The problem with the 'Sexism' Label...

[stevenleser]

Is that it is being used for every criticism of Hillary. Here are a few examples

Banshee - A few times in my life when I have been angry and yelling about something, I have heard people describe me as screaming like a banshee (and yes, I am a male). I've described men and women as screaming like a banshee. That description, Irish fokelore aside, does not smack of sexism to me. It means someone was upset and yelling. Unless you are actually referring to an Irish supernatural creature, I dont see why it has a gender implication. Men can't scream? Men cannot wail?

Mood swings - To me, this is similar to the accusation unfairly levied at Al Gore by rethuglicans in 2000. "Which Al Gore is going to show up" and "who is the real Al Gore, does he even know". The accusation is one that seems to be levied where people seem to see widely divergant versions of the same person. Why is this sexism? Was it sexism when virtually the same thing was said about Gore? It was ugly and unfair, I'll give you that, but sexist?

Bitch - OK, I'll give you that this is further down the road towards unfair gender bias, but what is the person trying to say about someone that they call a bitch? Is the behavior that they find objectionable also objectionable if a man does it? Because THAT is where sexism COULD come in. If a man would be acceptable if he exhibited the same behaviors, then, yes, it is sexism. Otherwise, does it really matter if a man exhibits the same behavior and is called an asshole vs a woman being called a bitch? So in that circumstance, if we drop the 'B' word and call the woman an asshole does that remove the sexism? Because if it does, then sexism is clearly not what I thought it was. Nor is it what Merriam Webster seems to think it is:

sexism
One entry found.

sexism

Main Entry:
sex·ism
Pronunciation:
\?sek-?si-z?m\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
1sex + -ism (as in racism)
Date:
1968
1: prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women
2: behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex
------------------

If you can find anything more beneficial or prejudicial or stereotype fostering about being called a bitch vs an asshole, I would like to hear it.

It isnt that I have never seen sexism in attacks against Hillary here. To be sure, I have seen it exactly once and told the person doing it in no certain terms that their comment made me sick. But every other thread I have read critical of Hillary had zero sexism in it.

[RandomKoolzip]

1. I beg to differ.

Most men are unconscious about their covert sexism. This is a real issue. Language can be received in ways the messenger never had intended, and for a male to deem the receiver "too sensitive" is just compounding sexism upon sexism. In other words, because men are power-holders and privileged in ways they don't even realize, it is not up to them to decide what is sexist and what isn't. That area of relative (note the qualifying hedge word) power is reserved for women only.

That's just my opinion as a white male who wants to live in a misogyny-free world.

HAVING SAID THAT, I wish Clinton would drop out of the race and allow the black guy a shot at the brass ring this year.

[zanne]

4. I'm a feminist and I use the word "bitch".

I wouldn't use it to describe Hillary because, even though I'm an Obama supporter, I have to admire her strength and ambition. Many people use the term "bitch" for a woman the same way they'd use the term "bastard" for a man. I use both.

[hfojvt]

11. so do I, but in the other direction

I don't think men are that powerful, certainly not any more, and I really am not sure they ever were. Two stories on the M$M confirm that for me. One involved a study that showed the women were the ones making decisions in most marriages. This was an objective study of hundreds of couples. Wife said X, husband said Y. They then compromised on X. A majority of them. The other was a woman who went deep cover and lived for a year as a man. Her opinion - women have the power in relationships. Not an objective study, but the comment from somebody who has been both.

Finally, there is a certain advantage to be gained by being over sensitive. Any time I can call somebody on a perceived slight, that gives me an edge. You find yourself hamstrung because you might say a wrong word, and then be told, not just "please do not use that word" but also, "you have a severe character defect".

Which is unavoidable if it is true, but a serious charge like that should not be made on questionable evidence.

[stevenleser]

13. "a serious charge like that should not be made on questionable evidence."

And that is a very wise and critical element. you dont judge someone a sexist or a racist on the kind of things people are using to support those sorts of accusations here. It smacks of reaching for making onesself and ones candidate a victim. it is victim mentality to always reach for these kinds of labels.

[RandomKoolzip]

24. So the patriarchy's been overthrown because men are making fewer decisions

in marriages? I dunno, man. I think it's going to take a lot more work and a lot more evidence to convince me that women aren't the subjects of systemic sexism.

I really don't think it's too much to ask of men (and women) that they not use certain loaded terms in certain contexts. It's just common courtesy, IMO.

[hfojvt]

33. the patriarchy is a myth to me

It's focusing only on the powerful men and missing that there are lots of men with no power.

I don't disagree with your last statement, but I think it gets out of hand when that list keeps getting longer and longer, including lots of fairly ordinary words like claws, unhinged, periodically, down, and banshee. Where does the list of loaded terms stop?

[stevenleser]

37. Well, I was rather offended by the use of the word "list" in your post, so...

you had better apologize! ;-) in all seriousness, thanks for getting it!

[RandomKoolzip]

45. Even men with no insitutional power are repositories of privilege.

It's just that we don't recognize it as privilege because we don't know what it's like to NOT be male.

[hfojvt]

47. and women do not know what it is like to be male either

except the one who went undercover. I can see what it is like to be non-male from my mother, my sisters, and my nieces, and I have seen the male privilege checklist and found it wanting.

[misanthrope]

58. I agree with this as well...

...I spent a LOT of my younger life "outside the norm." Whether it was as the only male in the household, the only white kid in the black neighborhood, the only bookworm in a redneck neighborhood, the only kid without a dominant Southern accent, the only athlete in the gifted classes, the artist on the athletic team, the poor kid in the rich school or in lots of other ways, I know what it is like to be on the outside looking in and realize things aren't always as popular wisdom makes them out to be.

[DemBones DemBones]

117. Sorry you're not getting your full RDA of male privilege but

that doesn't prove it doesn't exist. It does, as much now as ever, and I was calling certain men "male supremacists" years before I ever heard of Betty Friedan or Gloria Steinem or "male chauvinism," so my memory goes back pretty far.

You wrote:

"and women do not know what it is like to be male either"

which is true.

I disagree with the next phrase, though:

"except the one who went undercover."

because a woman posing as a man or a man posing as a woman gets to find out how the opposite sex acts when they're just girls or just guys hanging out. But crossdressing does not allow anyone to understand the physiology of the opposite sex, or the conditioning they've received throughout their lives.

