who might take offense at a 40 year old essay on gender stereotypes.
It's just the latest swift boat attempt from people who don't want to discuss the real issues.
And the only reason they hate him is because he got in the way of Hillary's coronation.
Before that all of DU loved Bernie.
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)
aikoaiko
(34,204 posts)Seems like a good response to me.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)
As for the article at the link, you do know that if Sanders wins the primary, the Republicans are going to use that first and foremost. And they will use it ad nauseam. It will be a guaranteed loss for Democrats and then we can say good-bye to SCOTUS for a generation.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)She was like, what??? Why??? No one really knows apparently.
And yes, the thing that cannot be mentioned here without being hidden will feature prominently in rethug attacks. And sadly, it would be legit. Other than John Edwards I cannot think of another Dem presidential candidate in my lifetime with such a terrible skeleton in the closet. It makes Gary Hart's monkey business look quaint.
Most women voters don't know anything about it and Hillary has been very nice not to make an issue of it, I suppose because she has no need. But I cannot imagine most women would vote for him once it is made more widely known.
thesquanderer
(12,372 posts)...say, what HRC's husband actually did with a cigar and an intern?
Perhaps this has something to do with why "Hillary has been very nice not to make an issue of it."
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)And Bill is not running.
thesquanderer
(12,372 posts)...HRC chose to stay married to such a man.
Of course these things aren't black and white. But if you're going to speculate on how the electorate will respond to "sexual skeletons," there are all kinds of possibilities.
Personally, I don't see any of these things as as serious obstacles.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)It's a window into his mentality about women and it's not pretty.
okasha
(11,573 posts)Sander's first wife and the girlfriend who had his son chose not to stay with "such a man."
Be careful where you step on this one.
thesquanderer
(12,372 posts)And was it their choice not to stay together, or his choice, or was it mutual?
I don't know the answers to these questions, but it sounds like you do...?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Was he a serial philanderer like Bill?
I don't give two shits about Clinton's affairs but if you want to drag Bernie through the same mud you'd better have more than idle gossip from the Cave to back it up.
kath
(10,565 posts)And laughed about it (and she took the case voluntarily, in order to curry favor with a judge - always looking to do what will benefit her politically). Google it. Lovely story.
George II
(67,782 posts)thesquanderer
(12,372 posts)And I bet she even voted for him, despite knowledge of his sexual indiscretions. So maybe she is more open-minded than some of her supporters are, and recognizes something about babies and bathwater.
If you're going to rule out anyone who's ever had a "distasteful" sexual thought -- not even action, but merely thought -- that probably rules out virtually all males, and a good number of females as well, from ever being qualified to be president.
I mean seriously, regardless of what he wrote--keeping in mind his actual public policy actions--does anyone genuinely believe Sanders would govern in a way that is not supportive of and respectful toward women? Really?
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Burlington College even though he doesn't think there should be any golden parachutes. His wife chose to marry him after his rape article.
thesquanderer
(12,372 posts)to the first, I don't think her golden parachute rises to the level of potential marital issue that an affair with an intern does, depite perhaps their different philosophies about such things. To the second, similarly, I don't think that article (did you read it?) rises to that level either. Though again, I'm not criticizing HRC for staying with Bill. My main point is that I think this "rape article" is just not much of an issue, nor going to be an issue for much of the electorate even if it is more greatly brought to their attention.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)" But the person who chose to stay married to him is"
Perhaps we have a difference of opinion, you don't think the rape article is much of an issue, Bill and Hillary's marriage is not much of an issue to others outside of their marriage.
I did read the article, and I find it disturbing.
thesquanderer
(12,372 posts)But I guess i found it ironic than Hillary can get past some arguably unsavory actions, while some of her supporters can't get by some arguably unsavory thoughts--not action, but thoughts--from 40 years ago in their consideration of BS, this even despite his strong support of women's issues throughout his career,
I think a good sum up of the BS article issue is here:
http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/05/29/410606045/the-bernie-sanders-rape-fantasy-essay-explained
Delver Rootnose
(250 posts)...the nomination how many little steaming piles from her past will be used repeatedly. I would rather take a chance with Bearnie's past than Hillary's.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)They haven't even begun to vet him.
Up to this point, it's been nothing but a media love-fest for him. They've taken a hands off approach with him and the only real vetting he's getting is here, on DU, and opposition research by Hillary Clinton supporters (just as Sanders supporters are vetting her here and on every left-leaning blog by Sanders supporters).
If you've been here long enough (since 2009 but a low post count tells me you don't really follow DU), you would've noticed how we criticize the way U.S. Media have ignored Republican hypocrisy, distortions, and outright lies. We complain that U.S. Media never takes Republicans to task no matter how outrageous they talk or act. Ultimately, we've come to the conclusion that U.S. Media favors Republicans over Democrats on any given day, any given time. And in 2012, the Pew Research Center's study vindicated us by showing that a sitting Democratic president running for reelection with high popularity among Democrats, Independents, and Liberals, gets the least favorable coverage in all U.S. media, and a sitting Republican governor from Texas got the most favorable from the get-go.
