Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

It's clear that there are some hard feelings surrounding discussion of LGBT issues here on DU.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Skinner ADMIN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:16 AM
Original message
It's clear that there are some hard feelings surrounding discussion of LGBT issues here on DU.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 09:55 AM by Skinner
And I think some of you need a place to hash this out. There have been a few attempts to work through this, which is good.

Unfortunately, I think those attempts have been stymied by our efforts to enforce the DU rules, which has had the unintended consequence of creating more hard feelings, and making honest discussion difficult. The purpose of rules is foster productive discussions, but in this case I think the rules are having the opposite effect.

If one thing is totally obvious, it's that I can't make you get along, and I can't make you talk to each other and understand each other, and I can't make you happy. You need to do that yourselves. By getting myself out of the way, I hope that some of you might be able to hash this out.

So, I am posting this thread where interested DUers can engage in an unfiltered and uncensored discussion. I am instructing the moderators not to delete any posts, so don't bother alerting. This thread is for you all to actually engage in a discussion with each other, rather than sending tit-for-tat alerts in hopes of getting the moderators to censor people.

Obviously feelings are very raw, many DUers feel misunderstood and disrespected, and I know that there is a good chance this discussion will get very hot. To be honest, I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing. Maybe, once people have had a chance to blow off steam, we can finally make some progress.

Good luck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well, my support for full equality for GLBT human rights
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 09:22 AM by MineralMan
has never flagged. Sometimes I'm misunderstood, but that support is unbreakable. I may differ on strategy with some, but that's it. Never on principle. I understand the frustration many feel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. People get married to tactics
and believe that failure to support the specific tactics they favor indicate a lack of support for the LGBT community.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. No doubt. That's OK.
My personal belief is that the entire issue needs to be dealt with on constitutional grounds. Anything less is not enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hifiguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #7
167. +1 This has always been the simplest of issues for me
Equality before the law is just that and it isn't negotiable. It exists or it doesn't, and where it doesn't, that is a wholly unacceptable situation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dotymed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #167
1032. +100
Gay, straight, bi, IMO anything that does not hurt other people is your right. That is what the constitution says too.

IMO, this is another "divide and conquer" tactic. Stand proud.
I hope to see all of you on Oct. 6. Even if I have to crawl from TN., I will be there.

I hope that it is the beginning of a non-violent (on our part anyway) revolution that will lead to an actual government for and by the people.

We are all people, lets govern ourselves as peaceful, responsible citizens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #1032
1042. Yep....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Macoy Donating Member (102 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #1032
1730. That's Crazy Talk
"We are all people, lets govern ourselves as peaceful, responsible citizens."


That is just plain crazy talk!! What's next, treating each other with respect??? Kindness???



Macoy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #7
201. Agree.
All the more reason to keep democratic presidents who will appoint good judges.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #201
227. Absolutely, and even more importantly, keep Democratic
control of Congress and state legislatures. Failure to do that will doom all efforts, I fear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #227
460. Sadly, MineralMan, having Democratic majorities has not helped us.
It was the votes of DEMOCRATS that killed marriage equality in New York and New Jersey last time around, for example. A Democratic congress and filibuster-proof Senate allowed DOMA to stand, refused to pass ENDA, and waited until its lame-duck session to pass the eyewash that they called "repeal of DADT" which has not been implemented and probably never will be at this point.

It does us no good to elect Democrats when the Democrats that we elect act like the current bunch of Democrats in Washington and vote against our rights and our interests.

The Democratic Party has to stop taking gays for granted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #460
477. I understand what you're saying. And you're right.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 03:51 PM by MineralMan
We need to move Democrats in the right direction. It's certain, however, that Republicans aren't going to do it...ever. This is a very difficult thing, and there's a lot of mindless opposition to marriage equality. I'm very frustrated with the pace of change. In my own state, I can't believe that it isn't already a fact. The 2010 election set the state back three steps, when we were just one step away from making it happen. Frustration doesn't even begin to describe how I feel about that. My own state legislators are 100% behind marriage equality. Sadly, they're now in the minority party. Back to the drawing board.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #477
505. Trying to stay within the letter of the rules here.
The problem with voting for an anti-gay Democrat because you think the Republican opponent would be worse is actually self-defeating. It makes the anti-gay Democrat more entrenched and harder to beat. In some cases I think having an openly hostile Republican you can campaign against next time around makes you better off.

Look at 2010. In some ways it was a godsend because now the Republicans have way overreached and are turning people against them. And most of the people that they turned out were Blue Dogs who couldn't be counted upon to work with the Party on many issues, not just gay ones. In 2012 we have a chance to kick them all out with Democrats who will hopefully be lightyears ahead of the ones that got defeated.

I have a similar case here in New Jersey's first Assembly district. Our Democratic incumbents (Jeff van Drew, Nelson Albano, and Matt Milam) not only all voted against gay marriage, they made a robocall in 2009 BRAGGING about how they were more anti-gay than the Republican candidates. I made an impassioned speech at the County Committee meeting this year arguing against giving them the party line in the primary. Everyone slapped me on my back and said how brave I was to speak up, then voted unanimously (except for me) to reject my proposal. Meanwhile, someone was stealing my petition to run against one of the bigoted incumbents in the primary.

Now why would I really expect that crowd to have my best interests in heart? And if I vote for Jeff van Drew and his cronies, then I will be not only keeping anti-gay legislators in office but I will be making it harder for a pro-gay Democrat to unseat them down the road. See what I mean?

And as long as a Democrat "knows" that he can do what he wants in office because the queers have nowhere else to go might think twice if they realize that the queers won't automatically be behind them next time around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #505
629. That's what primaries are for, IMO n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #629
776. Yes.
And when the County Chair has one of his minions destroy the signature petition you brought to a committee meeting two days before the deadline, the primary becomes a moot point.

But that's a Democratic issue, not a DU issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joshguitar Donating Member (138 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #776
868. agreed
and specifically a new jersey problem. Devincenza has stacked the primaries with his thuggish minions who cut deals with repubs as they entrench themselves deeper and deeper though party line votes: giving a good party a terrible name.

gay rights are the last of their priorities. we need to get more dems informed and out to the primaries.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:22 AM
Response to Reply #776
968. But there must be some way to turf the asshole out, right?
Not familiar with NJ politics, but in WA State, local Dem organizations often have very highly contested reorganization meetings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #505
662. You have a point, where that is the case. In my own
district, that's not an issue, and all of my reps are 100% behind marriage equality. I'm not egotistical enough to think that I can affect other districts. I've tried in the past, but without success.

Frankly, I don't know any anti-gay Democrats. That may be because of where I live. But I don't know any such people. Perhaps your experience is different. I have to work within the areas where I can have influence, and I have to leave others to work in their own districts and states. I have no funds to donate, so my time is all I can offer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justabob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:34 AM
Response to Reply #505
1445. this
This is what makes me crazy whether we are talking about civil rights, social policy, business regulation.... What the hell difference does it make what letter is behind the candidate's name, if they are going to vote/support/advocate everything I detest and abhor and makes my life harder to boot? Essentially, it is a question whether you would rather have a death by a thousand cuts, or a quick slice across your throat? Really... at the end of the day you are still dead. You know?

There is already a good schism developing in the GOP with the Tea Party monster they created, and I think not too much longer we are going to see one on the left too. There is only so much people can take. It will be a little while longer, but I do think things are going to shake up a lot party-wise in the next few cycles. Whether people will drift to apathy/fatalism or organize into something viable is the big question. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #4
28. I concur with that assessment
The goals are common and well understood. Most of the disagreement I see is on the "how" and the infighting on that has been scary at times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
divvy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #28
156. I completely agree.
There needs to be a way to approach this issue without alienating pockets of support no matter how small or weak they seem to be. There has been too much blugeoning of these well-meaning and future friends IMHO. We really do need ALL the support we can get.

It is never over with the first successful legislation. The Phelps types always come back to fight it again. We need long-term friends, and this senseless squabeling only produces long term hard feelings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #4
31. Excellent points . . . nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #4
182. and, of course, sometimes it actually is a lack of support for the LGBT community
There are some people (yes, even here on DU) whose support for the community is lukewarm at best and non-existent/oppositional at worst.

The DU rules prohibit opposition to equality, but they do allow discussion of tactics, and so, alas, that becomes for some a proxy way of expressing opposition to the cause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #182
1633. And doesn't that involve the Mods, Skinner and the rules ... ??? Just passin' by ... but ...
don't see how this get reconciled without including Skinner, Mods and discussing

the rules --

Maybe I'm wrong?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dogtown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. In agreement, Mineral Man.
I believe that anyone not in full support of equal rights for LGBT community members has no right to even attend this board.

Equal rights for all is the pivot point for any discussions here. If anyone is not on-board with that concept they should spend their time elsewhere, with like-minded bigots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
286. That's my position as well, MM
It's unfortunate that discussions on tactics have been so divisive.

However, I'm absolutely positive that everyone agrees that nothing less than full equality is acceptable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
awoke_in_2003 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #286
511. "everyone agrees that nothing less than full equality is acceptable"
too bad that is not the case, at least as far as I have seen. There are plenty here who are opposed to full equality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #511
1224. I'm certainly not in that number, yet I'm getting all sorts of shit and hostility here
I'm not really going to puzzle that out since I'm good with where I stand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yodermon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:23 AM
Response to Original message
2. this may end up being the longest thread in DU history :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zenlitened Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #2
176. And the straightest. - n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marcel Donating Member (61 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #2
407. Well, not sure.
There's that thread that never die in the Lounge and it's huge. Don't remember when it was started.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentauros Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #407
925. That would be graywarrior's
"I want to create a thread that never dies" thread :D

I think it's over 4000 posts now
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #2
1704. kr
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:24 AM
Response to Original message
3. ''What's the big deal?''
My 10-year-old upon hearing politicians argue same-sex marriage:

What's the big deal?
It's just about who they like.
It's not who they are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maine-ah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #3
29. Sometimes I think children
are way more intelligent than adults...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #29
134. my boys see it like that, but then that is what is in our home. unfortunately, that is not what
they hear from kids in their school, because those kids are taught otherwise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xmas74 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #3
107. It's how my soon-to-be eleven year old has been raised.
When she was about six she heard someone use the word gay. We sat down and we talked, then she explained it to one of her friends.

As she said it:

"Boys and girls fall in love with each other. Sometimes boys fall in love with boys and that's ok. Sometimes girls fall in love with girls and that's ok. You should love a good person and not worry about the rest."

Now she tells people that she doesn't understand why two adults in love can't get married. Smart little girl.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marcel Donating Member (61 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #107
412. Yes, it's the way kids are raised, I agree.
And I don't understand why two adults in love can't get married either. Smart and compassionate little girl. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xmas74 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:15 PM
Original message
I made it as simple as possible
no talk of sex to complicate the matter. I talked about love with her and that's all she, or anyone else, needs to think about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomfodw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #3
1065. 20 years from now...
...that will be the feeling of at least 90% of Americans.

"What's the big deal"?

Or, more accurately, "What was the big deal?"

They won't get it any more than 99% of Americans can remember the fracas over interracial marriage before Loving v. Virginia.


---------------------------------------------------

Tom Beck


Dudley Moore: Do you feel you've learnt by your mistakes here?

Peter Cook: I think I have, yes, and I think I can probably repeat them almost perfectly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
personna au gratin Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #3
1611. Exactly! Very wise 10-year-old. Here's the crux of the issue:
It's gotten where you have gay people who seem to take an aggressive stance and those who wish to keep their private lives private. Personally, I really don't need to know who you crush on, lust after. I think marriage for anyone is sheer madness. Look at what's her name--Melissa Ethridge. All gung-ho to marry her girlfriend and then they were caput not so long afterwards. Many people gay and straight are nuts. They live in a dreamworld about what marriage is gonna do for them (please don't bring up the whole "rights" part of it because even straights are getting hospital rights and property rights these days).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
5. I think we are all for LGBT equality
but in disagreement about how to get there.

Let's not forget who the real enemy is: the fundamentalist preachers and the politicians who take their marching orders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nichomachus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. It might be the other way around
Politicians, especially those on the right, need wedge issues. This has been the tactic since Pat Buchanan told Nixon, "Find some way to tear the country into pieces and we'll pick up the biggest piece." They have enlisted the help of the churches who need hot-button issues to keep the "pray, pay, and obey" crowd in the pews. So, there's a certain amount of synergy going on.

Prior to the gays being the focus, we had Communism. When that went away, they needed something else to scare people with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #11
140. do you know in the 90's an easy majority felt gay marriage should be. something like over 65%
it was late 90's that they started using it as a wedge issue and creating the divide. i was so sad with where we have gone here the last over decade.

anyway, i was surprised seeing the number, but i do remember when it was pretty accepted way back when.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkansas Granny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #11
153. I think you're on to something. They use abortion in the same way.
They find it easy to get their constituents to demonize people they can label as "immoral".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DURHAM D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #153
559. The first big wedge issue I recall that the Repubs used was busing.
Followed by, believe it or not, the Panama Canal.

Also, the ERA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #559
1696. But the way desegregation of the schools was handled, a "wedge issue" was created
for the Repugs --

Instead of upgrading ALL of the schools as desegregation went on -- and

creating magnet schools which any student/parent would be happy to be a

part of -- they tossed the busing issue onto the poorest communities.

When "whites" left the southern schools for "Christian academies" --

they withdrew financing from those schools --

Just as we're seeing is being done today by Obama/Duncan with "Charter schools" --


The campaign against the ERA was financed by the RCC and the Mormon Church with

tax-exempt dollars --

just as was recently repeated by the Mormon Church re Prop 8 in California!!



Also ask yourself if it was simple coincidence that W created a windfall for the

RCC in giving them tax dollars for their "faith-based" organizations just when

the RCC was in desperate need for money to pay off their pedophile lawsuits?

At that point Catholics were out in the streets protesting the selling off of their

schools and churches -- and it all came to a halt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #5
18. How to get there
That is the question of which i have seen no real answer.

There are many ills of this society and many problems.

For this problem of sexual equality how do we overcome? What is the plan?

And lets not forget, there are many minorities that do not have equality.
How do we get equality for everyone seems to be the main hang-up.
So, it seems, what is it that is the oppressor which works to deny equality?

Could it be the oppressor are those who would love to make slaves of us all?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texshelters Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #5
47. Don't be so sure
many pretend to be for the LGBT community, but deep inside are homophobes that think things Tracy Morgan said about "gays" are okay.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/06/11/tracy-morgan-the-word-faggot-and-a-plea-to-call-people-jerk/

Peace,
Tex Shelters
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #47
1635. Agree ... there is a lot of hidden prejudice here --
you can see they don't respond directly -- but when other issues are

discussed you quite well understand that what they are saying on that

issue wouldn't permit them to be as accepting as we might like of feminism,

homosexuality -- or people of other races. And it seems to come as a package.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #5
177. I think there are posters who are not for LGBT equality
I think there are some posters who don't have any interest in getting there. And there are others who don't understand where "there" is or who don't believe we're not there.

Because the DU rules prohibit people from expressing opposition to equality, such posters can't come right out and say that, of course. Sometimes the discussion about how to get there, then, becomes a proxy fight. Sometimes that tension plays out in other ways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
christx30 Donating Member (774 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #177
952. I used to be ambivlent
about the issue. I wasn't gay. No one I knew was gay, except for a friend of my wife's (who doesn't like me). So why should I care?
That was... until I heard Michael Savage talking about it. Why should we be against gay marriage? Because it would ruin heterosexual marriage. How would that happen? By making marriage meaningless.
There was no actual reason. There was no supporting arguments. Just circular reasoning (or a poor excuse thereof). Then I realized, quite late, I'm ashamed to say, that my lack of support (I was never against in any way) for gay marriage made me a hypocrite. In every post I've made on DU (just past 500 tonight) has been pro-freedom. Against the Chinese government because of their human rights violations. Against the HCR law because of the mandate to buy insurance. By not being 100% behind the LGBT community in support of gay marriage, I wasn't pro-freedom in that regard. I was a non-entity. The easiest way for evil to win is for good people to do nothing? I was doing nothing. And evil was winning. Human beings were being treated as second class citizens. Being denied equal protection of their relationships. The fact of their love for each other was not being taken into consideration at all. It sickened me when I realized that I was not helping the situation.
This issue has gone on for far too long. It's 2011. Gays have been living, loving, and dying in this country since it was founded. It is LONG past time that their marriages are treated as real marriages, with all of the legal protections as straight marriages.

Anything less is, in my mind, criminal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #5
1634. May I disagree with that .... The real enemy is those who profit from this exploitation ....
that would be organized patriarchal religion -- just as it was during the

days of slavery and Segregation, Inc. -- but organized patriarchal religion underpins

patriarchy/elitism --

The same people profit from exploitation of humans based on myths of "inferiority" ....

whether it is women, or African Americans, or homosexuals --

There has to be a underclass of some kind for elites to profit -- and PREFERABLY FOR THEM ...

that would be all of us!! However, if it were ALL of us at one time, then we would be

more likely to unite against them. The object is to keep the public disunited!

Create situations where people fear the poor, or homosexuals, or Jews.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
6. I commend you for what you have tried to do Skinner.
But as my daddy always told me a bigot is a bigot is a bigot & they will never change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #6
15. bigoted people change, Will
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 09:37 AM by fascisthunter
I have been bigoted for a short period of time. Problem was, I had a brain that demanded to be fed to understand things I couldn't grasp, so I grew out of that bigotry fast. I was young and ignorant.

I have know others who were bigoted yet grew out of it as well.

PS - my sister is married to a wonderful women who is in charge of Gay Pride... at first my own mother had a hard time accepting her... now she is extremely proud of her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. I appreciate your post.
and applaud you in your effort but I have seen it up close and personal and continue to see it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #17
24. I can Understand
just don't let the bigots make you feel there is no hope for others. You have a lot of support and it grows daily. It is why the bigots are going nuts....

I grew up with lots of homophobia, so I truly can understand why you said what you did. Just know there is one straight guy on DU that supports all of you even if we disagree on other issues. My support is unconditional on this issue.

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TBF Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #17
507. I agree people can change -
often by exposure to the thing that scares them. Granted it can be slow, but I see hope with the coming generation. Granted I am female and straight so may not be in tune as much as you are, but I am middle aged and have seen a difference just in tv shows between now and twenty years ago for example.

I really believe the biggest division in this country is by class, and republicans (and others) love to use wedge issues to drive people apart. Solidarity my friend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapislzi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #6
16. Bigots can change.
Smart ones anyway. I grew up with many acceptable bigotries that I have happily abandoned in my adulthood.

I was genuinely frightened by the "otherness" of gay people when I was growing up, because that was how it was presented to me. It was only after I started spending time with my openly gay friends that I learned acceptance and love. And that there's nothing "other" about gay people. They're just people, and you love who you love, and that's beautiful, no matter what.

Not every bigot can change, but education can work wonders.

And if I have learned anything on these boards over the last ten years, it's how to practice the politics of inclusion.

Peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thanks_imjustlurking Donating Member (462 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #16
771. It isn't just bigotry, it's bullying, as has been mentioned below.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 08:06 PM by thanks_imjustlurking
I'm no expert on bullying, but the poster below also said that bullies seldom change. I'm willing to believe that, since bigotry can come from ignorance or upbringing but bullying, it seems to me, only comes from psychological problems or maybe just pure-d meanness. Not an expert - it's just that the argument I'm referencing rang a bell with my instincts, such as they are.

Edited to add - oh, and also baiting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #6
32. And you think (some) active DUers are bigoted against LGBT issues?
That's where we differ.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #32
57. Yes we do. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:09 AM
Original message
That's the problem. People want to fight with their allies here instead of fighting their enemies.
If they really want to fight, go to FreeRepublic . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
85. Maybe your allies,
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 10:31 AM by William769
Not mine.

ON EDIT: somehow you flew under my Gaydar. After reading your posts in this thread I now know ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thanks_imjustlurking Donating Member (462 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:25 AM
Response to Original message
983. I'm an ally, and I'm not fighting.
I'm also (I think) listening more than I'm talking and (I think) not telling others that I know how they should feel and if they don't feel the way I think they should it's their problem not mine. (That's my stab at a description of what about this ongoing brouhaha bothers me the most.)

Well, that was kind of incoherent, but I'm going to leave it stand and add that what gets my back up is being told to shut up, which, IIRC, was the gist of what started what is being continued here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #983
1123. Not a bit incoherent. Thanks for that. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FloridaJudy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #57
347. As do I
Look, I'm straight, and I'm appalled at some of the homophobia I see around here: search anything that references a "pony". Wanting basic human rights is not equivalent to being disappointed that you didn't get some luxury item for your birthday.

Same sort of people probably told African-Americans to sit down and be patient during the sixties. Well they did - smack dab in the middle of the schools, courthouses and lunch-counters. And we're a helluva lot better country for it: not perfect, but much improved. We don't hang black people in front of the city hall any more, for one thing. I look forward to the day when no one ties gay teens to fence posts and beats them to death or bullies them into suicide as well.

I was a tad too young to join the Freedom Riders: I still had a 9 o'clock curfew on school nights. But if the GLBT community wants to do the same they can count on at least one gray-haired little old straight lady to join them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #347
349. Awesome! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chervilant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #347
768. Me, too, Judy,
Me too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
auntAgonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #347
945. well said Judy! I'm with you. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:25 AM
Response to Reply #347
1001. Too bad you can't rec a reply.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #347
1103. I would be honored to join you.
It is time. Past time.

I was also a tad too young for the Freedom Riders but I am not too old for this. We all have our time. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amaril Donating Member (447 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #347
1497. You can count me in too
My hair isn't completely gray yet, but it's getting there pretty fast. :-)

I want to help, but I'm just not sure what to do. I joined the (nearest) local PFLAG group (it's about a 40 minute drive from here to attend meetings) and Straight for Equality, but neither of these groups seem to be very active (only thing on the PFLAG calendar is a potluck dinner the end of this month, and the Straight for Equality site seems all but abandoned).

In any event, well said, Judy! :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #347
1535. Very true... I expect those comments
from right wingers and NOT democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #347
1637. All of these issues are the same -- same exploiters, same patterns, same "stfu" --
Edited on Sun Jun-19-11 10:29 PM by defendandprotect
Whether we discuss Native Americans, or half of the species/Women being exploited

all over the globe, or slavery and the African-American -- Jews kept in ghettoes

by the RCC and forced to wear yellow stars, isolated from society -- or whether we

discuss homosexuals --

it's all the same thing -- !!

Myths of "inferiority" which are preached to spread intolerand hatred for groups of

people the elites wish to exploit for their profit -- that's all!!




:nuke:



PS: Terrific post by you -- !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
etherealtruth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #57
666. I've got to say ....
I grew up white, middle class and straight ( .... and female).

I don't know what its like to be Gay ... transgendered ... Bi ...

The only way I can know is to listen when people that know how it feels to be Gay (transgendered ....) in this society speak.

Certainly, I don't need any one to tell me discrimination against any one is wrong ... but, I really try to listen to how it feels ... I'm not talking about how blatant discrimination feels (any idiot know its horrid) ... I'm talking about the more subtle things that I might miss because I don't know enough to pay attention to particular details.

Five years ago I didn't understand why the concept of "civil unions" would be so repellent ... after listening (OK, reading) to real people talk about why this is unacceptable (a multitude of issues) and how this "separate" distinction makes them feel ... I get it.

I don't think I was ever a homophobe ... but I did not understand the issues confronting Gay Americans ( I should clarify ... I clearly understood the threat of random violence, workplace discrimination ... and am and was horrified), but I don't think I fully grasped the full complexity of all of the issues. I am truly grateful to DU for allowing me to grow as a human being.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texshelters Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #32
58. Yes, homophobia runs deep
in our society.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/06/11/tracy-morgan-the-word-faggot-and-a-plea-to-call-people-jerk/

Peace,
Tex Shelters
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #58
73. But not here. I challenge you to find anyone who opposes full equality for LGBT here.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 10:12 AM by mistertrickster
But that's not good enough for some apparently.

On edit--by "anyone" I mean an active long-term member.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texshelters Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #73
143. People who oppose
equality won't necessarily make themselves apparent in this inclusive environment.

I doubt that everyone here is okay on all questions of gay equality, and they will remain closeted.

However, I don't have evidence of it here and now. But elsewhere it is apparent, (read my link and the comment on the progressive Addictinginfo), and homophobes come after me thinking they are defending Tracy Morgan.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/06/11/tracy-morgan-the-word-faggot-and-a-plea-to-call-people-jerk/

Peace,
Tex Shelters
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #143
1639. +1 -- they do not openly state it -- which is where the difficulties with MODS comes in ....
Edited on Sun Jun-19-11 10:35 PM by defendandprotect
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #73
524. Oh my god.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lil Missy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #73
594. You are an example of the problem. You've conflated the meanings of LGBT equal rights vs. homophobia
They are NOT synonymous. One might even conclude that you are being deliberately dismissive of homophobia by insisting on this sleight of hand with terms.

And secondly, who the hell are you to decide that the feelings and experiences of others are not valid, because you don't feel the same way? If you think your opinion is THAT important, you flatter yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #594
857. Wow. Lots of passion there. I have literally NO idea what you're talking about.
Try it in English next time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:30 PM
Response to Reply #857
889. Let me give you an example that may help
I've got a couple of libertarian friends who have no issues with gay marriage or gay rights or anything. But they're not exactly comfortable around gay people. They will say things like "I don't care if they get married but I don't like seeing two dudes kissing in public". And while I think it's good that the majority of Americans now support gay rights, I think it's unfortunate that that some people in that majority see gay people as strange or weird. True equality is when we get to the point where everyone realizes that gay people are just people, no different from anyone else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texshelters Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #889
1061. You are absolutely correct
and over time I hope that changes too.

Peace,
Tex Shelters
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #889
1260. I totally agree. I don't understand how anything I wrote could be construed otherwise. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lil Missy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #857
921. Ahh yes, deliberately dismissive again.
Good to have people like you on record, out here in the open, as someone who prefers to stir shit rather than honestly participate in discussion.

Enjoy your stay. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texshelters Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #921
1059. Wow, you are thin skinned
disagreement isn't being dismissive.

And I did say change was difficult.

Sorry I didn't just bow to your greater wisdom and accept all you say even though it wasn't true. The example I posted demonstrates that some can change.

Is the example not interesting, or are you just worried about your ego?

Peace,
Tex Shelters
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lil Missy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #1059
1124. I wasn't responding to you. Check again. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texshelters Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #1124
1332. Sorry Lil MIssy
I usual add a name to my comments to eliminate confusion.

Peace,
Tex Shelters
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #921
1258. Thank you. I've been enjoying my stay since 2002. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #32
183. you think no active DUers are bigoted against LGBT issues?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #32
184. Of course some are. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gkhouston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #32
274. Yes. Not sure if they're trolls, but yes. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #32
278. If a person spends years deliberately antagonizing a group of people every chance he gets,
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 12:58 PM by QC
then there's probably some bigotry involved, don't you think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Safetykitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #32
363. Yes. there are bigots here. Fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marcel Donating Member (61 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #32
439. So...
Not a single DUer from the 172,137 registered ones are bigots?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #439
464. You want me to name them?
m******, N*******, T*******, c*****, V********, and N******* come to mind immediately. That I could name six off the top of my head just based on recent activity shows how deep this problem is.

If you want to know the letters behind the *'s, you can PM me. And three of those six are moderators.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #464
521. Funny how I could identify the letters behind those asterisks like THAT!
(snapping fingers)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:29 AM
Response to Reply #464
1020. Funny- I know EXACTLY who each of those astericks represent.
There is a reason for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #1020
1025. Purely coincidental, I'm sure. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #32
461. Yes.
I'll PM you the names of at least five of them. I'm tempted to post them here if this is supposed to be a frank discussion. Three of them continuously post messages berating gays and questioning the need for our "pet issues" and another two use their powers as moderators to cover for them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #32
518. Some DUers delight in gay baiting.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 04:17 PM by ZombieHorde
The whole "pony" trend was about belittling gbltiq issues. It was really fucked up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #518
536. It was, and is, fucked up. People are still trotting out that swaybacked old nag.
I mean, what says 'enlightened progressive' quite so well comparing a person's desire for basic human rights to a petulant little girl's demand for an unrealistic birthday present?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #518
1428. That was last year?
I remember going into self-censoring mode after the purges, even though I was never particularly outspoken. I had the 'pony' garbage directed my way. As well as the 'you never really loved him' despite I was onboard supporting and contributing to Obama's campaign before the fan girls even knew who he was. *LOL*

I don't think DU has any longterm members who are homophobes. I believe there are quite a few who don't believe equal rights for LGBT's are all that important. The same people were OK with huge compromises on health care too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #518
1640. Agree 1000% --
Edited on Sun Jun-19-11 10:52 PM by defendandprotect

Unfortunately, didn't recognize the gay-baiting in that until it's been pointed out!!

Wow -- !!


Of course, it's also about saving Obama here --

a lot of money went from this website to Obama and Dems --

something I disagree with -- I'd prefer to see individuals give directly --

especially since it's still proclaimed that DU has no "affiliation" with the Dem Party!

And we now know that the Koch Bros funded the DLC giving them an affiliation with the

Dem Party! So -- in the end -- who were DU members funding?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #32
1019. There absolutely are some
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #32
1636. Can you speak for every active DU poster here?
I doubt it --

Then why not give some consideration to what is being said here of bullying?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texshelters Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #6
54. Actually
a former KKK clan leader befriended a black civil right leader in the 70s when they found they both had children in the same school and were working for better schools.
http://www.oshadavidson.com/books/the-best-of-enemies-race-redemption-in-the-new-south/

Change is difficult for all of us, especially changing bigoted attides, but it's not impossible.

Peace,
Tex Shelters
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #54
1048. malcolm x changed also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
8. We shall see.
I think part of our anger is HOW the rules have been applied

It feels like the people who understand their own oppression the best often then have the rules used against as opposed to those who diminish us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
10. Recommended.
One of the things that I find most valuable about this forum are these discussions. I would like to think of myself as a fairly open-minded, informed person. But DU has provided me with the chance to learn a heck of a lot more about LGBT issues.

About a year ago, I recommended that one of the best friends that I've had in my life join DU. We had worked together in human services in the 1980s, and remain close friends through time and distance. I was about as ignorant of LGBT issues as a person could be, in part from growing up in a home environment where prejudice/hatred wasn't okay, and also from being part of a small school class where -- as far as I knew -- our gay & lesbian classmates were in the mainstream, and the few hateful kids were marginalized. Again, that was just my impression.

Working with my friend was eye-opening. Even in human services, supposedly open-minded, she showed me what types of stupidity she faced. I don't pretend that I came to have a full grasp. But I learned, and learning is indeed an important process.

That process continues. I attempt to put what I learn to use in daily life. And, on this forum, I continue to try to learn. Thus, I look forward to this OP/thread's growth. Thank you for starting it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #10
466. But the problem is, H20 Man....
...just like the "Mending Fences" whitewash, we can sit here and talk and talk and if nothing changes then we're back where we started. Maybe even worse because the bigots can say "look, we talked about your pet issue in Skinner's thread in GD, so shut up and toe the line."

We need REAL, CONCRETE, and FAST action or the situation will just continue to deteriorate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:30 AM
Response to Reply #466
984. I certainly agree
with your assessment.

