when they wake up in the morn. life’s better when you Ignore them.

So there is always that option.

or based on someone's sexual orientation.

That doesn't mean I don't recognize gender gaps, and the effects of long time white institutional racism.

I don't believe in trashing white males, I even happen to be one of them but I do know which race and gender dominates our society.

I know there is a glass ceiling and I know there are still overt and subtle forms of racism.

I believe we as a community are more than capable of communicating our thoughts, anger, sadness and frustrations while being sensitive to the overall group at large.

All we need to do is just walk in the other persons' shoes and think about how we phrase our messages, none of that means we don't have freedom of speech.

Thanks for the thread, BainsBane.

autocratic, conservative bent? In Florida we have many of those in both parties and they are not only responsible for instilling institutional racism, but also promoting an unfair, dichotomous society that effects just about every young family that moves into Florida. Because of their unchallenged authority, it inspires a Thirdway form of political networking that shuts out outsiders.

None of it would be possible without the participation of attorneys who try to brush off their frauds and conspiracies. What they will tell us is, "Oh, we listened to the 'old guy.' Yes, I have a letter that says that very thing--from a city lawyer! Hard to believe, but our local government takes the word of "the old guys" instead of doing their own due diligence. If you lived in Florida, you would understand the seriousness of the situation. The social expectation is that we will forgive the offenses because the people who commit these strategic errors are old. But if you dig into their public information, you realize that you're dealing with someone who has resources. Sometimes it can be someone who not only hob knobs with Tallahassee politicians, but also takes down a salary of $200,000 from some government paid job.

Why shouldn't we use the term "old" when these people are specifically selected because the assumption is that their age gives them a teflon effect since we're all raised to respect our elders?

that there are approximately one and a half million "old males" and one million "old white males" in Florida.

Ask yourself these three redundant questions.

Are all "old" people in Florida males?

Are "old" males in Florida white?

Are all "old white males" in Florida of the autocratic conservative bent?

Obviously the answer to all three is no, so why use an unnecessary, ageist term in describing your opposition when said word has the capacity to alienate across the board, people falling into the other three categories.

People that might otherwise agree with your point of view.

As Florida has the largest % of senior citizens of any state in the nation, it simply makes no logical sense to use a broad brush or ax instead of a scalpel in criticizing your opposition.

I am trying to meet you halfway. I am saying that the problem is mostly autocratic, conservative older white males. And I believe that we have a right to address it in those terms. For a member of a minority group, there is no one that falls in that category that wishes us well.

On edit: Not to mention, that you haven't addressed the age issue when it's used as a ploy to steal property rights from innocent homeowners. The decisions these people are making continue to erode our rights as homeowners and citizens of Florida. Yet, we're expected to forgive them because of their age. It's something that triggers the radar when you realize that the city government continues to rely on the information from the same people even years after it becomes apparent that their information amounts to a case of fraud.

broad brush.

Some people have no problem with aging, they're content with life's journey but many are constantly yearning for their youth, when they were stronger, faster, more agile, more handsome or beautiful, sharper of wit with better memories, had less pain in their lives, watched fewer of their friends and family die and were seemingly farther away from death.

When you start trashing an entire age bracket with no thought to the consequences or effects, you might as well invade Iraq for attacking us on 9/11.

You haven't addressed the age issue when it's used as a ploy to steal property rights from innocent homeowners. This is a very recognizable pattern in Florida. These are very savvy business individuals who congregate in private organizations that have direct connections to local and state government. If you get close enough to them, you'll eventually hear them talk about themselves. They describe themselves as land takers or entrepreneurs. They are old, they are white and they are male. And they use their age to great effect. Each time they make a decision that erodes our rights as homeowners, we're expected to forgive them because of their age.

It's something that triggers the radar when you realize that the city government continues to rely on the information from the same older citizen even years after it becomes apparent that their information they provided amounted to a case of fraud.