Can we agree that U.S. mass media are no friends to Democrats?
Okay. Ever since he announced his candidacy, aside from the kid-gloves the media are handling Sanders with, Republican strategists have called for Operation Chaos 2016, called for their people to donate to Sanders' campaign, and big Republican operatives have even been tweeting "feelthebern". Now you need to ask yourself why that is.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Not in this case. They'd rather have a Republican, true, but if they can't get one, they'll take the DINO every time.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)And there's nothing more to say to you about this.
Delver Rootnose
(250 posts)..and I follow politics a lot. I have been following since the Carter/Reagan race.
I just don't post here a lot.
That said, the media isn't treating sanders with kid gloves, they are largely ignoring him in the hopes he goes away.
And what you call vetting is really they have been attacking Hillary and Bill for decades. You are correct in that. And while nothing has stuck leagally it has conditioned a generation to think negatively about the clintons. That is why she has high negatives. No other person on the democratic side will motivate republicans to come out and vote more than her and in a year where what remains of the moderate business republicans have little to look forward to.
It is my opinion that nominating Hillary will lead to high republican turnout and depressed democratic turnout. Which is not a good place to be as a candidate. There is a VERY strong anti establishment bent in the electorate, as shown by trump and Carson's popularity, and you really can't get more establishment than a Clinton. Even sanders years in the senate, and relative low name recognition, is nothing compared to Clinton.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)...to call out a fellow DUer for their "low post count" and then make assumptions like "you really don't follow DU."
And then you make further condescending and presumptuous comments about their failure to understand the "U.S. Media (sic)", etc.
It's ok to slug it out politically, but calling out people like that is wrong.
840high
(17,196 posts)artislife
(9,497 posts)Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)And while he's providing his defense, he can actually hold the Republicans record on women - which would be turning his supposed weakness into a strength.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Oh, le irony.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)It's okay for Bernie to pretend he's the second coming of MLK, but paying tribute to Rosa Parks is bad. Can you explain?
Also, want to weigh in on why this is hidden so routinely? It's true, and quite insulting to women. Why is it off topic for discussion?
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/bernie-sanders-1972-essay-rape-fantasy-surfaces-article-1.2240379
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)As for the mimeographed page-long essay in the alternative weekly from 1972, to the contrary, it was discussed into the ground when it was first "unearthed", and I will gladly explain again - you yourself boasting that you haven't bothered to read the thing, but you want to make damn sure you reference what you claim it implies anyway - at least my interpretation of what it is about.
It is a poorly-crafted attempt at a contemporary (by 1972 standards) analysis of the state of gender and sexual roles and politics. Badly written and certainly outdated, but not all that different from similar analyses done by the likes of Andrea Dworkin and her ideological fellow travelers, in the same decade. It's not even close to the "gotcha" that you seem to think it is.
Now, if you bothered to actually, you know.. read it, you might get that.
Also, to add, your post wasn't hidden 7-0 because you referenced that old story. It was because of the absolutely ugly allegation you made, fallaciously based on the thing.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)And I was in my teens back when he wrote that. It wasn't any more acceptable then as it is now to pretend women fantasized about being raped. At least not to women. Let's not pretend it was okay back then. So much for your revisionist history.
As for the hide, what makes it fallacious and an "allegation" instead of a fact? Are you claiming he wrote something he didn't really believe, or that he evolved in his views on women? He's divorced and has an out of wedlock child. What do those two women think about him? Do you care? I do.
Men that think that kind of thing don't evolve. At least not in my experience. Why should women trust him?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Because anyone who was around in the 70s likely remembers the rather stark and bleak interpretations of the state of gender politics popularized by some of the louder and more ideologically rigid voices of that decade.
He's' making a comment on an interpretation of society and socially prescribed roles, not suggesting that that situation is ideal or healthy.
Your logic - such as it is, here - is akin to suggesting that because he made Schindler's List, Speilberg is a Nazi.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)You're making excuses for your hero. And you know it.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Shit like using 9-11 as an applause line to deflect from questions about donations from Wall St. and financial deregulation?
Easy-Peasy.
Phoooooooooning it in.
MADem
(135,425 posts)You'll be infuriated.
He doesn't have much sensitivity or understanding of women at a very basic level. His writings show that.
MattSh
(3,714 posts)"It's okay for Bernie to pretend he's the second coming of MLK"
But that's OK. Others will come along and top that in 3...2...1...
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)She also claims that Bernie Sanders has no clue about women's issues and that he wants the ACA repealed.
God damn he's such a monster!!
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Some days it's like watch really bad street theater.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Christ almighty!