I posted what I did for a reason -- but it was not to disagree with what you have said. It was in support. Let me try to explain: In the past month, I've been interviewed by a number of area and regional journalists. One afternoon, while being interviewed by two television reporters, one commented to the other on how smart I am. (Fooled her!) The other, who has interviewed me from time to time, on a wide range of issues, responded, "You can ask him about any topic, and he'll give you the most informed, intelligent response available." Now, other forum members may not view me in quite that way, but I think/hope most have some degree of respect for my opinions. And my point was that, even as well-versed as I may be on a range of human rights issues, this is one where I am admittedly still learning a lot. I tend to do best by keeping my mouth shut, and my eyes and ears open, because many, many forum members are far, far more informed on these issues, and I surely appreciate the opportunity to learn.

That doesn't translate into being quiet when I see a faction of DUers dismiss these issues, or pretend this administration has made necessary progress. Or that society -- including many liberals -- have advanced in their thinking.

There are several divisive issues on DU. None is more important than the GLBT issues. Others include sexual equality (male v Female); domestic violence; and racism. By no coincidence, these issues all overlap. And unless and until the vast majority of forum members come to grips with these realities, including recognizing that we all not only have much to learn, but an opportunity right here on DU, this forum is shackled with a ball & chain that keeps us from making progress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #984
1077. Thanks Waterman, you always "get it"- almost always anyway :)
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 10:46 AM by Marrah_G
People would be wise to stop and listen when you speak.

PS- I was really glad to see that you got well :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #466
1642. Issue of the MODS has to be opened up -- otherwise you're talking to yourselves ...
Not all MODS are created equal -- especially when issues like homophobia

can be hidden here -- all you have to do is not make your bigotry known.

Simple --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 07:27 AM
Response to Reply #1642
1734. True.
Valid point. I agree 100%.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snoutport Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
12. I've yet to be offended by anyone on DU over gay issues. My threads about me and my hubby have been
very respected and I feel lots of support from DU.

Good Morning peeps!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #12
145. i love your posts
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 10:55 AM by seabeyond
:hug: and i am glad you feel this way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snoutport Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #145
622. :0) Thank you very much!
I get LAMBASTED over some of my education posts (good God...and nuclear energy)...but the gay ones have never had issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #622
786. i duke it out on the education threads, too. i happen to think the schools are kicking ass
and the teachers, for the most part, are very good, and the huge problem is the parenting and expectation not being high enough for our kids.

i am a hard ass myself, lol.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
auntAgonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #12
951. there have been a LOT of offensive posts regarding gay issues
I'm glad you were never offended. IF you haven't been offended for someone else though, you've not been paying attention.

aA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Le Taz Hot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:32 AM
Response to Original message
13. Apparently, I'm WAY out of the loop here.
There have been GBLT wars? Seriously, I'm clueless. (NOT ONE WORD!) ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #13
22. Me too.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #13
220. same here.. but then I don't post much anymore
on much of anything:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #13
1643. I'm watching this thread because all of these exploitations -- discrimination -- are related ...
Edited on Sun Jun-19-11 11:12 PM by defendandprotect
they are related in the sense that elites profit from exploitation of any

group of people which they set in motion -- whether it be females or AA or

Jews, Native Americans - or homosexuals --

Now, could you say honestly that you don't sense that there is anti-female

sentiment on DU? That we have not here actually arrived at an embrace of

feminism?

Often it is hidden -- but on many threads you will see questionable comments --


AND, feminism, imo, should be one of our most settled issues here --

then, if you rethink this, where do you think that leaves DU re unexpressed

animosity for homsexuals?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snooper2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:32 AM
Response to Original message
14. I used to think civil unions were the way to go, but now understand marriage for everyone
No reason two guys or girls who want to get hitched shouldn't have to go through the same shit as the rest of us married folk :P

Most of educated America feel the same way. It's the backwards fucks that are holding us back. I honestly don't think it will happen for 10-20 years...There's a generation of hard core fundies that need to die off first who grew up pre 1960.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #14
19. I think civil unions are a half measure, but I support them
when the alternative is nothing at all. Until this whole thing is settled on a constitutional basis, some people will benefit from the civil union half measure. I notice that many in Illinois, for example, are taking advantage of the opportunity to formalize their partnerships, despite it not being fully equivalent to marriage. I would not deny them that in the name of insisting on marriage or nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #14
25. Civil Unions for all - No Government Approved Marriage
I feel that the Government should not be in the business of approving marriages; they certainly shouldn't be in the business of determining what a "real" marriage is (they don't have a good track record). Civil Unions are better; contracts between individuals giving the legal protections that marriage gives now for straight and gay people.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #25
35. There are people who do not understand the difference between being legally married and religiously
I would like to see no government approved religious marriages, but only legal ones (civil). If someones want to do a religious ceremony for some reason, they can, that is an option. But even now it won't give them the legal rights and protections UNLESS they also sign the civil/legal papers.

I am amazed talking to people who do not understand the basic fact that you need to do the legal/civil part, that simply getting married in a church doesn't give you the rights, protections.

I want marriage equality for all, the same name, the same protections, the same rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #35
37. That's why i favor civil unions for all - at least from a Government Perspective
clarifies the issue.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GodlessBiker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #37
55. That's what we have now. Anyone who wants to be married *must* go through ...
the civil process, with its requisite civil legal paperwork.

This religious thing is just icing on the cake.

It's really just like divorce. No one needs to have religion get involved to get a divorce. All that is required is to complete civil legal requirements. If you want a religion to also sanction the divorce, well, you are free to do so, but you don't need to in order to be divorced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
semillama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #55
151. That's a fantastic point. about divorce
Thanks for bringing it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GodlessBiker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #151
191. Indeed. The Catholic Church doesn't have a say who gets divorced ...
It can deny that people are divorced within the eyes of the Church, but it cannot prevent people from getting divorced. The same should be true of marriage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #191
207. isn't the same already true of marriage?
The Catholic Church can't prevent people from getting married, either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GodlessBiker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #207
440. They're helping to prevent me from getting married. Why don't they have a campaign ...
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 03:02 PM by GodlessBiker
to only permit those legal divorces of which it approves? Fucking hypocrites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #440
508. I think the church would be thrilled if they could restrict divorces
and I'm sure they've fought hard against no-fault divorce laws, as they did against tolerance for birth control, etc.

I say that not in any way to defend them from your charge of hypocrisy, nor to defend their opposition to marriage equality, which is disgraceful.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #440
1646. RCC and Mormon Church also funded the campaign against Equal Rights for Women ...
and they funded it with tax exempt dollars -- !!

Meanwhile, they play a little game of "annuling" marriages of wealthy which end in

divorce ... because they can make a few bucks on it!!


:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #55
1489. And churches aren't required to recognize civil divorces from a religious perspective
Which is IMO as it should be, just like a church would never be required to give religious sanction to a gay marriage if they didn't believe in it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #55
1645. Agree 1000% -- interesting ....
Edited on Sun Jun-19-11 11:17 PM by defendandprotect
and from what I'm aware of, the RCC only gets involved in kind of "annuling" marriages

which end in divorces when they can make a few bucks on it -- !!

:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
awoke_in_2003 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #37
527. the problem is the word "marriage"...
is deeply embedded in the minds of most Americans. Most legal documents- like mortgage paperwork, insurance paperwork, or anything associated with probate law, use the word marriage. You have an easier chance of getting laws allowing gays to marry than you do changing all these types of paperwork to "civil union". Another thing- would everyone currently holding a marriage license now how to get a civil union license?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gormy Cuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #37
1054. The government perspective is already clear.
Creating a new category called "civil unions" is just a sop to people who don't understand the difference between civil and religious marriage law.

We've tried that "separate but equal" thing in the past. Didn't work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #35
62. A couple who has a wedding ceremony in a church without obtaining a marriage license from the state
is not married. So technically, there is no distinction between a legal marriage and a religious marriage. You're either married or you're not.

I so agree with you! I'm amazed how many people do not understand this. (Spoken as someone who will be officiating her 295th wedding tonight)



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #62
68. Depends on the state

On top of it all, there are common law marriage states...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #68
78. Every state requires a marriage license in order for that marriage to be recognized by the state.
http://www.1800bride2b.com/articles/marriagelaws_chart.htm

There are a few states that will recognize common law, but again there are specific longevity rules that apply and that marriage will be recognized as a civil institution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #78
200. Yes, you repeated the point....

"There are a few states that will recognize common law, but again there are specific longevity rules that apply and that marriage will be recognized as a civil institution."

That is correct.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #68
91. Not true.
Every single state in the U.S. requires a valid marriage license if the couple expects their marriage to be recognized as legal from day one. The major differences among the states are:

a) fee for the license
b) waiting periods and valid dates
c) proof of identity and freedom to marry
d) individuals authorized to certify the marriage

Common law marriage states are fading away fast. Very few left and the requirements are generally pretty strenuous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #91
199. "as legal from day one"

That is an additional qualifier. Quite a few states will recognize a marriage which has met the requirements for time, public representation, and so on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:55 AM
Response to Reply #199
992. Actually only nine states recognize common law marriage and a handful more...
have grandfathered in common law marriages recognized before a particular date. Probate issues in a couple of states will acknowledge common law marriage situations, but it really does involve jumping through some pretty substantial hoops. That's not exactly "quite a few states."

With respect to marriage equality, we're talking about the issuance of a valid marriage license by the state. i.e. marriages that will be valid from day one. Discussions of common law marriage are utterly irrelevant to granting equal protection under the law for GLBT couples.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #199
1647. Are you saying that homosexuals can have a "common law" marriage recognized????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #68
93. The officiating clergy can sign and file the papers in some cases, if they are certified to do so
otherwise simply having a religious ceremony does not give you the legal rights that a legal one does (in most cases).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gkhouston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #62
277. They're not legally married. That doesn't mean holy union ceremonies
have no value to the participants. I agree that legal marriage throughout the US is long overdue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #277
597. Of course not.
I perform wedding ceremonies where:

1. the couple has a valid marriage license and the ceremony will result in a legal marriage
2. the couple is already married and wants a wedding ritual
3. the couple do not want the state involved and simply want a public celebration of their commitment
4. the couple do not want the state involved and would like their union blessed by a member of the clergy

My only desire is for heterosexual and homosexual couples to have equal opportunity under the law to choose whichever they prefer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
markpkessinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #62
632. That's not quite right...
It's true that a wedding ceremony in a church absent a state-issued marriage license is not a legal marriage, but one can get married by a judge or other public official so empowered without the trappings of any religious or sacramental rites. So there _is_ a distinction. Depending on the dictates of the particular religious sect, it is conceivable that one's religious organization could view a religious marriage ceremony as being valid in that organization's eyes, even if the civil authorities do not so recognize it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:51 AM
Response to Reply #632
991. We're talking about equal protection under the law.
If civil authorities do not recognize it, no legal benefits of marriage are conveyed. I've performed plenty of wedding ceremonies for same gender couples in states that do not grant marriage equality. Do I consider the couple married? Sure. Do I refer to them as spouses? You bet. Are they married? No.

Sure you can have a religious organization that views a religious marriage ceremony as valid and the couple is married in the organization's eyes. But that is still not marriage equality and the couple are not legally married.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #35
63. Agree - it is pretty weird how many people do not understand marriage as a legal concept
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #35
80. In some countries, getting married in a church fulfills all the legal requirements
eg England:

If you wish to be married in the Church of England or Church in Wales, speak to the vicar of the church in which you wish to marry. There is usually no need to involve your local register office.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Governmentcitizensandrights/Registeringlifeevents/Marriagesandcivilpartnerships/DG_175715


The vicar has all the powers of the state registrar for marriage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #80
90. I know. And in some countries, like the USA, it is in no way necessary or legal unless they also
sign the legal papers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #80
132. Marriage law is quite different in the U.K. verses the U.S.
For example, secular venues have to have certain rooms licensed for marriage ceremonies. A wedding performed in a room that hasn't been licensed won't be valid.

I read through that page and its a little confusing whether they are talking about arranging for the ceremony or legal rights.

Personally, I wouldn't bring the U.K. into a discussion of equal marriage rights in the U.S. because they are so different.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mwooldri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #132
562. The only reason why UK should be brought into this debate of marriage rights...
... is that the UK does have civil unions that the UK government views as virtually equal to marriage in terms of legal rights.

However it is still entitled a civil union - this "separate but equal" nonsense - that is not recognized in countries that don't have civil union or "free marriage" laws. Hence a couple from the UK going to my adopted home state of NC would not be viewed as a couple in any shape or form.

But the rest of UK marriage is different from US marriage to such an extent it's like comparing apples and pears. Even comparing English marriage and Scottish marriage is not comparing like for like.

Personally if the Feds can get some legislation on the block that at the least recognizes civil unions as being equal to marriage then that would be a good start and better than the status quo. But DOMA must go, and work towards "free marriage".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lance_Boyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #80
247. That's because those are official State churches.
We don't have those here, thankfully.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #25
36. I agree, although it's been pointed out that the term "Civil Union" already has a specific legal
meaning in some states. So the term might better be something like "Civil Marriages" for all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #36
44. Currently, every legal marriage... that is, a marriage that is recognized by the state...
is a civil marriage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #44
52. The problem with that is that there is no uniformity.
Plus, the federal government only recognizes something called marriage. That's the bottom line, here. Full equality requires that it's fully accepted throughout the country, at leas in a legal sense. That is not currently the case. The change must be on a constitutional basis if it is to have the weight it needs. State-by-state recognition isn't enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #52
64. The fact that the government only recognizes marriage means that it is a civil
institution. The bottom line is that we already have a civil institution and it is called marriage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #64
84. I don't disagree with that at all. Marriage is the universally-accepted
partnership of two people. So, that's what's needed. I don't care if some church or another doesn't accept marriage between people of the same sex. Hell, the Catholic church doesn't accept marriage between a Catholic and a non-catholic. That's all irrelevant. It's what the government accepts that matters. Right not, there's a difference in how the federal government treats married couples and other types of relationships. Either it has to accept all forms of partnerships as equal or it has to define a way that allows same sex couples identical and equal treatment under federal law.

Congress is not likely to do that anytime soon, so a constitutional case in the federal courts is the fastest potential route. There is progress in the courts. I'm celebrating that. Congress will take another decade or two to come along, and then only if we're successful in the next few elections. We need to make Congress irrelevant in this issue by making it unconstitutional to treat same-sex partnerships any differently that others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #25
38. Marriage in the U.S. is already a civil union. Why codify it as a purely religious event in order
to appease the bigots?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #38
42. Because marriage is clearly more than a civil union in some peoples minds
and not just the anti LGBT Bigots. The term has larger connotations; whether or not it should is beside the point. It does. So take those connotations off the table; it's not the Governments place to decide that kind of issue anyway.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #42
49. You exacerbate those connotations when you change marriage to a civil union.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #49
56. In the short term that's probably true
In some cases I don't mind it; riling up those who hate LGBT people is going to happen whatever we push for. I guess I'm not sure what your point is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #56
66. My point is that since marriage is by definition a civil union ...
there is absolutely no reason to change the term.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #66
71. If a marriage is a civil union is a marriage - why are civil unions so unpalatable to so many?
Because, while legally they are the same thing, societally they are not the same thing.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #71
82. Precisely.
Marriage has extremely important social, legal and emotional weight to it. And instead of telling GLBT folks they have a right to it as well, the suggestion to use the term civil union still tells them they are not entitled to what heterosexual couples have had for centuries.

Why reinvent the wheel? Marriage is a civil union, but the term is an important one. Marriage Equality sends a more powerful message of acceptance and equal protection under the law than throwing out the baby with the bath water.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:21 AM
Original message
And I don't think it's a good idea to let the Government assign that social, legal and emotional
weight. Even if they do it in a manner I agree with; it gives them power they have shown in the past to be irresponsible with. And you can't be sure the next generation won't change their minds about what a "real" marriage should be.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:25 AM
Original message
What is wrong with the next generation making that decision?
The one before mine decided laws prohibiting interracial marriage were wrong. I hope our generation decides laws prohibiting same gender marriage are wrong.

The government is not what has assigned social, legal and emotional weight to the institution. That's too pat. The government does have a responsibility to recognize the social, legal and emotional weight and extend equal rights to all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
111. One clarifying point
I don't want to insinuate that the Government has assigned the weight to Marriage; we have. Society has. But what we have delegated to the Government is the power to decide what a "real" marriage is. To decide who gets that social and emotional weight.

As it turns out while you do make a good argument, I still think I'm right; but your position is the one likely to actually be on the ballots, and you should rest assured that given the chance to vote for mandating that the Government give marriage certificates to everybody regardless of gender preference, I'd vote for it.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
customerserviceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:24 AM
Response to Original message
946. A point of law here on what you said
The previous generation, as a whole, did not decide that laws prohibiting interracial marriage were wrong, it was the result of a 1967 Supreme Court decision that Gallup showed that 90% of Americans disagreed with at the time.

Sometimes, it takes the highest Court in the land to lead, and that's what I envision happening in this case. DOMA is not a Constitutional amendment, and I look for the Supreme Court to apply the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution to same-gender marriages performed in the handful of states that recognize them. At that point, it becomes irrelevant how many states have stained their constitutions with homophobia.

Yes, there will be an outcry among the fundies and their supporters, but there will not be a damned thing they can do about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:47 AM
Response to Reply #946
989. Point well taken. Thank you.
My comment was simply to point out laws change over time. What we experience today will not be the same legal environment in the next generation or the next....To worry subsequent generations are going to forge their own paths is a silly worry. Of course they are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
customerserviceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #989
1327. Things do indeed change over time
Sometimes, it's too easy to leaf through a history book, and assume that an obvious truth won, but every civil rights struggle was a hard-fought battle, where the eventual outcome was often shrouded in doubt. It doesn't surprise me that the fight for equal marriage and gay rights resembles that past.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
693. The government is responsible for laws, and no other entity n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #71
99. Because there is a different term based on sexual orientation. Give them all the same term
otherwise it is not equal. Why call it "marriage" if between people of opposite sex and "civil union" when between people of the same sex? That is why it is unpalatable to me. Make whichever term the same term for all.

I think this is also what you are saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #99
112. that is what I am saying; civil unions for all, straight or gay. no government sanctioned marriage.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #112
135. Basically you are eliminating the very word marriage then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #135
147. Well people could still go to their churches or other organizations to get "married"
with whatever societal weight they feel that carries. But as far as Government goes, "I say, we will have no more marriages: those that are married already, all but one, shall live; the rest shall keep as they are."

Ok maybe not that last part.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #147
163. See, that's exactly the part that bothers me.
I don't want churches to have that degree of control over a word. It's adding an extra unnecessary step.

People can already go to their church to have their marriage (that is a civil union) blessed in the eyes of their denomination. Why then make the word exclusive to such ceremonies?

I wonder what the percentage of people having civil rites verses religious ceremonies to solemnize their marriage are. I know in my case, even though I am clergy, over half of my couples want a civil/secular ceremony. In your scenario, all of my couples will have civil unions but only the ones who requested it be blessed in the context of a religious ceremony will have a marriage? Makes no sense and opens the door for religious bigots to use the word as some sort of division, or worse, a weapon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:15 AM
Original message
You mean like they are already doing?
I mean isn't marriage being used as a weapon by some right now? How is doing this going to be worse?

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:03 PM
Response to Original message
226. x1,000 yes
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 12:03 PM by Pacifist Patriot
At the moment they have no right to do so. In your scenario, they would.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #226
263. I don't know if they would have any additional right to do so
They certainly would. But if marriage between same sex partners were authorized tomorrow they would complain about that as well.

It comes back to what a real legitimate marriage is. Legally I am sure we both agree that there should be no difference between same sex and opposite sex marriages. The issue is the social and emotional weight given to a marriage. You feel it is appropriate for the Government to weigh in and declare a same sex marriage to the same weight as an opposite sex marriage. I don't want the government making that call; would rather that was left up to individuals, with the understanding that many of those individuals will continue to be nasty bigots and others won't be.

But if the government does weigh in and declare a same sex marriage to be as legitimate as an opposite sex marriage those nasty bigots will continue to be nasty bigots in that scenario as well.

This seems like a good point to reiterate that your position is the one more likely to be on the ballot, and if it does appear on the ballot we will certainly vote the same way.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #42
53. Actually, it is the governments place to codify civil matters. And legal marriage is
a civil matter in all cases. Even when performed by clergy, that clergy becomes a representative of the state and empowered by the state to conduct a civil ceremony. No different than a county clerk or a justice of the peace.

There is no compelling reason to wipe out a civil designaiton in order to pacify bigots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #53
76. Indeed. All we clergy do is....
sign we witnessed the two people cited on the marriage license exchange an intent to be married in our presence. Exactly the same thing a clerk of court, justice of the peace, and in the case of my state, a notary public do. The only difference may be the contents of the ritual aspect of the occasion.

As I explain to my couples. I'm not authorized "to marry you." The state issues your license, I witness your vows. You two are responsible for marrying each other. I just indicate to the state I saw you do that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #76
101. That is a good way to put it to them, thank you. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #76
115. Yup. That's why I got my ULC ordination.
I'm not marrying folks in Minnesota, but I did in California. However they wanted to do it and wherever. Then, I filed the papers at the courthouse for them, which made it official. That was really my only role in the matter, no matter what the form of whatever ceremony there was. Marriage is a matter of law, not church. If it were a matter of church only, very many couples would not be married today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nichomachus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #76
306. In fact that is (or used to be) core to the Catholic teaching on matrimony
All the priest does is witness the vows.

The easy answer is to do what other sane countries have done, including nominally Catholic Mexico, by the way.

Everyone -- must first complete the registration at the civil registry. At that point, they have all the rights, privileges, and obligations attached to marriage.

Then, and only then, they can go to a church of their choice and be married by clergy who agree to marry them

Priests, ministers, and other clergy should not be the gatekeepers of civil benefits. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:01 AM
Response to Reply #306
993. It still is. It's the one sacrament not administered by a priest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nichomachus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #993
1111. I know, but they don't act like it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #42
422. Religious bigots oppose civil unions just as strenuously as marriage.
And straight people will never want to "downgrade" their marriages for gay people.

It's full, equal CIVIL marriage or bust. Get on board, please and stop trying to find a "third way." There isn't one, and there doesn't need to be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #422
452. Get on board?
Well as I've said above, when the vote actually happens (if it does) I will vote in the way you would prefer.

Why am I not allowed to look for a third way?

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #452
484. Because the "third way" is a lie. It creates a classification of a legal religious marriage that
simply does not exist. And pretending that, in the eyes of the state, that marriage is nothing more than civil arrangement is pandering to bigots. It would be akin to, rather than expanding the franchise to women, the government creating a parallel voting system because men couldn't stomach the idea of women participating in a system that was traditionally open to men exclusively.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #484
490. Pandering to bigots. I suppose that's the crux of the matter
Suffice it to say I don't see it that way, for reasons I've enumerated elsewhere.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #452
537. It's already been pointed out to you why it's not viable, politically or otherwise.
Maybe a more important question is, why do you think there needs to be a third way?

What the hell is so sacred about the existing institutions that we shouldn't just be made a part of them, as they are now? Why are we not worth that much?

When you say, "let's find a third way," what you're really doing is lending credence to the idea that GLBTs shouldn't be a part of the traditions and laws that exist right now. Why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #537
603. Thank you, that's my point!
All we have to do is establish two consenting adults of legal age may obtain a valid marriage license in any state regardless of gender. Done.

I admit I remain baffled why such an easy remedy for equal rights is so contentious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #537
627. Well it's been pointed out to me that other people disagree with my opinion
As for the last question, as I have pointed out, it's because defining marriage, and all the societal and emotional weight we give that ceremony, shouldn't be the purview of the Government. That's my opinion; I kind of get that other people disagree with me.

Basically you have bigots on one said saying to the Government "Look tell those LBGT people, once and for all, that their marriages aren't real marriages!" And your side is essentially saying to the Government "Look, tell those bigots, once and for all, that our marriages are real marriages!" I don't think the Government should be in the business of defining, for either side, what a "real" marriage is.

But I understand people disagree with me on this one; and since any third way isn't likely to be adopted, I will end up voting on your side of the fence.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #627
948. There is no reason to capitulate to the bigots ignorance of the law. The govt. views marriage as a
civil contract between two people and that contract is a real marriage. I find it amusing that you've no problem with the govt. creating an identical parallel system and being in the business of defining THAT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #948
1012. Well I'm glad to amuse you
But obviously the issue isn't the legal ramifications of marriage or civil unions or civil marriage or whatever we want to call it. It's the societal and emotional weight we have assigned the word marriage. The parallel system is to split out what is the natural role of Government (the legal ramifications of civil unions) from what is not the natural role of Government (the social and emotional weight of the word marriage).

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #1012
1476. If it is not the natural role of government, whose role is it?
It just dawned on me I never asked that question.

Since marriage has always been a civil contract defined by a governmental entity, I'm a little confused by your resistance to the government defining marriage.

Who else could?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #1476
1480. Ultimately individuals
Some of those individuals will certainly look to social structures already in place (churchs for example, or DU) to decide what a real marriage is. But when it comes to assigning that emotional and social weight it will be individuals.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:22 AM
Response to Reply #627
999. You've been a great challenge and I thank you for that.
I've enjoyed discussing this with you. I admit I'd hoped for a full convert, but I appreciate someone just being willing to at least talk about it.

I get your point about not wanting the government to define marriage and all the societal and emotional weight we give it, but since the government has always defined marriage it's a bit like not wanting the government to define who is an adult. Through laws, the government does just that. Doesn't matter if a 13 year old boy is considered an adult in Jewish law he's still not going to be able to make his own medical decisions, sign a legal contract or drive a car.

Personally, I look at it at its most elemental. Our government (in my opinion) is responsible for making sure all of its citizens have equal protection and equal rights under the law. By not issuing marriage licenses to same gender couples our government is discriminating based upon sexual orientation which is simply part of who someone is. No more easily changed than skin color, eye color or height. Permitting same gender couples access to the same legal benefits heterosexual couples are entitled to under the law when they marry is what this is all about.

Forget the church, forget society's expectations of what a "real" marriage is, There are on the order of 1,400 legal rights conferred upon married couples in the U.S. -- about 400 state benefits and over 1,000 federal benefits. http://www.religioustolerance.org/mar_bene.htm

Two people who want to be married and gain those legal rights should be able to do so. Shouldn't matter whether they are a man and a woman, two men or two women. That's all it comes down to for me.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #627
1648. But government is NOT going to stop licensing "marriage" for hetereosexuals ... therefore ...
they must do the same for homosexuals ---
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #38
51. I should have read your response before posting.
Needless to say, I agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Still Sensible Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #25
45. I used to agree with that idea
that civil unions is a better solution, but the problem with that solution is the laws in the various states. The term and state of "marriage" and "spouse" is codified in far too many areas. So I have come to believe that unless there is complete marriage equality, there will be far too many discriminatory laws still on the books from state to state preventing true equal rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #25
48. Except marriage has always been a civil union.
The government and colonial governing bodies have always been responsible for marriage law. Religious institutions have never had the authority to render anyone legally married in the U.S. They are authorized to function as official witnesses and certify the marriage has taken place, but so are clerks of court, justices and in three states notaries. All clergy can do is witness something the state has licensed.

By declaring the government responsible for civil unions, but not marriage, we remove centuries of precedent and in my opinion further strengthen the perception marriage is a religious rite when it is not.

No semantic gymnastics need be performed here. Equal marriage rights for consenting adults. The state issues marriage licenses, issue them to same gender couples. The couple decides whom they want to sign as their officiant. Simple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_bryanto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #48
67. That's well argued; I can't deny I'm bucking tradition
I'm just not sure that's a bad thing; if the Government has the power to decide what a real marriage is, as they do now, they have the power to declare LGBT marriages or interracial marriages or other types of marriages as not real marriages. I think the value of getting the Government out of the marriage business overshadows the problems with changing traditions.

I will also admit I do think it will be more palatable and likely to get passed. Which I suppose is appeasing bigots; but there are a lot of them. And they get to vote too.

Bryant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #67
86. Actually, the government being in the marriage business makes a great deal of sense.
The Roman Catholic resisted it for over a thousand years. It only became a sacrament in about the 11th or 12th century I believe.

Family law is a sticky wicket. Would you really want oodles of different canon law determining whether a couple can or cannot divorce, issuing property settlements, deciding on child custody? What if the couple are from two different faiths...or no faith? Who makes those judgments then.

No, marriage law makes perfect sense being in the secular realm of government. It's a contract after all.

We have a sensible workable system. As I've mentioned above there only needs to be one teeny weeny change made and the issue becomes moot. Issue valid marriage licenses to same gender consenting adults. Done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #25
114. Calling it 'marriage' may be necessary to get rights when abroad
Even if the entire USA was fixed so that everyone had equal rights for 'civil unions', and 'marriage' was just a term for whatever religions wanted to approve a civil union, other countries would still be saying they'll only recognise 'marriages' as the full contract.

It's better to make it 'marriage for everyone'. Religions can then decide if they recognise each marriage or not (as they may not, at the moment, if someone has been married and then divorced; it's just an internal problem for them, then).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #114
129. Very good point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #114
1649. Male-Supremacist religion has a stake in homosexual exploitation continuing ....
just as it has a stake in female inequality continuing --

and we know that they and the Mormon Church have used tax-exempt dollars for

campaigns to defeat both Equality for Females and Marriage Equality in CA --

and I believe in other states --

Organized patriarchal religion has profited over millennia from th exploitation

of Native Americans, Women, African Americans, Jews -- and Homosexuals --


not to mention "Manifest Destiny" and "Man's Dominion Over Nature" which are teh

licenses they granted to elites to outrageously exploit nature!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blasphemer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #25
120. This has long been my position as well
Of course, I fully support gay marriage given our current laws and the current political climate. However, ideally, marriage would be taken out of the equation completely. Legally recognized unions and, if so desired, marriages sanctioned by other entities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #120
138. Except marraiges sanctioned by other entities gives them an authority they do not currently possess.
It further exacerbates the distinction and undermines the idea of equal rights on not just a legal, but social level. We do have a history of legislating for social change. Marriage equality could very well do just that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blasphemer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #138
250. I did not mean legal sanctioning
I mean apart from legal sanctioning of a civil union (required equally, for all) individual couples could choose religious sanctioning, for instance. However, in real world terms (as in, the world as it currently is), I agree with you and support marriage equality AND legislating for social change. I shall always support that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #25
1644. WAIT -- DU RULES ... support homosexuality, including GAY MARRIGE ...!!
While I agree with you that marriage is a private thing --

AS LONG AS WE HAVE GOVERNMENT RECOGNIZING HETEREOSEXUAL MARRIAGE, THEN THEY MUST

RECOGNIZE HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JanMichael Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #14
26.  "It's the backwards fucks that are holding us back."
Absolutely; the people that are told ad nauseum from birth about the "biblical principles" that "form" and "validate" their silly assed opinion on civil rights.

My wife noticed from working at a large university that the undergrads (over the past 7 or 8 years) just don't seem to notice or care about differences either in race, religion or sexuality. They are the most accepting generation... on the whole... and they are voters now. I think the attitudes are changing rapidly, the problem to people like us is that we are sick of freaking waiting to see our friends be able to get married, and enjoy the same rights that we have.

We are in our forties, and in our opinion, this issue should have been put to rest a long damned time ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #26
79. Unfortunately, the folks in government are still in the age range
that has a backwards attitude towards the LGBT community. And until they get cycled out or straight people demand equal rights for everyone then we're stuck waiting... and waiting... and waiting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #79
102. My fourteen year old son made the prediction the other day...
I will be in my late 50s or early 60s when marriage equality is a reality throughout our country. He might be right, because in about 15-20 years we will see a new generation in power. I hope he's wrong and its much sooner though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 11:53 PM
Response to Reply #79
1651. They also have a backwards attitude re Equality for Women ...
but it isn't about a lack of consciousness raising -- it is about the

fact that discrimination is exploitation -- and it still pays elites

and their pre-owned elected officials to keep those profits in place --


Whether you're talking about women, or native American, or AA -- or homosexuals --

it's all the same!!