I'm telling you, as long as they're going to use their age as a shield, they are opening the door for criticism.

We will agree to disagree on this issue.

when you attack age, you're falling into their trap.

Peace to you, Baitball Blogger.

Peace to you.

tomorrow is coming.

That's why it's my responsibility to stand up and point out the flaw in bestowing carte blanche to any group that controls power.

How does this law work allowing them to steal property?

that is 90% Anglo-American, with a demographic that is primarily Republican. A Liberal would not have trouble seeing the picture that portrays.

If you like, I'll PM you when I post it to DU.

The Midwest is running short. That should be enough to tide them over.

Too bad your OP was not hidden as you probably would have preferred.

The fact that it wasn't rather undermined your point. Ouch.

some of it came from your posts. I got a particular kick out of your inability to see the irony in a statement, made in the context of a discussing about censoring speech, that people who talk about privilege are irony impaired. That was a good one.

I guess you probably need to review what strawman actually means.

Thanks for the chuckle though.

Since my post reflects what has been explicitly argued on this board, much of it today alone.

Yes, that is a heap of straw, as your failed attempt at having an OP hidden proved.

Seriously amusing though.

You've missed a great deal during your vacation. Ask Bravenak what happens when she talks about white people.
Yes, I really, really wanted to get to five hides and be put on forced leave. If I wanted to get a post hidden, I could do much better than that.

I agree that the problem minorities face is far larger than just bigotry and racism emitted from the Republican party. We know we are dealing with something that crosses party lines and it's not helpful that our voices get shut down on a progressive site because posters continually take bullets for these people based on a misunderstanding of symantics.

So to avoid time wasted I suggest going half way and use the tag: "autocratic and conservative white people", since we know that there is still a Southern problem in parts of the Democratic party. That is a reality that we should all be able to face in the 21st Century. I can't imagine any progressive saying otherwise.

It extends beyond conservatives.

racial issues in as a bargaining chip? Because, I have noticed that myself. Especially in suburban Florida where there are areas that are ostensibly composed of white residents. I don't like how the voices of minorities have been effectively diluted. Hell, not just diluted, but removed from the conversation entirely.

Anyway, I don't mean to put words into your mouth. Who, outside of conservatives, do you view as a problem? If you think it will create a problem for you to respond because of alerts, just PM me.

Many are the people who insist the Democratic Party isn't left enough to suit them, that Obama is a corporate sell out, Hillary a w...e, on and on. They are the same ones who insist discussions about race and gender amount to "dividing Democrats." and a few are the ones gleefully using misogynistic insults toward other DUers since juries have started to allow it. Naturally demeaning people because of race, gender or sexual orientation isn't divisive. Division comes from permitting members of those groups to speak in public about issues of their own choosing.

ostensibly people oppose bigotry but pretend it doesn't exist. they try to have it both ways.

We can't review what YOU find acceptable or unacceptable.

Only YOU can do that.

And DU gives you many options on how to deal with what you find UNACCEPTABLE:

1. Don't respond and keep kicking the thread you find unacceptable back to the top of the page and getting it noticed by many. Hell, you SERVE THEIR PURPOSE when your outrage overcomes your common damned sense.

2. If you MUST respond, make your feelings known and then click that little boxed X at the end of the thread and remove it from your sight.

3. If you find objectionable language, call out the perpetrator and WALK OUT OF THE ROOM. Don't give them the satisfaction of your outrage. Address it and don't give them the attention they came here for.

4. Deny the racist/msygonist/whateverist the soap box. Don't feed the trolls.

5. Don't start 15 NEW threads about your outrage.

or so I'm told. Evidently ignoring or trashing a thread isn't sufficient to deal with the verbal violence that is my opinion.

Considering I only heard about all this because of those 15 threads, I think you ought to offer that advice elsewhere.

What a perfect example of your OP.

That is the irony in all of this.

There are things that you could say that might make me angry enough to respond, and wrestle an issue into the dirt with you, but you can say, whatever you want. I'll engage or not at my choice.

