Rant

Just need to vent--my thread in GD got locked, which wasn't really surprising since it had descended into a complete flame-fest, but...

It was NOT "flamebait."

It was not intentionally put there in order to incite argument amongst DUers.

Unfortunately, people here seem absolutely incapable of discussing gender relations without treating each other like garbage.

End rant.

Hi, your post inspired me to come to this forum. I think it's a shame that we can't ask for an honest discussion of women's issues w/o it being locked as "flamebait." I know that's not what you intended. And I wanted to thank you for being brave enough to start that thread - I hope it helps to address some of these issues, or to at least inspire women to fight against sexism in our society. It certainly inspired me. :hug:

Welcome to this group -- it rocks, a little slowly, but it rocks.

It mostly annoyed me that after a couple of days the thread was locked--if it was obviously flamebait, it should have been locked within 20 minutes of posting.

It was just an excuse because the topic makes people uncomfortable.

Well, too bad--I just started another "fem" thread in GD, so we'll see what happens...

discussion and even some understanding being gleaned in that thread from both perspectives.

It started with all sorts of nasty defensiveness but then there was some real discussion. I can only assume now that it degenerated into nastiness again? :(

It was a good effort, Katherine. Don't give up. Believe it or not, there has been progress made on the gender wars front here. Yeah, I know, that may sound discouraging but it has gotten better than it was say a year or two ago. And it has done so only because so many of us refuse to give up fighting. :)

people here to give up on all of them, lol.

at all. Your initial post seemed a sincere desire to get people talking about women's issues. How can we bridge the gaps of understanding if we can't have open discussions about such issues.

It saddens me that there seems to be some sort of "idea" that feminist ideas or posts are another way of seeking an argument.

That doesn't make sense to me.

I've seen posts on the forums (in GD primarily) where the original poster makes it clear they know they are going to get flamed, they say that they don't care, they state they are open to putting people on ignore--then to put a cherry on top of the whole thing by placing the popcorn eating smilie at the bottom. Nothing says flamebait louder to me than a post with that. :shrug:

Well, you tried--sorry it didn't work out. :( :hug:

trying to get people to think honestly and openly about these issues, and hope that the ideas sink in with time.

It just annoyed me that the thread got locked, not for my actions, but for the indifference, ignorance, and general asshole-ness of other posters, lol.

I am working on my March Wrap-Up for The Next Wave article series--I am going to continue the series in April, because there is waaaaaaaaay too much to cover, so this one is a list of questions--I will post it when I am done later tonight.

so glad that it didn't discourage you! :hug:

But it's not your fault that a) GD is about the least civil place this side of a bar brawl; b) that women's issues so offend and scare some of the HOX9 gene displayers that they literally can't think about the idea of women's issues without Xanax and Budweiser and c) that the mods are not doing a decent job of dealing with actual issues of flaming, and so instead shut down legitimate discussion.

Unfortunately, I don't know how to deal with the issues - we used to have an Ask the Administrators forum where this could be discussed, but that's been gone for over a year. Once upon a time, the mod who locked a thread had to sign his or her "real" screenname, but they can now lock threads anonymously, which gives them a lot of power and little accountability. In other cases where threads have been locked or deleted, the admins have, to my knowledge, always taken the mods' sides.

I will say that I'm afraid to discuss moderator actions in email to the admins because I don't know what other punitive actions may be taken that I can't see.

Yeah, it's a private board and the owner has the right to do anything he pleases... but those of us who subscribe have do pay the bills and yet have little representation, so to speak. I guess we can go elsewhere, but... where else are we going to find such a large, diverse population of voters?

women's issues so offend and scare some of the HOX9 gene displayers that they literally can't think about the idea of women's issues without Xanax and Budweiser

You are so right with that comment, particular with the word "scare"

anything to do with Women's Liberation is flamebait. It's just too scarey for those males who are insecure.

However, I do believe that insecurity is cured with knowledge.

After reading what seems like a bazillion posts on the subject - in that and in other threads - it appears that the men who are some of the most adamant against the idea that men are sexist -will deny the institutional aspect of sexism while at the same time in other posts) they will acknowledge that most of the men they know/work with/etc. are sexist and even THEY can't relate to them. IOW - they see other men as sexist - just not themselves - and they don't want to be lumped together with those other guys. Not that I can say I blame them. What they don't seem to realize is that they end defending the sexists - just because they don't want to be seen as one. :crazy:

And when they harp and harp and harp about how "women are sexist" - while for most part NOT acknowledging that many or most of the men that they know are sexist and abuse their power in a sexist way - it just makes for an awfully lame argument.

The idea that "Woman doctor" is considered ok while "stay-at-home-dad" is not - to me is an indication MORE of sexism toward women - because what women have typically done is devalued - than it is an indication of "sexism" directed toward a few men who happen to take on a traditionally women's role.

---

I think most of the concern is - as many described in their experiences - the lack of expectation for women as career women, the denial of opportunity, the objectification of women and the attempt to keep women from acting as equals. I don't care what any of those guys say - men do NOT suffer from institutional sexism (except for what they suffer because of sexism against women) - and to suggest that women are "sexist" for pointing out the sexism (against women) in our society is just an indication that they don't get it - and don't seem to be trying to get it either.



And it wasn't flamebait - and wouldn't have had to have been a controversy if some people didn't make it one.

within an hour-- called "flamebait." There were NO flames.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x770778

Too bad it was locked - I'm glad you linked it.


I thought the "Patronize" "Patron" "Patriarchy" was pretty funny - good catch.


I also thought the KKK reference was odd. I was just thinking today how The Followers of Flynt remind me of the KKK - what with the idea of buying and selling women - dehumanization and all that. Seems a lot more like KKK than anything any women are doing by any mention of (SOME) men's sexism.



:yourock:

Hi bloom :hi:

It's not merely "too bad" it was locked-- it's inexpicable. Unless I am the only one who saw the humor in it and that's my problem...... but the folks there were diverse and all great-- again NO flames, aside from the KKK sideswipe. We were having fun with it, laughing at ourselves (I thought). Teaser really got it and made a good (ironic) funny.

Bottom line is: if there is no way (including good-natured parody) and no place (other that FG) to openly express ourselves, where does that leave us?

I keep harping that it MATTERS to the Dems and DU goals. It's not about placating (or tolerating) women, it's about facing facts and issues and working toward a viable progressive and/or Democratic party.

:kick:

If we're kept runnin in distracted circles like this and stuck in the doghouse, what's the point? :thumbsdown:

It's all about who is the ingroup and who is the outgroup. And if we say that we are at odds with sexist, misogynist types - does make us the outgroup - because we are the ones who are not "tolerating" other democrat's nonsense?

I certainly don't want to support a group which has no problems oppressing or marginalizing women or other people. And if that leaves me with a group that amounts to 5% of the men and 30% of the women in this country - then that's what we've got - and we'll have to go from there.

Maybe the feminists in this country do need to be more vocal - as a group. Maybe that's the only way. Right now - the assholes are winning.


I was thinking recently how a lot of Democrats can see that there was a problem for liberals when the "fairness doctrine" was removed. But in addition to Rush Limbaugh and his "feminazi" tirades - it seems like there are just an awful lot of misogynists jokes on the so-called liberal side. It would be great if there was actually equal time for women.

Please do not refer to other DU threads when posting in DU Groups.

Lithos
DU Moderator