It isn't about enlightenment -- it's about profit!!!



:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #26
1650. Discrimination has to be also understood as exploitation for profit by the few ....
It is elite profit which holds these ridiculous notions in place --

it is always the same patterns whether female, native American, Jews, AA --

or homosexuals -- the FEW profit!

Whether it is "Manifest Destiny" or "Man's Dominion Over Nature" -- the

licenses extended by organized patriarchal religion to elites/patriarchy --

to exploit ... nature, natural resources, animal life -- and even other

human beings according to various myths of "inferiority."


And their PROPAGANDA WHICH TEACHES INTOLERANCE AND HATRED for those they

wish to exploit -- from Hammer of Witches to priests standing at pulpits

still today saying that homosexuals are an "abomination"--!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #14
149. i thought so too. i thought it would be fastest to get us where we wanted to go. i was so
attacked. and it was ok. though, was not my intent to hurt anyone. i listened, and listened some more. this was a couple years ago. and i decided i would stay out of issues and just hear what was said.

be it sexism, racism, or homophobia, i know that i cannot understand not experiencing, and i am better served to listen more than express. i am on this thread to better understand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #14
512. California allows civil unions for heterosexual couples, but only if at least one is over 62
Explain the logic behind that restriction, I cannot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
namahage Donating Member (678 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #512
671. Because the option of marriage is open to heterosexual couples.
The reason for the exception is that Social Security benefits might be lost to the 62+ partner if they were to get married--a sort of "marriage penalty," as it were.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #671
672. Thanks! That's a reasonable explanation that I had not thought of or heard previously.
The reason for the exception is that Social Security benefits might be lost to the 62+ partner if they were to get married--a sort of "marriage penalty," as it were.

Awesome reply!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Creideiki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:47 AM
Response to Reply #14
988. My first election back in Colorado in 2006 had two initiatives:
Personhood and Civil Unions.

Personhood went 2-1 the right way.

Civil Unions went 2-1 the wrong way.

That means that a bunch of people who knew that fetuses aren't people couldn't understand that people ARE people.

With massive Democratic turnout in that election, it signaled a complete failure of the Party to help with the education on the issue of Civil Unions, although they did help with education on Personhood. And that's how things have been ever since. All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #988
1652. What has to be understood is the collaboration with elites who profit from exploitation ...
Edited on Mon Jun-20-11 12:04 AM by defendandprotect
whether women or any other group who are still or were once discriminated against --


Decades ago, I could tell you this was discussed re "consciousness raising" and

enlightenment --

Let me assure you that women were told how unaccepted they would be just as African Americans

before them heard how unaccepted they would be by co-workers.

I can assure you, however, that management -- well below the CEO levels -- understood

quite clearly that all it would take would be a simple MEMO on the various bulletin

boards stating clearly that African Americans were being employed and that it wasn't only

a matter of law for the company but of welcoming them -- and all employees are expected

to behave accordingly -- in every way.



We rarely ever any longer hear Democrats speak about Equal Rights Act -- but we do very

much still see male-supremacist religion -- which underpins patriarchy -- fighting to

keep this exploitation going -- the RCC still does not acknowledge the full personhood

of females as it acknowledges the full personhood of males.


The Bible for cripes sake is still floating around with very little attack on it -- though

Thomas Jefferson had the courage to do it!!


Whether women, or African Americans, or native Americans or homosexuals -- or Jews --

it is simple exploitation put in place by violence and propaganda of hatred and intolerance.

These are the enemies of organized patriarchal religion -- age old -- because it is these

oppressions which keep patriarchy in power and in profit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
handmade34 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:39 AM
Response to Original message
20. rec
I'm bookmarking to keep in the loop on this one... I have not witnessed the hard feelings but where they exist, it is crucial that we mend them. Of all people, if we can't figure this out, it is a sad day indeed.

By any means necessary, we must have equality!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
21. I strongly hope people get to the point where they discuss what they need from one another in order
to trust one another more. I'm very curious about that, especially in a pseudonymous environment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peacetrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
23. K&R..
People of good intentions on ALL sides sometimes hear things through the filter of previous conversations and not what a poster is actually saying.

I wish this thread the best..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
27. I've seen more hard feelings about brands of automobiles on here and whether weiner should resign...
that seem like people need to kiss and make up.
I have not noticed any hard feelings about lgbt isses. Maybe someone can point me towards an example or two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #27
34. This may be informative
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=173419&mesg_id=173419
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #34
1653. Yes, but what about Skinner ensuring that Gays/Lesibans are always represented on MOD staff ...
Edited on Mon Jun-20-11 12:08 AM by defendandprotect
that we have feminists -- that we have AA -- that we have whatever mix is

required and to ensure that people who are homophobic are kept off MOD staff -- ???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #27
40. Well, Skinner posted this for a reason. My "ignore" list had a number
of folks who were later banned. They were whipping up strife in which any quibble made one Fred Phelps, and there was no way to call it anything different.

You had no right to an opinion if you weren't LGBT with those posters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #40
50. I don't understand what you're saying.
I missed those posts about Fred phelps apparently.
But to say I have no right to an opinion?
Are you just exercising your right to be rude since there is no moderation in this thread?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #50
60. "Are you just exercising your right to be rude since there is no moderation in this thread?"
Yeah, that's what I'm doing.

I'm just being rude.

You can totally ignore my point now.

(sarcasm)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #60
65. I asked you to explain what you meant and you failed to do so.
I'm gonna give you one last chance to explain what you meant or apologize before I open up a can of rudeness so strong, your computer will start to cry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #65
83. Let's take a "time out" shall we, I don't want to get into the "who's got the longer schlong" thing.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 10:18 AM by mistertrickster
On edit--

I said that with SOME posters, you had no right to an opinion if you weren't LGBT.

I didn't say that YOU had no right to an opinion.

Hope that helps clarify.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #83
87. As a member of the LGBT community, I feel straight people have NO RIGHT
to tell us that we should be happy with what we have. We're not stupid, we know there are strides that have been taken with this administration but there have also been things done/said/written that have been attacks on the LGBT community and to think that we should be complacent because this particular President has done more than any other just means the person making that statement has no understanding of politics and how they've been applied to the LGBT community.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #87
109. I think we're arguing two different points--I totally agree that the Big O hasn't done enough
for gays or his base or for any other American citizen.

His sellout of liberal core values is truly astonishing in scope.

My issue is with the tactics that LGBT community has used at times. Some of the spectacles at Gay Pride parades for instance may not be the best way to convince middle America to accept the lifestyle.

That doesn't make me a bigot or opposed to full equality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #109
118. "Some of the spectacles at Gay Pride parades"
that is the kind of language that starts problems on DU. :)

Do I wish that some of gay and lesbian brothers and sisters were a bit more conservative and Pride parades, sure I do but I don't want people (gay or straight) to have to change to get equal rights. I personally don't care if some close-minded person doesn't "accept" my life (it's not a lifestyle, it's my life), what I care is that they accept that I have the right to have the same rights they do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #118
121. See that's what I mean . . . one dares not even utter the phrase, heigh ho. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #121
125. Sorry you have such a problem with Diversity.
It seems you don't like that. It is what it is, you are what you are.


Thats what I'm talking about!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #125
137. I have participated in pride parades myself. Now you get to call me a liar. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #137
208. I would never call you a liar unless you gave me reason to.
Now the question begs (since you brought it up), May I ask how you participated?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:54 AM
Original message
I marched with my friends. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:57 AM
Response to Original message
219. Well good for you on that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
240. LOL. Aren't you glad you replied?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #121
127. Nor would I utter the phrase "uppity" in a thread about African-Americans
Sensitivity is a good thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:21 AM
Response to Reply #121
1658. Come on ... you've been trying to be RUDE right down the entire thread ....
Edited on Mon Jun-20-11 12:25 AM by defendandprotect
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1299874&mesg_id=1300199

Interesting how you picture yourself as the "victimized" in a thread about

homophobia on DU -- !!!


:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ikonoklast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #118
171. Public behavior by heterosexuals is so much more dignified, you see.
Just go to Mardi Gras in New Orleans, and you'll see exactly what I mean.





Do I really need to post the 'sarcasm' thingy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #171
234. Heh...when I read this all I could think of was Christ on a trailer hitch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #234
1283. "Christ on a trailer hitch."?
http://www.carid.com/religious-hitch-covers/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #1283
1301. I was thinking more like this
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pipi_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #118
217. That must be a direct quote...
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 11:57 AM by pipi_k
I don't know because the person you're replying to is on my "ignore" list, but anyway, to address the statement on "spectacles"...

I live not too far from Northampton, MA, where they hold Gay Pride Parades. Not to mention that the city itself is almost a Mecca for gays in the area...but anyway...my point is that I've always wanted to participate in one of the parades.

They always look so....festive. I'm thinking I would probably have a hell of a lot of fun.


And who among us couldn't use a bit more festivity and fun in our lives on occasion?

:7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #118
480. Yup
I posted in that thread calling it "homophobic bullshit" And alerted. And the moderators deleted my post and then locked the thread. Which was amusing. Sorry mods but that made my eyes go :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #480
499. It is considered far worse here to call out homophobia than to engage in it.
That's the problem in a nutshell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #499
502. Yep nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #109
131. What? Spectacles?
Seen Mardi Gras? There are many heterosexual spectacles. Who cares? If you don't want to see them, pull your shade.

For pete's sake!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #131
141. My alleged prudery is not the issue. The issue is how to sell equal rights. nt
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 10:54 AM by mistertrickster
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #141
152. Oh, not really. That's not the issue.
People objected to the "filthy hippies" who were protesting the Vietnam war, too, and said they weren't helping the cause. It's a cop-out. It truly is.

Yes, there are pride events. They're events where people can do as they please to express themselves. Lots of events like that, you know. There's Spring Break, for example, in many resort areas, where heterosexuals are exposing their naughty bits willy-nilly, too. Ignore them. It's not the expression. It's the issue that's important.

When you call out an event, like a gay pride parade, and use that to criticize the entire GLBT rights issue, you're missing the point, you see. Completely missing the point.

A gay pride parade is just an expression. It's not the movement. Stop focusing on the expression and focus on what's right and what's just. Pull your shades down when the gay pride parade passes your window. Your approval is not required.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #152
161. The filthy hippies did not help the cause. That's a very good example.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 11:25 AM by mistertrickster
They allowed the middle class into believing that the street protesters were anarchists who rejected American values (true, actually).

Real organizers like Saul Alinsky had the utmost contempt for the anti-war radicals who knowingly and willfully alienated the very people they had to convince.

The 60's radicals had a real opportunity to build a better society--a once in a century opportunity--and they completely and totally blew it.

On edit--but they did create such loathing and ill will that Ronald Raygun was elected on what historian Thomas Frank calls right-wing backlash.

How'd that work out for our side?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #161
1431. ^ WTH? ^
May I say you, Mister Trickster, don't sound like you were around back then? I was. I was young butI was involved in the anti-war/anti-draft movement at the same time i was working in the post Stonewall gay rights movement.

The anti-war protesters came from all walks of life. Many of the activists in the early anti-war movement were the same religious who had been active in the civil rights movement.

Reagan was elected president in 1980, a few years after the wars in Asia cane to an ignominious end. Reagan didn't particularly come across as a right winger at the time. He was elected because the economy was very bad. Home interest rates were 16 to 18%. Gas prices were high. When the economy is perceived as bad, people will vote for 'change'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #161
1660. Surprised you didn't mention "Helter Skelter" and Manson ... NO ... this was contrived ....
Rather this was an attack on Youth Revolution which the rw likes to try to limit

to a sexual revolution -- it was a great deal more --


The farce you saw portrayed and bought was the bought and paid for backlash by elites

who recognized that their authoritarian rule was being challenged -- and their profits!!



Indeed, in 1972, when the details began to come out about a break-in at Democratic Party headquarters in the Watergate Hotel, Mae immediately recognized personnel and modus operandi from nine years of assassination research, while the mainstream press continued to refer to Watergate as a "caper" and "a third-rate burglary." And so it came to pass that while Rabbi Magnin was entertaining Richard Nixon at his home in Los Angeles, his daughter Mae was revealing the President's role in an incredible conspiracy. Meanwhile, she also perceived an assassination plot, not merely against specific individuals, but against the entire counterculture that was burgeoning at the time.

"I realized that in this country we had a revolution--of housing, food, hair style, clothing, cosmetics, transportation, value systems, religion--it was an economic revolution, affecting the cosmetics industry, canned foods, the use of land; people were delivering their own babies, recycling old clothes, withdrawing from spectator sports. They were breaking the barriers where white and black could rap in 1967. This was the year of the Beatles, the summer of Sergeant Pepper, the Monterey Pop Festival, Haight-Ashbury, make your own candle and turn off the electricity, turn on with your friends and laugh--that's what life was all about."


http://maebrussell.com/Mae%20Brussell%20Articles/Ballad%20of%20Mae%20Brussell.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #141
155. Sell equal rights?
Oy vey.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #155
168. Very good. Why should they have to be sold at all?
Uff da! (Norwegian equivalent)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #141
1659. The issue is how to stop oppression .... for profit -- which is what homophobia is about ....
Elite interests in oppression based on their propaganda and myths

taught by male-supremacist religion -- of "inferiority" of women,

native Americans, Jews, Homosexuals --

Patriarchy's eternal enemies - and their propaganda of intolerance and hatred

for these humans --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #109
160. Spectacles? "convincing middle America to accept the lifestyle"? LIFESTYLE?
It's not a lifestyle, it's not a choice, and it should not matter what middle America thinks.

Civil rights, Human rights should never be something that you vote on.

Do you think the majority of middle America wanted racial equality at the time?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #160
166. While your rights continue to be violated, you quibble with your supporters over word choice
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 11:07 AM by mistertrickster
to prove who is more ideologically pure.

It's the essence of political correctness.

But I have done.

The dog-piling has begun and will not relent, if history is any guide.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TriMera Donating Member (885 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:31 AM
Original message
Words matter. Words like "lifestyle" have
connotations. That word in particular is harmful because it solidifies many people's misconception that those of us who identify as LGB or T have a choice in the matter. If you are so worried about us making the right impression, think about the effect that words like "lifestyle" and "preference" have on our attempts educate people and have them understand who we are. It's not purity or political correctness, it's accuracy and respect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:34 AM
Original message
Or that all LGBT have one "lifestyle", that sexual orientation is a "lifestyle". It is not pc but
as you put it, accuracy and respect. If people who say they support equal rights cannot see the problem with this phrase when it is pointed out, they have a problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aerows Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
1502. Exactly
The implication that every single gay person is identical is like the assumption that every Muslim is a terrorist.

I'm a lesbian - it doesn't make me identical to every lesbian in the entire world. Sure, I have a connection with the community, but just because I embrace my sexuality doesn't mean I condone or embrace the behavior and beliefs of every lesbian in the world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dutchmaster Donating Member (195 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
1021. Words matter. but . . .
. . . different words matter to different people. As a social worker who works in a clinical setting, I can tell you that there are a plethora of ways that people prefer to be referred to as. Client, consumer, participant etc . . .

There is no point arguing terminology. It is, for the most part, subjective. If someone is offended by a word or label, they should state it assertively and move on with their lives. if someone disrespects that, it is on them. If someone points out to you that your language is offensive to them, you should apologize and alter your language when dealing with that person and move on.

No one ever accomplished a damn thing arguing semantics, terminology, and labels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TriMera Donating Member (885 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #1021
1230. Thank you for your response. However, I am not arguing
semantics, I am talking about using terminology that is detrimental to the LGBTQI community as a whole. It doesn't matter who is using it. Also, it's not just a matter of offensiveness, the term "lifestyle" in particular perpetuates the myth that homosexuality is a choice. I stand by what I said before, words matter. If I'm walking down the street and somebody calls me a dyke, I just keep walking. That is offensive to me, but I keep moving forward because it doesn't warrant my time or energy. What does deserve my time and energy is letting people know that there is no "gay lifestyle", just like there is no "straight lifestyle". There are only lives and I would like to live mine with the same rights as everyone else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #1230
1287. LGBTQ....I?
First time I've seen that one (with an I). Looking it up, I'm glad you exposed me to it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aerows Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #1230
1503. Well said
I'm a lesbian, and it drives me crazy to hear people pass judgment on my "lifestyle" as though I strip at a club, do drugs or participate in some heinous ritual on the weekends. I go to work, love my family, and generally do the best I can to be a good person. I happen to love another woman, and that doesn't change my life into a "lifestyle".

I hate that term. It's like every lesbian everywhere, or every gay man everywhere is the same. We aren't. Some are good people, some are bad people, but we are just people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Creideiki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #1021
1335. I call bullshit
I can think of a number of "labels" that are are not accepted. The "N" word, "gook", "spic", "kraut", "slut". More recently "oriental", "negro", and any number of others. None of those are acceptable, as they all denigrate the people. However, "lifestyle" is okay because that's a word that you use.

I see now. "For me, but not for thee," as David Sirota (an actual progressive) would say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #1021
1465. As a social worker I'd assume you'd know better than this
Edited on Fri Jun-17-11 07:37 AM by justiceischeap
When you use a denigrating label for a group of people, that allows others to look at that group of people as less than they are. It's common sense that my non-college educated brain gets, why doesn't yours? If you call a group of hispanics "spics" you don't have to think of them as real people, with real issues. They're just lumped into this label that allows society to ignore their needs. Who cares, they're just "spics".

You call someone a faggot or a dyke, it's the same thing as with spics. If arguing about labels, semantics and terminology is so bad, then why is the "n" word so horrible. We should be allowed to go about shouting it from the rooftops and no one would care but yet we don't, hell we don't even type it out, it's become "the 'n' word" because it really IS about semantics, terminology and labels.

For example, if someone calls me a dyke to my face in a hateful manner, you know what that is going to accomplish? It's gonna piss me off because it matters. I may be a lesbian, I may even be a dyke but above all else I'm a human being with feelings that don't want to be relegated to someone else's incorrect use of terminology.

edit for typo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #1021
1662. You don't understand "lifestyle" as an insult to homosexuals?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #166
214. respecting word choice shouldn't be all that difficult for a supporter
But rather than demonstrate your support by acknowledging your mistake, you'd rather quibble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #214
1663. Rudness down the thread ....
CLEARLY, posts that Skinner should be paying attention to all the way down the

thread --

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #166
221. I am left wondering if you truly do not understand how offensive you are being.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #221
236. Will Pitt "Why I Hate Liberals"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3544461&mesg_id=3544461

All too often, liberals would rather complain and feel good about themselves than choke down the hard stones that sometimes have to be swallowed when seeking a solution that might actually work.

Liberals like to fight. They get into a room, either real or electronic, and wind up in huge, epic arguments about this or that while skating past the fact that the person they are arguing with and insulting agrees with about 90% of what they agree with. They forget the old rule: If you find yourself screaming in rage at someone who agrees with 90% of what you agree with, you might just be a zealot and therefore no good to anyone but yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #236
241. So you do know you are being offensive.
You seem to be enjoying yourself so I will leave you to it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #241
252. I'm old. I can remember when "queer" was bad and "lifestyle" was polite and respectful.
Let's wrap this unfruitful discussion up.

I've got other plans for the day, heh . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #252
261. It isn't anymore so please change. Quit using offensive terms simply because "it used to be ok" or
you like to argue. Please. Just stop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jamastiene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #252
1477. Calling black men "boy" and black people "coloreds" used to be ok in some areas too.
People have since learned that is very disrespectful and demeaning and the majority of people no longer do that. Only those who WANT to be disrespectful do it nowadays.

So, which is it? Are you going to hang on to the old days when it was ok to call gay people names or listen to what we are trying to explain to you and move on?

That's the whole point. If you can't listen to us when we tell you it is disrespectful and now KNOW that terminology needles us and irritates the hell out of us when you use it, then why do you still use it? It is ridiculous to insist that we let you continue to use language that demeans us just because you say you support us in one breath and use terminology that demeans us in another breath. It makes no sense that you insist on using that language to describe us. I cannot think of one reason we should take that from you. Who the fuck are you to call us names and insist we put up with that shit from you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aerows Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #252
1506. You know
Judging from the comments you've made, I don't even care if you are gay. You are a homophobe that wants to tie all gay people up into a nice little package with a bow on it, and say "This is who you are."

I'm way too much of a human being to be labeled as simply a "lesbian". I'm a woman, I'm a sister, I'm a loving friend, and I'm a hard worker. My sexuality isn't the end all be all of me. It's a facet of me.

What right do you have to term my life as a "lifestyle" when you don't even know me?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #236
246. So rather than simply saying you were wrong in using the phrase "the lifestyle", you'd rather fight?
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 12:27 PM by uppityperson
A true supporter would simply say "I am sorry, I was wrong to use that phrase" rather than insulting those who call you on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #246
492. +1!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #246
1664. +1 --
Obviously, he's outted himself -- and his rudeness down the entire thread

is something that has to be pointed out to Skinner -- just in case he misses it!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #236
249. so why keep fighting? Just acknowledge that your word choice was off and do better next time
Pretty simple, really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aerows Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #236
1508. I read that post
and my first thought was "Maybe you are just an asshole, come off like an asshole, and even liberals know you are an asshole?"

Because he did come off as being a whining asshole. So yeah, I could see why he doesn't like "liberals" since many "liberals" (and other folk of other political persuasions) don't like assholes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aerows Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #166
1500. The fact
that you don't even understand what is wrong with what you are saying, and how you are saying it speaks more eloquently than anything I could offer.

Wow. I don't live a "lifestyle" - I live a LIFE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #166
1661. "LIFESTYLE" isn't a mere "word choice" ... it's an insult to homosexuals ...
Political correctness -- ? Interesting word choice for abusive situations

for women and homsexuals, AA and others -- !!

And, again -- YOU are the victim?


:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #109
186. Question for you, what is "the lifestyle"? You consider this word quibbling but it IS important
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 11:32 AM by uppityperson
Since you, as a supporter, use "the lifestyle", then how can equal rights ever be gained? Can you not see how using that phrase is wrong?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snooper2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #109
203. Yeah, the pride parades should look like Bike Night


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #109
311. I've seen worse at Spring Break or Mardi Gras (and it's not a lifestyle)
(not that I've actually attended either in person, but I've seen the photos)

I'm sorry if the Leathermen, the Court of the Rose, the Bears (like my boyfriend), the Dykes on Bikes offends your fragile sensibilities. The militaristic displays on the Fourth of July and Canada Day offend mine (even if my boyfriend is in the Canadian Armed Forces). Do you object to girls flashing their tits on "Girls gone wild?"

If you (attempt to) follow the logic of the position against gay marriage it runs something like...

The purpose of marriage is procreation, children and "fambly values".
Gays are "functionally disordered and damaged" and incapable of procreation and promoting "fambly values" (unless turned straight by "pray the gay away".
Allowing "gay marriage" would "damage" the sacrament of marriage.

"Lifestyle" indicates something that can be changed, like your choice in socks. Sexual orientation can't.

The "gay agenda" is to promote that we are different but equal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #311
321. Excellent post!
I live in a popular spring break destination, so I have seen plenty of heterosexuals grinding their barely-covered naughty bits together in public over the years. I would never think to make that into a broader attack on heterosexuals, college students, or whatever other demographic is involved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #109
336. Similarly, some of the spectacles at Mardi Gras may not be the best way to convince
middle America to accept the mostly straight lifestyle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #109
528. 'the lifestyle' - great. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #528
938. That's usually a dead giveaway.
Many of "those" people actually are exposing themselves quit nicely in this thread as well as this one, What has Obama done to help, protect, and expand the rights of the LGBT community?!.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heidi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #109
1022. Oh, dear.
1. Homosexuality is not a lifestyle. It's an orientation. Would you call heterosexuality a "lifestyle"?
2. Spectacle? I certainly hope you're not using this term in the Merriam-Webster "b" context: an object of curiosity or contempt. Frankly, that the harmless actions of some LGBT folks at their own pride events so turns your head (and by the sound of it, your stomach, too) says more about you than it says about them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #109
1127. I can only assume you believe that being left-handed is a "life-style" also, yes?
I can only assume you believe that being left-handed is a "life-style" also, yes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Creideiki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #109
1333. Have you ever thought that Gay Pride is for us, not you?
I don't care if you accept my lifestyle (monogamous same-sex relationship, three dogs, and the best balcony garden in my apartment complex).

My husband won't see the Transformers movie this summer. He hates the Transformers movies, so he doesn't watch. Oddly, he doesn't get offended that I do want to see it (and will probably go with one of our best friends). This is maturity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jamastiene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #109
1475. 2 things
1. Do you also take issue with homecoming parades that show actual dead deer on floats? Every year, here in middle America, in my hometown, they have a bloody deer complete with blood smeared all over the entire float in the homecoming parade. It stinks. It is real blood, not fake.

It is a real dead deer. The carcass is usually half gutted and rotting (because of the heat that is still present that late in the year down here in the south). The meat isn't edible after it gets to that point of decay. The animal is killed and the meat is wasted and allowed to rot right there in the parade. It signifies the other football team(the Bucks), this town's rival.

It is a bloody spectacle to see such a thing. THAT is an example of what IS acceptable to middle America. This particular gay woman finds that disgusting. Do I think straight people and their dead rotting deer carcasses should not be allowed rights because I do not agree with the stench of their rotting deer carcasses? No, that would be silly. So, your assertion that gay people should tone it down, and behave in some imaginary way that is not "offensive," to ask for some kind of acceptance from people who find rotting deer carcasses acceptable is downright silly. Your slip is showing.

2. The word "lifestyle" is total bullshit. Guess what? Gay people shop at the same grocery stores as straight people. We put our pants on one leg at a time the same way as straight people. We do everything the same way as straight people, except we love people of the same sex as ourselves. That is the only difference. There is not "lifestyle" involved. We have to pay our taxes, work our jobs, do our laundry, wash our dishes, and live our lives in a straight world and 99% of what we do is identical to what straight people do.

That is why the term "lifestyle" pisses us off so much. You never hear the term "lifestyle" applied to straight people at all. If you truly feel that we should be treated equal, then why call our lives a "lifestyle" and differentiate us from straight people as if we are THAT different. The truth is, we are not THAT different.

If telling you about these two little factoids of information means I am using some horrible tactic against you and claiming you are Fred Phelps, in your mind, then so be it. The truth is, I am not claiming you are Fred Phelps. I am only claiming that you are using language that signifies that you, in reality, do not consider us equal. If you did, you would not continue to use such language after we let you know why it is offensive.

You CAN, however, reasonably claim that I said I do not believe you consider us equal based on your continual usage of language that demeans us, even after it has been explained to you WHY that terminology is offensive, because I just did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #109
1657. "Lifestyle" .... ??? There's that right to be rude again ....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1299874&mesg_id=1300199
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #87
169. Honest question.
How does one say "This President has done a lot in the last three years, and has promised to do more in a second term. Further, there is more than one issue on the progressive agenda and that one is often pushed at expense of the others. Working against democrats is indistinguishable from working for Republicans." in a way that doesn't sound like "you should be happy with what you have" (a phrase which google can't find here, btw).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #169
485. You can do it without minimizing what still needs to be done
and not glorifying tiny little things. For example, Obama is credited with ending the HIV travel ban in "teh LIST" when it was actually a bill signed by Bush that did it, not Obama. That's disingenuous.

Also acknowledge that the Administration argued for retaining DOMA by comparing gay relationships to incest and pedophilia, yet not one person in the Administration (let alone President Obama) has apologized for that.

Posting that list when Obama has been actively fighting AGAINST our civil rights by defending DOMA, especially with such offensive arguments, is equivalent to "shut up about bread, don't you like the crumbs I've given you?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #485
1290. "argued for retaining DOMA by comparing gay relationships to incest and pedophilia"
That's not entirely correct.

The administration argued that the laws for regulating marriage included regulating issues of age and close family members, so it was legal to regulate in other ways....

Which got spun, and spun, and spun, until people were tricked into believing they "argued for retaining DOMA by comparing gay relationships to incest and pedophilia".... which is not what happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #87
1028. This straight person agrees with you. If there's no equity then there is still
work to be done. I see many of the same anti-LGBT posters also are anti-women's rights; they don't believe that we deserve equal pay for an equal job. Those posters have a simple agenda: promote the continuation of "the straight white christian male is more equal than anyone else" status quo. It's something that has benefited them personally while causing a great deal of struggle for the rest of us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #1028
1118. +100,000,000
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #1028
1266. That is so unfair. After millions of straight white males worked hard for women's rights,
we still get dissed like this.

Oh, well . . . I'll still do the right thing even if the rad fems kick me in the teeth while I do it, heigh ho.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #1266
1268. I didnt think Lorien was talking about you
.....but apparently YOU did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #1268
1276. I'm only talking about him if the shoe fits
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 04:16 PM by Lorien
saying that we-the non-straight white Christian males of America- want the same protections and rights as those who are straight white Christian males (perhaps we should add "rich" to that description) is NOT the same as "bashing" people of that description. No, I'm criticizing those who want to maintain the status quo; and that includes some women and non-whites, sadly. I'm guessing that the responder is one of those thin skinned defendants of "I've got mine- and you can't have yours"! Pointing a finger and screaming "radical Feminist"! is so like a bald faced misogynist. You damn well better believe I'm a feminist-and so is EVERY man who ever fought for women's rights! But there's nothing "radical" about equality unless you hold the same beliefs as Michelle Bachman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #1276
1300. Like I say, I'll continue to fight for the rights of all even when I'm called a "bald faced
misogynist."

And btw, your own post shows your logical contraction: Michelle Bachman is not male, and yet the dissing was directed only at white males.

Knowing your allies from your enemies is the point I keep trying to make around here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #1266
1271. Lorien didn't dis straight white males
She dissed those who are anti-LGBT and anti-women's rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #1271
1337. She said that 1. white males benefit from the status quo and 2. therefore
want to maintain it.

I disagree with both those contentions.

Also, her observation that anti-LGBT's here at DU are also anti-women's rights?

Is that based on empirical evidence or just gut reaction?

I don't see a lot of either here at DU.

This is a liberal website and since liberals traditionally have espoused both LGBT rights and women's rights, I wonder why the obsession with seeking out the perceived apostates . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #1337
1341. no, that's not what she said
She said that (1) the same posters who appear to be anti-LGBT also appear to be anti-women's rights and (2) those posters "promote the continuation of "the straight white christian male is more equal than anyone else" status quo." Nothing about that means that straight white males are bad, or that the posters she's referring to are exclusively straight white males.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #1341
1346. She said that the same posters who appear to be anti-LGBT also appear to be anti-women's rights
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 07:40 PM by mistertrickster
Yeah . . . let's see the quantitative data behind that.

How many anti-LGBT posters has she seen?

How many anti-women's rights posters has she seen?

How many are both?

Or maybe the whole issue of who's anti-LGBT and anti-women's rights is a big scary straw man that is used to beat liberals over the head with for not being liberal enough . . .

On edit--you can't just work for women's rights, you also have to CARE about it with precisely the same zeal as the most zealous. Otherwise, you're a misogynist.

And how do you prove you care?