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)According to Hillary supporters on DU Bernie is Israel's #1 shill, a pro gunner that thinks women enjoy being raped, racist, gun nut, scheming little sneak, drooling, sweating old fool, scumbag, pandering phony braggart with some kind of emotional instability, tool for the NRA, Republican man with his head between women's legs, who protects the minutemen militia, pedophiles, racist cops, has rape fantasies, thinks that orgasms prevent cancer, wants the guns in the streets, and is supported by Stormfront.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)He wants the ACA repealed:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=872491
He is clueless about women's rights and women's issues:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=869580
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I'm going to need a bigger boat.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)He multiplied!
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)
Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #11)
Post removed
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)Why can't we talk about it or discuss why it was so stupid? These are Bernie's OWN WORDS written when he was in his 30s. Bernie supporters love to talk about Hillary being a "Goldwater Girl" when she was a teenager. Why can't we talk about what Bernie did in his 30s?
It's not like it was dug up by some right winger and copied on DU like so many anti-Hillary posts here. Bernie's "Man - and Woman" essay was dug up and displayed by Mother Jones magazine:
http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2015/05/young-bernie-sanders-liberty-union-vermont
Again, why the censership?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Gee, whiz, I have no idea why a jury decided to hide that post.
It's not for calling the essay stupid and badly written, though, after all many people including myself do that in this thread.
And it's not, er, censorship of the essay itself... again, despite claims that "no one will talk about it", again, many people discuss the context of the thing and why the egregious attempts at misrepresenting what it supposedly implies about Sen. Sanders' character are so wildly off-base. And it was discussed endlessly when the mojo article first came out.
So, again, why was that post hidden?
Hmmm, verily, 'tis a mystery.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)This essay has been discussed to death here, no one had their posts hidden for posting facts, but when you smear Senator Sanders by claiming he thinks women enjoy being raped or accuse another member of condoning it that deserves more than a hide, imo.
And the post you're claiming was unfairly hidden wasn't even about Bernie, it was about ANOTHER member.
The jury got it right.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Ever noticed that you talk waaay more about Sanders than you do clinton?
is it looooooooooove?
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)You all spend 24/7 smearing Clinton. Don't like it when the tables are turned? Why is that?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Like here... you're complaining about people complaining, while also complaining about something else.
And the irony is how much outrage you have expressed towards people simply citing Martin Luther King, Jr., much less commandeering him and stapling him to an official campaign logo.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)No problem. 
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Have you ever heard of "pharaoh's serpent"? It's a chemistry stunt of a sort, where mercury thiocyanate is ignited.
The result is a slow-burning self-destruct that produces copious amounts of very toxic ash that looks like shit and falls apart under the lightest touch.
No particular reason for bringing it up, I just think chemistry is cool.
Response to Scootaloo (Reply #35)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)“Respectfully, if that is your position, then I will talk only to white people about how we are going to deal with the very real problems,”
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)Maybe you should complain to the black people that didn't care for it. I'm sure they will all agree that you are in a much better position to make that decision than they are.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)This sudden outrage is fake and the drama is laughable
Even if the act was more convincing it's much too late to be believable, we heard all about this months ago and we're still rolling our eyes.
Oh and your post was hidden because of this:
Speaking of fantasies, Bernie thinks women enjoy being raped. I simply cannot understand how a real liberal would vote for a pro gunner that thinks women enjoy being raped. Can you explain that to me? I just can't wrap my head around that. Especially when I think about how many women have been raped at the point of a knife or gun.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=868622
So you can quit pretending Duers are trying to censor this non-story about an essay on gender stereotypes.
They just don't like it when people lie about Dem candidates.
See, real liberals are like that, 40-year old essays don't bother them but lying does.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Where's my couch, somebody fetch the smelling salts!
Divernan
(15,480 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)
840high
(17,196 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Response to MaggieD (Original post)
Post removed
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)The only people who think Bernie has sick sexual fantasies are projecting, imo.
And the only ones I've seen getting the vapours over the essay are uptight right wing conservative types who are too stupid to understand it.
Like the ones at youngcons.
But then reading comprehension was never their strong suit.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)"Wall St."? "9-11"?
Sure, seems legit!
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Makes some folks absolutely incapable of critical thought.
Response to MaggieD (Original post)
Post removed
bowens43
(16,064 posts)to get the power she believes she is entitled to then you already lost........the woman is morally and ethically unfit to be president.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Even by Clinton supporters, Sanders fantasies can't be discussed here. I have no clue why considering we know his fantasies will be used.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Apparently it is not permitted if it presents Bernie in a bad light.
Change has come
(2,372 posts)I'm starting to feel upset too! 
morningfog
(18,115 posts)I've seen you do better, but I guess you're losing steam. It's tough to stir shit day in day out and present coherent thoughts.
The article had been discussed here as nauseum. Posting about the article does not get a hide.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Even though the articles have been posted here countless times, Maggie had a post hidden for saying Bernie thinks women enjoy being raped so suddenly that means Hillary supporters are being SILENCED for daring to speak the truthiness!