Then you wrote:

"I can see what it is like to be non-male from my mother, my sisters, and my nieces,"

I don't know what you think you're seeing, but you can't really understand what it's like to be non-male without actually being female. Neither can they fully understand what it's like to be male.

[hfojvt]

146. good points kinda

but there is not a consistent "male conditioning" that is universal to all males. A boy who is raised in a misogynist household and goes to Catholic schools is not the same as a boy raised in a more liberated household who goes to progressive schools.

As far as seeing my sisters, that means that I can see some of what is going on, and am certainly not oblivious to the problems or privileges of females.

Thing is, if I do not get my "male privileges" simply by virtue of being male, then clearly some of what are called males privileges really are not about male-ness. The rich and powerful have privileges more than the poor and meek.

[DemBones DemBones]

116. Exactly, just as white people don't realize the privileges

they have as white people because they've never been not white.

[stevenleser]

136. But in various cases, whites, males, straights, christians, etc...

... are not in situations where those priviledges apply or have any effect.

[stevenleser]

134. Not necessarily...

be careful with your generalizations. In most cases, whites vs non whites, men vs women and straight vs glbt have repositories of priviledge, but not in all.

[uppityperson]

41. Thank you. Common courtesy. eom

[misanthrope]

57. Good post**nm

**

[leftofthedial]

96. racist

"let the black guy win"

I'm disgusted!




;-)

-just kidding-

[formernaderite]

135. you know what...I'm going to come around and agree

that Hillary has been subject to sexist remarks. It's not that all of us don't know that either....but I'm not a fan of hers. So we all have her in our sights so to speak. Were she a man...we'd hit "him" with something else. The sexism is just one way of striking out at her as a candidate at the moment. Those of us in the "other" camp...(and btw, I was an edwards supporter before he dropped out)are just lashing out. Yes it's ugly out here...and no, I don't think it's fair either. But I think we've seen the height of ugliness on both sides. I also think the sexism is related to the level of dislike a lot of people have for her personally. I'll admit....I really don't care for her. But I think I'd be pretty supportive of a lot of other women...and NO I don't believe they'd be subject to as much sexism as Hillary.

[SoFlaJet]

2. thanks Steve

I had no idea it was gender specific when I made the reference earlier-banshee that is

[stevenleser]

7. And there really isnt any reason why you should

I dont think the complete Irish etymology of the word is necessary to use it. It doesnt have any sexist connotation. I have never had any ,an or woman I have thusly described say anything of the kind to me, nor have I felt someone was making some sort of gender statement when calling me one.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

3. I want to extend my formal apologies.

I had no idea I was offending short people, magical fey, or the Irish when I called Dennis Kucinich a "leprachaun."

[DJ13]

5. Im a guy who's wife is constantly telling me to stop bitching

Can I call her sexist?

[stevenleser]

28. Interesting how none of the folks trying to paint me as wrong have responded to you

I wonder why that is?

[Der Blaue Engel]

6. "But every other thread I have read critical of Hillary had zero sexism in it."

Please. You've seen one and only one example of sexism used against Hillary. Most people just claim they've only seen a few, but you've really taken that to a new level of blinders. Or mendacity.

As for your excuses for how those terms aren't sexist, I've seen similar reasoning used to explain that "picaninny" and "cotton-picking" aren't racist. "Picaninny is just from the Portuguese for 'little one. That was never intended to be an ethnic slur to anybody." "Lots of people pick cotton. Why would you assume it's a reference to slavery?" I could go on, but I'm getting queasy.

[stevenleser]

9. Never heard of Picaninny before, didnt know that "cotton-picking" had racist

connotations. I have heard and seen in literature references to "Get your cotton-picking" hands off of me. Reading or hearing those words never mqde me think of black people. Why would they? I would have the same bewilderment in that case. I'm sorry Mein freund, but you have only made me feel more confident that people here are determined to find epithets where there are none.

[uppityperson]

14. What about if someone tries to shortchange someone else?

Would you say "don't jew me" or "don't gyp me" and expect there to be no issue? How about "that's so gay"? How about calling someone "nigger" and expecting it to be just peachy because, after all, rappers say it all the time so how COULD it be an insult?

From what you write, you seem to want to live in a world where words have little emotional meaning, and don't understand their history and meanings implied. It might be good to ask, rather than saying "how should I have known? I didn't mean anything. Sheesh."

[stevenleser]

17. Because it is impossible to live life that way

asking before saying every single word that comes out of our mouths.

Yes, there are pretty well accepted bigoted words, whether the affected group is a religion, ethnic origin or orientation. We all know what they are. To my knowledge, Bitch, Banshee and mood swings are not among them. You can say all of those things at work and not be instantly fired. Although I dont get dont "gyp" me. Dont tell me that is a reference to gypsees?

[uppityperson]

19. I guess you have superior wisdom and don't want to learn.

"We all know what they are." Obviously not. "Dont tell me", tough shit. Here is the answer since, even though you prefer to not understand, to not learn, you get to hear it. Yes, "gyp" comes from the prejorative "gypsie". "Gypsie" is a pejorative and bigoted term about the Rom and Sinti, rather like "nigger" is.

"You can say all of those things at work and not be instantly fired." You can call someone a bitch at work and not get fired? Wild.

[stevenleser]

26. Really? You have seen HR at a firm come by and escort someone out for saying "bitch"?

Please tell me where

[uppityperson]

29. You can call someone a bitch at work and not get fired?

You don't answer except with a question? Ah.

To answer, yes, I have had people written up for this. If they continue to do so, yes, they get fired. Ever been in a nursing home and heard a staff member call someone a bitch? How about a grocery store? School? Where do you work that you can call people "bitch" with impunity?

[stevenleser]

32. Sure I can.

One of my good friends and I call each other bitches at work all the time. Many people at work call each other bitches all the time. In many big cities in the US, it is part of the accepted colloqialisms to do so and that has likewise made it into the workplace.

[uppityperson]

40. A teacher calls a student "bitch". A doctor calls a patient "bitch".

A cashier says "hey bitch, here's your change". All accepted colloqialisms in many big cities. Right. :eyes:

[xmas74]

48. In most fields you would

be fired for using that type of language-and deservedly so!