Why, attacking people on your side for not caring enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #1346
1351. And you claim that was dissing straight white males. But it's not.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #1337
1669. There is a parallel in all discrimination, exploitation by patriarchy ....
Edited on Mon Jun-20-11 01:00 AM by defendandprotect
are you part of patriarchy?

These are hierarchies which keep discrimination in place -- keep propaganda

of intolerance and hatred going --

You don't seem to "see" much of anything on DU --

but you are obviously making every effort to disrupt the thread --

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #1266
1668. Starting to look more like you're trying to distract and disrupt this thread ... !! Hi Skinner!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #1028
1499. Name names. Don't hide behind "many say".
I doubt you can name one DU poster who is anti-LGBT OR anti women's rights. Let alone simultaneously.

Skinner put this up here so we could get this shit hashed out. Continuation of the passive-aggressive whispering doesn't help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #1499
1670. Are you trying to disrupt this thread by any chance?
Names have been suggested -- and I'm sure would willingly be turned over to Skinner --

And very definitely there is homophobia and anti-female equality sentiments very active

on this board -- including bullying --

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #1028
1665. Thank you -- and I would also point to the BULLYING on those threads ....
same as homosexuals here experience --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #83
235. Ok . You are forgiven.
:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #50
1656. The right to be rude ....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1299874&mesg_id=1300199
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #27
104. Here is one from a couple days ago
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1290092&mesg_id=1290092
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #104
172. The part of that thread that is relevant to this one is this post.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1290092&mesg_id=1290783
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snooper2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #104
210. man there is all kind of stupid in that article
and in the thread
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #210
223. I especially "like" the ones saying that a gay person can't be bigoted
I can see how the article, in the right place, could be ok as sarcasm, but to post in GD and ask blithely "is this true in your case?" is pushing it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #210
373. This is the thread I was satircally asking about upthread.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #104
296. Oh my god - I missed that thread.
:puke: Wow - It's the standard passive aggressive posting procedure followed up by martyrdom. It's been going on for *years* now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:21 PM
Original message
Yes, he's been doing it for years now.
And nothing has ever been done to stop it.

Let's face it--if one wants to have a fine time at DU, there's no safer way to do it than trolling the queers. A person is about as likely to win the Powerball as to be banned from this place for being a homophobe.

And that is precisely the problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:10 PM
Response to Original message
391. *sigh* I agree.
:-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:25 AM
Response to Original message
1432. ^ LOL! ^ So true, QC.
Yes, MisterTrickster's style is no different right wing guys on 'conservative' boards. There's an underlying hostility women and gays catch.

I don't mean to be offensive, Mister Trickster, but the word trickster has long made me wonder where you're really coming from.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:08 AM
Response to Original message
1671. DU needs increased MOD supervision watching for threads like that -- Hi Skinner!
Outrageous -- !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #296
338. fwiw
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1299874&mesg_id=1301201
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #338
376. Considering he's posted self congratulatory victory laps in the lounge
when he's "riled up the gays" in the past, I don't believe there's any sincerity involved - just more contempt. :puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #376
399. Bingo. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #376
1079. And yet still seems to think we should buy that he is sincere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:09 AM
Response to Reply #376
1672. MODS should also be alerted and watching for threads like that ... even if in Lounge. ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #104
544. Mr scorpio didn't mean any harm by posting that any more than folks that post WBC/Phelps quotations.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 04:32 PM by Shagbark Hickory
Was it sterotypical? Yes.
Was it upsetting that the article was written and published somewhere? About a 1 or 2 on a scale of 1-10.

It didn't once occur to me that Mr scorpio was doing it to troll the forum. Even if it was a rubbish article to begin with and not worthy of posting.

I guess that's what this whole thing is about then.
Some people sometimes take things the wrong way.
For the same reason I wouldn't dare use the word "retard" or "redneck" on this forum, some people take it the wrong way. DU is a microcosm of society. There's all kinds of viewpoints here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #544
550. There is a context that long predates your arrival here. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #550
554. I guess so. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #544
881. To give you some background, I should point out when this ongoing exchange started
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9232141#9241017

I do admit that I've made my own mistakes in times subsequent to that first discussion.

But all in all, it's only discussion that I've ever wanted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #544
1130. While still others present things the wrong way...
"Some people sometimes take things the wrong way..."

While still others present things the wrong way. There is indeed a most notable, relevant and precise difference between the two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #544
1673. Mr. Scorpio "bragging" in the Lounge about "riling up the gays" ... seems to make intent clear!!
As much as that may upset your intent to alibi for him --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #104
803. When I first saw that article posted, my only reaction was
"huh?" What is the fucking reason for posting it?

There is NO good reason to post something like that on GD. It became quickly apparent that it was done in order to elicit certain reactions or rub certain people the wrong way.

I don't know the poster's history and won' assign blame or judgement, but based on that one thread that is what seemed quite apparent to me (and I can be pretty damn dimwitted).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:09 AM
Response to Reply #803
967. I did it mainly out of curiosity
That's all, I was simply curious at first and wanted to find out if what the writer wrote was valid. It seemed to me as if Moylan was exposing a hidden aspect of gay male culture that he was intimately familiar with. Something that I never heard of before. So I asked a question. I do admit that I could have gone about a different way, But the subject matter seemed benign, in spite of the writer's apparent generalizations… Not everyone saw it the same way.

I take it that guy is a gadfly who would say anything on Gawker and not care if anyone is offended… None of the commenters to his post were, in spite of that.

I really didn't consider what reaction that I'd get on DU… My mistake.

I don't post in GLBT because I figure that I'm not wanted there. I usually post here and in the Lounge anyway.

It wasn't as I was looking for a visceral reaction, I was merely looking for an intellectual consideration of the material. I was pleased that I actually got some calm answers in spite of all the other stuff. It's all good anyway, visceral or otherwise. Every reply was instructive.

I posted another OP about the fact that I'm an INTP. I have to admit that I'm not very good at dealing with other people's feelings and there are a LOT of feelings in play when it comes to GLBT issues. So, I tend to get a lot of speculation about my "intentions" whenever I talk about the subject. Quite a few times, my own reasoning goes unconsidered by people whom I have offended for one reason or another. Raw nerves and all that… But I do my best to deal.

If I came off the wrong way, I apologize.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:12 AM
Response to Reply #967
997. If you came off the wrong way...
ok, where I was raised that isn't considered an apology, but if it makes you feel better about yourself and your silly excuse of "but I'm an INTP so treat me special since I'm rare!" makes you feel better, have at it.

The bottom line is that most people saw that article posted as gay-baiting, including myself who does not go around looking for where such actions exist just for kicks. Just because you don't think you're good at dealing w/people's feelings doesn't excuse your actions. If it's a problem than maybe you shouldn't post on controversial topics which give you so much trouble due to you not knowing how you are offending. IMO there's really no excuse, there is plenty of warning on this site about what is ok and what is not ok with regard to bigotry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #803
1135. In the old days......(*last year)....
They'd have called it TROLLING.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #104
1666. Yikes! And no MOD saw that -- ???? Hi Skinner -- look here -- !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue_onyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #27
404. There are hard feelings....
on many topics, including lgbt issues. I was once told on DU that the fact that I'm gay makes me too biased to have valid opinion on gay marriage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #404
529. And that comment is troublesome to you? I don't see how that would create hard feelings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue_onyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #529
571. Are you serious?
Your comment reflects why this thread even exists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #571
688. Yeah. What's the big deal?
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 07:06 PM by Shagbark Hickory
:shrug:
I doesn't mean it has to be factually correct.
People are making the same argument about the judge who overturned prop 8 in ca, because they were in a homosexual relationship. They thought that was biased.

I'm not saying they're right, I just fail to see what is so personally troublesome about this position. Some people just don't think it through.

It's nice that you rush to suggest that I'm the reason this thread exists.
You don't know what my sexual preference is and if you did, I think you'd be eating those words right now. I think *you're* the reason this thread exists. PEople like me are just innocent bystanders getting caught in the crossfire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #688
715. Rather like women should not have protested to get the vote since they were involved.
Or Rosa Parks should never have been involved or held an opinion on civil rights for people of color since she was in that category.

Someone in a category fighting for equal rights cannot have a valid opinion...because they are involved? What?

You don't see what is so troublesome about that position? Seriously?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue_onyx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #688
791. Nope
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 08:27 PM by blue_onyx
Didn't say you alone are responsible for the thread. Your comment which reflects an opinion I see on DU that gay rights aren't that important...that they should be a secondary concern. That's why the thread exists. The fact that someone on DU thinks a gay person isn't able to have a valid opinion on gay rights because they are biased is offensive. I don't really care what your sexual orientation is but if you are gay and aren't offended, that's sad.

"Innocent bystander?" That's a good one.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #688
1087. You say 'people' are making that argument about Prop 8
But the argument is being made by right wing, anti gay Republicans who backed the bill in the first place. Those are the people who were making that argument, which has been rejected as specious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #529
1667. Any comment which suggests that homosexuals are biased because they want human rights ....
should trouble ALL of us -- !!!

Obviously you don't "see" -- or ....

"You can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep" --




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #27
641. I agree.
I just don't see this issue standing out. The Olive Garden causes harder feelings.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #641
753. Skinner? ^^ Posts like this.
Belittling "our issues."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #641
777. Wow.
I can only shake my head.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #777
782. If something does not affect her personally, it is not real.
That's privilege, and in fairness to this poster, that post is hardly the most egregious example in this thread.

For those, you need to check out the straight white guy decreeing that we are not permitted to be offended by the president's (quite literal) embrace of homophobes.

Since he does not consider it important, it's just not important. End of discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:24 AM
Response to Reply #641
1000. Case in point. You care more about Obama than equality.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchtv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #641
1373. what a suprise
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #641
1392. Wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #641
1560. The Olive Garden causes harder feelings, yea..that was funny.
You find yourself unable to see this issue standing out is unfortunate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #1560
1561. She has always treated equality with this sort of breezy dismissal,
like a Junior League matron who just can't understand why her maid would like to be with her own family on Christmas.

You just can't get good help these days, you know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
30. k&r&b so can check back later
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:50 AM
Response to Original message
33. I want to state publicly that I support my LGBTQ brothers and sisters 100%.
This means full equality - this is a human rights issue. :grouphug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuesday Afternoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #33
39. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #33
43. Really? How about when one or two take on the mantle of all gays and call you a bigot and a liar?
Do you support that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #43
74. Your communication problem with two people is not a gay issue. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #74
89. Agreed. And it shouldn't be interpreted as such. Exactly my point. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #43
75. I don't know what you're talking about.
I support human rights. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:14 AM
Response to Reply #43
1674. No question but that you are trying to disrupt the thread -- Hi Skinner -- !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #33
139. Me too!!!!
:grouphug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
41. Good work, Skinner. I'll step aside now too, but wanted to say THX.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
galileoreloaded Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:59 AM
Response to Original message
46. My two cents, and what I see....
I have very close ties to the LBGT community, friends, my 19 yo "son" (legal guardian, had him since he was 9).

I tell everybody that if you don't want a culture war don't start one, and frankly most 16-30 yo's grew up a part of the "Will and Grace" generation and they really don't care. They really don't.

I think the average age on DU is a bit older and many experiences are rooted more in the 70's, 80's, and early 90's. It just doesn't apply anymore.

5 years and this is an non-issue, nobody will care at all. I promise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:06 AM
Response to Original message
59. One of my biggest beef's is when DUers dismiss GLBT activists
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 10:40 AM by tekisui
as single-issue voters and minimize the importance of what is trying to be done. The callousness of some of the most hardcore Obama supporters who refuse to accept and acknowledge that there is a real and personal direct impact on GLBT DUers lives.

Instead, they will all too often discount the very real and wholly valid positions that GLBT activists take by insinuating (or saying outright) that the poster 1)doesn't like, never has or even hates Obama, 2)the poster is too wedded to their position to praise and support what Obama has done 3)are single-issue voters with an axe to grind or 4)engage in snark and subtle (or overt) personal attacks.

It is really only probably a dozen (+/-) who do this, but it is constant and prevents ANY kind of civil discussion or debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #59
94. That's the problem as I see it, too.
There is a small but hard-core group of people here who will not tolerate ANY criticism of Obama and his policies, and lose their minds when anyone dare to express anything but the utmost praise. THEY are the ones who create nearly all of the problems here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #94
100. Absolutely. And it isn't just on GLBT issues. But, it is most personal
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 10:27 AM by tekisui
and hurtful there.

If the mods enforced the rules equally for all and if some longtime assholes who do nothing but disrupt where booted, this place would be much more civil.

There is a way to discuss issues and debate without making it personal and without taking every honest and valid criticism of Obama personally. Some, just a few, don't know how to do that and they are perpetual turds in the punchbowl.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #100
108. "some longtime assholes" Gloves are off, name names. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #108
123. I am hesitant to, even though there are no rules in this thread.
A couple can be easily identified here, though, in this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x688889#688935

There are a few others. I'll see how this thread goes before I stick my neck out any further on names.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #123
144. Lots of deleted posts in that thread.
I can't tell who the people are who got their posts deleted. I hadn't seen that thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #144
150. Oh, there are plenty of posts left which exemplify the point.
They haven't been deleted, which actually proves the point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #150
158. I don't disagree. I was just saying that I couldn't see the posts
that had been deleted or who wrote them. It's a real problem when a divisive thread is used as an example. I can see some stuff in the thread. I can see that I wasn't a participant, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #144
266. "Name removed" is the new Gay.
I watched a lot of those posts disappear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #266
271. One can always spot an LGBT-related thread by the number of deleted posts.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 12:38 PM by QC
Strangely, few of the attacks on LGBT people are deleted. It tends to run the other way--the attacks stay up while the responses to them vanish within minutes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #271
1434. Mods ought to think about how true that is. And do things differently.
I'd applied to be a mod a couple of times because I know I could be more fair. I doubt it will ever happen though.

Anyway, somebody could look at my 2007 and 2008 posts (btw I was supporting Obama in October 2006 on my home board) and see how onboard I was with Obama. Yet there are people who were Johnny come lately's - sometimes called the BOGers or cheerleaders- who bash anybody who posts how we want Obama and the administration to help us. Most of those folks think it's our job to work for Obama. I think it's his job to work for us. The racist 'conservatives' will NEVER like Obama no matter what he does, so why try to appease them and 'meet them halfway'?

Meeting rightwingers halfway means going to the right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #123
190. There are a lot of examples of assholes on both sides in that thread.
My favorite of the more reasonable posts of either side is this one http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=688889&mesg_id=689359
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #123
205. Jesus. That reads like a DoD report released on a FoIA lawsuit.
*redacted*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Le Taz Hot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #123
287. It's the usual
"Obama can do no wrong" cheerleaders. You'll find the same people defending his use of supply side economics because it's not supply side economics if a Democrat does it. :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #287
320. Yep and blind defense of his wars without end (up to 5 now!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #123
1433. That's them alright.
There is a group who can insult at will. They seem able to get people banned even when they start the fights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Safetykitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #108
381. Agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #108
495. Fine. I've censored myself long enough.
cbayer, mopinko, NYC_SKIP, Tx4Obama, Tarheel_Democrat, AtomicKitten, Vabarella, phleshdef, just to name a few off the top of my head.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
murielm99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #495
886. At least one of those people trolls on other issues here.
I don't understand why he has not been banned.

Maybe alerting on him for other things might do the trick, since homophobia is not "good enough."

I am a straight female with a bisexual daughter and a gay sibling. I may not know everything, but I am willing to listen and learn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #495
937. You can see a number of them in this thread....
What has Obama done to help, protect, and expand the rights of the LGBT community?!

Like moths to a flame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #937
943. Or flies to shit. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #937
1491. yup yup yup
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #495
1540. oh yes...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 04:24 AM
Response to Reply #495
1593. Frenchiecat, scheming daemons, wndycty, Prosense, bigdarryl
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 06:12 AM
Response to Reply #1593
1599. Just say the Obama Freicorps and don't call people out.
Everyone'll know who you mean anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 08:42 AM
Response to Reply #495
1602. Should we also name the jerks who bait Obama supporters with constant snarks?
Because you would be one of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #1602
1605. They're being baited into being homophobes! Those dastardly gays and their jedi mind tricks!
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #1605
1606. Wrong, I made no such insinuation. But it is interesting to see your kneejerk reaction and
assumption.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #100
116. indeed -- the rules & subsequent bannings have not been applied equally.
and i certainly would feel different if they were.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:18 AM
Response to Reply #94
1675. No -- your problem is you have had too little MOD supervision of GLBT issues ...interests ...
Edited on Mon Jun-20-11 01:19 AM by defendandprotect
and the same goes for feminism here --

You need to be sure that there are always MODS who are homosexual

watching the threads --

Obviously there are MODS who could care less about homosexual rights --

or female rights -- we all need a keener interest in that aspect and keep

pushing Skinner to ensure that he has MODS who aren't biased -- and who

are interested in supporting ALL human rights!!



:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #59
96. Agree
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #59
119. That's a very good point. A lot of the tangible gains on the liberal side
have been made by "single issue" voters . . . pro-choice and environmentalists would other examples.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #119
1435. ^ OK! That's a good point, MisterTrickster ^
Kudos! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:16 AM
Response to Reply #59
998. Perhaps this thread should be on GDP and not GD as much...
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 07:17 AM by Dappleganger
seems to me that is where most of them choose to isolate themselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:21 AM
Response to Reply #998
1676. This thread is about human rights -- EVERYONE here should be interested and supportive ...!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
delunapark Donating Member (131 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:06 AM
Response to Original message
61. 16 years and still going...
My partner and I own a house thanks to mortgage modification. We get along with the neighbors and live a pretty boring but very happy life. When will Florida recognize our commitment? Probably will have to be decided in the courts. I for one have never felt uncomfortable on the boards here. I have developed a thick skin and love to debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:08 AM
Response to Original message
69. Even if I was hetero, or whatever, I would be upset
that I was not permitted to marry whomever I chose to marry. It would just totally fry my grits that someone was unreasonably restricting my options.

I believe that most folks here understand that LGBT issues are not solely LGBT issues.

They really are human rights issues that affect everyone.

Thank you all, so very, very much, for the unabashed outpouring of support for LGBT equality that is so prevalent at DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #69
103. Not just on DU and other liberal sites.
An increasing number of Americans every year are coming around to support gay marriage.

I'm completely heterosexual, and I know fully well that it's unfair to prohibit gay marriage. The more people sit and think about it, really think it through, the more people will support gay marriage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texshelters Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
70. Great discussion
thanks y'all.

Even Skinner, ha ha.

Peace,
Tex Shelters
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
72. I think most of the "problems" happen in other forums
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 10:18 AM by justiceischeap
And mostly revolve, currently, about what the LGBT community has to say about Obama and his lack of real support of the LGBT community. This all started in 2009 when his DOJ defended DOMA by comparing same-sex marriage to incest and pedophilia. That pissed off the LGBT community mightily and rightly so. Though he quickly had the DOJ rescind that language, that it was there in the first place is what is troubling. And people not even attempting to understand why that would be bothersome to the LGBT community is frustrating.

Also, there are some on this board that think we have no right to bitch because Obama has done "so much" for the LGBT community. Yet, actual members of the LGBT community feel he hasn't done nearly enough. Often we are given a big list of his "accomplishments" to show that we're just being bitchy, ungrateful whiners and that is when the emotions and issues sprout up in threads. Don't ever tell me as a lesbian who is discriminated against that someone has done so much for me. I won't be pleased with any politician until I have the exact same rights everyone else has.

Since we're allowed to break the rules in this thread I'd like to see CakeGrrl and ClarkUSA involved in this thread because IMO, they are 2 of the worst offenders I've seen recently.

Prism has a good retort about "The List" in the GLBT forum

My personal feelings are basically when a straight person attempts to tell me that our President has done "so much" for my community, I wonder where they get the gaul or how'd they feel if they had their rights taken away from them. I appreciate and understand we need more support from the straight community but telling gay people to shut up and be happy with what we have isn't showing support, it's condescending and hateful and makes me angry. Having straight people, people who are supposed to be our allies tell us we're to blame for losing an election or that our "rights" are less important than whatever that person's topic du jour is painful and it's happened often on DU. The LGBT community has been fighting for equal rights (officially) since 1969... maybe if you do the math (42 yrs) you'll see why we get frustrated, why we get angry, why we don't want to see a list of accomplishments that don't show that we have the same exact rights as everyone else.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:14 AM
Original message
+1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #72
97. +1000 . . . Obama sold all us liberals out regardless of sexual orientation.
And if one mentions the obvious, "we didn't get a pony."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pisces Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #72
117. I can read your anger and I agree that the LGBT community should have full rights. Here comes the
but, I don't understand that when someone says the Obama admin has done nothing??? As we can see with all issues, change is hard to institute in government. I do believe that the next term will
provide even more positive changes for the LGBT community. DOMA will be repealed and I believe gay marriage will be a given recognized in all states.

If you studied the civil rights movement, even after the civil rights act was signed it took years before some states accepted the new laws. This is the civil rights fight of our time, and we should be united
not divided on this issue. Giving credit where credit is due is not diminishing your demands for full equal rights. When discrediting this admin. for the accomplishment thus far it seems like spitting in
the eye of an ally. I don't agree with everything the admin has done on every issue, but I do see progress on many fronts.

I am not trying to tell you to be pleased with Obama and the long list of accomplishments is not meant to shut you up, it is meant to try and get a grudging response that maybe something has been done instead of the "nothing" comments by some on this board.

I fully support equal rights for the LGBT community and will not be happy until such rights exist, but until them I will congratulate progress when progress is made.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #117
124. I don't know that I've seen (personally) anyone on DU say he's done nothing
I see plenty of people say he hasn't done enough and I see many in the LGBT community on DU get pissed when presented with "the list."

To me, that list is a list of things the majority of will never affect MY life. I'm never going to be a federal employee and that's where most of his "accomplishments" have been made. I applaud those accomplishments (some if not most of which will probably be rolled back when a Repub admin takes over). That said, the list is also a huge glaring reminder to the LGBT community how far we HAVEN'T come or how much farther we have to go. Will it take another 42 yrs before we get full, equal human civil rights?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:26 AM
Response to Reply #117
1677. Nonsense ... delays in human rights come because of rw backlashes -- well financed --
Campaign against Equal Rights Amendment was run by RCC and Mormon Church --

with tax exempt dollars --

Same with campaign in CA against Prop 8 --

These are the very people -- elites and their hierarchies -- who put

systems of oppressions in place for their own profit --

All of these discriminations are the same thing -- from Native American to Jews,

from females to African Americans -- and to homosexuals --

And the propaganda is the same -- from the Bible to the Hammer of Witches --

and the continuance of propaganda spreading intolerance and hatred for these humans.


Obama is against gay marriage -- so your argument for him is an odd one!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ohheckyeah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #117
1753. Why?
Why is it so important to you that someone give Obama a grudging pat on the back? I don't get it. He's perfectly able to defend himself and you are alienating people with whom you have at least a small measure of a relationship because you post on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duncan Grant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #72
126. ^ This post. ^
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #72
130. I agree completely.
AtomicKitten should also make an appearance here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #72
142. When someone says "Obama has done nothing for LBGT issues"
What should the appropriate response be?

Are we entitled to our own opinions AND our own facts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #142
213. I wish someone could point me to a post where a LGBTer said Obama has done nothing
Like I said in a previous post in this thread, I've never personally seen that here. I've seen plenty of "he hasn't done enough" but I've NEVER seen it said that he's done nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snooper2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:05 PM
Original message
here's one
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x688901
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
245. Thanks for this example
I'm not trying to excuse this argument but this guy just seems to hate Obama and anything he does (if you look at his journal).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #72
175. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #72
487. Who said you couldn't be frustrated?
No one. Absolutely no one.

And you'd damn well better produce the example where I EVER told anyone to "sit down and shut up" if you're going to exercise your privilege of breaking DU rules to call me out.

If you don't feel this administration has done enough, no one is suppressing that opinion.

On the other hand, are you implying that straights have NO STANDING to point out any LGBT accomplishments by this administration? Because what I challenge is the automatic shouting down of THAT expression of opinion by anyone who dares respond.

By the way, I didn't post that list yesterday, so I don't know why you're so riled up about me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #487
655. My issue with you and the reason I called you out specifically is
that when someone tries to explain why "the list" is offensive to the gay community, you don't seem to take the time to listen.

For example, claiming that "This is the problem. GLBTers are NOT being attacked by DUers" http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=688889&mesg_id=689121

Read the following post with quoted examples of DUers attacking LGBTers http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=221&topic_id=173647

I've been on DU a long time and you don't have to say "sit down and shut up" to say sit down and shut up on this site. You may not have specifically said that but the tone in some of your posts on this issue feel the same to this LGBTer. Are you going to fault me for that as well as not being pleased with Obama's record on LGBT issues?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #655
730. Are you citing my post as an example of being tone-deaf?
In the context of the (admitted) prior examples in that second link?

THAT is offensive to me.

As I have said to someone else downthread, please do not presume to know me, my life, the people in my life or my interest in seeing LGBT equality come to fruition any more than you appreciate presumptions made about you.

As to my post that you cited, that itself was a direct response to a poster who claimed that if only Obama's supporters weren't ruining things with their attitudes, there'd be more support for him. I asserted the lack of LGBT posters being attacked in the relative context of the discussion. THAT was where the focus on "the list" went on a tangent. That response was focused on the claim about Obama supporters. It did not reflect a lack of "listening".

I can't control whether you like or dislike my posts. But if you consider me a "top offender", knowing little about me personally other than the limited context of these exchanges, and in light of what's been said on these boards over time, then I say "to hell with that".

I'm black. I'm a Democrat. I know about struggling for rights and equality. I don't appreciate being called out as an offender when the REAL offenders are out there causing REAL problems in the struggle for equal rights.

Ironically, I was 'advised' that Obama supporters are helping ruin things with their zealotry. Consider that that argument can be made in different ways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #72
506. "Tired of being at the back of the bus?"
"Be glad we let you on the bus at all."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #72
1296. "defended DOMA by comparing same-sex marriage to incest and pedophilia"
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 05:28 PM by boppers
No such thing was done. I've read the document involved, laws regulating marriage were compared to other laws.

That didn't stop people from spinning it, though.

Oh, and gall is not spelled gaul. One is a physical organ, the other is an ancient group/culture.

edit: spelling (heh)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #1296
1349. Maybe I'm misinterpreting the below passages...
The courts have followed this principle, moreover, in relation to the validity of marriages performed in other States. Both the First and Second Restatements of Conflict of Laws recognize that State courts may refuse to give effect to a marriage, or to certain incidents of a marriage, that contravene the forum State's policy. See Restatement (First) of Conflict of Laws § 134; Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 284.5 And the courts have widely held that certain marriages performed elsewhere need not be given effect, because they conflicted with the public policy of the forum. See, e.g., Catalano v. Catalano, 170 A.2d 726, 728-29 (Conn. 1961) (marriage of uncle to niece, "though valid in Italy under its laws, was not valid in Connecticut because it contravened the public policy of th{at} state"); Wilkins v. Zelichowski, 140 A.2d 65, 67-68 (N.J. 1958) (marriage of 16-year-old female held invalid in New Jersey, regardless of validity in Indiana where performed, in light of N.J. policy reflected in statute permitting adult female to secure annulment of her underage marriage); In re Mortenson's Estate, 316 P.2d 1106 (Ariz. 1957) (marriage of first cousins held invalid in Arizona, though lawfully performed in New Mexico, given Arizona policy reflected in statute declaring such marriages "prohibited and void").


The fact that States have long had the authority to decline to give effect to marriages performed in other States based on the forum State's public policy strongly supports the constitutionality of Congress's exercise of its authority in DOMA.


I'd like to provide a quick quote from Obama:
Appearing at a presidential candidates forum in August 2007 sponsored by the gay and lesbian rights group the Human Rights Campaign, then-Sen. Obama said it “is my strong belief that the government has to treat all citizens equally. I come from that, in part, out of personal experience. When you're a black guy named Barack Obama, you know what it's like to be on the outside. And so my concern is continually to make sure that the rights that are conferred by the state are equal for all people. That's why I opposed DOMA in 2006 when I ran for the United States Senate.”

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/06/obama-justice-department-defends-defense-of-marriage-act-that-candidate-obama-opposed.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #1349
1354. So, was there a direct comparison to Italians? (Catalano v. Catalano)?
See how ridiculous that spin is?

It was/is being spun to selectively highlight very specific interpretations.

I don't see the word "incest" in there at all, or the word "pedophilia".... the language used reflects that marriages that are perfectly *legal* (not incest, or pedophilia, but totally legal) in some states, are not always held to be legal in other states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #1354
1397. Maybe it's a woman thing but when I read Uncle marries niece
I think incest... When I read about a 16 yr old girl being married, I think pedophilia. And apparently so did many, many others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 05:12 AM
Response to Reply #1397
1459. So, who is adding the context... that was not there?
Who thinks that a comparison that was not being made.... *is* being made?

When I read about a 16 yr old girl being married, I think "Idiot".
When I read about a 26 yr old girl being married, I think "I hope you have a clue, but I doubt it".
When I read about a 36 yr old girl being married, I think "You should know enough to decide by now".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 06:14 AM
Response to Reply #1459
1600. An uncle marrying his niece IS incest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #72
1436. 1969 was when I got into it.
Thanks for pointing it out, Justiceischeap. We've made some big strides since then, but not enough.

I'm glad about Obama's Supreme Court appointments because I think ultimately that is where the main issues will be decided.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
77. Damn kids. Dad just gave you boxing gloves, use 'em.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 10:25 AM by lumberjack_jeff
Something that really gets on my nerves is a whisper campaign.

Politics is all about compromise. I don't like it when my important issues are deferred in lieu of someone else's, but so long as "someone else" is willing to push progress on my issues in return, a little circumspection might be appropriate.

Yes, it's time for gay marriage, and DADT was never fair.

But people are dying for lack of medical care, too. The only person who has the luxury of uncompromising support for one issue is the person who cares about one thing exclusively.

I support LGBT issues. If you want me to do stuff which elects Republicans... our definitions of "support" differ.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #77
122. Hear me. Medical care is one of the issues that drove the GLBT
community to action. Much of the roots of the health care reform movement sit in the soil of the AIDS crisis and the community response to the profit driven horrors of the Insurance industry.
First time I was at a protest outside an Insurance Company's head office to call for Universal healthcare, access for all, including the poor was I think 1985. How about you, LJ? When did you get that issue out in the streets?
Just think for a second. The luxury of supporting one issue. Sure. While thousands died, we had so much luxury! Nothing but time to want ponies.
We brought the health care reform movement to the crossroads. Now, I will instantly add that along with me at the Insurance Companies were some righteous straight people who even way back then saw that our issues were also their issues, particularly the Health care issues. So it was not just gay people, but it was just thinking and feeling people.
Luxury. Did you know that today, HIV/AIDS is the number one killer of African American women in some age groups? So, like, health care and GLBT issues are very often the same issues. Luxury. Strange word to use around a lack of equal rights and a huge health crisis that the majority community denied was happening for years on end.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #122
136. Protesting for universal coverage at an insurance company?
Were you surprised that didn't work?

I campaigned for Carter in 1980 for a variety or reasons, including his support for achievable healthcare reform. Sadly, he faced a brutal primary in which Kennedy's supporters, who (with luxury of moral absolutism on the issue of HCR) destroyed any chance he had against Reagan.