The only thing I will ever alert on is direct personal attacks on DU members, and MIRT fodder trolls. That's it.

Speak your mind.

Younger people are considered to have absolutely no judgement and are trashed by the same folks who get all huffy if you mention old people. They hate the idea of young people having any little power or authority while at the same time they have power over the young people and make all the rules.
I'm seeing a case of reverse ageism right now. In GD.

A poster above insisted there was no problem mentioning white people here. I told him that your experience says otherwise.

My mom said i need to stop scaring folks about the future even though they might not be here.
Besides, i love hypocracy and bullshit artists. They make me feel better about myself.

Hell, the south bashing on DU has always been ridiculous.

And, good lord, should ANY state who's legislative member voted against aid to NY/NJ after the storm last year gets hit by a tornado, flooding, wildfires, any natural disaster, DU members of those states can just suffer alone, in silence, thankyouverymuch.

And it's not the southerners. During that time this winter when people in the south were crashing on the ice and getting stuck on the roads, i felt bad. Some people here loved it and were amused as heck. It rains out here in the winter sometimes when the roads already have a foot of ice and we all go bananas. Accident on every corner.

That was horrible and mean. . I have lots of Democratic friends in Atlanta that were born and raised in Rochester NY. They know how to drive in snow and ice - but thats assuming salt and plows are in play. It just showed extreme arrogance on the part of some DUers - and I know Arrogance. . . I'm the queen of it!

Sometimes posters here aren't interested in meaningful progressive change, and are afraid of winning.

We all do something sometimes. I find myself to be a bit misogynistic at times. I just think we need to get all the young people to vote dem since they are liberal as heck. Most wont vote repub if they vote, so i want them to be on our side.

I also want them to get the best education this once great nation of ours can provide.
We need critical thinking skills going forward. We need for them to know that they matter.
They are our future.

They see whats going on and they feel the pinch harder than when i was attaining my majority in 99.
I still think jr college should be free up to an AA degree. We should subsidize the people who are going to pay our SS and take over from us. How can they help us if we don't help them? I worry about that sometimes, how we suck the money from the kid's future and cut education and then expect them to earn enough to pay enough into SS to fund retiree benefits. Makes no sense.

"We all don't need to think the same." Exactly.

The other list is a better read.

and why is it a better read?

But it only touched on a small part of this whole phenomenon. Nor was their any comment on the hypocrisy of decrying censorship while telling other people to shut up. Plus, it was just one in a series of that poster's Friday threads. You have to consider them as a whole to get a fuller picture.

Being an expert on swearing, I volunteer to represent the Southern Hemisphere...

Some of the protest threads in GD (not this one, which I might have just done a jury on) make over-the-top assumptions that are really out of line without having the results in hand, and so far I haven't seen them.

but I haven't gone into most of the threads on the subject. At this point no one is going to admit to being the alerter or a juror, for understandable reasons.

Typical. Why let facts get in the way of a good nutrage? Also this newly reborn "I don't need no stinkin' PC police to tell me what I can say" meme got old a long time ago and it was batshit wingnuttery to begin with.

She died a quiet death long ago. No one attended her funeral. A most sad affair. Yet her name lives on, adorning many slogans and ornaments under a cold, dark rain.

There, I've said it!

That word is thrown around way to much on here.

I just can never remember where they are to link to them. I also hate how nobody else can see them, it's frustrating as hell.

Taking seriously what anyone says is a mistake. Including this.

It is just the way it is here in effect the mob rules.

Clever liberals (that "we" claim ourselves to be) embodying said empathy could frame their statements to serve communication without collateral offensiveness, and without feeling any chaffing rub of self-censorship.

The expanded appeal to the Bill of Rights to protect chauvinistic speech (that according to a jury slipped out of the envelope of acceptability) has some qualities of a smoke screen in response to being caught lacking that traditional liberal value, rather than an honest defense of freedom.