[stevenleser]

138. It depends on usage...

... people in my dept playfully call each other bitches all of the time. However, if we called a customer a bitch or an asshole or a fucking piece of shit, we would be fired. But we would not be fired for being sexist, we would be fired for insulting a customer with a vulgar word.

[Der Blaue Engel]

44. Obviously, you don't have to ask before every word you say

Responding with understanding when someone explains to you that something is offensive should be enough...unless you don't care how your words make other people feel.

[Der Blaue Engel]

16. Funny, your failure to understand that convinced me that I'm right

eom

[stevenleser]

18. But you so obviously arent.

you seem to be one of those people determined to find offense and apply victimhood where there is none.

As someone who is mixed hispanic, african and Jewish descent, I've been the object of a lot of bigotry. I can tell you, this isnt it.

[uppityperson]

21. As a female, I've been the object of a lot of bigotry. "Bitch" is often sexist.

And yes, I've used it as a joke with other females. People belonging to the group of (negative word) can and do use the word amongst themselves in a non-ist way, rather mocking it. Just because I call a sister a bitch doesn't mean you, a male, gets to. Unfair? So?

[stevenleser]

25. But that is not the only use of the word, so, you are still not right...

... I think someone else pointed out that "bitch" is gaining popularity for men to say it to other men with zero gender implications. So, if it is OK for men to say to other men, and it is OK for women to say to women, and I have been called a bitch by women as well so I guess that is OK, why is it not OK for a woman to be called this by a man? This isnt like the N word or similar epithets.

[uppityperson]

30. "This isnt like the N word or similar epithets." Wrong. Plain and simple. Wrong.

It is like nigger.

[stevenleser]

34. Really? Wont calling someone the N word here get you tombstoned?

But calling someone Bitch doesnt. So, obviously, it isnt the same, now is it?

[uppityperson]

35. No, it won't. It depends. It is the same.

But you must be much smarter than I, with much more worldly knowledge. Good luck and keep that same open mind going.

[Der Blaue Engel]

39. So because one kind of bigotry is acceptable to many

it's fine and dandy. Thanks for clearing that up.

[stevenleser]

76. Nice straw man, no, I never said that...

but your use of logical fallacies says a lot

[uppityperson]

82. I think you do not understand what that word means.

[stevenleser]

89. Oh, I know what a straw man argument is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
"A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.<1> To "set up a straw man" or "set up a straw man argument" is to describe a position that superficially resembles an opponent's actual view but is easier to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent (for example, deliberately overstating the opponent's position).<"[br />
The person restated my position incorrectly that "some bigotry was OK and some wasnt" since I never said that, that incorrect restating of my position to an easily refuted one is a classic example of a straw man argument.

Next?

[Der Blaue Engel]

94. It's only "incorrect" because you don't even understand what you're saying

or are pretending not to.

Your insistance does not make it a logical fallacy, nor does pasting a definition from Wikipedia.

I'm done talking to you. Your words speak for themselves.

[stevenleser]

130. Sorry to embarass you by showing your use of logical fallacies, but it is what you did

... if that causes you to put me on ignore, it says a lot more about you than it does me.

[uppityperson]

143. Bwahahahahaha. You slay me.

You who has told posters in this thread you are putting them on ignore, reply this way to someone who says they are done talking to you.

I'll explain it slowly.
1. Putting someone on ignore is different than just stopping talking to you.
2. You say you have put posters on ignore, then say "if that causes you to put me on ignore, it says a lot more about you than it does me."
:rofl::rofl::rofl:

[DemBones DemBones]

147. You nailed him!

"You say you have put posters on ignore, then say 'if that causes you to put me on ignore, it says a lot more about you than it does me.' "

That quote from him doesn't sound like someone who did well in a Logic course, does it? :shrug:

:rofl:

[Der Blaue Engel]

85. Since I've used neither, I'm starting to understand your lack of comprehension

of language in general.

[stevenleser]

90. Yes, you did. To wit:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4783265&mesg_id=4806746

[xmas74]

49. And I would tell a man off if I heard him say the

word "bitch" in any kind of public place. Not only that but if it were a public place I would probably speak to a manager about that kind of language.

[ContinentalOp]

62. Actually it does have gender implications when used between two men.

The whole point is that it's an insult because you're calling a man a woman. In fact I would say it's less offensive for a man to use that word against a woman where it's just a sort of feminized version of "asshole." In that case you're just saying that a particular woman is a terrible person. If you call a man a bitch you're saying that he's a terrible person because all women are inherently weak or whiny or whatever supposedly "feminine" trait you're accusing him of displaying.

[uppityperson]

67. Exactly. You are accusing "him" of acting like "her", with etiology of "bitch" being FEMALE dog in

heat, acting as FEMALE dogs in heat do. Calling a man a bitch is saying he acts like a stereotypically irrational female.

[stevenleser]

75. No, it doesnt.

It no longer has that connotation.

[DemBones DemBones]

118. HELLO, you're male. You don't get to decide what is offensive to women

and girls.

I think you said you were part Jewish and if that's the case, your telling women that "bitch" is not offensive to women is like somebody who is not even part Jewish telling you that "kike" or "hebe" is not offensive to Jews.

[stevenleser]

128. yes, in some cases, I definitely do...

If several members of a minority group decide that calling them I dont know, calling them "individuals" is bigoted, I get to say that this is not a bigoted term.

Next?

[Der Blaue Engel]

36. You don't actually get to decide what's not bigotry simply because you're a member of

a minority group.

The rule of thumb that I go by in life is that if someone tells me they find a certain word denigrating to a particular group, I stop saying it. It's one thing to say you didn't realize something had a derogatory meaning or intent, and quite another to insist that you aren't responsible for its effects and continue using it.

And when words have a long history of bigoted usage and you STILL insist that they aren't meant that way, people can see very clearly where you stand.

[stevenleser]

133. Rational people, whether minorities or not, can decide that, yes...

And I normally go by the same rule that you do. However, when dozens of words and phrases all of a sudden start being represented as bigoted during the waning months of a campaign by supporters of the person that is losing, and that supposed bigotry is being used as a hammer with which to hit the supporters of the person who is winning over the head, my B.S. detector starts going off.