Kennedy helped elect Reagan. Nader helped elect Bush. Despite the fact that Obama was my last choice in the 2008 primary, it is my hope that we do not help elect Romney.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #136
414. Um, LJ, we were there because of their inhuman treatment of
people with AIDS. Universal Healthcare was part of the message being delivered to the media and public, not something the company was being asked for. We were shaming the companies, not entreating them. They were doing truly horrible things to people with AIDS, and as I said, this was one of the crossroads for the healthcare debate in our times. The first attempt, Clinton's was right on the heels of this time. The point was about your 'single issue voter' claptrap. You mentioned healthcare. I told you a chapter of history. You made a snarky remark. About people who fought for and got better treatment for people in extreme need, and also helped move the public health care debate forward as part of that.
Your talk of candidates is not related to this subject. If you are Carter old, you should have a basic knowledge of the times I was speaking of, and no need for smirky comments. I will spare you the images I could write of the suffering of individuals that was being demonstrated against at that Insurance Company, the human reasons we all wound up there, and so many other places. You could not, as they say, handle the truth.
Enjoy your condescension and sarcasm. It is very well placed. Yes, Lumberjack, we expected the Insurance Companies, who were wheeling the dying into the street, cancelling policies and all of that, we expected them to provide Universal healthcare. Right. No, we thought to shame them from the worst of it and to attempt to wake up as many people as possible about the train wreck of public health care in America. Because the majority of you were fast asleep, and not doing a thing. Oh, that's right, I did ask you what you did, when you got up to support health care reform. You failed to respond to that, or the other points I made.
Stay classy, man. Stay classy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #414
475. HCR was an example of another of the issues that are on our plate.
And as you point out, it's a life or death struggle for tens of thousands. Should gay marriage have been on a front burner ahead of that issue? Should there be a moratorium on ending the wars or closing dungeons until it's DADT is resolved?

We progressives are faced with hard choices, compromises and alliances because this political system won't allow us to accomplish them all at once. I'm frustrated to the point of vitriol that progress has been so slow on EVERY front, but I'm not willing to put my de-facto support behind Mitt Romney.

My admittedly snarky point was an attempt to draw a distinction between pushing the system (from within, I suppose) to do the right thing and impotent expressions of frustration such as supporting Kennedy in 1980, Nader in 2000 or... who exactly?... in 2012. Electoral frustration really can't get more inchoate than "none of the above".

No, I don't hold single issue voters in very high regard, particularly when the "secondary" issues are those of life and death. By definition, single issue voters are not good allies unless you share the same issue. Once you solve that issue, you're on your own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:00 PM
Original message
Your snark was a poem about the regard you hold for me.
What the fuck have all those past candidates got to do with anything we were discussing? The exchange we had is right here for all to see.
Can not talk to those who will not listen to what I am saying. You said what about health care. I said, why were you late to the game, and told you why health care IS an GLBT issue. You make a mean wise crack. An snot boxed, juvenile snark about activists attempting to serve those in great need. I was reaching out to you, showing you the common ground that your stale point of view does not allow you to see.
What the fuck does Nader and Kennedy have to do with a political demonstration outside a vicious Insurance Company? In what way does snarking at that event relate to Nader? Explain. How did that 'draw a distinction'? What distinction, between what two things? It is like gibberish you are posting. This whole theme of Nader and Teddy is yours and yours alone. What does it have to do with Insurance Companies or the idea that the GLBT community shares your interest in health care reform and has been working on it for years, before you then along side you?
You spend much energy to refuse common ground. Again, stay classy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:29 PM
Response to Original message
888. Whatever. Pandering to single issue voters is a waste of energy.
Do we have common ground? If you're a single issue voter, you're not trying to find common ground with me, I'm not a partner, I'm simply a resource to be exploited.

I'm going to continue to encourage and push for your civil rights. I'm going to continue to try to end the wars. I'm going to continue pushing for healthcare, civil liberties and protecting Social Security. None of those things are possible without democrats in office.

If you're onboard for those things then I've got your back, even if you don't think my priorities are in order. If not, well then your concern is noted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hassin Bin Sober Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #888
920. Jeff, just yesterday you posted to me "Thanks. Didn't know that"...
... when I posted a map of the U.S. depicting the miserable state of affairs as it pertains to legislation/protection of LGBT rights in the workplace nationwide.

This was in the "Two Gay Men Kicked Out of The Pool" thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1293142#1300673


You didn't KNOW that?

First off, how can ANY long time DUer NOT know the situation = that gay people can be fired, denied housing AND kicked out of public pools in half the country for being gay?

Secondly, how can you, in one breath, lecture LBGT DUers for being "single issue" and vow to "have our backs" when you don't even KNOW our BASIC issues?

I don't mean to single you out. You seem like a nice guy. But I was APPALLED at the level of ignorance of some long time DUers had as it related to the issue of blatant discrimination in public accommodations, housing and employment.

"They should sue!!!" "That guy is so fired!!!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:58 PM
Response to Reply #920
935. Because I live in Washington.
I'm a supporter of gay marriage, but I didn't know how inconsistent state laws were in regard to the issue posted in that thread.

My support for civil rights was made more urgent by learning what you posted the other day. But that new knowledge didn't diminish the importance of healthcare, civil liberties or the other issues on our plate.

IMHO, you're justified being frustrated with my ignorance about that. My only excuse is that in my state that extreme degree of bigotry is not permissible by a public employee. My incomplete understanding of what you go through is comparable to my incomplete understanding of the problems with healthcare, elections, the economy, etc. That doesn't imply that my interest and support of those issues is insincere.

It wasn't meant as a lecture, but as a statement of position. I'm likely to be persuaded to reprioritize my issues if I feel that the whole of progressive policy is enriched and strengthened because of it. I'm not likely to be persuaded to reprioritize my issues because I've been called a bigot by someone who makes plain his/her ambivalence about the other issues. (e.g. who cares about Social Security since I can't get survivor benefits)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #935
1038. Hi jeff, marriage equality please, not "gay marriage" because yes, words matter and if we supporters
can't use decent words, things are really bad. Thanks. Yay for sun!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #888
1116. Nothing in any word I wrote implied that I am a single issue voter
In fact, all respect, I have been writing to you many words which explain the common ground you seem to be so stunningly ignorant of. And you keep calling me a single issue voter. I show you all the issues we share, and some of the specific ways that GLBT interest and efforts on those issues moved them forward, for the benefit of all, and you say, 'whatever, single issue voters....' and it is trip, it is intellectually and personally dishonest.
Why would you even think that I do not care about health care, after all I just wrote to you? Social Security is again, a number one GLBT issue, it is at the core of the whole equality question. How can you, as a Democrat, not understand that?
Why do you keep up with 'if you are on board' and 'single issue voter'? Because you are talking to yourself, not to me. I have done nothing here but list the various issues we have in common, and in fact shown you that your first example, health care reform, has been on my front burner since the 80's. And yet you continue with 'are you a single issue voter' bullshit.
This is Democratic Underground, I'm a Democrat. The GLBT Community votes Democratic at rates at and above 70%. Only African Americans vote Democratic in a larger percentage. So your constant attempt to paint me or us as disloyal Democrats is absurd. If Straight Americans would vote as Democratic as we do, especially White Straight Americans, especially White, Straight American Men, there would be no Republicans in office anywhere, so I am not sure where you think you get the standing to question the Democratic voting record of the GLBT community. There is no factual reason to do anything but thank us for the years of Party building, the millions of votes, and the many millions of dollars.
Now enough of you and your childish nonsense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:56 AM
Response to Reply #1116
1439. Nobody who's read BlueNorthwest's topics and posts could think you a single issue voter
Odd. Just odd.

I doubt anybody would think me a single issue voter either. I'd hate to rank my 'issues' but health care reform has been #1 for nearly 20 years. Anti-war, #2, equal rights #3. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy Vixen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #414
1414. I was doorbelling at 12 with older Democratic volunteers
When I wasn't doing that, I worked for a home health care company. I watched HIV+ people injecting themselves with Compound Q because they were hoping that anything - even a drug with dosing directions printed in Chinese - could save them from certain death.

I'm "Carter old," too. I'm only sorry I wasn't outside that insurance company with you, Bluenorthwest, in the names of many of my HIV+ co-workers who aren't with us anymore.

The LGBTQI community has been waiting since 1969 for substantive change in a number of areas. How much longer will they have to wait before the rest of us stand the hell up, and say that it's wrong?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
81. What if you admins actually enforced the rules equitably?
It gets difficult to follow the civility rules when others are allowed to not only engage in personal attacks that are nothing but personal attacks, but also to post whatever lies and false information they want to post about our movement and history. It gets old. They post hype, and we are supposed to reply with kid gloves.
How many times are OPs posted by certain straight members of DU, on GLBT issues, with dubious intention? "Hey, is it true that you are all skinny because you fear being alone?" Now, tell me what the objective of that sort of thread really is? And the 'list'. Oh, my God, that list. A year of the list. Imagine such things toward another minority, from the majority group. I dare you to. Try this one on for size: "As a gringo male, I am asking Mexican men if it is true you are all fat because your wives like to make you unattractive to others, so they add lots of lard? Just asking!" Now, does anyone here think that is alright? Really? "As a Christian, I want to ask the Jews about that tight wad thing. It is not true, is it? Just asking!"
Yeah, a double standard is a double standard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Morning Dew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #81
92. +1
and bookmarking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #81
95. just as an fyi, we do not
remove things because they are false. it is hard enough to figure out whether or not something is a personal attack without having to pass judgement on the veracity of posts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #95
308. So you would allow clearly false things to be said about elected
Democrats or the history of the Party? How about false commentary on other minority groups? I thought right wing memes were forbidden? Claiming the GLBT rights movement did NOTHING for decades seems to be just that. The death of Harvey Milk, NOTHING. Millions organized. NOTHING. To tell us we accomplished NOTHING but more restrictions for decades really does not need a judgement of veracity. It is a simple slander from the right leaning 'moderate' OFA folks who employed and defended McClurkin, who calls us vampires, that is the sort of veracity we are dealing with. Liars have no veracity. Hate mongers who put rhetoric and religion over human beings. NOTHING.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #308
418. it is not my place to judge.
nor is it my job. we are just unable to check the veracity of every post we see, or even those alerted as untrue. it could take hours to research an iffy statement, and in the end often not be able to judge anyway. i understand your concern. but it is up to members to point these things out in the thread, and in my experience, they robustly and articulately do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #418
447. Well I would hope that when people do that crap as a practice
that at some point they might be prevented from doing so? I am speaking of 'veracity' that nudges up toward being vicious bigoted lies about good individual Democrats past and present, not 'every post we see'. Good lord, why do that, crapola rhetoric such as 'every post we see'. Who asked you to do that, really? Anyone? What a cheap tactic in thread like this. "WE can not check every post we see". Wow, who knew? And such a direct response to the actual points made to you. The respect is almost palpable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #447
1080. We have an expression - "we are not the truth police"
A moderator's job is to keep things civil. That's why I've seen over and over again....

A: (blatant falsehood but not breaking any other rule)
B: (personal attack)

B's post is removed because it's a personal attack, which is within a mod's parvenue.

Often the thread or post is controversial, meaning the mod can't enter the fray (this thread a notable exception). Hence we're left with a falsehood, a deletion and more hard feelings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #1080
1293. Why are you answering for your fellow mod?
I was addressed by that one, spoke to that one, and I see no reason for this tag team business. The other mod was rude, for no reason.
Blatant falsehoods that attack a group of Democrats with right wing memes are in fact, against the rules. Your rules are just terms of art, used as such. If your job is to keep things civil, take a look at DU, and the thread. Are things civil? It is not for me to judge, but if my job was civility and this thread existed, I'd not be patting the backs of myself and my counterparts.
Allowing people to lie about specific groups of people over and over again is wrong, and if the rules allow for that, they should be changed. They were not brought down from Sinai. Skinner made them up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #418
513. "it is not my place to judge"
and yet you do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #513
1299. It's the difference between (in the US system) a judge and jury.
Judge controls the rules, jury controls the outcome.

Moderators enforce the rules, not determining an outcome, other than removing posts that break the rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Creideiki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #1299
1330. You do know that judges sometimes determine the outcome, right?
Are you really that ignorant?

Oh, wait. Yeah. I know. Sorry.

Here's a cookie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #1330
1340. Sometimes their actions lead to an outcome, and sometimes people opt to not have a jury.
The point being that mods aren't content controllers, they are behavior controllers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Creideiki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #1340
1355. Not always
The point being that by letting people continue to bully LGBTers here, the mods are abdicating the responsibility to control the bullying content.

I can now tell you've never been a moderator of any size internet community or you'd know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #1355
1394. I haven't seen much bullying here.
Alert is my friend, for all content I find offensive, trollish, etc.

The "moderation" work I do has some 20,000 other active participants, with wheel wars galore, and the ability to edit the posts of others, so I'm used to a slightly different model, and a lot more moderation (and reflection).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 04:14 AM
Response to Reply #1394
1592. Believe it or not but there's a whole world outside of your own personal experiences. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 05:27 AM
Response to Reply #1592
1597. Back atcha.
All people experience things differently.

"Somebody disagrees with me" is not a personal attack, or a sex/sexuality/identity attack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #81
98. I believe that to an accurate description of things that have happened to us. Nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #81
113. "The list"
"Obama has done nothing for my issue of ___________!"
"Yes he has."

Reasonable people can disagree about the value of the items on the inevitable and unavoidable list posted in response, but the questioner asked for it.

Also, your complaint is that the mods aren't vigilant about anti lgbt bigotry. The mods aren't going to lock this, so please provide links to those comments made that weren't deleted or locked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #113
170. Here's some older ones that were recurrent.
Down the post a bit.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=173419&mesg_id=173647
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #170
178. That's an exceptionally good post
I'm sorry I missed it first time around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #170
270. Thank you for this link.

This is the place we need to get to on DU
"Yes, I trust what you're telling me. How can we ally together?"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=173215&mesg_id=173287
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #270
519. "How can we ally together?"
Simple. Remove the bigoted moderators we have complained about uneven treatment from. Lift the veil of protection from anti-gay posters who repeatedly make bigoted, baiting posts.

Then maybe we can all work together.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smokey nj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #170
401. Sapphocrat really knocked it out of the park with that post.
Thanks for the link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #170
411. That is an amazing post! Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #170
532. sappho is awesome -- & a certain contingency needs to be held accountable for all that is in there &
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 04:26 PM by xchrom
& the never have.

but lgbtiq folk have certainly paid a price here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #170
1053. Fantastic post, thanks for sharing the link.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #81
146. The person is charge needs to deal with his policy of needing mod consensus
one stubborn or insensitive moderator or one unfair action by just one moderator can prevent offensive threads/posts from being locked.

there was some talk about changes to deal with offensive posts, but it didn't address this one contributing cause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #146
1679. Agree -- the homosexual/human rights interests here need more MODS watching ....
and we need to ensure that any biased MODS are removed --

imo, no MOD should serve more than once --

We allegedly have tens of thousands of posters here -- there should

be no shortage of MODS!!

They should be people who have supported human rights openly --

and perhaps the selection should be by lottery?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snooper2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #81
239. My Hispanic neighbor on the lot behind me says Hispanic men are fat
because wives love to cook, a lot...he said his wife spends 10 hours a day cooking with friends and family...

All the fucking time :P..everything from scratch, all the time.. Tacos, tortillas stuffed with cheese melted on top of chicken cooked in animal fat, 2lb burritos.

Americans overall are still fatter though, Mexico comes in #2

Oh, and FYI, Mexican is a type food not a person :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #239
362. Sort of missed my point there sport.
Intentionally it seems. Enjoy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #81
273. Now there's a bold, fresh idea! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:32 AM
Response to Reply #81
1678. GLBT issues need more watchers -- more MODs with your interests in mind ....
Edited on Mon Jun-20-11 01:37 AM by defendandprotect
rather it seems you have been plagued by MODS who are biased in that regard --

I see it as well when feminist issues arise on threads -- and that includes the

bullying --

You have to openly negotiate with Skinner for more homosexual MODS and have them

watch the interests of that community -- perhaps they can double on the feminist

front?

:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hamsterjill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:21 AM
Response to Original message
88. I support full equality for everyone.
I've identified myself as a Christian numerous times on DU. I support gay rights. I don't understand how some religious people can condemn something so wonderful as two people finding one another and falling in love. Love is love, regardless of what sex one or the other partner is. People should be able to be who they are without concern!

I believe that gay partners should have the same rights, respect, privileges, etc. as heterosexual partners.

I echo the posts advocating civil unions for all. I think that civil unions should be the governmental portion of marriage (mostly for record keeping, etc.), and then the couple...ANY couple...should be able to marry in whatever fashion that they choose, whether a religious ceremony or other.

I do not believe it will ever be a realistic hope that some of the existing religions will embrace gay marriage. Religion should be separate and apart from government. So, therefore, if a particular religion chooses not to embrace gay marriage, I think they have that right. I just don't happen to understand why they would alienate fellow human beings.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
105. To be honest, the conversation on DU have done more to open my eyes
to an entrenched kind of thinking. Although we are all supportive of our GLBT community on the surface, there are issues that impact the community that us straight folks just don't get. I can only speak for myself, I am more often clueless as to the impact my attitudes and blind spots have than I would care to admit.

I appreciate that I am being educated. It hurts me that my education often comes at the cost of great pain to my friends who find that they must, once again, explain it to me. For that, my friends, I am deeply, deeply sorry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #105
520. "there are issues that impact the community that us straight folks just don't get"
yet you, and some others, seek to "get" our side of the issue. Certain people do not and never will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #520
1101. I'd like to know exactly what some of these issues are that straight (or LGBT) folk don't "get"
I'm bi. I've got my own issues. I get "pick one, dammit".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #1101
1303. No, you get to pick both!
:evilgrin:

I got lucky, and married somebody who is also bi... we have lots of "genderfluid" friends and family, on all kinds of spectrums (sex, gender, sexual preference), so it's always interesting to see who "gets" what.

Turns out that there are lots of things that people in other communities don't "get". Since you asked, some examples:
1. The effect of testosterone shots on a relationship.
2. The challenges of synced menstruation cycles on a relationship.
3. The difficulty of office parties where you're supposed to bring a "spouse".
4. The pressure to have offspring.

It's a wide world, and lots of folks have lots of perspectives, so it's almost impossible to "get" it all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
106. Great concept
Having a discussion without moderators censoring thoughts and ideas.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:31 AM
Response to Original message
110. good move
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wetzelbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:46 AM
Response to Original message
128. I, for one, welcome our gay and lesbian overlords.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:19 PM
Original message
And some say there is no problem?
Here it is from the horse's mouth, people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wetzelbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
894. oh if you only knew what I meant by that
Its a private joke between me and many of those who were purged and are now on another site.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #128
865. First dictate of the LGBT Non Empire: It is now illegal to sell beer.
All beer is hereby now, and forever, free.

See, Wetzelbill, it won't be so bad.
:party:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jamastiene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #128
1479. Have I told you lately that I love you?
:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #128
1680. Here ya go SKINNER .... ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 3 or 4 disruptors on this thread ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
133. Where is MineralMan?
I think he savvy and understands this subject better than just about any straight guy I know.

I learned that here the other day.

He is the one to watch on this thread if someone doesn't have a good understanding of this subject like myself.

Thanks for starting this thread Skinner.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #133
164. Oh, I'm here in the thread.
I've been posting. Thanks for what you said, but I'm not as smart as you think. I'm a strong supporter for absolutely equal human rights for every person on the planet. I sometimes can't see the best way to get that done, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #164
179. Well, this issue is all about equal human rights as far as I can tell
So you are still the person to be listening to because you have that issue down pretty well as far as I am concerned. One of the best.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bragi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
148. Damn. I have no accusations to make.
Instead, can I tell a story?

I'm a straight male, and my very best friend ever is gay. I knew he was gay for years, but he wasn't actually out of the closet, so we never made any point of it, until one day he simply started talking about himself as "a gay man", and that was that.

For years after that, he and I fought over the issue of same-sex marriage, in that I was in favor of it, he was opposed.

I supported SSM for all the obvious reasons, he opposed it, mostly, I discovered, because it was convenient for him not to have marriage on the table in his various relationships.

Anyway, eventually he caved in and came around, and he now supports SSM in principle, though remains as non-committal as ever in his fleeting relationships.

I love my gay friend a whole lot and miss him greatly. He moved to the west coast a year ago, and I'm excited about going to visit him next week.

There is no point to this story, but I thought I'd share it anyway.

- B
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
handmade34 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #148
1233. I love stories
even with no point sometimes... my story is that I miss my friends too, but because they have died; suicide, AIDS, etc... I miss them!!! I will fight to create an equal society
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bragi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #1233
1379. Yep, equality for everyone everywhere all the time! /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Proud Liberal Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
154. I see mostly differences about strategy here
However, there are debates about political strategy regarding LGBTQ rights throughout the entire country and within various GLBTQ organizations, so clearly there is disagreement about strategy even among the persons directly affected by the issue of LGBTQ rights.
I have yet to really see truly homophobic and/or anti-LGBTQ postings here but obviously I don't have time to read through every thread/posting and I'm sure that some freeper might blow through here occasionally and say something really nasty. Hopefully, however, anybody so blatantly homophobic/bigoted has long since been TS'd. I like to think that everybody would be able to overcome their bigotry but I realize that with some people that is simply not the case (at least without years of therapy or other interventions). If they can't play nicely with others here, they should have to go IMHO. If somebody inadvertently says something insensitive and/or offensive, hopefully they are called on it and make amends as necessary.
As for "the list" issue, I'm not quite sure what to say about that. If somebody posts a thread/comment that President Obama hasn't done enough for the LGBTQ then why is it necessarily inappropriate for somebody to post a list of things he HAS done in response? This IS a discussion board and all and people have a lot of opinions on different subjects. Should those of us whom have a different opinion from other DUers simply refrain from commenting with a dissenting post? That would kind of defeat the whole purpose of having this be a discussion board, wouldn't it?
I admit that I don't like to see dismissive "pony" posts- directed at progressives, GLBTQ DUers, or basically anybody disappointed with President Obama and/or the Democratic Party but there is a difference IMHO from posting a factual/reasoned response to a thread/comment and dismissively accusing/suggesting that the poster is an ingrate, "sour grapes", etc. simply because they feel differently about a subject than somebody else does. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
157. Jumping into the fray
At this point in the history of our nation we have existential issues to grapple with - issues that will determine the answers to questions like "Will the USA continue to exist?", "What is the fate of the U.S. military empire?" and "Will the whole of the population end up reduced to menial debt-chained slaves for the benefit of the banking class?"

I feel that these questions are the most important ones to deal with as they will directly impact the whole of the population in fundamental ways.

So when I see 10 posts/day on GLBT and an average on maybe one in Economy, I lament what I perceive to be badly misplaced priorities. If those other issues are not handled well, nobody will have any rights.

This is not some far-off danger; there are immediate, imminent, and dramatic economic changes coming at us at a breakneck pace. You can see it everywhere in the price of gas and in the price of food. You can see it everywhere in deteriorating infrastructure. You can see it in the increasingly transparent lies put out by financial institutions and authorities.

In this context I believe the right thing to do is not to force wedge issues. There is a time and a place for everything, and this is not the time for GLBT issues to be at the forefront of discussion. By promoting these issues over issues of tremendous importance to the whole of the people, it sends the message that said activists really couldn't care if the rest of the world goes to hell, if they can't have their way. Because that's what will happen if this country remains divided on issues like GLBT, prayer in school, abortion, and a whole list of other wedge issues.

What is at risk is nothing less than ALL of centuries of gains in social progress. This year's key social issues are financial, monetary, fiscal - and that's what we should ALL be focused on getting right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beam Me Up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #157
174. I'm gay and I totally agree with what you're saying
Wedge issues are emotional issues that are used to PREVENT a strong consensus forming against the criminal class that rules us, mostly through deception and distraction. It doesn't matter whether it is abortion, racial equality, gender equality, sexual orientation equality, environmental sustainability, workers rights -- or what have you. YES each of these and many many more issues are important. However, no one of them gets at the heart of the problem -- economic inequality which invariably leads to political inequality. Worse, leads to multi-national corporations in CONTROL of our government and military. Until we address THAT issue, we will never make *significant* progress in all the other issues we can name -- and those who have a vested interest in maintaining their hegemony will make sure we don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #157
180. monday through friday you can visit SMW and anywhere from 560 to 100 posts re: the economy.
and demeter runs the weekend economists threads friday through sunday -- and before the weekend is out there is usually 100 + posts re: the economy.

for me this is just telling gay folk there are more pressing matters at hand.
nothing is more important than not being fired from a job for being gay -- or turned out of your apartment for being gay.

now those economics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #180
181. +1.
Economics mean nothing without the rights to enjoy it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #181
187. We all have an equal right to "enjoy" the end of Social Security and Medicare.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #187
192. I just would like the chance to have all the rights you enjoy.
But unfortunately I don't. When you have the same rights as I do, maybe your understanding would be a little bit better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #187
384. Not those of who can't GET social security benefits from a deceased partner.
For those people, there was never a beginning to "enjoy."

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pale Blue Dot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #180
1545. +1000
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #157
185. my quibble at word choice. Otherwise, +1
In this context I believe the right thing to do is not to force wedge issues. There is a time and a place for everything, and this is not the time for GLBT issues to monopolize the at the forefront of discussion. By promoting these issues over issues of tremendous importance to the whole of the people, it sends the message that said activists really couldn't care if the rest of the world goes to hell, if they can't have their way. Because that's what will happen if this country remains divided on issues like GLBT, prayer in school, abortion, and a whole list of other wedge issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #157
242. Same shit, different day. We'll give women the right to vote next year.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 12:18 PM by Zorra
"Now shut up you stupid bitch and iron my socks, we have more important things to worry about than your equality and right to vote"

Or, "Get to the back of the bus, Rosa, you know the rules. It's not time for negroes to have the same rights as white folks."

Do you have even a tiny clue as to how utterly insulting and demeaning to GLBT's what you posted is?

You have all your rights. We do not. What part of this do you fail to grasp? Why do you think you are better, and more human, and more deserving of rights than I am?

Your apparent sense of personal total entitlement and not believing that others should have the same rights as you is very disturbing, not only from my LGBT point of view but from my POV as a progressive Democrat also.

Yes, of course, all those issues you mentioned are very important also, I post about them constantly. But I wish for just one day that you could be blessed with the empathy to feel what it is like to be considered and treated like a second class citizen.

Maybe you wouldn't think that my not having the same rights as you was such a trivial matter anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy Vixen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #242
318. Thank you for your post
Let's face it, I've been married since the dawn of time. I also grew up in a fundamentalist church, so I had a lot to learn in a variety of areas. I am still learning. I am so grateful to those who help all of us have more understanding.

One thing I know for sure: If you are oppressed, we're all oppressed. My marriage is no more "sacred" than anyone else's because it's between a man and a woman. ALL consenting adults deserve to have their relationship and their family recognized and respected by state and federal governments and by society as a whole, and that's the least of it. Prejudice and intolerance has no place on a progressive message board, or in our country.

LGBTQI (and please correct me if this is an incorrect acronym,) rights are civil rights. Period. I believe those civil rights should happen NOW, not in four years, not in eight years, not after the next election. It's non-negotiable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #318
831. Thank you so very much for really getting it.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 09:16 PM by Zorra
"Prejudice and intolerance has no place on a progressive message board, or in our country."

"civil rights should happen NOW, not in four years, not in eight years, not after the next election. It's non-negotiable."
:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy Vixen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:48 PM
Response to Reply #831
933. It's marriage or nothing. It's a life free from fear and bigotry.
:hug: :hug: :hug:

God, I hope we see this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchtv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #831
1393. thank you Zorra, for your posts here
and to they stand out as eloquent
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #242
324. You are very wrong
My rights are not fully recognized either, but I have enough perspective to see that when the entirety of civilization is threatened, that non-vital interests have to take a back seat to getting the big things right.

If you're going to maintain the position that ALL that is important to you are GLBT issues, I'm perfectly willing to see you drop from the Democratic Party coalition. We haven't the time to deal with people who want to push fringe issues into the center of the table when our very national survival is at stake on other issues.

I'm not even going to pretend to cater to your gross indifference to the welfare of everyone else in this party, and in this nation. So go ahead, tear up your party registration and leave. We will win over a thousand voters by focusing on the important issues for every selfish brat who feels alienated by the party getting its priorities straight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #324
387. This is not a FRINGE ISSUE, you entitled person.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 02:11 PM by Maven
JHC. People like you give straight males a bad fucking name. And that's sad to say because there are so many straight guys here who really do get it and aren't self-centered, entitled brats, unlike you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #387
459. It most certainly is
I "get it" perfectly fine, thank you. I also happen to have a sense of proportion and the ability to understand that if the issues I enumerated are not resolved in a satisfactory way, you will have no rights at all. Those who hate you will be free to kill you on sight because no law will restrain them in the face of a collapse of the government.

The fact that you are willing to have the rest of the world go to hell if you don't get your way immediately makes you and those who hold the same position out to be sociopaths.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #459
474. ^^^ THIS. Skinner, and mods, if you want to know the problem, it's the failure to examine
The underlying homophobic message conveyed by posts and posters like THIS. There are other ways to tell GLBTs that we don't matter and are less-than than calling us f-----s and d---s. One way is to use code words like "fringe" and tell us that our obsessive need to impose our will upon poor straights who have more important things to do makes us "sociopaths" and no better than Republicans.

And to the concerned citizen I'm taking to, do send word to the psych ward once you've saved the world from collapse so we know when it's permissible to talk about our civil rights, lest we speak out of turn again, master.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #474
476. LOL
Your hysterical, absolutist reaction to perfectly reasonable statements is why people are sick and tired of your whining and don't want to hear it anymore.

You're a freaking sociopath, completely without empathy for anyone but yourself. May the misery you wallow in be lifelong, it will be well deserved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #476
491. Thank you
You make a stronger point than you will ever know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #476
496. And you're a perfect example of the banality of evil.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 04:23 PM by Maven
Just another self-important tool whose cruelty comes in the form of passionless disregard for those who are different than you. Thinking you're "empathetic" when in fact you can't see two feet beyond your own privilege. You pathological narcissist.

I happen to have a pretty decent life and a loving relationship that would be legal but for bigots like yourself. As for everything else that you shat out of your mouth, you know where you can reinsert it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #496
1628. "perfect example of the banality of evil" = there we go. +1000.
Stated perfectly, Maven.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RandomKoolzip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #476
569. You're accusing OTHERS of being hysterical?!
Comedy gold, I tell ya.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #476
580. With each of your posts on this thread, I think you can't possibly
be a bigger douche, and yet you top yourself every time. It's astonishing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chervilant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #580
932. No duh!!
I know that bigot is going on my ignore list, but I have a macabre fascination with his utter lack of self-awareness, so I'm waiting until I've read the entire thread (which should take at least two more hours)!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Call Me Wesley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #476
602. May you be banned,
the next day I log on to DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #602
605. Don't hold your breath. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #602
607. He won't be.
And not because of homophobic moderation, either. Skinner declared this thread open and I'm glad that he decided to spout his venom in public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Call Me Wesley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #607
619. I'm going to bed now. I check tomorrow.
Uncensored posts don't mean no banning. The venom is spilt and has no place here. So I'll make it easy for the DU search engine: "notesdev. homophobic."

Nighty night.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #602
811. It should be banned right now.
Unbelievable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #811
833. Although his comments are reprehensible
People shouldn't get banned out of an anything goes thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #833
847. Bullshit.
Anything goes doesn't give immunity to rank bigots. It simply puts aside usual DU rules of civility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #847
877. Thank you all for demonstrating the problem so clearly
Anyone who doesn't agree with certain militant one-issue types gets called all sorts of nasty names, gets threatened and ganged up upon.