Such brave and noble martyrs, sacrificing themselves for the cause, just breaks my heart.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)at a much higher rate than Bernie supporters is proof that they are being silenced by the 85%.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)artislife
(9,497 posts)Maybe they should post better posts?
Change has come
(2,372 posts)Maybe HRC supporters should lay off the personal attacks? Or not.
merrily
(45,251 posts)morningfog, you are one of the bravest posters on this board. Huge 
In Bernie land a tribute in a logo is a big deal, but Bernie's ridiculous views on women is no big deal. Just don't mention, please. LOL!
morningfog
(18,115 posts)It is your disruptiveness that earns you each and every hide.
Your OP still lacks focus. The two feeble points are unrelated.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)And I really don't care if you insult me as a means to ignore the issue. It's perfectly obvious that is what you are doing.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)That's a tough fact for your paranoid OP.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Every non-Bernie supporter here knows damn well they have to tip toe around evidence like this or they will be hidden. Just like I was because I REFUSE to tip toe around disgusting stuff like this.
Meanwhile Hillary is called a whore and a shill daily with ZERO evidence and it is allowed to stand. If you are trying to convince me or any other non-Bernie supporter here that the jury system is not FOS you are wasting your time.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Yours was not hidden for posting the content of the article or a link to it. It was hidden for violating the TOS.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Response to MaggieD (Reply #80)
Post removed
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)What you really mean is I don't act like a puppy dog while you all smear good Dems 24/7. And you know what? Too bad if you don't like that I don't.
I think you all forgot that this is DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Want to see someone who smears Democrats and lefties day in and day out? Look at you "My Posts" tabs. Just one flame bait fly paper post after another. You get hides and vacations because you are rude and insulting. It has nothing to do with your claimed "support" of Hillary. Nothing.
So, buck up and drop the faux victim act.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)I thought we settled that one. He isn't.
I have never had a hide for insulting ANYONE here. My hides come from telling the truth about Bernie. And you know it. Just like the hide last night, for TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT BERNIE.
That, apparently, is not allowed here because the jury system has been taken over in a coup.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)You have a long history of hidden posts for personal attacks. That is too fucking funny.
Oh my GOD< I'm dying. TOO MUCH!!!LOLOLOLOLO
JURY COUP!!!! LOLOLOOLOOOL
P.S.
We are an independent website funded by member subscriptions and advertising, and we have no affiliation with the Democratic Party. Democratic Underground is a truly grassroots community where regular members drive the discussion and set the standards.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus
Oh, my side is hurting from the laughter.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)You're making a fool of yourself with your attempts to personally insult and bully a person who is immune to your attempts. Sadly, you can't seem to grasp that, but it matters not to me.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)
Juicy_Bellows
(2,427 posts)Mail Message
On Thu Dec 3, 2015, 09:46 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
No, you are not. You are a disruptor and a stirrer of shit.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=870843
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Rude and over the top. Enough with the name calling.
JURY RESULTS
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Dec 3, 2015, 09:54 PM, and the Jury voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: As objective as I can possibly be - if the shoe fits.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Speaking of fantasies, Bernie thinks women enjoy being raped. I simply cannot understand how a real liberal would vote for a pro gunner that thinks women enjoy being raped. Can you explain that to me? I just can't wrap my head around that. Especially when I think about how many women have been raped at the point of a knife or gun.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=868622
So claiming that the jurors (who ALL voted to hide your disgusting post) are in on some huge conspiracy is not only paranoid it's obviously false.
And please link to where Hillary is called a "whore" daily or are you just making that up too?
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)That is exactly what he says. You have a problem with the truth being posted, apparently.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Or is that a lie too?
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)"A woman enjoys intercourse with her man, and she fantasizes about being raped by three men simultaneously."
And it just gets worse from there. Now what part am I lying about? Please be specific.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/05/young-bernie-sanders-liberty-union-vermont
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)And if you have trouble with reading comprehension I can't help you, perhaps youngcons is a better website for you, they had extreme difficulty understanding that the essay was about gender stereotypes too.
Small minded uptight Republicans thought it was quite the scandal as well, liberals are usually more intelligent.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)On Fri Dec 4, 2015, 02:26 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
Link to Hillary being called a"whore" daily? Do you want everyone to think you're lying?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=870888
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
use of the word w****
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Dec 4, 2015, 02:38 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Telling a member here to go post at a conservative site is rude
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Ridiculous alert.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Post is part of a heated conversation. I don't see any personal insults.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: use of the word is in form of a quotation - quoting someone else's phrase and use of the word.
I am sure you know how I voted.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)- that I know of.
I think the Cave is getting desperate.
There's alert stalking going on, alright, it's just all coming from that place.
Thanks!
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Everyone knows if the bigots and assholes at the conservative/other cave hate ya, you're doing something right!
It's a badge of honour!