When those supporters of the losing candidate insist on starting multiple threads accusing other DUers of bigotry when this has not happened in the past (and when there is an approved method for dealing with bigotry, i.e. the alert key, that will get bigoted posts removed without the fanfare you all are causing) until this candidate has started losing, I think we can all clearly see where you all stand.

[hfojvt]

20. there is a question of intent meant or intent taken

To me, a northerner born 100 years after the Civil War, it is an innocent term that some people use instead of saying the more offensive "Goddamn" or "God damned". It is thus very easy for people to pick it up without knowing where it has been and to use it without meaning any deeper offense at all.

Still I always take a little bit of umbrage when people use the term "paddy wagon" or use "anemic" or "mouth breathing" as terms of approbation, but I don't normally make a huge deal about it. I normally don't think offense should be taken unless offense is meant or egregious.

[uppityperson]

8. It depends on usage and intent. You seriously believe asshole and bitch carry same weight?

If a man is called an asshole, and a woman a bitch, you do not see "bitch" as sexist? Are you saying "asshole" and "bitch" carry the same emotional weight when said in similar/same situation? You seem to be saying that what is sexist, in your view, is calling a female a rude name when you would not call a male in the same position a rude name. Is this right?

Do you seriously not see anything sexist in calling a female a bitch and a male an asshole? Calling different sexes different name is not sexist?



Here is DU rules take on the word.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules_detailed.html

Special note with regard to the word "bitch": The word "bitch" has been the source of a great deal of controversy on this website, because some of our members consider it to be a bigoted slur against all women, while others do not consider it bigoted. For a while we actively deleted posts which included this word, in an effort to keep the peace. This effort helped to keep discussions on track, but it resulted in many deleted posts that were otherwise perfectly fine as well as many confused people. Futhermore, the moderators themselves were ambivalent about removing the word. For this reason, we no longer automatically remove the word "bitch." However, we strongly urge members to voluntarily avoid using the word if they wish to keep their own discussions from going off-topic, and we reserve the right to take disciplinary action if we think someone is deliberately using the word in an effort to disrupt or cause trouble.

[stevenleser]

10. I think you said it in your subject, it depends on usage and I think the mods agree

from the snippet you posted. I think asshole is generally a worse thing to call someone. The point people are not getting is, if you are going to call someone some variation of a vulgar word, does it really make a difference one you choose? If I am angry at someone and I choose asshole instead of fucking piece of shit, doest it really matter? Am I really saying something materially different? If we add bitch to the mix, does it really feel worse to women to be called a bitch vs an asshole or a fucking piece of shit,because I have to say that for me, it wouldnt. I get that the person is very unhappy with me in any of those cases.

[uppityperson]

12. In answer, yes, it does. Being called a bitch implies sexist thinking.

Being called an asshole implies the person thinks badly of you. Being called a bitch means there is most likely sexism in there, that a man in her situation would not be called out, she is being called that BECAUSE she is female. And yes, it does feel worse. Think poorly of me if you wish, but make it because of what I say or do, not because I am female/male.

[stevenleser]

15. But if there are a lot of people who dont see it that way, including the people

who are using the word, where does that leave you/us? If the person using the word doesnt mean it that way, it isnt sexism, right? You do accept that words can mean different things to different people, right? I'm in France right now, and have just been educated on use of the French words for Cabbage, Cow, Camel and Pig. Each can be used to refer to people and three of the four are pretty serious insults, one is an endearment. I didnt guess right when my instructor had me guess which ones, can you guess? The point is, what seems obvious to you as an insult coming from a particular angle may not at all be what the person is saying, mon petite chou.

[uppityperson]

27. Let's try this again.

The definition from your OP. "prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women"

Calling a woman a bitch because she is a woman is sexist. If behavior is objectionable, why have different labels? If the sex of the objectionable person is objectionable, you call her a bitch. "Bitch" implies that part of what you find objectionable is her femaleness. This is sexism.


Saying I shouldn't be upset at being called a bigoted thing, that I should not take offense at bigoted remarks is a way of your passing off responsibility for your behavior. If you call someone in France a camel and they take offense, are you going to say "I didn't mean it to be, what's your problem?" or are you going to take responsibility for what you did? You are a fool, egotistical, in denial, or yanking our chains here. Said in all seriousness and how can you take offense?

[stevenleser]

31. You immediately start from a flawed premise which I pointed out much earlier in our discussion

"If the sex of the objectionable person is objectionable, you call her a bitch. "Bitch" implies that part of what you find objectionable is her femaleness. This is sexism."

As I said in my initial response to you, if the person meant bitch the same way he means asshole, then there is no sexism. There is no implication or evidence that the objectionable thing is the fact that the person is female. Another point is that there is no consensus that bitch is a bigoted thing to call someone. If anything, the word is being used more and more by men and women to call other men and women, it is gaining acceptance, not the other way around.

You keep trying to assert things that are absolutely not in evidence here. it doesnt matter how many times you do, the evidence does not support you. And you clearly missed what I was trying to explain to you with the French stuff, but I'll make it more obvious. If a French person goes to the US and calls someone their little cabbage, I can see where someone might take offense not knowing what the person meant. But was the person intending to be offensive? No. Ergo, are people here intending to be sexist? I think it is pretty obvious that they arent. Most people do not regard use of the words I mentioned as sexist.

Of course, I can spin anything you say as sexist or bigoted. The problem here is that it so obviously is being used to achieve a political objective for a desperate candidate. That further sheds doubt on the idea that what is being said is really sexist.

[11 Bravo]

22. Did you miss the "hysterical wifey" thread? How about the "PMS" thread?

Denial, it's not just an African river anymore.

[stevenleser]

23. PMS thread was the sexist one I mentioned in my OP...

didnt see the hysterical wifey thread. I do miss DU on occasion particularly since I have been traveling abroad.

[COFoothills]

38. What's wrong with being sexy?

It's a fine line between stupid and clever.

[MonkeyFunk]

42. Yes, I understand why people

want to excuse their sexism, but I'm not buying what you're selling.

If I continually referred to Obama as a "pimp", would that be OK? No... it would get me banned.

But why? There are white pimps and black pimps and asian pimps... Nonetheless, it would be racist to do so, and it's sexist to use common negative stereotypes of women to depict Clinton.

The problem is so pervasive that many here can't even see it. It's a sad commentary.