There's no room allowed for anyone who doesn't share this monoline fixation. This makes this militant group completely unsuitable as coalition partners in a large political party.

I think you people need to fish or cut bait with regards to your participation in the Democratic Party. You can't both ignore the vital interests of the political coalition it represents and demand its support for your own. Life doesn't work that way. You want people to help you, you have to be willing to help them.

I see very little willingness to even acknowledge others' priorities. I see great readiness to take offense at any point of view divergent from GLBT orthodoxy.

Don't get mad at me for stating what is obvious to every person with common sense. Blame Barack Obama for not having followed through on the expectations that were given when he took office, along with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid for squandering the opportunities afforded by unified control of the legislative and executive branches of government. He had the political capital and instead blew it completely on a Frankenstein of health care legislation.

Everyone else in this country is worried about basic survival. If that is not also in the first place on your agenda then you are out of step with what our party coalition needs to do for the people of this country right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #877
891. LOL is your word salad is supposed to make me quiver in shame?
Not sure what you mean by your cutesey just plain folks use of "fish or cut bait" but whatever. I can call a crack on the wall a crack on the wall with no problem. And you, being the author of the above posts should be TSed off of this site.

:hi:

Have a nice night!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #877
900. Do you understand that what you said to Maven was wrong
and mean spirited?

"May the misery you wallow in be lifelong, it will be well deserved."

You should apologize for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #900
906. I really don't care
I'm tired of people creating problems out of nothing with I'm-offended tantrums. That's behavior appropriate to a 5-year-old, not to someone who should be participating in national policy debate. The vanity and selfishness level of the thoughts expressed by that person are off the chart and deserve nothing but contempt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LaurenG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:39 AM
Response to Reply #877
973. I am not a militant, one issue type and I rarely jump in but you
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 05:34 AM by LaurenG
need to be brought down a few thousand pegs. So it seems you are either unable to empathize or you are a troll or worse.

Let me just ask you how you would feel if you were faced with a society that only believed those of the same sex should get married or have sex. What if you had to hide the fact that you loved someone of the opposite sex or were forced to date someone of the same sex just to keep up appearances? What if you were tied to a fence and beaten to death because you went against societies rules by loving the gender society thought wrong for you? I could go on and on because this doesn't even scratch the surface but I know you get the picture.

If you were so altruistic you would never come to the table with demented ideas of why people are fighting for equality. Your issues are all about what you want, not what is best for society because equal rights for all effect us all.

I understand why people don't like you, you are a projecting one issue troll hiding behind your own agenda in order to try and tear down those who scare you to death because they are different from you. You seem to be a bigoted little person with an ego the size of the planet.

Maybe you should stay the hell out of the way and realize you have nothing of value to contribute here and let the more evolved and grown up people get the work done since you can't even grasp the issue.

edited to change a word or two
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #973
1027. More self-absorption
Let me just ask you how you would feel if you were faced with a society that only believed those of the same sex should get married or have sex. What if you had to hide the fact that you loved someone of the opposite sex or were forced to date someone of the same sex just to keep up appearances?


You seriously don't get it.

Not only you but everyone else as well is having and/or will soon have problems so fundamental (food, survival) that you won't have the luxury to worry about some government acknowledging your relationship arrangements.

From the many responses given to me all in the same vein, I seriously have to wonder how many of you are simply incapable of understanding the scale of what is going on in the macro picture.

In the meantime you all are acting like you're the only ones with a problem of injustice in a country where injustice is everywhere you look. This is a narcissistic, vain, selfish, and ignorant to take.

If you guys want to Thelma & Louise yourselves over the cliff, that's your prerogative. Just don't expect anyone else to stay in the car when you do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LaurenG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #1027
1045. Really, this is your response, this is the best you can do?
If this were you or your loved ones being bullied and denied rights you certainly would scream your head off and it would be the most important issue there is. You deny rights by calling others self absorbed, this is how you respond to fellow human beings? You tell them there are bigger fish to fry? If you can't see that what you just wrote is a condecending boatload of crap I feel there is no hope for you.

Stay out of the egual rights movement you are no more than a mouthpiece for the ignorant world that we live in. How shameful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #1045
1066. I find it utterly amazing when people think that equality
doesn't affect their personal issue du jour. Like we're special people who aren't touched by the same issues everyone else is. What some refuse to acknowledge, especially those who think the economy or war is more important than equality is that some of the issues they think are more important, affect the LGBT*.* community twice.

For example, there are LGBT*.* folk in the military, currently fighting one of our many wars and should they be partnered and die, guess who doesn't get death benefits or even notified? But you have a straight service member whose married die, and the spouse gets the benefits and notification. Hell, we don't have to go as far as the marriage inequality argument. LGBT*.* service members probably suffer twice as much stress as straight service members because if their orientation is made public, they then become one of the ones affected by unemployment. Funny how that works, huh?

Anyway, I would have preferred to respond to the poster whose pissing everyone off but I've got them on 'ignore'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LaurenG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #1066
1084. He has been ts'ed
:D I guess you were smart to ignore him in the first place. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mvd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #1027
1056. So a GLBT person who is poor can't want their equal rights?
I completely disagree. People are more complex than that. Also, both hunger and discrimination can affect someone's life very much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #1027
1136. It appears your position on human rights...
It appears your position on human rights is based on a post-apocalyptic dystopian story taken from a badly written hack-authored science fiction novella. I was not aware of the previously. I will now allow your political positions and arguments all the credit they are due.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #602
1078. They're gone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #1078
1267. ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #1267
1307. OMFG, I love that Image!
Must make it viral.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #1307
1309. Already is:
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/this-pleases-x
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #476
614. BITE ME!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #476
682. Over the top, and incorrect.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 06:58 PM by MineralMan
Wrong in so many ways, I can't begin to count. Please knock that shit off, won't you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:31 PM
Original message
wow. Thank you Skinner for letting such nasty posts like this stay so we can see what posters are
made out of.

notesdev, you made it to my "watch this fucking asshole" list a month after you signed on DU. And you are showing, again, that you well deserve it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:19 PM
Response to Reply #476
835. That's probably the single meanest thing I've seen posted here
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 09:20 PM by Renew Deal
:wtf:

Maybe now people will begin to realize why the mods and rules are so successful on this site. Shit like this is what you see on other forums.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #835
1097. But if the rules REALLY worked
Then notesdev wouldn't have been around to make those posts in this thread. He would have been TS'ed ages ago.

Hell, if the rules REALLY worked, or at least were applied evenly, this thread might not even have needed to exist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #476
843. wow.
:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #476
855. Yup . . . the first part of your statement I agree with. I've been at the receiving end
of "not being sensitive enough" too, as if sensitivity will bring about civil rights. (see for instance the dog-piling above over the single word lifestyle, which btw I've heard many GLBT folks use to describe their . . . uh . . . lifestyle.)

You're right that money trumps everything. Who lives a freer, better life: a straight homeless man or Elton John?

The second part of your post though is unnecessarily harsh. You don't know what it's like to be culturally demeaned the way this minority has over the years. If some people are overly sensitive and lash out at their allies, it's understandable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #855
1496. Why are you being so obstinately ignorant?
Lifestyle: It's okay to be gay if you don't live the lifestyle. The term comes from our history of closeting and dehumanizing people who are born outside of the sanctioned norm. If you can't understand why it's offensive, can you at least acknowledge that it is, even in the absence of your understanding?

Post after post filled with absolute ignorance. Stop it already.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #476
910. Welcome to the ignore list...
reserved for SNAKES.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hosnon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #476
940. LOL. Your doom and gloom binary choice is by no means reasonable.
Desegregation was accomplished amidst the threat of complete nuclear annihilation.

Build a bunker and let the rational wing of the human race take care of business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:54 AM
Response to Reply #476
1010. Wow - I'm stunned. You have truly exposed your nature here.
I'm embarrassed for you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #476
1119. You are nasty human being and as of now- the only person on my ignore list
Gross, nasty, disgusting mean little selfish, privileged pig.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #1119
1141. looks like you can take your ignore last back to empty
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=217900

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #1141
1168. Oh- cool! Thanks Admins/ Mods
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #476
1563. Does a post like this keep you from being selected for a mod?
I'm not trying to be sarcastic, after reading this thread I really do wonder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #1563
1565. Sad thing is, he lasted for about three years posting that sort of thing.
I mean, he didn't just suddenly become hateful yesterday.

The fact that such a douchebag was allowed to engage in such douchebaggery for three years really does sum up what has brought us to this point, doesn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 12:44 AM
Response to Reply #1565
1586. I hope he was never a mod, unreal. 3 years of that, inexcusable. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #459
500. Actually, one strong social justice movement inspires others. The civil rights movement...
the anti-war movement, the womens movement, the AIM movement, were all inspired by each other.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Safetykitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #459
553. It must be fabulous to see into the future...
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 04:52 PM by Safetykitten
The future of your issues getting solved to help us solve our little "pet" issue.

Of course in your spectacular stupidity you pose the scenario of getting to it after all is safe and calm. Then you get your rights you pestering gay people.

But the scenario of a society that goes to hell by trampling gay people never occurs to you. That the very "no rights at all" situation you pose would be equally obtained by the dismantling of the rights we have now and making us the the scapegoats of all manner of things which would give us the same result.

Your hesitation or remarkable idiocy keeps you from realizing that making sure ALL have equal rights makes us stronger as a society. When no group can be called out as different of less than the others, then society is stronger for it.

I will go further and say you are not a Democrat by any stretch of the imagination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #459
573. The government will collapse and then mobs will kill gay sociopaths!
The only way to save the gays is to abandon their civil rights! It's for their own good!

That is some funny shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #459
907. God damn...
now I see what is meant by the wolves coming out in full force. What a horribly bigoted and selfish post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #459
1273. THANK YOU MODS FOR THE TS
This was wayyyyy beyond acceptable. Have been watching this one since it had signed up, glad to see it gone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #1273
1356. +1

#11
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #324
558. The government doesn't only handle one issue at a time.
So addressing civil rights doesn't mean other issues must be postponed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #558
1099. We can multitask.
We have Windows 7.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #1099
1310. *snortwaffle*
Wait until the next patch... :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #324
675. Equality is vital and is a "big thing."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #324
709. Seems to me that civil rights are the most vital interests of all
Seems to me that civil rights are the most among the most vital interests of all. That the depredations done to minority groups throughout contemporary history are done to those groups who have fewer protections and liberties than does the mainstream.

That without those rights recognized, in place, and in use, freedom is little more than a word used to sell trucks and credits cards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thanks_imjustlurking Donating Member (462 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:33 AM
Response to Reply #324
985. "non-vital interests have to take a back seat to getting the big things right."
If civil rights are non-vital issues now, we are in bigger trouble than I thought.

First they came for.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:45 AM
Response to Reply #324
1681. Party is more important than human rights? Didn't know that -- !!
You should be able to understand that when anyone in our society isn't free

it makes you less free --

If you're going to maintain the position that ALL that's important to you is

alibing for Obama and the Dem Party -- a party infiltrated for 20 years by

Koch Bros -- then you become a fringe issue --

Our national survival is dependent upon Global Warming -- about which O has done 00000000000000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Safetykitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #242
378. No, that poster does not know how repugnant that post is. They are the BIG picture people.
Everything has a time and place. Every issue is compartmentalized and if lucky can be used to get votes from a captive group.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:47 AM
Response to Reply #378
1682. Frightened his little applecart of "lesser evil" voting will be disturbed ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chervilant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #242
929. No,
that person doesn't have 'even a tiny clue' about a lot of things, apparently...

(I can tell that my ignore list is going to have several new additions after I finish reading this thread...)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #242
1029. Well said. And those who can't multitask shouldn't wag fingers at those of us who can
My big issue is climate change; I figure that little else matters if we're all starving and fighting over scarce resources. But that doesn't mean that I don't write to politicians about LGBT rights, or the economy, or women's rights, or union rights, or education, or ending the wars, or food safety, or animal welfare, etc. etc. There is no ONE issue. The media may try to train us all to believe that we can only focus on one matter at a time and ignore all else, but that's BS. We can each do far more than we have for dozen of important issues; and we should, every day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strong Atheist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #242
1060. Agree:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4854000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #1060
1129. Yes.
Great post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strong Atheist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #1129
1157. Thank you. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #157
380. Oh bullshit.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 02:06 PM by Maven
This is the kind of heterosexism (if not latent homophobia) that absolutely must stop.

I'm gay and as concerned about the economy as anyone, but this is bullshit. DU (and discussion in general) is not a zero sum game. There's plenty of time to discuss both. The point you're making (which is far from an original one) is that GLBT rights are basically a frivolity compared to the economy. And that's nonsense. How about gay couples who pay more in taxes than straight ones because they can't get married? Or pay more in benefits because they can't put a partner on their health plan? Or lost a job due to employment discrimination.

My civil rights are not a "wedge issue" and you'd best start getting used to that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ohio Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #157
763. No. You are simply dead fucking wrong
America is a country of ideals, not finances. We may go through hard financial times but that does not mean we will become The US of China... It just won't happen.

So what is it that can ruin us as a nation?

I'll tell you... Some douchebag relegating equal rights for everyone to being a "wedge issue".

Equal rights for everyone is THE core founding principal of America and the one single issue we should defend above all others. No other issue matters as much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #157
1264. *Does the Nelson Muntz laugh*
HA ha!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=217900
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
159. Can someone explain to me exactly what happened with the "purge"
that took place here a while back. I was not around, but from what I can glean, it was a complete shitshow and left very hard feelings that linger to this day.

I'm sorry if this sounds like a stupid question, especially since so many here seem to know the details intimately. But I also think those events have a lot to do with the hard feelings Skinner is speaking of.

Thanks in advance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #159
165. You can PM me
I'm still extremely gunshy about speaking freely about that and these issues publicly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #165
173. Done.
Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #173
194. Answered- Woohoooo Bring home the Cup!!!
Have you seen this?

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2011/06/14/toucher-rich-the-big-scary-man-guys-bruins-song/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #159
488. Will, that is it in a nutshell.
The purge was ugly, divisive, and left a permanent bad taste for many longtime posters, regardless of orientation. Thank you for having the courage to bring it up -- it's been the "elephant in the room" on this thread so far.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duncan Grant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
162. First, stop posting "The List" -- unless you include "Maine 2009".
Add this to your list of Obama's LGBT accomplishments:

The White House, (when) asked about the criticism, had no immediate comment.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33626383/ns/politics-more_politics/



Let's also start giving some credit to the LGBT activists who held Obama's feet to the fire on DADT. They're the ones who forced movement on this issue, not people like Andrew Tobias.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #162
193. I don't follow the logic there.
Because Obama did not engage sufficiently in Maine, its his fault how things turned out there.

But with regard to other actions he did take to help the LGBT community, you seem to be suggesting that he shouldn't get any credit whatsoever. All the credit goes to others.

Using that logic, the loss in Maine would not be Obama's fault. Instead, the fault would lie with LGBT activists who didn't do a good job "holding his feet to the fire".

I'd suggest that a more consistent approach would be to give him some credit when he does take actions to help the LGBT, and then continue to call on him to do more.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
188. there was no purge. just people breaking rules.
reinstating the rule breakers and apologizing to them was a huge mistake
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #188
197. Yes there was
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wetzelbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #197
351. yup
Dead on Marrah. Left some bad feelings too. Its a big reason why I'm not around much anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #188
202. I disagree on both counts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy Vixen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #188
322. Yes, there was a purge.
Those purged deserved an apology.

There are others as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #188
335. If breaking rules were enough to get people banned, you would have been thrown out years ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #335
393. +1000
All's well if it's done in the name of Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #335
493. ha. typical typical.
meowwwwww! pssssst!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #493
609. Skinner? ^^ This.
See?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #609
625. But fags is catty! You didn't know that?
:sarcasm:

My hat is off to Skinner, for this thread was a great idea. When bigots are allowed to speak freely, they always hang themselves with their own filthy, hateful words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #625
633. the catty thing is directed toward women. where have you been.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 06:16 PM by Whisp
seeing as sexism against women is still a-okay here and seeing as 'pearl clutching' is okay according to some of most staunch supporters of everything that is progressive I hardly thought 'meow pssst' would be verboten.

ah, okay, different rules for different people. gotcha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #633
1311. Pearl clutching is limited to women?
Interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wetzelbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #188
348. lol
Really?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #188
390. Skinner apologized for the purge that wasn't. So yes, there was a purge.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #390
509. he wanted your money back.
I don't think he got it tho.
so he pissed off Everyone - again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #188
470. That's not accurate.
I've seen the evidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #188
531. People breaking rules?
Like posting the number "7?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchtv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #188
845. wrong
dead wrong
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #188
874. Yeah actually there was.
With a great deal of courage and humility Skinner admitted he got backed into a corner and over reacted. It's his ability to admit a mistake that gives this place it's heart. Maybe you could learn from that? Perhaps you should research things abit more before you post. Oh and BTW I was moderating during both of those periods so I know what I am talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #188
893. How big of a fucking idiot are you?
Seriously.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #893
901. not as big a fucking idiot as you.
apparently
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #901
904. No, I think you've proven yourself wrong chilly.
Dumbass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #904
1312. Hey. Be nice.
"Not moderated" is not a reason to be unkind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
189. I feel it is very important to minimize moderation.
I've been having this discussion on another forum. It is a place that is one I respect highly for it's way of behaving. There is a level of participation whereby the people interacting have a keen sense of right and wrong. It's very hard to put this into conscious terms for me. But I've been on that other forum for nearly ten years, and I've marveled at how the members manage to retain the forum so that it is preserved in the form in which they enjoy. We can say cunt. We can say nigger. We can post photos that make fun of war crimes. And there is discussion of how far we can push the boundaries. We had a big talk about this yesterday. Essentially it is the context in which we operate that is of importance. When I mentioned that racism was always off limits, I got the response "Two blacks walk into a bar...". To which was responded by someone else "And it was dark so no one noticed.". As an attempt to prove to me that even racism done in the right context was funny.

But let one serious attempt at real racism surface, and all hell breaks loose. The members come down on the person who posts such garbage.

There are two key things going on here.

This requires a mature, aware, educated membership. And by mature I mean able to handle anything. There is nothing more damaging to the integrity of a group than censorship. I find myself having to censor myself on DU where I wouldn't on the other forum. That necessarily means that DU isn't fulfilling it's potential. It's quite the opposite effect of what censorship is intended to accomplish. One can see this in the country in which we live. I listen to radio in Europe, and it's quite refreshing to hear expletives. In other words, what membership are we trying to create? One that is polite and immature, or one that can handle the truth. Because the truth contains expletives, etc.

This entire notion relies upon the level of it's members. When I first participated in that other forum, I was amazed at how civil it was. Civil, and puerile, and vile, and funny, and serious... And it all came down to the concept that the members valued what they were creating so much that they policed the activities of the forum. There are mods on that forum. But they are like the Prince Phillip. Not much to do.

I want to extrapolate what I see to more than forums. This concept is precisely what we need in America. The reason we have such trouble today is that the level of participation of the members of this society, in politics, is low. Very low. Without that, things run wild. Look, mods are like police. The bottom line is, you can have a police state and still have a society that is running amok.

Unless the members of anything value what they have created, the value will diminish.

Now the question is, do you really value this forum? I do. And I've made an effort to behave myself. Many times I've wanted to say things that were less than cordial. Mods are needed only when I can't contain myself and behave in a mature fashion.

Well, that may just be a bunch of typing, or it may have gotten a message across.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #189
198. i have been on other forums like that, but there was a respect thing going on. du is big. and it
is a target for many that sole purpose is to disrupt. to insult and hurt and flamebait. there is an element in du that are not on other forums because of its size and frankly, what appears to be a jealously. and is used to cause problems.

i think this forum has to be run a little differently from other forums.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #198
212. The other forum is just as big.
And my other point was that this is universal. In fact that was what I mainly want to get across. I'm not advocating anarchy. But what is wrong with both the forums and our societies is that we have lost member participation. One reason is size. But that is only because of the sense of anonymity. And that can be overcome by a high, mature level of participation.

There are only so many police. I can rob a store and maybe get away. Take cell phone cameras, for example. In lieu of quality membership participation in a society, regardless of police or not, people are now realizing they may be on film. We may very well see a decrease in crimes for that very reason.

The reason a small group works well is that there is no anonymity. It's the ability and willingness to call people on their unacceptable behavior that will preserve the quality of the group.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #189
222. What seabeyond says above, and also: is that other forum primarily political?
As seabeyond says, DU may be a target - and I would say that's because it's political and partisan. There are plenty of right-wingers who would love to disrupt a left wing site until it becomes unusable. It's already big enough, and well known enough, to attract plenty of trolls. And less moderation would certainly show up in the area of LGBT - the RW has loads of bigots who want to hurt LGBT people, as well as stop any attempt at discussion or organising.

I think a lot of the 'hard feelings' that Skinner refers to in the OP can be summarised as: many LGBT members see a few DUers as homophobes, and regard their posts on LGBT topics as trolling, and alert on them. The mods have sometimes not agreed, and let the posts stand; a few members have then accused the DUers in public of trolling and attacked them, and the mods have then deleted those attacks. If this continues long enough, the LGBT members run the risk of being banned for consistent personal attacks.

The problem is that the mods and some LGBT members can disagree on what is homophobic or trolling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #222
254. So what is the problem?
When one says "hurt", did the trolls bring bats and hit them? No. I still stand with what I said about members taking action on their own. It soon becomes visible just who is a troll and who isn't. If someone has thin skin, and doesn't want to be called a fag, then that's their issue. It's no different in that other forum. People come their and try to bring the place down in quality. And it is like a bolt of lightening how they are struck down.

And there's another problem with having threads deleted. No one ever sees the dirt. I've had a thread deleted on me recently. I came back the next day, and it was gone. No explanation. No evidence. Let it stand as a testament to the troll. What is this hiding bullshit? It's no different than not being able to say "fuck" on radio or tv in this country. Although that is changing. It's artificial. It creates an environment that is contrary to the very thing I'm trying to describe.

Now I'm not saying seatbelts are not needed. That's related to mass times velocity. What we're discussing here is social. And hurt isn't really hurt. It is if the recipient takes it on as hurt. And that, no mod can help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #254
275. I'm not sure what you mean by 'struck down', then
If you just mean they are insulted, and the vast majority of members agree they are trolls and worthless, then they'll say 'so what?' and continue disrupting. If a site gets a reputation for endless shouting matches full of insults and lies, then people won't bother with it. If 'struck down' means 'banned, temporarily or permanently, by the members', then it's a question of how to reconfigure the forum to allow that (Skinner drops hints that DU3 will move in this direction, somehow, but it's been in the future for a long time ...).

Yes, people do feel some insults, when they are bad. Most people can feel hurt by an insult, if it's severe enough.

When you say "what we're discussing here is social", I don't think you're right. This is a political website, and it attracts people not for social reasons, but for political argument. And there are enough RWers on the web who would be happy to pose as Democrats and then put significant effort into disrupting this site by turning it into non-stop personal arguments. You can look at the comments sections of some blogs and see they've become worthless because of the arguing - you can't find the decent discussion hidden inside it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #275
304. Struck down means exposed through the group
Trolls show up, and are immediately given a reprimand by those members in the forum who have the skills to do so. It's those very abilities and skills that stem from what I call mature. I see someone was offended by my post here. I consider it weakness to not be able to handle the truth. The truth isn't all pc discussion. Bill Hicks was anything but pc, and yet he was one of the great comedic minds.

By social, I really meant that this is not physical. It is not physical hurt that we encounter on the forums. The only reason mods are needed is to do the work the forum members are unable or unwilling to do.

All I know is I see this in action, working. It's very clear to me when I see how well maintained that other forum is without some group of mods policing activities.

I have to ask, just how is the censorship of several words from our airwaves making this a better country? I argue it has made it worse.

In a way I can see what I'm saying here as a kind of conservative argument. It could be said that we don't need police in a real society if citizens would only take care of things themselves. But that is a physical world. And I am arguing that every single attempt at censorship that I've seen is only a means of protecting someone who has something to hide, or has a weakness. Don't tell the kids I had an affair. The kids should know. The truth is always important. There is no such thing as children. But adults can pretend that they're grown up. I find it nearly impossible to express myself on this subject. I don't have the consciousness that I'm trying to discuss. I see it, but I myself don't really have it fully yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #304
628. To most trolls here, a reprimand is just an indication they have succeeded
I thought that by 'social', you meant that the forum consisted of people that want to be 'social', ie generally friendly to each other (even if they occasionally have major disagreements about certain subjects). But DU is a forum that doesn't just attract people of a like mind; it's widely known, and despised both on right wing forums (such as Free Republic) and 'splinter' forums of groups who have some things in common, but who disagree with DU violently on some topics (Israel, socialism, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama ...) which have some members who were DUers but got banned after they became too disruptive. There's a reservoir of people who would like to come here and make normal discussion or argument next to impossible. For them, mods are pretty much the only solution - there needs to be a way of banning people. If you want to see how it can end up, try reading the comments on The Guardian 'Comment Is Free' commentary pages - although it's a left wing paper, they're full of right wingers, and not worth wading through the idiotic replies to get any thoughtful comments - and they are moderated as well (but comments are not deleted just for being right wing).

As far as language goes - DU is pretty liberal with 'neutral' language ('fuck' is not a problem, for instance, as long as it's not aimed at a person, while it would get deleted on some forums). It does have rules about language that imply groups with less power are somehow inferior; this is a fairly standard liberal stance, to protect those who have been getting a bad deal in society. The thing is that the restrictions are not really a problem - I can express strong hatred of any public figure with a wide vocabulary here, without using words that DU deems unacceptable. I am, after all, typing, not speaking, and it's not much of a problem for me to read it before hitting 'post message' and think if I'm unfairly denigrating some group with my language - especially an underdog. The 'censorship' of 'cunt' or 'nigger' is way, way down on my list of priorities - these are not words I need to use. I'm more concerned that you have to type several characters to get a decent formatting of a quote on DU, really.

I wouldn't say your argument is 'conservative' (many conservatives are in favour of greater censorship of words), but you might call it 'libertarian' rather than 'liberal'. Saying some words are unacceptable isn't because people have something to hide, and, if it's a weakness, then it's a typical human weakness - there's only so much hatred anyone can take against them, and, for some groups, they get enough of it elsewhere that they don't want it added to at DU, where they hope for consideration. I don't think that the DU rules on language hide any truth - but they do try to get people to avoid casual (emotional) hurt or dismissal of some groups that suffer it in other arenas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #628
665. Excellent comments.
You can probably tell that I am highly impressed with how we have retained the high quality of that other forum. I spend time on a bicycle forum, and now that I have just read your reply I realize that I was initially shocked when I discovered that not all cyclists are liberals. And the forum has perhaps a quarter of it's members being conservatives. And I found it irritating that discussion would often devolve due to political differences. I do see now how that forum, and DU, benefit from the act of moderating.

I still feel that moderation of some behavior only suppresses it. It's still there, but not expressed the way it would be under non moderated conditions.

We're all in different stages of what can be called maturity. I do dislike that term. I honestly feel the more mature one is the more infantile they can behave, and still retain respect. It's something very few people can even see. It takes a high degree of trust and understanding for it to happen properly. I noticed this first through music. I was a classically trained musician. Then I moved on to jazz. If I talk with musicians I used to play with now, they are still in the same place they were 30 years ago. I love Art Tatum, Art Blakey, Miles, Coltrane, but continued to grow. It looks to them like I've gone backwards, because I like the Ass Baboons of Venus, and the Melvins, and a huge volume of music that came along in the last 30 years. I still love Freddie Hubbard. I just expanded my horizons. I mention this because it has to do with acceptability. I'm irked by posts many times. But I'm learning to look at why I feel disturbed by it rather than to condemn the one who seemed to cause it. I think this is at the heart of a lot of what we're discussing here. It may help ease conversation on the forum to have this moderation to eliminate the difficult replies, but ultimately I don't think it serves our purpose. I know we've had this discussion on the forum regarding letting right wingers freely infiltrate. So I'm just repeating what has been hashed out already. But in all honesty I think we need to interface with the opponent in order to facilitate change. But that would require civility that I doubt many people have under the circumstances.

I don't know. I just envision a world that works. And I see one that is dysfunctional. It could be such a wonderful world. I must be naive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #189
288. I disagree completely with your defintion of mature.
But I'm happy that you found a place where you can say cunt and nigger.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #288
314. The mods will protect you.
I don't believe in censorship. When I said the word context, I meant that it is not the content of the discusssion, but the context. And this is exactly why an African American can use the word nigger, and have it be ok, yet a racist using the word is extremely offensive.

I'd say more, but I have the feeling you had no interest in this other than to try and inflame the conversation due to your being offended by the words themselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #314
344. I'm grateful to you for not saying more.
I've heard quite enough, thanks. And BTW, using Bill Hicks as your God of PC has no effect on me, I can't stand the guy. Have a nice day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #314
866. You're exactly right . . . who says it makes all the difference in the world.
I think most people know this intuitively, but some here feel the need to show their ideological purity by showing that YOU are impure.

They want to demean you until you apologize, and then they gloat.

It's an ugly motivation . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #288
388. lol bunny
sometimes

you just tickle me so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
195. Maybe it's time to start banning blatant homophobes. Or at least stop making them moderators.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 11:39 AM by LeftyMom
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LaurenG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #195
350. Hey!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wetzelbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #195
463. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #195
510. +
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RetroLounge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #195
651. + 100
:applause:

RL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #195
674. OK. Gloves off. Name the homophobic moderators and provide evidence
I'm bisexual. I consider myself an equal-opportunity mod. I hate everybody.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #674
699. Sure. Give me a couple of hours to dig up links. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #674
841. A few of the worst offenders showed up on this thread.
Hell, they're doing the STFU homos routine on this thread. I appreciate their making my life easy, and I'll go back to baseball and tacos now.

If Rasputin doesn't show up and make a gigantic asshole of himself (I'm sure he will, he can't help himself) feel free to look up the flypaper thread he posted to start the gay purge. I can't, of course, since the whole mess was deleted once it proved embarrassing and after enough uppity 'mos and allies took the bait.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #195
739. Well hell, this POS thread just got a little bit better.
Hi, LeftyMom. :hi: LTNS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #739
844. .
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #195
890. I'm just gonna stand here, behind her in agreement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #890
898. Thank you love.
Your support, as always, means the world to me. :hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #898
903. .
The Mutant abides.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #898
1121. OMG get a room!!!!!
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:56 AM
Response to Reply #195
1684. This thread is meaningless without discussions re biased MODS ... and more MOD supervision
-- MODS who are pro-human rights across the board --

and this includes feminism -- and racism -- whatever --

the bullying has to be watched and dealt with --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
196. The problem is, it's impossible to be 100% supportive of Obama *and* 100% supportive of equal rights
since Obama has been a disgrace on gay rights. Some of the conflict appears to originate with some DUers' reluctance to acknowledge this. I actually believed that Obama would suspend implementation of DADT by executive order on his first day in office, for example. I guess was a little naive. And I would like to believe that in his hear of hearts Obama supports marriage equality, but is too much of a coward to admit it.