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)My god no wonder you're shocked.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Bernie thinks women fantasize about being raped. That's what I said, and the essay proves it. Do you admire him for that view? I sure don't. And I sure as hell don't want someone who is so clueless to be president.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Speaking of fantasies, Bernie thinks women enjoy being raped. I simply cannot understand how a real liberal would vote for a pro gunner that thinks women enjoy being raped. Can you explain that to me? I just can't wrap my head around that. Especially when I think about how many women have been raped at the point of a knife or gun.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=868622
First you claimed Bernie "thinks women enjoy being raped".
Now you're saying "Bernie thinks women fantasize about being raped".
You can't weasel your way out of this one, Maggie.
Either you don't understand the difference between consensual sex/fantasies and rape or you were lying about Bernie in that post.
Which is it?
Oh and keep pretending to be outraged and/or fantacizing about being persecuted, this is hillaryous.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)"A woman enjoys intercourse with her man, and she fantasizes about being raped by three men simultaneously."
Do you really think most women fantasize about being raped? Do you approve of a man making that claim? You don't want to address what he said, apparently.
Believe me, that Neanderthal essay WILL come up in the election, and the majority of women will see it just as myself and lots of others do. You cannot hide it or wish it away in this campaign. And your attempts to do so are foolish.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)The one where you claimed he said women fantasize about being raped or the one where you claimed he "thinks women enjoy being raped"?
And congrats, you're just as despicable as the Republicans who already tried to call Bernie a misogynist and turn this into a scandal.
There's a difference between acknowledging the other side will use sleazy smear tactics against our candidates and doing the work for them on DU.
Stay classy, Maggie.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)by three men simultaneously"
Let's break it down "enjoys".... "fantasizes about being raped"
And that is EXACTLY what I said he said.
Are you saying he wrote that, but doesn't think it? How do you come to that conclusion? It's a fucking essay, not a short story. He believes that. Or he has "evolved." Which?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Either that or you don't understand the difference between consensual sex/fantasies and rape.
Which is it?
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)He wrote it.
Are you calling me a liar?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Or you lied in your hidden post, it's your choice, pick one.
Either way Bernie's not the one who ended up looking clueless or vile in this thread.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts).... he knows what WOMEN fantasize about and PUBLISHING it is disgusting. It is an insult to every woman. There is nothing CONSENSUAL about what he did.
Now enough pretending and twisting yourself in a pretzel knot to excuse it. I'm done with you.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)The only one twisting themselves into a pretzel is you, I'm just quoting your own words back to you and asking for clarification.
I love the capital letters, very dramatic! And completely convincing.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)rapes; raped; raping
: to force (someone) to have sex with you by using violence or the threat of violence
NOT CONSENSUAL. Got it yet?
So do you really not know what the definition of rape is? Hope I was able to help.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Speaking of fantasies, Bernie thinks women enjoy being raped. I simply cannot understand how a real liberal would vote for a pro gunner that thinks women enjoy being raped. Can you explain that to me? I just can't wrap my head around that. Especially when I think about how many women have been raped at the point of a knife or gun.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=868622
First you claimed Bernie "thinks women enjoy being raped".
Then you said "Bernie thinks women fantasize about being raped".
Since you appear to understand the difference between consensual sex/fantasies and rape doesn't that mean you lied about his essay in your hidden post?
Or did you just figure it out?
Which is it?
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Please explain.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Please explain why it looks like you lied about his essay in your hidden post before moving on to lie about my posts.
Thanks!
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)Women fantasize about sex with men they want to have sex with. Some women may fantasize about men they find sexually attractive and who they WANT TO HAVE SEX WITH taking a dominant role in sex play. BUT that is NOT fantasizing about "rape."
RAPE IS RAPE. It is not pleasurable. It is not consensual. The victim does not want to have sex with that person, nor does she "fantasize" about having sex with that person. It has nothing to do with sex. It is a violent, often deadly, horrible attack and humiliation of its victim. No sane person fantasizes about being such a victim.
Bernie's "Man - and Woman" essay suggests that women routinely fantasize about being raped ("A women enjoys sex with her man - as she fantasizes about being raped by 3 men simultaneously." . http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/05/young-bernie-sanders-liberty-union-vermont That is offensive. Worse, it glamorizes rape. As Bernie's spokesman said, that essay "looks as stupid today as it was then." Calling Bernie's essay "stupid" is putting it mildly.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Read some erotica, it'll blow your mind.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)Here, let me try to make it simple for you. Women's erotica involves acts women WANT. Rape involves acts women DON'T WANT.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I won't go into the stories here but give it a google.
It's quite common, I assure you. No need to freak out about other peoples' fantasies - they're quite healthy.
Unless you think women who like 50 Shades of Grey and fantasy fiction are sick and not "adult" enough for you.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)Rape is NOT consensual. It is NOT what women want or fantasize about.
Wow. Just wow.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)The women who have those fantasies aren't victims, stop trying to pretend otherwise.
Like I said, thousands of intelligent adult women read that essay and aren't having the vapours over it.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)I am saying that suggesting women fantasize about being victims of rape is offensive. What you call "rape fantasies" are not fantasies about rape. They are fantasies about being dominated by a person the woman WANTS TO HAVE SEX WITH. Being dominated by a person you want to have sex with is not rape. Hence it is not a rape fantasy.