[Der Blaue Engel]

46. As evidenced by this thread, it's not that they can't see, it's that they refuse to acknowledge it

and refuse to treat certain groups of people with respect, all the while claiming ignorance.

I have an intense dislike and zero tolerance for deliberate ignorance.

[Marie26]

43. You appear to be a guy

I'm sorry, men really don't get a say in what is or is not sexist; sort of the same way whites don't really get a say in what is and is not racist. It's hard to imagine a liberal telling someone to "get over it" or "don't be so sensitive" about a racial slur, yet women are told that all the time. And I find it patronizing in the extreme. Just think of it this way - you have a privilege that you might not even be aware of. Just like people in the majority race have privileges that they are not even aware of - because they take it as the default, the norm. Fish don't recognize the water. People are only made aware of this privilege when it is pointed out to them by those who do not share that privilege, who hold a different place & different perspective on society. When someone points that out, my role is to listen & perhaps see the world in a different way. It's not to shout down the other perspective & continue to believe that privilege doesn't exist. But I think most of the time people in the dominant group choose to do just that, because they've been taught that only their own perspective matters.

[stevenleser]

50. I would say that it depends...

there are limits where people not of the class in question can say, I am sorry, that is not bigotry and you dont get to make that phrase or word or action off limits.

I understand there was a move afoot some time ago to have people not use the word 'black' in literature to mean something bad, as in, it was the blackest night, or the blackest evil because some members of the African American community thought it was bigoted or racist to use the word that way. That was rejected not so much by African Americans, but by people in general. It just is not considered a bigoted term. 'Black' in that case is not meant as a referral to people of color, just like bitch when used as a perjorative really has nothing to do with someone being female.

[uppityperson]

66. You are seriously comparing "black" with "bitch"? omg.

Don't say "a black night" because that is racist? Are you series? The word "black" has many uses, way beyond racist designation.

What use does the word "bitch" have beyond being a slur on women? A female dog in heat? Aha, there is that female thing again. Etiology of "bitch" was from a female dog in heat and her actions. It is a gender slur, even if you use it against a man because, guess what. You are insulting him by saying "he" is like a "female" dog in heat.

[stevenleser]

77. Yes, yes I am...

because no matter how many times you say it means what you say, it doesnt necessarily mean that to other people when they say it. You cant get around that argument.

[uppityperson]

80. If you don't know in your heart what's sexist, then...

then there's no information I can provide to you that will educate you. I don't handle remedial cases. (thank you MonkeyFunk for the apt post)

[casus belli]

87. The problem is you can change the definition to suit whatever purpose you want.

And by the way, you are completely, utterly wrong. Sexism and racism are very much two way streets. Ask anyone in any of the "dominant" groups you seem to think are immune who has actually suffered under either. In fact, I would argue that your "you must be a guy" was absolutely sexist. The condescending manner in which you stated "men just don't get it" is female cheauvanism, which is a very real form of sexism. In fact it reeks of misandry though I won't accuse you of that. I won't paint by numbers for you or cite examples, because this conversation is mostly dead - thank god. But you are, most assuredly, wrong on all counts. If you want to be respected, I suggest you learn to do the same.

[stevenleser]

92. Ouch. Very well said...

I notice no one dared respond to you either.

[uppityperson]

98. Some of us sleep during the night, or work. Patience grasshopper.

See, like now. It's been 15 minutes and you haven't dared respond yet.

Patience grasshopper:


Yes, master:

[uppityperson]

97. I think you are replying to the wrong person since I never said that.

Not me who said "you must be a guy", not me who said "men just don't get it". Try again. If you want to be heard, I suggest you reply to the right person.
Try here, post #43 by Marie26
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4783265#4784939

[Marie26]

104. Is that me?

"In fact, I would argue that your "you must be a guy" was absolutely sexist"

LOL, the poster's profile said he was a guy! How sexist of me to assume that someone describing themselves as male is, in fact, a guy.

[uppityperson]

106. Yes, I think it was you and how DARE you call someone male because their profile says they are!

I mean, really! :sarcasm: and :rofl: You sexist you!

[casus belli]

109. You miss the point.

Entirely. See below for explanation. The sexism is derived from the tone of your argument, and the outright stupidity of suggesting that whites cant be victimes of racism and men can't be subject to sexism, when you, in fact, just did.

And again, I'm done. Good luck with your life.

[Marie26]

115. See post #114

And wow, that's a lot of anger there. I never said that men can't be subject to sexism or whites can't be subject to racism. What I AM saying is that men really can't tell women that sexism against women doesn't exist (being as they have never experienced it), in the same way that whites really don't have the ability to tell minority groups that racism or bigotry don't exist (because they haven't seen it). That is a member of a dominant, privileged group telling members of the unprivileged group that bias or prejudice doesn't exist. A majority telling the minority that the majority's own perspective on what minorities experience has more validity than members of the minority group itself. Or that a man's opinions of what women experience has more validity than women's opinions about their own lives. That's piling sexism on top of sexism, as randomkool said, by assuming that your own perspective of the other group's experiences has more validity than their own first-hand perspective. And that is someone assuming that their own experience is the same as everyone else's, when it is not.

[uppityperson]

123. Congratulations. After using the word incorrectly elsewhere, you did a strawman!

ed for typo

[uppityperson]

107. psst, that user's profile SAYS he is male.

"you appear to be a guy" is not sexist when the person posts that they are a guy. Just in case you didn't read below where the poster you were here calling sexist (Marie26) replied to me. His profile says he is male. "You appear to be a guy" is then sexist? Since you are sensitive to others being completely and utterly wrong, I am sure you appreciate having this pointed out to you.

[casus belli]

108. "I'm sorry, men really don't get a say in what..."

"is or is not sexist; sort of the same way whites don't really get a say in what is and is not racist."

Sexist. Pure and simple. Or would it be ok for me to say, you can't possibly understand where I'm coming from because you're a woman? I mean that is, after all, the bottom line of her post - "What's a guy doing talking about sexism? You don't understand what sexism is." Isn't that really the bottom line? That's not sexist?


Let's just take the straw men and pack it up. There's no upper hand in this for you to gain. Her post was sexist as well as ignorant, the tone is denial, and for her to suggest that men can't be victims of sexism and whites can't be victims of racism is absolutely akin to me telling you you've got no right to speak because you're a woman and you can't understand how a man thinks.

