Is there any hope that I can ever make anyone here (DU, not this group,

obviously) understand that belittling someone, even someone as vile as Ann Coulter, by calling her a c--- is really making slanderous and demeaning remarks about all women. (Also, bitch-slap, whore, etc.). The men in charge here don't, can't, won't see this as an issue and many women here use the word and remark that it is okay to use the term since they are women. I put this word and the other feminine-rooted epithets right up there with racial slurs. That is how they effect me and my daughters and my friends (and enemies) and my foremothers and all women. Our culture still sees us as less than. The powers that be always will use any wedge they can (language) to continue to keep us in our place as long as they are acquiesced the power to do so.

and if it's gone (I both alerted AND PMd Skinner asking him to remove it), contact me:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3341679

Which pretty much answers my question. (Edited to add this.)

it seemed to take forever and I alerted twice. The second alert was a little, well, mean? I was a little afraid that after I compared our disgusting posts of this nature to FR I would get the boot. There is still one up, I guess it isn't so bad? :sarcasm:

The one daughter who is married is married to a feminist (was a member of TARAL, before they met) and we are making sure that the 2 new male people are also feminists. Can you tell me exactly what happened? Young "liberal" males (and many females) think it it is fine to violate women by using language that is viscerally offensive, not because of the words themselves, but because of what these words indicate about the level of respect of women as people. I think often that I will leave DU (I came here in 2002.)because of the level of trash that is spewed with impunity against women. No other group (except repukes and that is to be expected) are as unprotected from the slurs that are distributed here on a daily basis as are women.

and quick agreement accorded dsc, whose initial OP did NOT include sexism, in this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1190842

I mean, I don't begrudge that he's getting a good response on the issue of homophobia, but if anyone posted a similar thread, it would NOT be met with that must respect, no matter who posted it. I was glad, however, to at least be able to reach dsc because he did not originally include sexism.

Happily, the offending thread is gone, but a companion in another forum is not. I alerted on it as well, making the argument that while the snuff portion isn't quoted here, it's still in the original Rude Pundit piece, and DU wouldn't allow a link to any article that advocated lynching blacks or anti-Semitic violence, so we shouldn't allow this link either. It has fallen on deaf ears. I think I'll try again. In the meantime, here's the remaining thread with its link to the offending material. You'll have to read it yourself. I believe the paragraph that led off the now-gone thread is just above the quoted portiion in the OP:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1195381

I made certain my two sons grew up with me as a strong, competent woman. I did all the stuff, talking about something they had seen or heard etc. Then they went away to college. Part of it is that they love to tool me around but they are learning that in this day and age it is not a good idea, I will not laugh it off (not that I ever thought it was OK). They stuck up for Michael Richards when he did his nasty routine and they stick up for people who make fun of everyone. I personally think it is laziness, it is too hard to think about not offending people so you just make it their problem. It seems that most of their friends are like that as well, even the young women and I hate it. At least they know not to do it around me anymore.

Oh yes, we catch it so much and I often think of leaving, today more than ever before but like you I have been here since 2002. I actually think the GLBT community takes a lot of crap and took just as much as we did over the Ann Coulter thing.

I'll disagree on one point only. Disabled people are as unprotected. Especially people with mental disabilities. :(

It's still considered fine to mock people with disabilities, to use terms like "retard" with impunity, and hate people with disabilities for being inconvenient for everyone else.

It's still okay to expect that people with mental disabilities will be kept hidden away, or invisible. And there is almost no place else where you're as helpless and under the control of absolute sadists as when you're in a mental health ward.

None of this changes or belittles your point at all. Sadly, it is considered acceptable to mock and belittle women. You're absolutly right. And anyone who is a woman with a disability is truly in a dangerous, vulnerable place.

seen, thankfully, many hurtful things go by the wayside. I had a mom who instilled in me the idea that a person of character did not use words or anything else to harm people. Few seem to see or understand this now days. Everything is "just a joke" or that term is just the "cultural norm". It doesn't really mean anything. Tell that to the person or group who is the butt of your "joke".

Can you PM me and let me know what I missed?

Unforunately, it doesn't surprise me that something sexist enough to get deleted got a lot of recommendations. :(

c word to describe Ann C. What I found refreshing about the thread were the 2 people who said that using that word to describe her was an injustice to a great and enjoyable part of the female anatomy. Of course, we know that the person who started the thread was using the word as an invective.

to describe Ann Coulter is about like describing * as "having balls." Apparently they only use words denoting their *own* anatomy to describe someone they admire. Even the word "dick" tends to be used for a man who has a lot of nerve ("balls") but whom they don't like. And they wonder why women object to their use of "c" in threads about Coulter. They sure are dumb.

it still objectifies women, reducing them to that part of their anatomy, however "fondly" it's done.

To me, it reminds me of those men who assure us how much they LOVE women when what they are is men who love to use women: love 'em and leave 'em, as a rule. Love to have sex with them, don't love to have lifetimes with them. You know the kind I'm talking about. They are at least, as far as I know, not overtly abusive -- or that's the stereotype. But they're users nonetheless. This kind of remark is just too reminiscent of that sentiment: yeah, I won't speak badly of that part of the female anatomy I find useful to me.

comments as "user" based but I can see exactly what you are saying.

really got to me. People, especially some of the women, took so much pleasure in deliberately using the word over and over again. They insisted that it's a perfectly harmless and acceptable descriptor.