Just because a woman does not agree with you does not mean she is not an "intelligent adult" or that she is "having the vapors." You are making a really sexist, stupid argument.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)You don't get to define what other women do and don't think about and you sure as hell don't get to judge them.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Please get over yourself, do some homework, get an education.
Stop judging other women.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)I am quite educated, I assure you.
I am not judging women. I am defending women from the horrifically wrong and dangerous assertion that women fantasize about actual rape. Words matter.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)How about this, prove your claim.
I want evidence that women don't fantasize about rape.
Go get some and present it.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)You do not appear to understand what rape is.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)And you don't get to decide what women do and don't fantasize about.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)...by men they do not find attractive or want to have sex with?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Women have rape fantasies, it's a fact.
The details of the fantasies are irrelevant, you're not in their heads, get over it and move on.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)You've wasted enough of my time. Good night.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Then you found out that was wrong.
So you tried to redefine what rape is and is not in other women's fantasies.
And that was a fail.
Then you implied I didn't know what rape was.
And found out I've been attacked.
So then you went back to trying to tell me what other women do and don't fantasize about.
And I asked you to prove it.
Now you decide to leave.
In short, you've got nothing so you're running away, quelle surprise!
LostOne4Ever
(9,597 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I guess all of those women are "sick" according to the posters in this thread.
treestar
(82,383 posts)and the explanation is that women are conditioned to avoid admitting they really want sex,so they fantasize they were forced, so "it's not my fault."
Funny the writer of both articles is a man.
it's not a good subject for a man to get into, and Bernie would have been unwise to do so. His only excuse would be it was back in the 70s when there was considerably less awareness.
LostOne4Ever
(9,597 posts)[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]But the results are still derived from women themselves so should be paid attention to even if the messenger is a man.
That said, one of the articles specifically says that fault avoidance is the reason given the least.[/font]
Contrary to the conventional wisdom that rape fantasies are based on blame avoidance (I was coerced. It wasn’t my fault.), the researchers found this the least supported explanation. The most sexually anxious, guilty, and repressed women had the fewest rape fantasies.
The data provided the most support for sexual openness (I’m free to fantasize anything.) followed by sexual desirability (I’m so hot. I drive men crazy.)
The most sexually open and self-accepting women had the most rape fantasies. They also had the most fantasies of consensual sex. And they reported the most arousal from their erotic fantasies.
treestar
(82,383 posts)that rape has nothing to do with sex. Creates cognitive cloudiness there. Nobody fantasizes about being assaulted otherwise.
Who was judging which women were the most "open and self-accepting?" Also I would question whether there is some attempt at gaining approval of being "open." Nowadays there are women who would not want to be described as "uptight."
If it happens it is still probably bodice ripper stuff at the concept "I am so attractive, men lose control." If these fantasies were described, it is unlikely they are of actually being assaulted.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)Mr. Castleman is talking about scenarios where the woman chooses who "ravishes" her, and he is invariably someone she wants to "force" himself on her. That is not rape. The woman created that whole scenario in her mind. She chose the man. She chose the acts. That makes it consensual.
That is not Psychology Today using the unfortunate terminology "rape fantasy." That it is Mr. Michael Castleman, M.A.
To suggest that women fantasize about actual rape is wrong and glamorizes rape.
LostOne4Ever
(9,597 posts)Last edited Fri Dec 4, 2015, 03:42 PM - Edit history (1)
[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]Neither one of them is very long. Quoting from the articles:[/font]
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-sex/201508/why-do-women-have-rape-fantasies
1. Being forced by a man to surrender sexually against my will.
2. Being forced by a woman to surrender sexually against my will.
3. Being forced into a sex against my will because I was incapacitated by drugs, alcohol, or being unconscious.
4. Being forced by a man to give him oral sex.
5. Being forced by a woman to give her oral sex.
6. Being forced to have anal sex.
7. Being raped by a man.
8. Being raped by a woman.
Note: The researchers did not define “forced” or “rape,” leaving participants to use their own understanding of these terms, “forced” having somewhat less negative connotations than “rape.”
Confirming earlier studies on the prevalence of rape fantasies, 62 percent of participants admitted fantasizing at least one of the eight scenarios:
Forced by a man: 52%.
Raped by a man: 32%.
Forced oral by a man: 28%.
Forced while incapacitated: 24%.
Forced by a woman: 17%.
Forced anal: 16%.
Raped by a woman: 9%.
Forced oral by a woman: 9%.
Note: The participants were considerably more likely to fantasize being “forced” than “raped,” presumably because “rape” carries more connotations of violence and harm.
The high prevalence of rape fantasies—almost two-thirds of the women—suggest that they play a significant role in the fantasy lives of college-age women ... and presumably many older women as well.