Both are utterly ridiculous, disgusting claims.

I'm done with this. It's depressing.

[Marie26]

114. Please respond to me

If you are going to criticize my posts, please respond to me, instead of calling me names in other posts. Yes, I do believe that it is very difficult for a man to tell women what is & is not sexist against women. In the same way that it would be presumptuous for whites to tell blacks or another ethnic group what constitutes racism. Or for a non-Jew to tell Jewish people what is anti-Semetic. That's because all these groups are the "dominant group" and they don't have the same experience as someone in the other group. So by definition, they haven't had first-hand experience w/the bias or prejudice that the other group has experienced. That's part of privilege.

My point is trying to get people to at least recognize that women have a different experience in American society, just as ethnic minorities do. Just because it is not your own, does not make that perspective invalid. In fact, since women are actually the ones that experience misogyny, that should give their opinions more weight. As is true of men if we're talking about sexism against men, I guess, which wasn't the subject of the post. I can't imagine having the arrogance to tell women that there's no sexism at DU, because the poster himself hasn't perceived it. Or to say that "bitch" has absolutely nothing to do w/someone being female. Women who get called that word would disagree. Imagine if someone posted that bigotry doesn't exist, racial slurs don't exist or aren't really racial slurs, and minorities are just being over-sensitive. That post wouldn't last long here.

It seems like people are more willing to see this when it comes to racism. OK, minority groups often say that they are unfairly targeted or harassed by police. White people haven't experienced this, so it's easy for them to say that it doesn't happen. "I've never been tailed by police for no reason, so that experience must not exist." That's someone not recognizing the privilege that they have as a member of the dominant group. They take their own experience, & assume it must be the same for everyone. I, as a white woman, have never in my life been tailed by a police car while driving alone. But when I've gone out w/my black friends, we've been tailed & followed for miles. If I just based my opinion on the way I am treated, I'd assume that unfair police harassment doesn't happen. But because I've seen the way other people who are in a different ethnic group are treated, I know it does. So when minorities say that police profile based on race, my role is to listen to them, knowing that racism is something that they would know a whole lot more about. It would NOT be my role to insist that racial profiling doesn't exist, or police don't follow cars, or worse, that it's racist to say that black people receive different treatment. That would be arrogant and ignorant in the extreme. Can you see that? Listening is the only way to get beyond privilege. Listen & understanding that members of the privileged group have a different experience in society - and that your own perspective cannot be applied or extrapolated to everyone else.

[uppityperson]

131. can't reply because is ignoring you. Somehow can read what you write though.

Just can't reply. Odd, that. see post #125
". I replied to you...

Edited on Sat Mar-01-08 11:41 AM by casus belli
because the response was to your words. Also, I can't respond to the original poster since she's currently ignored. Come to think of it, I'll just put you there as well and we can lay this stupidity to rest."

[uppityperson]

122. That part I consider wrong. The part where she called him male wasn't wrong.

Attacking part of your post, quoting your words, that was not a straw man. She called him male because he is.
I agree "men don't get a say" is wrong as of course we can all see what sexism is (like how the word "bitch" is often used), you can admit you were wrong also that her calling the other poster a male based on the fact the other poster said he was a male was not sexism but stating a fact.

And why do you keep replying to me with stuff aimed at that other poster? It is best to respond directly to her about what she wrote. Simple, eh?

[casus belli]

125. I replied to you...

because the response was to your words. Also, I can't respond to the original poster since she's currently ignored. Come to think of it, I'll just put you there as well and we can lay this stupidity to rest.

Just one last thing, take the entire thread, read it again, look up the definition for straw man, and use your brain.

The original poster has a problem with context, as I believe you might as well. "You must be a guy", is an assumption. "You're a guy" is not. "You must be a guy" is a phrase used in reference to the context of his post, denial of this point doesn't make it less true.

I'm getting the feeling here, that I am going round and round with three women who may have a very narrow definition of sexism, who believe they are somehow immune to it, and who may actually have tendencies toward misandry. If I had opened a post with "You must be a woman" and then went on to explain how someone in the "non-dominant" group can't understand what it's like to be a dominant gender or race, I'd have been not-so-politely removed from DU. The original poster will no doubt get a pass, but that doesn't mean I have to sit and listen to her, or you, tell me I don't know what I'm talking about when it comes to sexism or racism.

Have a nice life.

[uppityperson]

129. "I can't respond to the original poster since she's currently ignored."

Bwahahahahahahaha. So you read a post, ignore the person, then reply to someone else. Now you will ignore me too? Oh my word. :rofl:

[DemBones DemBones]

120. You might want to learn how to

spell "chauvinism" after you get down off your high horse.

Many men don't "get" sexism just like many whites don't "get" racism.


When a poster whose user name is stevensomething keeps insisting that it's OK to use the word "bitch" whenever you like, it's a no-brainer that the poster is a guy.

If someone posted something racist or argued that "nigger" is acceptable for anyone to say, and another poster said "You must be white," would you claim the second poster was racist? NO. You would say the first poster was racist.

But like far too many men at DU, you don't get it that you don't get to say what's sexist and what isn't.

I hope all you guys posting this shit are just very young and will mature and realize that sexism is a very real form of bigotry.

[casus belli]

124. But like far too many men at DU, you don't get it that you don't get to say what's sexist....

Ridiculous.

You have no idea of my life experience - either what I have experienced or what I have not. I assure you, that I am no stranger to either sexism or racism.

Sexism and racism are both real, you are correct. But they are NOT a one-way street, nor do they only apply to "non-dominant" genders or races, as some of you would like to suggest. What IS evident by these responses, is that some women don't "get it" either.

edit: I'll file this one under misandry as well, and add you to the ignore list - along with the other misguided posters with whom I've had the displeasure of responding on this turd of a subject. Good luck with your life, and that chip.

[DemBones DemBones]

140. I'm just crushed that you put me on Ignore, being

a hysterical woman and all that. :rofl:

Stick it in your ear, pal.

[uppityperson]

144. Did you see this post?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4783265&mesg_id=4834456
#130
:rofl: Certainly says something, doesn't it?