I just don't get it. It's no different from calling me a fag or a gimp, and I said so. I don't understand how people don't see that.
:(

with verbal respect. Why some epithets are okay and some are not is beyond me. When I wrote on one thread that I thought calling a person a whore was demeaning to women, I was told that it was a general term and besides "It is okay for me to use that term since I am a woman." This person is so embedded in our culture's message of degrading women that she can't see anything askew with using feminine-based slurs. I will venture to guess that those who use these slurs also use others in their everyday lives (racial, sexist, anti-gay, disability, etc). They are probably a tad less aggressive with some of their verbally nasty labels on DU because a select few of them can get one banned. But to my way of thinking, these demeaning labels are all wrong. There is no gradation here. There is no generic terminology here. There are no okay vilifications based on varing human traits. This is not about banning "free speech and expression". We already know that some select words are banned. Words are important and have power and are used to label, contain, ridicule and debase people on this forum on a regular basis. But it doesn't really matter because the people these things happen to are only women. Many women on DU have no problem with their usage so that proves it is an okay thing to do.

That response always shuts me up. I can't argue against that without sounding paternalistic. I know someone would twist anything I say into "you think you know better than women do" and that's absolutely never going to be my intent.

If someone else with a disability says it's okay to use words like "gimp" or "cripple" or "faggot" to refer to other people then I can definitely jump in and argue with them. I am disabled and I'm gay. I've got just as much standing in that fight as they do.

When women jump in the justify using slurs against women, I personally get very frustrated. The best I can do is wait until the women here jump in and then lend support. (not that being the auxilary is all that bad. Sometime it's nice to play the second line)

It's very frustrating how much slurs are accepted and allowed here. I wish there was more we could to to convince people that they're wrong. :(

other thinking person. Do I not have the right to call others down for using slurs just because I don't happen to be those things. Wrong is wrong and these words have no place on this forum.

The same way it does when I see black members(or DU'ers representing themselves as African American on the board) dismissing something racially insensitive, because it "doesn't bother" them. :eyes: ...

....or the glbt members that say something isn't homophobic, because they aren't disturbed by it in the slightest.

...or the (fill in the blank) members that crawl out to defend something insensitive, bigoted, illegal, cruel, sexist, homophobic and/or racist that another individual that shares their background did. :shrug:

Sorry, but from where I sit, such comments strike me as grossly insensitive and dismissive of the other members of a gender, sex, race/ethnicity, etc that DO take issue with whatever the comment or issue is--in this case, the word bitch. There's always several people that see the one that comes out to be dismissive and they jump all over that. So then, YOU have no right to feel that way--because this LONE REPRESENTATIVE of your community has thrown you under the bus. It's bullshit and the equivalent of saying,"...no one should be bothered by this--because I'm not, and clearly I am qualified to speak for everyone that shares my gender, sex, race, etc."

:wtf:

"If others are offended, they can suck it."

:(

I think that was the thing that surprised me most when I started posting here.

I (naively) expected liberals and progressives to be more "understanding" and perhaps open to views of groups they may have little contact with and/or prior knowledge of. Instead, I'm constantly seeing people shouting down those populations and telling them that their views aren't important. :crazy:

Again...:wtf:

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

Kind of shows exactly why nothing on DU will ever change.

You know, I understand why certain people think that kind of thing is funny. I do really get that. In fact, I used to think that kind of thing was funny. Mostly because it pokes fun at the foibles of humans.

But the thing is, and this is what I think a lot of them don't get, is that the default for woman as sex object -- meaning everything that has to do with women is all about sex to men... that's the damage right there. Women are the sex class and treating it as natural and normal is where the problems all begin.

I don't think I'm being clear. Sigh.

If we act like women are always and only about sex that men want, have, work for, fight each other, buy, cajole, force... anything goes when it comes to getting your end off because that's male humans default natural behavior... it puts women in a position of being less-than solely by the fact that women are objects to men and nothing more. That is not natural or normal but a reult of our culture. Women can't just be human in our hypersexual culture.

I still don't think I'm being clear.

If we act like women are always and only about sex that men want, have, work for, fight each other, buy, cajole, force... anything goes when it comes to getting your end off because that's male humans default natural behavior... it puts women in a position of being less-than solely by the fact that women are objects to men and nothing more. That is not natural or normal but a reult of our culture. Women can't just be human in our hypersexual culture.

very, extremely, crystal clear. the "women have all the power because they have all the pvssy" meme seems like it will never be overcome. :mad:

:thumbsup:

I have been thinking a great deal about the oppression of women and the use of force, whether it be physically, sexually or verbal. It is all intertwined with the submerged idea that women are here for men. We are, in their minds, here as breeders, nurturers, servants, and pleasure domes. Even the best and most fair minded men look to us to fulfill these roles. The only time I see this value shift is when a man has a daughter he really relates to and at that point he actually begins to see that particular female as a person of worth in her own right.

Sex, Intimacy and Oppression thread that has some bearing from the opposite direction (discussin men who see sex-as-aggression). Here's the link:

AND I'm glad someone finally noted by little post...I had posted it in its own thread and it got deleted, and fairly quickly. So I tucked it away here -- without any editorial comment -- hoping it wouldn't get deleted this time.

So, now Morgana's post is also deleted, weeks later? Too funny. Too sad.

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