Meanwhile, in line with other assessments, 15 percent of study participants reported being survivors of sexual assault. The researchers found no relationship, either direct or inverse, between real-life rape and whether participants had any type of rape fantasy.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-sex/201001/womens-rape-fantasies-how-common-what-do-they-mean
[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]Further, rape is not about want, but consent. If a woman wants to have sex but chooses not to for any reason and says "no" or "stop" and the man doesn't...it is still rape.
No means no. Forced sex is always rape because there is no consent.
Nor does it glamorizes anything. Fantasizing about something doesn't mean you want it.
I come from the asexual community and there are many asexuals who fear they may not be asexual because they fantasize about sex. I have to tell them all the time that dreams and fantasies are just that dreams and fantasies. In fact, I have to point out tthat there is a specific term for them, just to show them that they are still asexuals.
As you can see from the quotes above just because one fantasizes about something doesn't mean they want that in real life, the articles specifically mention that.[/font]
LostOne4Ever
(9,597 posts)[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]The specifically mention rape, and solely rape, as well as categorizing them as aversive fantasies.
Quoting:[/font]
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-sex/201508/why-do-women-have-rape-fantasies
1. Being forced by a man to surrender sexually against my will.
2. Being forced by a woman to surrender sexually against my will.
3. Being forced into a sex against my will because I was incapacitated by drugs, alcohol, or being unconscious.
4. Being forced by a man to give him oral sex.
5. Being forced by a woman to give her oral sex.
6. Being forced to have anal sex.
7. Being raped by a man.
8. Being raped by a woman.
Note: The researchers did not define “forced” or “rape,” leaving participants to use their own understanding of these terms, “forced” having somewhat less negative connotations than “rape.”
Confirming earlier studies on the prevalence of rape fantasies, 62 percent of participants admitted fantasizing at least one of the eight scenarios:
Forced by a man: 52%.
Raped by a man: 32%.
Forced oral by a man: 28%.
Forced while incapacitated: 24%.
Forced by a woman: 17%.
Forced anal: 16%.
Raped by a woman: 9%.
Forced oral by a woman: 9%.
Note: The participants were considerably more likely to fantasize being “forced” than “raped,” presumably because “rape” carries more connotations of violence and harm.
The high prevalence of rape fantasies—almost two-thirds of the women—suggest that they play a significant role in the fantasy lives of college-age women ... and presumably many older women as well.
Meanwhile, in line with other assessments, 15 percent of study participants reported being survivors of sexual assault. The researchers found no relationship, either direct or inverse, between real-life rape and whether participants had any type of rape fantasy.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-sex/201001/womens-rape-fantasies-how-common-what-do-they-mean
opiate69
(10,129 posts)Educate yourself before flapping your gums.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_fantasy
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)It is not a fantasy about actual rape. Rape is not about sex.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)I could introduce you to no less than a dozen women who can attest that you have no fucking idea what you are talking about with merely one phone call. Of course, this is such a sensitive subject, any more detail would leave me open to hides.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)There were at least three failed attempts on mine tonight.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)
opiate69
(10,129 posts)
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)
opiate69
(10,129 posts)I mean, when we go to the house of horror on Halloween, we obviously know there aren't real zombies/monsters/murderers or ghosts there, but we still get the bejeebus scared out of us by the actors playing them... even the mildest "consentual non-consent" play triggers the same psychological phenomenon.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)But now they alert on anyone who dares discuss anything even slightly risque.
In this case it wasn't even about rape, it was about fantasy, and trying to tell women what is acceptable and what is "sick" in their own minds is like...well it's like being Catholic and being taught to feel guilty for just being human.
I still can't tell if they're serious or if this is just another poutrage incident designed to make Bernie and his supporters look like misogynists.
Because that would be something new.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)Consensual acts are not rape.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)go make a free account at fetlife and search for rape/abduction scenes.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)opiate69
(10,129 posts)Much of what people regularly engage in consentually in dungeons and play spaces are still considered criminal acts. The legal system has a de facto assumption of non-consent for a wide range of play.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Or getting stabbed? Rape is an assault. Who fantasizes about being assaulted?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Rape fantasies are common, stop judging women who have them.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Quit lying about judging. You refuse to acknowledge the difference between a sexual fantasy and a fantasy about being assaulted. Why Bernie is worth this is hard to figure out - he wrote what he wrote long before people in general got the concept that rape is not about sex and was probably oblivious, it was long ago, and he's not going to lose votes over it.
treestar
(82,383 posts)if they consent, it is not rape. They would be fantasizing about what they would consent to.
LostOne4Ever
(9,597 posts)[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]In another PT article:[/font]
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-sex/201508/why-do-women-have-rape-fantasies
Forced by a man: 52%.
Raped by a man: 32%.
Forced oral by a man: 28%.
Forced while incapacitated: 24%.
Forced by a woman: 17%.
Forced anal: 16%.
Raped by a woman: 9%.
Forced oral by a woman: 9%.