[Marie26]

103. This is true

You are right. Women's own opinions on what constitutes sexism have much less value or worth than your perspective. The dictionary definition was especially helpful to make sure they understand what the word means. Yes, those radicals tried to get you to stop using the word 'black', just like Rush Limbaugh told you. And of course bitch has nothing to do with someone being female - the fact that the dictionary definition is of a female dog is mere coincidence. Gosh, you really set me straight.

[hfojvt]

52. hath not a man eyes, or logic circuits?

If you can see something, you should also be able to explain what you see. White people can understand racism and men can understand sexism, at least many men claim to. I would also add that "awareness" goes both ways. As a woman, you might have privileges that you are not even aware of, or that you think are just and fair.

Just because I listen respectfully does not mean I will decide that the complaint is valid. People are often unreasonable and illogical and employ their own double standards, even members of oppressed groups.

[Beausoir]

51. We know it when we see it. And we've seen enough of it here.

Take your simplistic lecture elsewhere.

[Breeze54]

53. Ditto

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[stevenleser]

55. No, I wont, because I am right

you have zero chance of shouting me down. Get it?

[Beausoir]

71. I'm shouting?? Did I shout at you? That's considered shouting?

Oh, I get it. It's the old shrill LOUD voiced woman thing.

You just dropped your pants and crapped on your entire premise.

LOL. Sometimes, it's like shooting fish in a barrel.

[stevenleser]

73. Take your comments elsewhere is a form of "shouting someone down"

And ONCE AGAIN, it has nothing to do with Gender. Funny you think that I made your argument for you, because I think you just made it 100% obvious just how far you will go to try to frame something as sexist. What a joke.

But the bottom line is, you WILL NOT SHOUT ME DOWN ON THIS. I will not "take this elsewhere"

[uppityperson]

83. Who is shouting? Who has used THE MOST CAPITAL LETTERS SHOUTING!!!11

Did you know that UPPERCASE = shouting?

[VotesForWomen]

54. uh no, the sexism charge is not used against any clinton criticism. and dude, the examples you gave

are a good indication that you don't have a clue about sexism, and it's no wonder you think it is practically non-existent.

[stevenleser]

56. I see, so you would join me in going from thread to thread saying that those examples

are not sexism? Just trying to be clear.

[LostinVA]

59. Those are all sexist terms -- no matter how much you try to justify their use

They're all used exclusively against women (or gay men). I doubt you were ever called a "banshee."

[stevenleser]

60. As I said in my OP, I have on more than one occasion been called a Banshee

and I have termed other men and women as "screaming like a Banshee"

it only became a sexist term when Hillary started losing. Sorry, dont buy it.

[LostinVA]

61. No -- it was always sexist

Sorry, I don't buy it.

In addition, a banshee is a FEMALE feri. A FEMALE sidhe.

[VotesForWomen]

86. uh, using female terms to denigrate males is hardly an argument * against* the existence of sexism.

[uppityperson]

99. shhh, don't confuse him with logic.

:rofl:

[stevenleser]

101. Since terms are not 'female' or 'male' I would say the logic was decidedly poor...

... sad that you cannot recognize that.

[uppityperson]

102. Back to saying "bitch" isn't female. Gotcha.

[VotesForWomen]

111. oh god. nevermind. nt

[stevenleser]

100. They arent 'female' terms, but nice try (n/t)

[cooolandrew]

63. As much as I disagree to sexist terms yeah it is open to interpretation. Still let's try to be

let's try to be nice. Eevery vote counts. Causing offense isn't the best way.

[stevenleser]

64. I agree with you, open to interpretation. But the Hillary supporters arent saying that...

they aren't saying, hey that could be construed as sexist, they are saying that those things ARE sexist and condemning many here as being sexists.

Of course, this is all because and since their candidate has been losing and they want to try to wring some points out of the idea that they have cast their candidate as a victim. The problem is, the vast majority of these accusations do not pass the B.S. test.

[uppityperson]

68. So now this is not about sexism but Hillary supporters over using "sexist"?

[stevenleser]

69. What do you mean 'now'? Read my OP again,,,

... what do you think is meant by:

The problem with the 'Sexism' Label...
Is that it is being used for every criticism of Hillary.

Dont try to paint me as changing my argument in mid stream. That was my argument from the very beginning.

[uppityperson]

81. How about this quote from your OP?

"If you can find anything more beneficial or prejudicial or stereotype fostering about being called a bitch vs an asshole, I would like to hear it."

I told you. You continue to deny it. I ask if now you want to make this just about Sen Clinton, you say "Dont try to paint me as changing my argument in mid stream. That was my argument from the very beginning." The quote above was from your OP proving otherwise.

If you don't know in your heart what's sexist, then there's no information I can provide to you that will educate you. I don't handle remedial cases. (plagiarized from MF)

[stevenleser]

91. But this other argument by you is wrong and I keep pointing it out

if that is not how the person meant it, than your premise is completely wrong.

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Sparkly]

70. The problem with the "it's being used for every criticism" statement is

that it's false.

[stevenleser]

72. So now you are going to split hairs with me. Fine...

I've complained to Skinner about this in the thread he put out recently about policies here at GD P. Hopefully these accusations of sexism will be banned and the policy will be that if people see something they think is bigoted, the proper response will be the 'Alert' button and the mods will take appropriate remedies if any which may mean the culprits tombstoned. Not dozens of threads and hundreds of responses and the supporters of one candidate trying to deflect reasonable criticism with unwarranted cries of bigotry.

[uppityperson]

84. Quoting your OP is "split hairs"? OMG, I love you.

I had a rough day and am really tired but thank you so much for continuing to post here. Makes my day.

Let us know how it works out with Skinner and you too, ok?

ps: "The problem with the 'Sexism' Label... Is that it is being used for every criticism of Hillary. Here are a few examples" is a false statement. there are lots of other criticisms of Sen Clinton.

[Whisp]

74. I have a question, for all of you... is it ok to call your female enemies sexist names?

sexism, homophobia, rascism has always been here in some % or other.

undoubtedly there is far more now directed at Hillary (but to be honest a lot of it isn't really outright sexism but some people will make new definitions for it) but how many times in the past has there been pile ons on Ann Coulter in a most cruel sexist way that was somewhat condoned by the community because it was 'funny' and against an 'enemy'.