Hopefully Obama's views will continue to "evolve" in the right direction; perhaps after his re-election he will acquire more political courage on these issues. If he does not, history will look upon him very unkindly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #196
206. This is one of the huge problems
Not JUST Obama though- Many Dems do not support equality, only "partial equality". It's very hard to feel as though you have to just eat it and sit down and shut up because they are Democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #196
231. This is the kind of hyperbole that pisses me off
as someone who supported Obama in the primaries, still supports Obama today, and is T--so I know what it's like to be disregarded by people "in my community," which is why I nearly never speak about LGBT issues.

Yes, it is true that it's impossible to be 100% supportive of Obama and 100% supportive of equal rights (or of human rights, or of search and seizure laws, etc)--that's entirely true. But it's not true IMO--and it adds to the rancor--by saying that he's a "disgrace" on "gay rights" (no mention of trans rights there--who'd have thunk it?). He hasn't done nearly enough, but he has done far more than any other president. That might be damning with faint praise, but in terms of the institution of the Presidency, it's not terrible. I have seen people say they'd give him an F on LGBT rights, which is just absurd. Is he as good as Tammy Baldwin might be? No, but neither is Barney Frank.

BTW, I also believe that Obama is too much of a coward for now to admit that he supports marriage equality.

And I believe that the list needs to be retired, but some of the histrionics I saw yesterday (on both sides) that led to the list being posted and the post-posting reaction were an embarrassment.

I just want to repost something ruggerson posted yesterday because I found it both insightful and fair:

"Obama has listened, learned and acted

The abrupt reversal on the Smelt brief being a prime example of how he heard LGBT legal activists, invited them into the process and then changed course with their guidance and counsel. He has a long way to go on marriage equality, but I have no doubt he will arrive there one day. And,, when he does, it will be because of his willingness to listen and evolve and the tenacity of the LGBT community which has never stopped holding his feet to the fire.

The repeal of DADT was another example of positive choreography, this time with some help from members of Congress whoo refused to let the timetable get pushed into 2011. While not a perfect end result (stripping out the anti discrimination language may come back to haunt us), it is real, concrete progress.

Obama deserves the support in 2012 of gay American families across the country who care about their legal rights, if for no other reason than they should be hoping that there is a President Obama making USSC appointments for the next four years, and not the horrifying alternative."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boston bean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #231
237. The problem is not about support for Obama, it is about support for equal rights.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 12:13 PM by boston bean
The issue as I see it, is that people who say they believe in LGBT rights are not.

When you get down to the nub of it, there are some who would sell LGBT rights down the river so Obama doesn't look bad politically, or to quell criticism of him on any front..

It is a political calculation for some on this board, and it makes me sick, and it's abhorrent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #237
244. We agree that some would sell LGBT rights down the river for Obama's sake
but the problem has become, I think, that there's such an entrenchment on both sides now--Obama is either 100% right or he's a disgrace on "gay rights"--that it doesn't leave room for many people to enter the gray area that's more or less correct.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boston bean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #244
256. There is a lot of what I describe going on here on DU. Those people who
make political calculations on the backs of people with less rights, need to go.

They do not belong on this website.

That is the issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #256
265. There is some, just as there was some blaming of African Americans
and/or Latinos after the passage of h8 in CA. But it's not the norm, really, and it indicates to me that we need greater dialogue, fewer entrenched positions, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boston bean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #265
268. I think the point would probably be echoed by most LGBTers.
So, not sure how out of the norm it is on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ikonoklast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #256
276. Let me pose a hypothetical question to you:
Let's say the next Republican nominee for president fully supports LGBT rights in all forms, right down to marraige equality, but was a total bust on all other fronts, cutting taxes for the wealthy and corporations, killing S.S. and Medicare, cutting social programs for the poor, etc., and was running against Mr. Obama.

How would you vote?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boston bean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #276
293. I'd keel over dead and wouldn't be around to vote.
This is never going to happen.

LGBT will win their rights through long hard fought battles. With a lot of pushing and prodding and criticism and changing of hearts and minds.

Criticizing those in power is an effective way of doing the above. Trying to squelch their voice to defend a president who is still "evolving" on gay rights, is wrong.

That is the point I am trying to make. I hope you can get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ikonoklast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #293
303. That was evasive.
It was called a 'hypothetical' question for a reason.

If you don't want to answer it, just say so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boston bean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #303
310. I see you still missed my point. go back and read again. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ikonoklast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #310
315. Oh, no, I got your point precisely.
But I didn't get an answer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boston bean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #315
329. There is no answer to your question.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 01:31 PM by boston bean
Trying to get me to say that I would support someone who opposes many of the issues I hold dear by trying to use LGBT rights as a cudgel, is probably as low as one could go.

Think I know about as much as I would like to know about you on this.

Edit to add, Again, the point of my comment was to illustrate that it is not helpful to tell people who are fighting for equal rights to shut up, because Obama looks like a homophobe in regards to full LGBT rights.

It wasn't to illustrate that we (us who allegedly have many of the same political principles) should never care about any other issue. I think since we all agree in LGBT rights, we can agree that they can use any legal means possible to attain their equal rights. Including criticizing a democratic president, no matter how uncomfortable, for whatever reason, it makes some. The only reason i can think of that someone (like you)would want the fight to subside is for political expediency. that makes me sick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #276
295. Thats not a hypothetical, it's an impossibility and you know it.
Shame on you for even trying it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ikonoklast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #295
300. Not really true.
I have seen interest professed by some in the potential of Gary Johnson (R) NM, as a presidential candidate.

Greenwald, for one, mentioned him in passing.


Not an impossibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #300
305. A Republican who supports gay rights *cannot* win the primary (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ikonoklast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #305
316. And a Black Man will never be President in this country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #316
319. I never heard anyone claim that (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ikonoklast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #319
326. But I have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #326
339. Is it nice?
To be a legend in your own mind?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #305
1324. A union leader cannot be a republican president.
And yet...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #276
489. self delete
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 03:55 PM by LanternWaste
Self delete
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #276
548. Really?
I'd vote for the pro-LGBT candidate, whoever it was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ikonoklast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #548
1295. The only honest answer in that entire exchange.
Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 02:04 AM
Response to Reply #276
1687. You're making the insulting suggestion again that those who want to move to the LEFT ...
actually want to move to the right -- !!

No -- dissatisfaction with Obama being on the right -- on the Koch Bros right --

means that we are fighting to move to the left -- not the right!

Therefore if Obama insists on playing one party rule with the Repugs --

i.e., -- "Bipartisanship is simply another way of saying one party rule" --

all the way to totally knocking over the New Deal -- initiating three new harmful

trade agreements -- and unapologetic for his trampling of MEDICARE FOR ALL --

then we need to move on to the tons of democrats outside of the party who can run

on a Dem ticket -- democrats who are not pre-bribed and pre-owned by Koch Bros and

the DLC --

Sen. Bernie Sanders is a better democrat than most Democrats --

and Tom Hayden would make a great anti-war second as a VP --

Lots of things to do other than the insanity of continuing to vote for the "lesser

of evils" -- and when you get down to the Koch Bros. you're sure talking about evil.


Clinton brought the Koch Bros in -- technically he may have been our first Koch Bros

president -- Gore could have been the second -- !!

Hillary Clinton is still part of Koch/DLC leadership --

And we've just had three years of Koch Bros/DLC Rahm Emmanuel in the White House!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:58 AM
Response to Reply #256
1686. +1000% --- exactly -- K/R for your post --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #231
272. If we had a President who opposed interracial marriage, I would call that a "disgrace".
So I am not going to call Obama's position on gay marriage anything other than a "disgrace".

Just imagine; Obama making a speech in which he admits he was wrong, apologizes for his previous stance and comes out full force in favor of equal rights. A redemptive event which would also help hugely in resolving some of the conflicts on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #272
283. You tried this line with me before. And you didn't call his position on marriage a ":disgrace"
you called his position on "gay rights" a disgrace (as a TS, I'm sorry I don't even merit a mention in your post, BTW). And on "gay rights" broadly defined--and I don't even have the temerity to expect him to worry about my rights when they don't merit mention from someone in "my own community"--he is simultaneously disappointing and the best President we've had.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #283
302. Isn't marriage a significant "right"?
If the President opposed interracial marriage would you quibble about whether his position on racial equality, broadly defined, was a "disgrace", or if it was only his position on interracial marriage that was disgraceful?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #302
323. It is one, but there are others. So--you have now narrowed the definition?
As I have said, the President's position on "gay rights" is both disappointing and the best we have yet had. He can do better and I, for one, intend to continue holding his feet to the fire, although I will continue advocating for LGBT rights, not "gay rights" exclusively.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #323
334. BTW when I say "gay rights" I include LGBTQI etc. It's just too many letters to remember (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #334
357. I appreciate that, but I think you know
transpeople are marginalized enough within the "LGBT community" that erasing them when talking about rights sort of looks like a continuation of that. I mean, when we had Barney Frank trying to move ahead with a non-transinclusive ENDA...a girl can get a complex.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchtv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #357
1398. I like what you're saying TishLA
No ONE gets left behind this time
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #1398
1399. +++++++++++++++++++++++!!!! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 02:09 AM
Response to Reply #283
1688. Obama is against gay marriage! Shameful; especially when based on male-supremacist religion -- !!!
which he also supports -- !!


:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phleshdef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #272
661. Who gives a shit about a stupid acknowledgement? Obama will never stand in the way of gay marriage.
He will never sign a federal amendment banning gay marriage. He has never tried to get in the way of any state passing laws to allow it. He has done nothing in regards to gay rights issue that isn't 100% positive in the direction things should go at the federal level.

It seems you care more about him throwing away his archaic religious beliefs so you can get some lip service from him on the issue of gay marriage than you actually care about his support for the right policies and his unwillingness to oppose the right policies.

He has said from day one that he believes that states should be able to legalize gay marriage. At the end of the day, thats really the only thing that matters. Him renouncing his religious beliefs on the matter of marriage isn't gonna do a damn thing for you other than massage your feelings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #661
683. "I believe that marriage is between two people of the same race".
Any problem with this statement?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phleshdef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #683
707. In the year 2011, yea. If the year was early 1900s or earlier, no.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 07:22 PM by phleshdef
First of all, I believe marriage is a total crock of shit in the first place, and yes, I'm married. But my commitment was defined and solid years before we ever spoke any vows. The fucking piece of paper we filed at the courthouse some years later and the 15 minute ceremony we had on the same day really don't mean anything to me at all. Its all for show and tax credits, nothing more.

Secondly, this country is just now coming into its own as a gay rights friendly country. The ice really didn't start to break on that until the mid 90s. I thank Hollywood for that, but thats a different topic altogether. I don't expect a 50 year old man who was raised in a country that treated homosexuality as a degenerative mental condition for several decades to suddenly throw down everything a good number of us were raised to believe and claim that he rejects central rules of his own religion as far as marriage is defined. I was able to do that about 10 years ago, but I'm still fairly young and my teenage years were spent being exposed to MTV in the mid 90s. That probably made it a lot easier for me.

People Obama's age didn't have that luxury. I expect him to be open minded about it yes, and he is to a degree higher than his predecessors. But some prejudices are indeed hard to get over, especially if you believe in a magical sky faerie that wrote this magical book that told you it was wrong. I have sympathy for that kind of inner struggle with moral questions, because I had to deal with the same struggle. It basically took rejecting the religion I was raised to believe in order to let go of those prejudices. You can't expect everyone to be able to just up and do that. The same goes with interracial marriage. A lot of people in this country were raised to believe that blacks were a subhuman species that were not to be treated as equals among whites. When that idea is pounded into you from a young age, its hard to get over it when everyone else around you was taught the same exact thing. It took a long time for this country to grow up enough on the issue of wrongly perceived racial superiority and the lack of racial equality for the ice to finally break on that. We now have a generation or 2 of adults who were not widely taught to see African Americans that way and lo and behold, we have a black President.

In either event, to see social changes of this nature take place, the ice has to break first. Then people have to be born and raised in an environment where they aren't told to believe these awful things that a majority of those in the earlier generations were taught. Then these people have to grow up and become leaders. When that happens, you start to see real progress occur towards defeating that kind of prejudice. There is always a process we seem to go through and we are going through it right now as far as gay rights are concerned. I'm not really concerned at all about gay people having equal rights because I know without a doubt that they are going to have them and they are going to have them very soon. But we aren't all the way there yet as a society. Thats just how this stuff tends to work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #707
750. So you *expect* 50 year olds to be bigoted, because bigotry was drummed into them at an early age.
I'm around 50 and my father derided blacks as "niggers" when I was a child. So should I get a pass if I was a racist today, which I am not? I don't think so, and Obama should not get a free pass for his bigotry either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phleshdef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #750
908. No, but its a problem with his personal beliefs on marriage from a religious standpoint
...and it doesn't reflect at all in his view from a legal standpoint. From a legal standpoint, he believes states should be able to regulate marriages, as states do, and that they should be able to allow gay marriage if they want to. From a legal standpoint, the only standpoint that should matter, he is not anti-gay marriage. I don't care what his religious beliefs are as long as he isn't trying to use them as a basis for what laws should be. He isn't. So its irrelevant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #908
912. Ah. "States Rights". That sounds strangely familiar..... (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phleshdef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #912
949. Yea, sounds just like how fucking marriage laws work for straight people!
States have always had an enormous amount of power over marriage recognition. Whether it be how young you can be to get married, if parent consent is required for those under 18, whether or not 2 cousins can marry, how long you can be married and still get an anullment, all kinds of different things.

You are a fool to act like me pointing that out is somehow embracing a right wing idea (which is what your smarmy ass little non response of a comment insinuated, and you fucking know it, so don't attempt to lie about it with your next response). Marriage is not an issue of commerce or national security, its not something defined by the constitution. And it should remain as such.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillParkinson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 05:46 AM
Response to Reply #949
1598. States have always had an enormous amount of power over marriage recognition...
Edited on Sat Jun-18-11 05:48 AM by WillParkinson
Really? How many get to vote on different types of marriage? I don't recall ever being allowed to vote on interracial marriage, intergenerational marriage, marriage for the elderly, etc.

When we start to vote on everyone's rights THEN perhaps we can discuss things like this.

Please don't trot out state rights here. Interracial marriage was NOT won because all the states got to make up their own minds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #707
1366. The thing is, a Democratic President of the United States in the year 2011, arguably
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 09:17 PM by Zorra
the "leader of the free world" - a person as intelligent and aware as President Obama appears to be - should be many light years ahead of the constipated social consciousness you are portraying him as exhibiting with regard to human rights.

While I can see the truth of what you are saying if what you are saying is applied to "Joe Sixpack", this should not, IMO, be true for a Dem POTUS today.

That said, I think your post was, otherwise, very insightful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #231
534. Well, will Obama apologize for the DOMA argument
comparing our marriages to pedophilia and incest? Is he big enough to admit that THAT was wrong if nothing else?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #534
545. someone should apologize for it
If you think it should be him, I'm OK with that, but I agree with those who, at the time, said that it was impossible to pin the wording on him. Obviously it was the fault of someone in DoJ, which is, of course, under his purview.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #534
1326. And again, this strawman.
Repeating a falsehood doesn't make it true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #231
1444. ^ +1000 ^
Tisha, I agree with you. The big fat gay issue will ultimately be decided in SCOTUS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #196
232. I have a problem with anyone being 100% supportive of Obama....
or any other public servant for that matter. No one is going to represent my perspective and my priorities completely...except me.

I do understand what you are saying and agree for the most part. I'm not sure I'd say he's been a disgrace, but he sure has hell has been disappointing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #196
260. Personally, I think it's impossible to support anyone 100%.
I can't even imagine who such a person would be. As a generalist, I support general trends more than individual candidates. Since no individual can actually make the needed changes in almost any area, it is a trend that needs to be supported. If Obama, for example, doesn't fully support something, that does not mean that I'm opposed to Obama. Someone else might not fully support something else, and it's a damn sure thing that the person elected from the other party won't support any of the things I support.

This is the dilemma when dealing with governing a nation that is almost equally divided on many, many issues. I long ago gave up hoping for elected officials who agreed with me on everything. I've not met one yet. So, my support is always conditional and general. I support a more progressive candidate rather than a less progressive one in the continuum that is politics. I support only candidates who have the potential to be elected, in whatever place they're running. To do otherwise would be a waste of time.

It's trends toward progress that I support, simply because I know that progress is not going to ever be complete or immediate. It never has been, and I don't expect it ever to be in a place like the USA. I don't see how it can be.

So, I support President Obama, even though he doesn't 100% support everything I believe should happen. He was electable and generally supports what I support. His opponent supported almost nothing of what I support. Lesser of two evils? Not really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #260
281. One can only support another person 100% on the basis of personality.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 12:52 PM by QC
Anyone who thinks in terms of issues is going to have areas of agreement and disagreement.

Sadly, we have a small but very loud and belligerent faction here that thinks of the president the way little girls think of Justin Bieber.

For some strange reason, they enjoy some kind of special protection that enables them to stalk, bully, and harass other members with impunity. They know that they are bulleptroof (I have seen some actually taunt people by telling them to go ahead and alert and see what happens) and they take full advantage of their protected status.

Most of the ugliness here is the work of no more than a dozen or so of these people. Take away their Kevlar and this place will become reasonably civil overnight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #281
299. You could be right. I'm here on my own and don't subscribe
to any particular group of other DUers. Every post I make is my own. I know next to nothing about how DU is administered or moderated, frankly. I'm not really that interested.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carolinayellowdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:19 AM
Response to Reply #281
972. Skinner, if you take only one post to heart THIS IS THE ONE
Before Obama was elected, we were all on the side of the powerless against the powerful. Bullying the powerless on behalf of the powerful was what Republicans did. But in the last few years, a smallish gang of bullies has been allowed to run wild here doing precisely that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #281
1069. I think we need to have a more open discussion about professional posters on DU.
Advertisements should be clearly labeled as such.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carolinayellowdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #1069
1245. Pugnacious persistent defenders of entrenched interests
make it seem as if there is something in it for them to be here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 02:13 AM
Response to Reply #1069
1689. Skinner needs to be making rules based on what members need -- not what
a few noisy right wingers here need --

Also it is obvious the homosexual community here needs more protection --

more MODS and more MODS who support equality for all --

and any biased MODS moved out --

Why should any MOD serve more than once?

We could also do the MOD thing by lottery?

DU'ers need more involvement in the RULES and other decision making here --

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #281
1169. OK, name names.
I'm not aware of any "bulletproof" members with "special protection". I've seen moderators get modded. I've alerted on Skinner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 02:15 AM
Response to Reply #1169
1690. Ask for the poster to send the names to Skinner -- that's all that's required ....
You obviously know that the names cannot be openly stated here --

but we have biased MODS -- and we need a change in that system --

homosexuals also need more watching MODS -- MODS who are interested

in human rights -- and who support equalit for all!

DU'ers need more imput into rules here -- the pot is boiling over and

if there is anything to be left of this website -- all of this has to

be opened up --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
204. Having a conversation.
As a hetero I learned the hard way AND the gentle way to speak about and learn these issues. This is directed mainly to those who continue to harass in every thread about LGBT issues but it is important for those of us who are hetero to remind ourselves of this, I do every time I post or speak and even then don't get it right all the time.

As a hetero we must learn how to speak about these issues. Speaking only for oneself can often sound very harmful, I have lost several friends here who I know were supportive but never thought before they spoke then they argued about it rather than learning that how they said it was not supportive but harmful. I used to do that and it was quite painful all around. Think it out before you type it, seek your own personal bias (this can be very hard) and try to read it from the perspective of those you are speaking to (even harder). If you truly do not understand then say so and ask for guidance and then don't start an argument if you don't get the answer you were looking for. Think about what they said. If you do not already come from the idea of full support of their civil rights please step back and let yourself think or at least be respectful of the answer you get. Continue to think about it.

This is a huge problem here and it has been very hurtful and harmful. No one seeking equality in this country should ever be told to wait or that their issues are "pet" issues. This is their life not an issue.

I am no expert but have done the time to at least have a head start on some who may be just coming to this. I am sick to death of the pain caused to LGBT friends. We all need to remember that this is life and death to a community of our friends, fellow citizens who deserve the same rights we all have. Life and death, comfort or fear, happiness or sorrow. The ability to tell their work friends about their family, to attend the PTA at the school together, to walk down the street together without fear of comment or pain. These are but a few of the things they have to contend with every single day of their lives while we take them for granted because we have them.....because we breathe. Think about that, because we are in this country we simply never have to worry about those things, because we wake up and breathe.

And please FOR GODS SAKE stop posting the accomplishments of the Obama administration on LGBT issues. Believe me when I tell you that every single person here is grateful for any step that is positive but these are really only tiny things that can seem like nothing more than a pat on the head when constitutionally there should never BE a problem. It is simply the basis of everything in this country. Equality. Just freaking do it and stop pussy footing around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #204
209. Thank you- I wish I could put my thoughts in writing as well as you have
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #209
216. I had to write what I felt first
then take out the names and the naughty bits and the anger. Then I took a couple of hours to think about it then I posted it. I do not do this easily. Thank you, I am always unsure of my writing. I appreciate this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TriMera Donating Member (885 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #204
215. +1,000,000. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #204
228. Thank you for understanding why Obama's "accomplishments" don't seem so great
to the LGBT community and for not accusing us of saying he's done "nothing" for the LGBT community. I keep seeing that posted in this thread and I keep replying that I've yet to see that posted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #228
248. Every little step is helpful,
but if only a little step it is also painful. Every little step fires up the bigots. Why not just do it and get it done? If that had happened right away it would be over by now and the scareds would have seen that a couple of guys kissing on the street did not cause the earth to open and swallow everyone up. Seriously! Why are we waiting? Political expediency or bigotry? Neither recommend a politician to me.

Still, every little step allows you more room to breathe and another issue to use as a step to the next. You all know it, many of the rest of us know it but there are those who think that should be enough. Maybe one tiny thing a year? Would that keep you all happy? (followed by eye rolls and heavy sighs)

The answer to that is a resounding NO. Still, it is better than before with each little step but to me it seems almost as insulting as doing nothing.

*This is just my little opinion. I am not speaking for the LGBT community here. I am just one pissed off middle American who does not get why this is even a fucking issue in the land of the free, home of the brave.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #248
257. What you write makes a lot of sense
If they'd just hurry up and get it over with, it becomes a non-issue, i.e. is no longer a wedge issue that our opponents can use against us. I mean, they could threaten to repeal laws and such but they do that with Roe v. Wade too but this is the closest we've come to having choice eroded but so far only on a state level.

Rip off the friggin' band-aid already. I was really frustrated when DOMA and ENDA weren't addressed in his first 2 years when we had the majority in the House and Congress. It was the perfect storm to get things done and, if he wins reelection, would have given the nation a good long time to get used to the social changes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #257
259. Exactly.
:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Still Sensible Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #257
379. Wedge issues are the moneymakers of the right
It's the same reason that abortion is a constant lightning rod issue 37 years after Rowe. The right wing politicians and the fundamentalist churches raise tremendous amounts of money by firing people up over abortion and LGBT rights. The right wing has always used fear to get donations and get out the vote.

Even when LGBT rights are "settled law" as many believe Rowe has been for more than a generation, these knuckle draggers will still be raising copious amounts of money from the ignorant that want to turn back the clock.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #379
423. That is very true.
LOL, I just accidentally deleted my answer to you. Here is a shorter version :)

I hope love wins out for LGBT equality. It will soften a lot of people. When they realize they are not getting door to door salespeople with pamphlets on the "gay lifestyle" and how you can join or that there won't be streets lined with LGBT people in various stages of having sex and that nothing, NOTHING is being "flaunted" in their faces and their children are safe they will relax for the most part. Happens all this time when people realize those very nice neighbors are actually a gay couple. They wake up and realize that although they "don't approve" <---why do they always use that phrase?, they like the people a lot and can't see treating them badly or unequally.

Abortion is about control of women, a time honored tradition. Oh yes, and see that adorable tiny baby? Can you imagine it being aborted? I am not certain that the learning material here is as easily taken by many. Don't know :shrug:

I am not saying one is easier than the other to get done but that hopefully people can soften to family and love and good, decent people. Harder to do when the woman is so horrible that she could do that to her own baby. Does this make sense? I want them both legal but I guess my work is LGBT so I am not as knowledgeable about how the abortion issue can be solved, sadly I know how it is going.

Sorry, it is hard for me to put this down in words, it may not make a lot of sense. Not shorter either!

I guess much of both depend on how strong the religious right get in this country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy Vixen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #248
416. The bottom line is that Obama does not support LGBT rights on a personal level
He disapproves. He will not help, and has shown he has no intention of helping.

There, I said it.

It's unfortunate that he's not courageous enough to just admit it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #416
419. I actually think the opposite of him
Which to me is all the more disappointing. I think he supports full equality on a personal level but is pandering to his electorate and swing voters who don't personally approve.

It's unfortunate that he's not courageous enough to just admit it. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #419
428. I think you are wrong about this.
I agree with Missy Vixen. He has said, I believe, that he thinks marriage is between a man and a woman but then that is just one issue. I can't get past the Donnie McClukin choice and Rick Warren. Can't do it. I do not care that he was trying to be the president of everyone, and yes bigots do officially belong in the everyone group, he pandered to bigots. He fed them what they wanted and he raised them up as important people. That is not how you set your stance as and equality president nor is it the way to change people to your own way of thinking if he does indeed personally agree that there should be equality.

Opinions vary on this however and this is just mine. I just can't give him that benefit of the doubt after all this time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #428
462. I can more easily get past Warren or McClurkin than marriage equality
The Warren and McCkurkin stuff depressed me, but their presence is symbolic. I'm more interested in things like marriage equality passing, in DoMA being repealed, in trans-inclusive ENDA, in equitable immigration rights for LGBT spouses, etc., because the legislation effects people's lives in a direct way.

I may be crazy, but I do believe that his position thus far on marriage is simply a political gamble. I also think that's why he's prevaricating about it--saying his position is evolving or whatever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #462
713. Things that are 'symbolic' that are also other things:
The Confederate Flag. The Nazi Star. Piss Christ. A noose. A pink triangle. One song. A two minute prayer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #713
726. you'll notice I didn't say I approved of them
I said they meant less to me than a pro-LGBT legislative agenda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #726
1096. I do understand that. Absolutley.
I would never think you would approve of such things. If I implied that, apologies. I just wanted to chime in on symbols having great power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #713
1085. Thanks Bluenorthwest!
I should have answered that but got busy. Symbolic is everything, that is why it was so very wrong. It showed me that he talks a certain talk but is not unwilling to broadcast how he really feels in a covert kind of way. It was to some less apparent and easily interpreted any way you wanted to see it. I know that may be politic but unequal citizens should never be treated this way and it should not be allowed from the top down. If he really was that big strong advocate he could just as easily started politicking from the beginning and brought the equality we hoped for by now but he did not.

Yes there are many important things to deal with. Apparently your second class status is not enough of one of them for there to be more than a few little advancements. I find this appalling, absolutely appalling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:09 AM
Response to Reply #248
996. I agree with you completely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
supernova Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #204
251. Absolutely agreed
We don't have the language in the wider culture to talk coherently and without rancor. And we should.

Dear God! I want to punch the next person who throws around the "politically correct" dog whistle. It's just another way of saying "I like using discriminatory words and getting away with it because I know it pisses you off."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #251
267. Remember when politically correct
was for good things like not telling racist jokes or calling people names because of who they are? Boy did that ever get hijacked!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullwinkle428 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #204
255. Perhaps the best post in this thread so far.
Kudos from a fellow straight! :hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #255
269. Thanks!
:hug:

I don't know if there is one but I think it is high time a group of straight supporters got together. A new organization formed to back up and do the work and show people that it is OK. An add on maybe to local groups. I have been thinking a lot about that. People are afraid that others will think they are gay. Is that not the stupidest thing? I was told by my organization that it was important to let people know that I am straight because allies are needed and essential in the fight. I hated that because I never thought it was anyone's business. So I tell them now thank you but I am just a plain old straight lady.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #204
395. I've never really learned the gentle way to do anything.
Especially not politics.

When someone says Obama has done little or nothing, reasonable people can disagree, and the content of that disagreement will inavoidably be a list. Silence is consent. If the claim that he's done nothing can't be argued for fear of being insensitive, then there's no alternative but to support his opponent.

I think he's done too little about EVERY progressive goal, but I'm prepared to acknowledge the "war list" and the "civil liberties list" and the "economy list" as well as the "lgbt list". The lists themselves speak to the political reality that there are more than one front on the war on conservatism.

Obama's best contribution (arguably the only relevant one) to equal protection is appointing progressive judges. He doesn't get to do that if Romney is elected.

Of course I speak for myself. It is presumptuous and condescending to do otherwise.

The problems with lines in the sand is that you can't reach across it to bring people forward.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
211. My only question is this: What can I do?
I want to see gay marriage NOW

I want to see DADT thrown in the dustbin of history NOW

Tell me what to do and I'll do it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #211
218. Join your local LGBT organization.
You are straight correct? Join it, speak your desire to help and then listen as hard as you can. I figure it is their fight and I am with them so I say what I think so they have that side of things and then I do what they need done. :) Join up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #211
224. Join PFLAG.
http://community.pflag.org/page.aspx?pid=803
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #211
230. I can give you one tip for getting started.
And I mean this in absolutely no snarky way whatsoever.

Pay attention to language, seriously. There is no such thing as "gay marriage." Two people are either married or they are not. Consider using the phrase "marriage equality" instead.

If no one above has mentioned Human Rights Campaign, definitely look into their work as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #230
253. Language is for me the hardest part.
Once in the lexicon and repeated continuously it becomes very hard to unlearn it. That is a very good suggestion. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #230
291. OK
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #230
294. I have used the wrong language but apologized and corrected myself when pointed out to me
I'd suggest listening to others and self correcting when it is pointed out. I am just adding to what you are saying. It can be difficult to stop, think, and say "sorry" then change, easier to argue. But it will help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #294
1234. This is exactly what needs to happen.
No one has ever, well once maybe, been really hard on me when I screwed up something.

Perhaps that is because I know, as you do and as many do, that if your heart is in it you will learn and everyone knows when you are sincere, it is simply a correction meant to guide you. All it takes is genuine questioning but here it so often is a challenge. It becomes a huge offense and needs defending or our little egos take a beating and we would not want that.

You screw up because you don't know then just listen, learn and apologize. Your post is spot on. It is the crux of a lot of bad feeling when we let our egos throw it all into a fight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
225. With all due respect, I don't think getting yourself out of the way is the answer.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 12:12 PM by Starry Messenger
People do look to you for leadership, it's an inevitable side-effect of the dynamic created by a privately owned website. Creating a power vacuum where people are left to form their own opinion of how you would like them to behave probably leads to 75% of the problems here. Several people believe that this website is strictly for bringing forward all of the present aims of electing Democrats and they let nothing stand in the way of their energy behind that. Can't fault them for that, the site does say Democratic Underground. In this view, any criticism of the party or its elected members is branded as counter-productive and the person who does it is labeled an enemy/right-winger/leftbagger/etc.

But the person who is criticizing is also bringing forth the aim of discussing left-wing ideas, which I believe is also allowed in the rules, though I don't have the quote handy. There are several positions on issues that Democratic politicians hold that are not *materially* different than the right wing. We can speculate all we want on the possibility of their having good intentions, but at the end of the day, it is the decisions that they make that improve or don't improve the lives of the people who elected them that matters. Several people have *not* had their lives materially improved by decisions made by this Administration. Yes, things are shifting, but things that could have been done have been left undone or not communicated about in a clear and sensitive manner.