[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]These are simply facts. And as always, facts are on your side BMUS.[/font]
treestar
(82,383 posts)in the fantasy is someone they'd want to have sex with. It all boils down to thinking oneself so attractive that men can't resist.
And that leads into the sexism of how men can't control themselves around attractive women.
Rape is not a form of sex. So a fantasy of really being raped would be a sexual fantasy. It'd be about assault.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)someone fantasizing about being assaulted. Forced into sex with someone they did not want and did not find attractive. It would be a negative fantasy or fear, like imagining being shot or robbed or something. And as such it would not be a "sexual" fantasy.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Your post makes absolutely no sense.
Women have rape fantasies, those fantasies are sexual and you don't get to decide what is acceptable or not.
What you can or cannot imagine is irrelevant.
Stop judging people.
treestar
(82,383 posts)imagining being assaulted. So it is something I do not identify with. And I have the concept that rape is an assault, not sex. To say that women have rape fantasies that are "sexual" is inconsistent with that. If I am fantasizing being raped, I am fantasizing an assault by someone I don't want to have sex with, and that would be about as enjoyable as fantasizing being beaten up. Rape is an assault; not a consensual sexual act.
I don't know why you think it better to go to all this trouble and come close to saying a very anti-feminist thing (that an assault can be sexual) just to defend Bernie from a decades old mishap that won't do him much harm in the primaries.
kath
(10,565 posts)sexual fantasies??
There's an entire chapter in there about rape fantasies.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)And that's just the lighter side of the genre, anyone who can Google can find thousands of stories written by women that are much more graphic.
This is just another manufactured scandal, most of us are too intelligent and well adjusted to even raise an eyebrow over this essay.
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)This is probably tmi, but I have often had fantasies about being raped. It does not mean that I have ever wanted to experience rape, since I have had two date rape experiences in my life and I would never want to go through that again. But fantasies are something different. I know that rape is not glamorous, and neither Bernie nor I am saying that it is.
But facts are facts.
And this sounds like the same thing that I have been hearing from right wing friends who are dredging up old essays that Sanders wrote in his youth. You are reaching.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)If you are fantasizing about being overpowered by someone you find attractive or who you want to have sex with, it is not a rape fantasy. It is a domination fantasy. Fantasizing about a hot guy having his way with you is not a rape fantasy.
Neither I, nor any woman I know, fantasizes about being dominated by men they find repulsive, and they certainly don't fantasize about actually being raped. Rape is rape.
I am really sorry to hear about your rapes. I have a close friend who was raped in college years ago and she is still suffering from it emotionally. Nobody fantasizes about that.
This essay wasn't dug up by a right winger. It was brought up in Mother Jones magazine.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I was attacked - I've posted about it here, and I am not offended in the least by what he wrote about women's fantasies.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)As I have repeatedly tried to explain to you in this thread, fantasies about being dominated by men you want to have sex with is not a "rape fantasy."
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Bernie knew that, others here know that, apparently you're the only one who can't figure it out and are still trying to pretend there's something wrong with womens' fantasies.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)But women's fantasies are not about actual rape. That is what Bernie's essay and you don't seem to understand.
There's snuff films out there too. That does not mean women fantasize about being murdered.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Like I said, do some research, those fantasies are common and you're certainly not an authority.
Get over yourself and stop judging other women.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)It's a well documented fact, get over it and move on.
SunSeeker
(53,865 posts)Bernie's essay does not count as "documentation."
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)And that particular fantasy has been around a lot longer than you or Bernie, try to keep up.
treestar
(82,383 posts)or assaulted in some other way. Not a sexual fantasy but a fearful one, like where a person might imagine being in a terrible car accident or being robbed/mugged. One might momentarily think what it might feel like to be told you have cancer or be in the World Trade Center and deciding whether to jump - it's not a pleasant fantasy but something we may think about when we hear about something awful happening to someone else.
Cassiopeia
(2,603 posts)On Thu Dec 3, 2015, 07:29 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
Pick one, either you lied about the essay or you don't know the difference.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=871096
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Calling a poster a liar is uncivil. Hide it. She's done it multiple times in this thread.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Dec 3, 2015, 07:32 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: The whole damn thread is a waste of time and should be hidden. Unfortunately, I can only vote on this particular post. Hide it.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Thanks for posting, this is SOP for certain posters, they try to set Bernie supporters up for hides.
We read about it at their website so it's nothing new.
yuiyoshida
(42,791 posts)**edited to note, the results are posted above.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Someone at the cave has a sad.
yuiyoshida
(42,791 posts)Cassiopeia beat me to it...
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Why do you think that's okay?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Speaking of fantasies, Bernie thinks women enjoy being raped. I simply cannot understand how a real liberal would vote for a pro gunner that thinks women enjoy being raped. Can you explain that to me? I just can't wrap my head around that. Especially when I think about how many women have been raped at the point of a knife or gun.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=868622
You still haven't explained, why did you post that about Bernie if you knew he was talking about fantasies?