I find that pattern here too often.

Same for the Gennifer Flowers and Paula Jones threads that pop up here once in a while. They are often called many awful names from bimbo to just plain dumb, etc.- they are defined by Bill and his sexuality - as holes and not human beings.
and Monica. She is still reviled around here - and also defined as a 'hole' that made things uncomfortable for great old big dog without any self control. I don't think I've ever seen such a hateful mob after an individual in the media and everywhere. Why? why was she the one who had to go hide in shame and have the name Monica turned into a nasty adjective? Bill sure isn't hurting much now on that count, is he?

so I'm all for not saying sexists things, but for me that should include EVERY WOMAN, not just the ones we find 'acceptable' here.

but still, I can slip once in a while, and probably have. You must consider that sometimes its difficult to retrain what you have been told by society and the media, etc., at large for so many years. I have wiped a few words out of my vocabulary for this reason, but it's an ongoing process.

It's not all that long ago that I truly understood the toxicness of calling a woman a 'bitch' and there is no equal slight against a man with just one word that includes so much distain and historical hate and fear.

[stevenleser]

78. I would say the answer is 'No'

But again, in the past, I have seen a word used by many Democrats for Coulter that Clinton supporters are now saying is a sexist term, "Harpy" In fact, I think she herself called the 9/11 widows "Harpies". Is that OK?

[Whisp]

79. It's either never okay or always okay.

I'm in the 'never okay' and that includes Coulter and Katerine Harris and Monica, etc. etc.

some seem to think sexist words are kinda okay, sometime, depending on
who says it
and who the target is

never okay is a lot easier to stick to

[stevenleser]

93. I would agree, but it also assumes everyone is on the same page

with the terms that are off limits and I think it is clear from this thread that we are not.

I'm certainly willing to dispense with "Bitch" since of the ones I mentioned, I indicated that it was iffy. But terms like Harpy, Banshee and "Mood Swings" are a lot less clear to me. There arent a lot of English equivalents that one could use instead of Banshee in "Screaming like a Banshee". German has a much better one that basically translates to "Screaming as if someone is sticking something in ones eye". But in terms of ancient supernatural creatures that had female qualities, I am not ready to accept that calling someone one of them is sexism. A harpy may have had the face of a female, but it was not a female, it was an 'it'. And a banshee may have been a female supernatural creature, but that was incidental to its screaming.

[leftofthedial]

88. you can't win on this one, I'm afraid. Not around here.

too many chips on too many shoulders. too many evil woman haters lurking behind every post. too many who'd rather scream than think.

[stevenleser]

95. That is probably true, unfortunately...

still, one can attempt to be the voice of reason...

[crawfish]

119. Here?

Reason is both sexist and racist. I'd stick to the party-approved platitudes.

[AtomicKitten]

105. "Sexism" is her default setting of excuses.

Others include:

Lack of money.
Didn't know the rules.
Media bias.
Caucuses are mean to her.

[casus belli]

110. You forgot...

"I always get the first question in these debates"
"No one ever offers me a pillow"

[Darth_Kitten]

113. Oh, but aren't some Obama supporters such put upon victims?

Oh, you can't hold Obama accountable, can't you accept a black candidate? :sarcasm:

[Darth_Kitten]

112. When you grow out of your need to please any man out there.....

then you MAY understand. :sarcasm:

[DemBones DemBones]

121. Newsflash: Banshees are female. Here's the reference.

banshee

Main Entry:
ban·shee
Pronunciation:
\?ban-(?)sh?, ban-?\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Irish bean sídhe & Scottish Gaelic bean sìth, literally, woman of fairyland
Date:
1771
: a female spirit in Gaelic folklore whose appearance or wailing warns a family that one of them will soon die

[dkf]

127. Yeah but screaming like a banshee

is a description of the screaming not of the person doing the screaming.

Just like "acting like sheep" doesn't mean you are an animal. It means you are a mindless follower.

[uppityperson]

132. Yup, and "acting like a bitch" doesn't mean you are an animal. It means you

are acting irrationally like a female dog in heat.

[stevenleser]

137. Wow did you miss what that person was saying. Probably intentionally..

... as it destroys your entire argument.

[uppityperson]

139. I bow to your superior wisdom. Try it now...

I missed the "acting like" part to make it comparable.

[DemBones DemBones]

141. You know, I've only seen dogs (males) act irrationally

around a bitch in heat. Why don't we have a word for that? Dog is not much of an insult, even in combinations like you dirty dog or you lowdown dog. It doesn't imply irrational or irritable behavior.

Dogs (males) come from miles away, dig under fences if they can't jump over them, tear down doors, anything to get to a bitch in heat. Now THAT is irrational. The bitches don't do those things.

Calling a female canine a bitch is technically correct, dog technically means a male canine. Brits who keep canines have always referred to them as bitches and dogs, just as those who keep chickens refer to them as hens and roosters, cattle are cows and bulls, sheep are ewes and rams.

But "bitch" has taken on nasty connotations in the US. "Hen party" is also a derogatory term with no male equivalent. Women are "catty," a negative term with no male equivalent. Tomcats and roosters are studs, admired by other males. "Sow" is a worse insult than pig. "Cow" is negative, too. "Bull" is negative only as a short form of "Bullshit."

And, of course, there's the famous bit of irony:

"I'm assertive, he's aggressive, she's a bitch."

[stevenleser]

142. Well, technically, yes, but...

in terms of continuity of a species, the desire for, drive to and successful fulfillment of mating and reproduction is anything but irrational.

I've been around several female dogs in heat and I have no idea why the word to describe them has become a pejorative. If anything, female dogs in heat are much more friendly than normal. Odd.

Course, this doesnt really have anything apropos to the OP, but it is a bit mysterious.

[uppityperson]

145. If you can find anything more beneficial or prejudicial or stereotype fostering about being called a

Since you missed this part of the OP:
"If you can find anything more beneficial or prejudicial or stereotype fostering about being called a bitch vs an asshole, I would like to hear it."

[stevenleser]

148. Except that this mini thread has gotten far away from anything to do with the OP (nt)

[AtomicKitten]

126. The Clintons have injected the "isms" into the race and they are failing, just as it should be.

I'm very proud that Democrats are rejecting that kind of old school dirty politics.

Viva Obama!