People with empathy who accidentally offend others, just apologize. Really. They typically don't get their hackles up and leap onto a legalistic molehill to crow self-serving defenses.

The freedom of speech argument seems confused, perhaps purposefully so, about a fundamental and necessary freedom of society and a selfish desire for guilt-free shamelessness.

On a liberal/progressive board it leaves the advocates of freedom of offensive speech in the awkward position of endorsing a much lower position for consideration of others feelings relative to self-gratification of fighting for the use superior protected "colorful" "funny" language.

Let's not be charlatans...speech is free but it has consequences. Umbrage is one of them. The jury agreed.

very well said.

You've said exactly what I think about this.

I don't think any speech should be off limits, but I'm liberal like that.

I've seen each of them consume half of GD one some days. It certainly appears the issues are being discussed. Now, if you are instead upset that not everyone is in lockstep agreement with your positions, may I suggest you change your approach. Right now, you often post very confrontational and shaming style OPs which usually result in those you wish to influence instead hardening their opposing position. I suggest you try a bit more dialog.

I get accused of being a troll and engaging in flame bait, as do the AA members. Then we get series of follow up threads talking about how we ought not to use words like privilege, mention white people or age.

Agreement isn't the issue. It's efforts to delegitimize the speech by insisting it is trolling and flame bait, in addition to the constant string of alerts on every OP I post. I have no problem with disagreement. I disagree with their point of view, as I do many. What ticks me off is the blanket assertion that posting about race and gender is unacceptable and should not be allowed.

DU has balkanized from some of those discussions into distinct camps, who now seek to score points against each other. It's not that it's flame bait, though some OPs are a bit pointed, as much as the two sides waging their war of words.

I know how it feels. I'm part of the gun owning and hunting community. But that issue is so tainted that I almost never dare discuss going out and taking down a buck last fall. After the local butcher handed over the cuts, grounds, and some more "processed" stuff like sausage, I only now have run out of frozen meat. But the topic cannot be discussed without turning into a flame fest.

I no longer engage in those discussions. As you say, it just gets too much.

on what we children may and may not say. Or we could continue to use the jury system we have and laugh at the self-appointed morally superior people.

to alert or for a juror to hide anything as inconsequential as insults to people who don't count--like women, people of color, and LBGT. They have insisted that jury hides among to RW censorship, unless of course the jury hides something they don't like, then it is righteous.
The bottom line: many insist their own speech and that they agree with must be protected at all costs, but speech they disagree with is uncivil or trolling and should be banished. Nothing demonstrates entitlement and hypocrisy better than this whole kerfuffle.

Nothing demonstrates entitlement and hypocrisy quite so much as moral superiority. Just ask George Will, who has made a career out of scolding entire populations (blacks, women, gays) for things only a few people are doing. Keep up the good work.

For jurors: IMO.

Is in the African American group. There aren't a whole lot of threads in there. Look for the meta-like ones. Some post jury results calling AA posters who talk about racism "trolls."

Terms of Service
By registering a Democratic Underground account, you agree to abide by these terms. A single violation of any of these terms could result in your posting privileges being revoked without warning.

The Democratic Underground Administrators have a great deal of confidence in our system of citizen jurors and software tools, but we are well aware that trolls are constantly on the lookout for new ways to cause trouble and therefore on rare occasions it may necessary for us to revoke a member's posting privileges for reasons that are not covered by these Terms of Service. Because of this necessity, we retain the right to revoke any member's posting privileges at any time for any reason.

Don't be a wingnut (right-wing or extreme-fringe).

Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office. Teabaggers, Neo-cons, Dittoheads, Paulites, Freepers, Birthers, and right-wingers in general are not welcome here. Neither are certain extreme-fringe left-wingers, including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.

Vote for Democrats.

Winning elections is important — therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where were a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.

No bigoted hate speech.

Do not post bigotry based on someone's race or ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion or lack thereof, disability, or other comparable personal characteristic. To be clear: This includes any post which states opposition to full equal rights for gays and lesbians; it also includes any post asserting disloyalty by Jewish Americans, claiming nefarious influence by Jews/Zionists/Israel, advocating the destruction of the state of Israel, or arguing that Holocaust deniers are just misunderstood. In determining what constitutes bigotry, please be aware that we cannot know what is in anyone's heart, and we will give members the benefit of the doubt, when — and only when — such doubt exists. 

Don't go overboard with the crazy talk.

Democratic Underground is not intended to be a platform for kooks and crackpots peddling paranoid fantasies with little or no basis in fact. To accommodate our more imaginative members we tolerate some limited discussion of so-called "conspiracy theories" under the following circumstances: First, those discussions are not permitted in our heavily-trafficked Main forums; and second, those discussions cannot stray too far into Crazyland (eg: chemtrails, black helicopters, 9/11 death rays or holograms, the "New World Order," the Bilderbergers, the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, alien abduction, Bigfoot, and the like). In addition, please be aware that many conspiracy theories have roots in racism and anti-semitism, and Democratic Underground has zero tolerance for bigoted hate speech. In short, you take your chances.

Don't willfully and habitually infringe on others' copyrights.

To simplify compliance and enforcement of copyrights here on Democratic Underground, we ask that excerpts from other sources posted on Democratic Underground be limited to a maximum of four paragraphs, and we ask that the source of the content be clearly identified. Those who make a good-faith effort to respect the rights of copyright holders are unlikely to have any problems. But individuals who willfully and habitually infringe on others' copyrights risk being in violation of our Terms of Service.

Don't threaten anyone (including yourself).

Do not post anything which could be construed as a threat toward any person, on DU or elsewhere. Do not post messages threatening to harm yourself. (If you are having a personal crisis, call a crisis hotline for help. DU members are not qualified to give you the help you need.)

Respect people's privacy.

Do not post or link to any private/personal information about any person, even if it is publicly available elsewhere on the Internet.

Don't post "shock content" or porn.

Do not post or link to extreme images of violence, gore, bodily functions, pain, or human suffering for no purpose other than to shock and disgust. Do not post or link to pornography.

No spammers.

Do not spam Democratic Underground with commercial advertising or promotions.

Don't do anything illegal.

Do not post messages which violate any U.S. laws (eg. linking to illegally-shared files, attempting to organize hacking or DOS attacks, libel/slander, etc.). Organizing civil disobedience with a legitimate political purpose is permitted.

Don't post malicious code or mess with the software.

Do not attempt to intentionally interfere with or exploit the operation of the Democratic Underground website or discussion forums (eg. by "post bombing" or using any other flooding techniques, by attempting to circumvent any restrictions placed on your account by the forum software, etc.) Do not post messages that contain software viruses, Trojan horses, worms, or any malware or computer code designed to disrupt, damage, or limit the functioning of any software or hardware.

Don't do anything else which is similarly disruptive.

Just because it isn't listed here, doesn't mean it's ok. If you post anything which is obviously disruptive, malicious, or repugnant to this community, its members, or its values, you risk being in violation of these Terms of Service.

One more thing: Don't push your luck.

The DU Community Standards state: "It is the responsibility of all DU members to participate in a manner that promotes a positive atmosphere and encourages good discussions among a diverse community of people holding a broad range of center-to-left viewpoints." Members who demonstrate a pattern of disruptive behavior over time and end up getting too many of their posts hidden by the jury (measured by raw number or percentage) may be found to be in violation of our Terms of Service. If you seem to be ruining this website for a large proportion of our visitors, if we think the community as a whole would be better off without you here, if you are constantly wasting the DU Administrators' time, if you seem to oppose the mission of DU, or if the DU Administrators just don't like you, we will revoke your posting privileges. Remember: DU is supposed to be fun — don't make it suck.

Some others, however, seem to.