The greater burden of proof about this should *not* be on the people who are suffering the most from this. And in my opinion, the rules have been *structurally* enforced in a way that requires a small minority of already burdened people to make the case over and over again that their lives have not been materially altered. For their pains they have been called all kinds of names, which I don't need to list here. Those kinds of personal attacks can be removed, but the fact that a person is capable of using that kind of language on a second-class citizen and DU member who has fewer rights than them should make for a higher burden of proof on *them* that they are acting in a good faith manner in the future after having those kinds of attacks removed. That way, when they skirt the rules with passive-aggressive insinuations that go up to the line, the alerts would be given more scrutiny. Or, you could take my approach, which would be zero tolerance for abusing second-class citizens with bigoted insults or insinuations that they are closet racists or republicans because they have to defend their lives and existence everyday on this website and in their lives.

I also submit that it would be useful to reiterate to some folks here that criticism of a politician is not equivalent to a personal attack. Paying out personal insults directly on a DUer for something that they say that you don't like about a politician is not "even". I've seen a lot of "so there" type insults paid to gblt members here as a way to settle some imaginary score, when criticism is perceived as a personal attack by some straight members here. Being insulted by something a DUer says about your favorite politician *does not equal* personal oppression by that criticism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #225
243. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marcel Donating Member (61 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #225
465. +1
Great post and I totally agree with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
supernova Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
229. I support Equality 100%
I once saw a definition of marriage, possibly here on DU, that has stayed with me. I'm paraphrasing here because I've lost the original. For marriage, work and everything else. I once came across a definition of marriage, IIRC here at DU that has stayed with me. The content is along the lines of "marriage isn't two people looking at each other with love, so much as looking out on the world with the same eyes."

I think any one who finds someone to share his or her life with, to dream with, to laugh and cry with, it's one of the rarest beautiful things that can happen to a person. And if you want to solidify that blessing with a marriage, and all the legal ramifications that go with it, that should be the law of the land for everybody, gay or straight. I used to think that "civil unions" were the way to go for everybody, as in Europe. But like someone else above, I've come to realize the word "marriage" is codified in our family law language. It would be exponentially simpler to avoid innumerable little court battles to say that "marriage" applies to every couple, regardless of the couple, who wants one. It's none of the government's business how we set up our households.

As for people evolving, it does happen. My fiance, who self identifies as "straight white conservative guy," says there is no reason our friends who happen to be gay shouldn't be able to marry also. So people can change. I have never nagged him about his views, only shared my experiences in my life with my friends. He also attended his first Gay Pride parade last fall.

I've tried to stay out of the most egregious threads because it breaks my heart to see people who should be allies tearing each other apart. Not always successfully have I managed that. And I'm sorry. As a matter of general perspective I try to defer to others who have more expertise on a subject than I do. I can only offer agreement and support. And yes, I've been annoyed at "the list" myself, though not to the extent as some others. I do know that a one-note response chaffs if that's the only response. A broken record never wins any debates.

One more thing, about the timing arguments, as in "we have bigger things to think about. Ending the wars; health care, poverty .... " What a load of bull hockey. It's never the "right" time. There will never be some perfect time in the always distant future when we will totally have our nation's undivided attention; when it will be acceptable for our LBGT friends to fight for their (our) rights. It wasn't the right time for women to fight for suffrage at the turn of the last century either. It wasn't the right time for the civil rights protests in the 40s- 70s either. Now is always the right time. And I will be there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
233. Isn't it ironic? The one LGBT thread we can flame all we want....
and it's the most polite.

Might be good to post a similar thread in GDP, FWIW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #233
238. I always try to be polite when the discussion is serious.
It's the crazy shit that sends me over the deep end.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #233
264. +100.
Well said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #233
285. Though I do notice a few posters haven't chimed in yet.
And others aren't calling them out by name. Being polite. Ironic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #285
289. Yes, there are some very conspicuous absences.
I guess they are busy revising and expanding The List.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #289
298. What is "the list"? thanks.
not sure what you mean, get the gist but not the meaning.

I notice one has joined in, "insensitive assholes" and "perpetually put-up on victims"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #298
307. Yes, I saw her invaluable contribution to the discussion.
Don't worry about it. It's what she does. Just as other artists might work in oil or marble, her medium is empty, hateful snark.

The List refers to that list of Obama Admin. achievements in the area of LGBT equality that gets waved around a lot.

Such a list is in itself pretty innocuous and even useful, but the uses of that list, and the people who use it most, have made it something of a sensitive spot. There's a good discussion in the LGBT forum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #298
312. the list is the accomplishments re: LGBT issues paraded out by Obama supporters
when LGBT posters ask what he's done for LGBT rights. Its appearance always annoys LGBT DUers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #312
328. Ah, thank you. Not the list I thought you meant. My take on that list
I try to not engage in dichotomous thinking, esp about politics but mostly all the way across the board. Yes, President Obama has done some positive things in most areas but there is a long long long ways to go in most areas also.

While it is good to recognize what has been done, still it is necessary to recognize how much there is left. I tire of those who say either "there is more to do so ignore what has been done" or "some has been done so ignore how far there is still to go". I don't like lists being posted to try and prove either and can very easily see how infuriating it can be.

Posting a list to say "see, it isn't so bad" is not helpful because yes, it is so bad. Recognize what has been done, understand what hasn't and needs to be done. I hope that makes sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #328
337. I couldn't agree more
If people have to post the list, it might be good to also say, "and here's what I'd like to see him do" instead of letting the list stand by itself. But it's also important to recognize that he has some accomplishments with LGBT rights
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #312
341. The annoyance comes from the motives behind why it is posted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #341
346. I honestly don't know the motives
Sometimes, I sincerely believe it's to put a thumb in the eye. And sometimes, like yesterday, someone actually asked the question in a thread, so someone responded by posting it in a separate thread. Does that mean the poster who responded did it to put a thumb in the eye? I sincerely don't know--any more than I know whether the "what has he done for LGBT rights?" was a serious or a rhetorical question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchtv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #341
1410. I get rather annoyed being told
what I should be grateful for, many of those things on the list are fine, but the spirit of the presenters is suspect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #233
327. The most egregious offenders haven't shown up yet.
Just sayin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #327
420. And they probably won't. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #327
646. That would probably explain why this has been a pretty polite thread, all in all. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #327
1067. If this thread had been posted on GDP they would.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #233
408. Well our gay friends
Aren't a bunch of flamers, then eh?

:P

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DainBramaged Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
258. Why is the LGBT community on DU treated differently? Why aren't they our equals (straight community)
If we are progressives/leftists/Liberals/human beings, why are our LGBT friends treated so badly? Their issues are compounded by not only the prejudice OUTSIDE of DU but by the prejudice within DU. I have noticed it quite often in my nearly 10 years here. And so so many good people are gone because their issues were not important to the rest of us.


What's wrong with this picture?


:shrug:


Thanks for reading
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
262. One other thing I'd like to point out about the LGBT community
and I'm certainly not speaking for all of us but I think this is a valid point to make...

The treatment we talk about getting here on DU doesn't just happen on DU. We see it on the news, in our papers, hear it on the streets, sometimes from our families. We are surrounded by negativity a lot of the times so when we come to a place that should be a safe-haven from derisive commentary on our lives, it gets exponentially more frustrating to see those things here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boston bean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
279. It's not an issue, it's about rights.
Even hearing LGBT rights referred to as an "issue", makes my skin crawl.

How many times have we heard on DU "what makes your issue more important", "don't you have any other issue that you worry about", "there are other issues that are just as important".....

Same thing goes for women's rights and civil rights, imho.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
280. Thanks, Skinner, for this thread
There are quite a few here who find me problematic, for one reason or another.

I'm very willing to have a calm discussion about this.

If anyone cares to ask me any questions or address any concerns, I'm quite open to a discussion.

Frankly, I would like nothing better than to resolve any and all issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #280
290. I personally wish you would avoid GBLT topics
Here is an example why:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1290092

I think you absolutely know how offensive you are but for some reason you seem to get off on poking sticks and then claiming to be a victim of the mean gays. I don't believe for one second that you want to have a "calm discussion" or that you want to "resolve and all issues".

I'm taking this one opportunity to say that I think you are a jerk for behaving the way you do.

Now you can once again start whining about how mean the gays are to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #290
317. So very seconded. But he's just their point man. He does the
full tilt shit, then the others come with the lists and such. He is the one who pokes the bear, clearly with impunity from the admins, so that the rest can come and howl as if they were not the oppressors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JanMichael Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #317
342. Wish I could kick and rec this
reply. I have never understood that-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #317
425. Who are "they"?
I should point out that I ask my own questions.

I ask because I'd like to know. I admit that I don't know everything.

What others do, they do on their own accord. That's my own position.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #425
563. Tx4Obama, Tarheel_Dem, phleshdef, AtomicKitten
just to name a few.

And homophobic moderators like cbayer, mopinko, and NYC_SKIP look the other way or delete replies unfavorable to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #563
636. I should clear up something
I rarely alert on anything, even when people are telling me to fuck off.

If a DUer in good standing's post is deleted, it's not me who put the mods up to it. I only alert on obvious trolls.

If someone agrees or disagrees with me, I hope to God, that it's only based on the strength or weakness of my argument.

I'm not holding court here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #290
354. I never knew that I came off as whining… Sorry if I did.
That's never been my intention. Besides, as I've said before, even the angry responses to me have important things to say. I don't object to them, I can take it.

But, I find it hard to understand why I should be prohibited from questioning the assertions or motivations of certain people, whether they be gay or straight.

And I'll give you an example of this: John Aravosis. It's quite clear to me that he exhibits a pattern of Obama bashing by using distorted assertions and misrepresentations. Even GLBT posters on his own website have pointed this out. And he has been completely wrong on various occasions.

Now whether Aravosis does things because he either hates Obama or is ginning up traffic for his site, I have no idea. However, when his ideas are posted in GD, then I think that they should come under scrutiny by all of us, including straight old me. Either he's right or wrong, that should be the crux of the discussion, not pointing out that he's wrong is akin to some kind of gay bashing.

If I see someone attacking our Democratic president by using, what I understand with, faulty claims... no matter who that person is, I think that I should speak up.

About that story I posted, simply telling me that the writer, a gay man who was writing about his own observation of other gay men, was full of crap would have been just fine. I didn't write the story and I had no way of knowing one way or the other if he was right or was just posting bullshit.

But somehow, I became the center of attention, and that's because a few like yourself find me problematic. That's fine. But as I see it, I simply asked if his generalization applied to any the Gay male posters of DU. Surely member here know one way of the other and some had posted in that thread with an answer based on their own experiences. I did not intend to flamebait the board, because I felt that a simple yes or no answer would have sufficed. Besides, if a gay man on Gawker is posting stereotypical messages on a public website for all to see, including people who would support stereotypical depictions of the LGBT community, don't you think that people here would like to know this? And would maybe go there and tell him a thing or two?

I'll state as I have always stated, I unequivocally support full equality for each and every LGBT person. However, I don't think that it's helpful to anyone if we stifle discussion about how, when and where to get there.

Let me ask you, how are people who aren't exactly sure about something supposed to get answers? What about differing opinions, are they not also considerable?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #354
365. Let me use small words. The problem was not the article but you asking "is this true in your case".
Posting something so stereotyping might be ok in context to point out the absurdity, but your asking DUers if they were like this offensive stereotyped gay person was what most of us took offense at.


" if a gay man on Gawker is posting stereotypical messages on a public website for all to see, including people who would support stereotypical depictions of the LGBT community, don't you think that people here would like to know this? And would maybe go there and tell him a thing or two?" Yes, but that is NOT what you posted. You posted your odd curiosity to find out if gay DUers were like this.

Your inability to understand the difference between "look at this outrageous article" and "hey gay duers, are you like this" is really odd to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #365
402. Ok, Mea culpa on a haphazardly framing of the question...
I should have been more eloquent.

My intent was merely to glean answers based on personal experience... Whether or not gays here have seen what he wrote about first hand.

I felt that it wasn't my place to point out whether or not it was outrageous, because again, the writer appeared to describe his own observations, not mine.

Opinions amongst LGBT posters in that thread were varied. And I hope that we're clearing this up now.

However, I did notice that none of the replies to his article's comment section, ostensibly from other members of the LGBT community, declared any objections to what he wrote.

But then, that was my mistake to anticipate a similarly bland reaction by DU members, as depicted by his own readers. I apologize.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Call Me Wesley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #354
448. "However, I don't think that it's helpful to anyone if we stifle discussion about how,
when and where to get there." So it's fine with you if we get there in, like, a thousand years despite of tomorrow?

Differing opinions are fine. You have all your rights, you're married. How would you feel if you were held back on your right to marry, because ...?

I never had a quarrel with you, but when you marked Manning as a traitor and practically said that what happens in the army stays in the army, no matter what, I thought of Eichmann's wonderful quote 'following' orders.

Perhaps you're not as left as I've perceived you in my time on DU; perhaps you just like to stir things up.

I will continue to like you, but if you really "unequivocally support full equality for each and every LGBT person," then the thing about where and when to get there would only result in one small answer: RIGHT FUCKING NOW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #448
473. Well, of course it should happen now. There's no questioning this
But we're talking about taking the path of a political process to get there.

It isn't as if it can be done fiat. Like all political processes in this country, it's going to be slow and ugly. There are a lot of people opposing full equality standing in the way, many of whom were democratically elected. These people have to be dealt with, am I correct?

Of course, I understand that my straight married position puts me in a different category than those who are denied full equality based on the fact that they are not straight. I'm appalled by this situation. And I wish it were different… Full equality for all right now, I'm telling you. So no, not a thousand years from now.

But I have always asked, ask I'm asking right now, how?

Really, HOW? And how in such a way that it will guarantee success and permanence? A few people here never want to even address that question. I understand the need for sympathy, but I think results say a lot more.

Screaming "RIGHT FUCKING NOW" isn't going to do it. We need to discuss both progress and setbacks. If we succeed, excellent. If we have setbacks, then we have to regroup and try again, hopefully without pointing fingers and without accusations of disloyalty,

If and when I do stir things up, I feel that I do so because I want a discussion on the merits of the topics, it's not because I want to piss people off. I have no control over what pisses people off or not. I would prefer that the people I do piss off tell me that they are and why.

I trust that they're doing so honestly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Call Me Wesley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #473
497. Setbacks?
Please explain, what setbacks? Screaming fundamental religious people?

You still argue about a long and tender progress, where's no hurry to get there. Well, okay then. Think about the setbacks, like how this might offend someone.

It's not a 'need for sympathy.' It's human rights. Like the ones you have. You'd think there's a setback for yours?

You just lost me, sorry. It's not a rhetorical thing.

It's this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF5SX_qqi-M
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #497
587. I would consider the passage of Prop 8 to be such a setback
A setback that impedes the rights of people like the Late Lt Hester. It is something to be overcome. Straights, as you have pointed out, hold the power. But I understand that power concedes nothing without a struggle.

What is be done to change the way that things are?

How must that power be overcome?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Safetykitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #473
600. "I would prefer that the people I do piss off tell me that they are and why."
Because you are the poster child of thoughtfull discussion on an issue that really deserves none. You are the pinnacle of the innocent bystander in all this, posing as the voice of a sane person, when you really could not give a shit. Well, strike that, as long as Obama gets no blame, and you can for whatever perverse reason only you know, make gay people your little pet project of distain.

Right fucking now got many things done in this society, sadly, you are in the Democrat as incrementalist group, a group more concerned with status quo than real viable change.

I am being honest in saying Democrats like you are useless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #600
616. Well at least I know how you feel about me
Thanks very much for telling me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Safetykitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #354
581. Cut the shit. Do you thing we should have equal rights or not? If not when?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #581
595. LGBTs do not have equal rights today
And LGBTs will have equal rights when that power to take away equal rights by those who hold it will be taken away from them.

That is what must be done. It won't happen by fiat, nor will it happen because it's the best thing to do.

It must be coerced from the powers that be by what ever means necessary.

I'm deferring to all who want those rights shared for the best answers that will achieve the best results.

I don't have answers… We all do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #280
313. I would like to know why you post stereotypes then ask DUers if they fit it.
Seriously. For example
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1290092

How does this sort of crap help clear up bad feelings? If I were to post an article about black men loving watermelon and ask "is this true in your case", would you take any offense or be supportive of those who did?

How about thinking about who objects and why rather than simply defending this sort of crap?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #313
369. I should point out as I did before in my other reply...
That I didn't write the thing. However, a gay man on a popular website did. And it's being read by some people who may or may not support that stereotype… I had no way of knowing if his assertions had merit, because I'm not him, I don't live where he lives, I don't talk to the people that he talks to and so on. So I asked a question.

Besides, if you know that he's wrong and is publishing, what you know as, faulty stereotypes, wouldn't it be a good idea to go there and point this out to him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #369
372. No, but YOU are the one who asked "is this true in your case" about stereotypes.
I'm not black, don't live where you do, wonder, do all of you black dudes luv watermelons?

You did not post the article with the text of "hey, look at this outrageous thing, maybe you could go point out his stereotyping to him" but "hey you gay duers, do you all fear being alone so stay skinny"?

Why can you not understand the difference or try to understand the problem of posting what and how you did?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #369
383. Dupe
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 02:13 PM by Vanje
Sorry
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #369
385. You "had no way of knowing if his assertions had merit"?
Really?
REALLY!?!!?

You didn't recognize the article was blatant stereotyping?

If that is true , That is pitiful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #385
421. Yes, really. So I asked a poorly worded question
And perhaps you can see where I'm coming from. Here we have a gay man in NYC, appearing to write about his own observations of other gay men in NYC. Apparently, Gawker pays him to do this. Is Gawker in the habit of posting derogatory articles about gays? I don't think that they are. If I knew that they were, even by gay male writers, then I would have dismissed the article.

Now, where and when and I supposed to tell Brian Moylan that he's wrong? And how am I supposed to know whether or not he's right of wrong? How should I obtain this information and from whom?

It appeared to me that he wrote it in such a way as to say that he was giving candid information that some other people did not want to say. So, I'm sure that he would have anticipated your reaction. But, just because my reaction is not the same as yours does not invalidate either one.

So I assumed that personal experiences of others here would either validate or not validate HIS assertions, in spite of my question becoming the center of attention. But overall, it's his assertions that should be debated, right? Again, they are not mine, because I did not have enough information to properly formulate one.

If you think he's wrong, because that hasn't been your experience, then that's all I wanted to know.

But really, pitying me for not knowing the things that you know and asking (even in a self admittedly poorly worded way) does nothing to help anyone understand anything.

Am I correct?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #421
434. Well, then

So NOW you know.
NOW you know it was an obvious stereotype.

Now you know why it was offensive.

I'm sure you are NOW very sorry for your inadvertent insensitivity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #434
442. Sure, but let me ask you this...
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 03:04 PM by MrScorpio
I checked that article's comment section just now, and I see there's still a lack of offense taken to what he wrote.

The article had a lot of views, almost 130,000 of them since it was posted two days ago. I see that you've offered your own opinion of that article here, but why isn't Moylan being told that in the comment section of his own article?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #442
456. I dont know
I dont comment on that site. Is it an entertainment/ Show Biz blog?
Its not really something I am interested in.
So, I don't really care about what Gawker readers think.
DU is my discussion Home.

If you are a big Gawker fan, then by all means ask gay male Gawker readers if gay men are skinny because they are French women, ...or whatever nonsense that has so captivated you.
No. Really. Please do.
And if even one of those 130,000 gay Gawkers says something real stoopid , you can post it at DU GLBT forum, in all of its moronic glory, and ask us if its true just because some jerk on an entertainment blog, said it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #456
486. Right, and I don't know either.
The divergent reactions seem a bit confusing, as I'm sure you will agree. But, I understand that you're offended by it. I see that.

So also, am I to assume from your reply that I'm invited to the GLBT forum?

Are you sure about that?

I mean, I could ask questions that people didn't want to answer and support opinions that some of the regulars there may not appreciate. I could also piss people off by simply being there.

Frankly, given my reputation here (whether it is justified or not), I think the last thing that I want to do is stir up dust GLBT. What's to be gained by such a thing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #280
758. I don't find you problematic but...
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 07:58 PM by Renew Deal
The "fat gay guys" thread was BS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #758
795. I hope that you don't mind if I ask for something to be clarified
Are you talking about the thread itself, or the source info posted in the OP?

If it is the source info, I really would love to see someone tell Moylan that he was full of it and why. In spite of the tongue in cheek way that he went about it, I took him to be sincere. We are talking about a gay man in NYC writing about his own observation of other gay men in NYC after all.

I was under the impression that he was expecting to be challenged, but he wasn't. Perhaps Gawker readers didn't want to refute him, and why, I really don't know.

About how I posted the thread, from the reaction, I readily admit that I should have framed the question in a better manner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #795
820. I'm talking about the content of that thread
I guess what you would call the source info. It seemed like stereotypical crap. There's nothing to refute. It's really opinion and I disagree with his opinion. I just wonder why it was written. I also don't understand how you didn't know it was flamebait unworthy of DU.

Other than that, I don't have an issue with you personally or in any other way. You seem like a nice guy and we've cracked some good jokes together.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #820
825. Thanks. I'm glad that you cleared that up for me. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snooper2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
282. What I never get is why a lot of guys think two men having anal sex is disgusting
When the exact same guys will talk the next day about having butt sex with their girlfriend. An anus is an anus right?
This is where a lot of slurs against gay men come from...but not women.


I need to start calling people on that more....

This is a subject that is often taboo/deleted here...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #282
353. Um. Do you really think....
Do you REALLY think this thread is about "butt sex"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snooper2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #353
367. no, i was talking about a certain attitude
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #367
375. I was also going to blast you, but wanted to see what you wrote. Do you mean the attitude
that there is a "gay lifestyle" that is just about promiscuous anal sex and toasters? "This is where a lot of slurs against gay men come from...but not women."

The attitudes that make people fear teh gay etc? Those ignorant attitudes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snooper2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #375
386. exactly, hard to word without getting run over by a fucking semi here
Any bar on friday night there will be guys standing around reffering to somebody as "insert gay sex slur here" but then an hour later talking about how he and some girl were doing every act possible the night before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City of Mills Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #386
409. Well...
As a self-proclaimed representative of all heterosexual males (ha), I propose the theory that butt sex is not the exclusive domain of the heterosexual community. Furthermore, an 'anus is not an anus'; true' the orifice itself may look and function the same, however it is what is attached to the orifice that makes it desirable. In a very general sense I am attracted to the female shape, figure, hips to waist ratio, etc... I am simply not attracted to a man's buttocks. I honestly don't know how any women (or gay men) find men attractive but I think it's fine that they do. You could also say 'a mouth is a mouth', so why wouldn't straight guys be OK with receiving oral from another male, or why wouldn't a gay male be OK receiving oral from a female? It's just not that simple, we're hardwired to be attracted to people in certain ways, whether same gender, different, both or neither.

If you're just referring to the 'macho' attitude, I really don't know myself but it's far too culturally prevalent. Look at any beer commercial, they establish that if you drink 'girly' drinks you are effeminate(code for gay, "bad" and worthy of scorn) while 'real men' drink Budweiser and eat Hungry Man frozen dinners and talk about women as brainless sexual toys. I actually saw a show called "That's Gay" (http://current.com/shows/infomania/thats-gay/) and found it hilarious, as it pointed out all these self-serious stereotypical 'macho' commercials and how pathetic they are; designed to appeal to simple-minded "guy's guys". At the same time, it was eye-opening and very sad to see so many examples of advertisers equating gay with soft, weak, effeminate and undesirable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #409
415. Ya know
Theres s always a straight guy (or this time 2 straight guys) who in any discussion of GLBT issues, ALWAYS have to talk about butt sex.

That is NOT what this thread is about.

Can DU get a special dungeon for those few straight guys that just HAVE to talk about butt sex , so that we can discuss GLBT issues without having to wade through posts about butt sex?

Please?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City of Mills Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #415
417. Go back and read #282
In your rush to label me I think you missed something, asked and answered. Skinner's not banishing anyone to a dungeon, if you want to discuss the issues then feel free to start, you comment has added little this open discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #282
450. This thread is not about sex acts in any way.
Uff da!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TaupeDem Donating Member (42 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
284. I'm a stickler for labels, it's actually LGBTIQ, the I and Q are for
intersex and questioning.

Carry on!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #284
436. Some people add a second "Q" for "queer"
I can't really voice the distinction.

There's also "C" for "confused" which pretty much sums up my adolescence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #284
567. LGBT
Lesbian, Gay, Bacon, and Tomato. Yum.

The more letters we add, the more obscured the intention becomes. We need a new umbrella term like "gay" used to be before too many people decided it was too male-oriented.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #567
690. It's nowhere's near that simple
Current research into human sexuality puts sexuality orientation on multiple axes including (but not limited to) how you identify yourself (eg. "gay"), how you present yourself ("trans", "passes for straight"), the sex you're attracted to and whom you're actually sleeping with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TaupeDem Donating Member (42 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #567
837. You're just being insensitive and insulting by calling the BT Bacon and Tomato. EOM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:47 AM
Response to Reply #567
1448. I think ''Gay'' is the 'umbrella term'
No need to come up with yet another word for the acronym soup.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JNelson6563 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
292. In this corner we have insensitive assholes
incapable of sympathy/empathy for those with different difficulties than their own.

In the other corner we have the perpetually put-up on victim who can interpret the most innocuous statements to mean the nastiest things.

And ne'er the t'wain shall meet.

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #292
297. Thank you for joining in to try and work this out. Appreciate your concern and attempts to clear up
the hard feelings. Grouping people into "insensitive assholes" and "perpetually put-up on victims" sure goes a long way towards clearing up those misunderstood and disrespected feelings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JNelson6563 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #297
406. Perhaps your tears will help wash it all away.
:cry:

Ever think you may take an obscure internet forum a bit too seriously?

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #406
410. This /\. This poster right up here
Yep. That one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #406
704. In this corner we have insensitive asshole

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #292
301. Which corner are you in?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #301
309. I think we have all known the answer to that question for a very long time. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JNelson6563 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #301
325. Neither, that's why I skip the topic at DU
They are so boringly predictable with the zealots from both ends of the spectrum taking turns with domination those threads. I support equal rights for all and see no reason to fight with DUers about it. Some like to fight about it so they do. And they forever will.

To them I say "Rock on, I'm out". :toast:

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #325
330. You "skip the topic" except to come insult? And this helps...how?
Insult then cheers smilie. And you do not see this as any part of the problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JNelson6563 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #330
403. Well let's see
The problem has gotten so bad that Skinner is once again trying to address it. Frankly I find the way discussion on the topic tends to go is a black mark on DU. I daresay we might see more prodcutive, grown up discussions take place on Faux News.

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #403
703. You come and insult everyone, then complain that the discussion is not productive or grownup?
Again I ask, how does insulting others help?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JanMichael Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #325
352. People who desire equality and civil rights are "zealots?" wtf?
god, no wonder you stay off those threads, you don't even know what you are talking about. Probably a good choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #352
355. Yes, they are either "insensitive assholes" or "perpetually put-up on victim who can interpret the..
"perpetually put-up on victim who can interpret the most innocuous statements to mean the nastiest things."

Copy pasted from the start of this subthread. But they support equal rights! It is incredible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JanMichael Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #355
397. Caught that
This has been a most enlightening thread. I didn't even bother with the upthread comments about the Pride Parades....I love seeing those...it makes me happy to see street celebrations of all kinds, but one guy said the participants need to be more "conservative?!" WTF?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JNelson6563 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #352
405. lolz Thanks for demonstrating the point.
If what you say is true then I would be calling myself a zealot, no? For clarification I use the term to apply to those who feel that if you do not feel the exact same way as they do on every aspect of a topic, you are the enemy.

Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JanMichael Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #405
413. "Enemy" is a strong word. However, if you disagree on human civil rights
issues, then you are definitely wrong. This isn't an issue that should be voted on, nor debated. If you are a fence sitter, quite frankly, you should be ashamed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ohio Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
331. OK... Then I'll give it as I see it
Anyone that is not for equal rights... RIGHT NOW... not later, not in a bit but right fucking NOW, is one stupid shit. If you think it is ok to put this issue off for one more second... That equal rights for everyone is not something we should have as a top priority, well you have your head up your ass.

Yup, the economy is a problem. Yup, jobs are a problem. Yup, the wars are a problem. Yup, there are shit loads of other problems.

Let me ask you this though... When was the last time anything else was suggested to be put on the back burner?

I'll tell you... Fucking never. Yet... Time after time we tell people that are not of the same as us that they should wait for equal rights because something else is more important.

Bottom line - Fuck that shit. Nothing is as important as equal rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #331
333. Thank you Joe!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #331
343. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JanMichael Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #331
345. +10000
Pretty damned hard to give a crap about jobs when you can be fired if someone sees you out having dinner with your partner...whom you can't marry, and whose work bennies you can't share.

Spot on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ohio Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #345
361. It scares the shit out of me
I'm a straight white male, so I'm in the one group that should have nothing to fear but... Back when I worked for Nationwide in Ohio, I knew a woman... a good friend... That was fired for being a lesbian... It scared the shit out of me... WTF? A woman that excelled at her job... Had zero personal issues with anyone... Always had solutions and not problems... Fired because some asshole had a problem that she was involved in a 15 year monogamous relationship they did not approve of....

Holy fucking shit... This is what we need to fight and this is what we need to be afraid of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JanMichael Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #361
400. Hetero here too; and it scares the crap out of me also
I agree with everything you have written. I am blown away that anyone takes this shit lightly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #331
359. Absolutely. And the Obama apologists are the offenders here.
They choose to minimize any criticism, no matter how valid. And they do it with insults, personal attacks and condescension.

The handful that shit on every thread, every post, that stands for unqualified equality now runs any chance at real discussion off a cliff.

I think the remedy would be a ban of the worst offenders from either DU or from threads on GLBT topics. They clearly cannot keep themselves from acting like total assholes and coming across as homophobes, whether they are or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ohio Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #359
374. Since we can say what we want here...
I have avoided posting in a large number of those threads because I fear I would get myself banned. I sometimes have a problem holding my tongue :D The fact is, the one who can get banned is the one who technically breaks the rules and not the one that is wrong... Fucking wrong.

I do support President Obama in a lot of things and I think it important he get re-elected. I also think he has failed us completely on a number of things. It's a heartbreaker.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #374
377. I am in the same boat. I will always prefer Obama over a repug.
It isn't zero sum, though. The radical Obama supporters play a zero sum game. Whatever their intention, they come across as caring more for Obama than they do for equality. And that is just fucked up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #377
389. I don't like the dichotomous posting and insults.
Those who post something positive, get called an Obama apologist. Those who post something negative or say there is a long way to go get called a hater. Yes, there are radical supporters and non-supporters, would be nice to be able to post positives and negatives and not be called names or insulted.

If I write "politics is a dirty game and all sorts of compromises are made", I don't like the assumptions and insults I like those compromises or politics. Simply pointing out that this is how it is, not putting a value judgment on it (though I truly wish it weren't and it sucks).

Makes it difficult to post, or rather makes me unwilling at times to participate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #389
396. I agree with you, and I admit I am all too easy to take the bait.
I have made strides to keep discussions civil in the past, but inevitably there is a handful that will not allow it. I have called them out for being what they are, disruptors. I have alerted and seen posts deleted. I have built cases on the regular offenders.

The thing is, as long as they are given reign to disrupt, they will be successful. As you admit, it makes it difficult to post or unwilling to participate. Other times, threads look like swiss cheese because of all the deletions. Or a thread gets so derailed by one or two poster's incessant disruption that it gets locked.

They succeed way too often.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ohio Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #396
433. It's true... and it bothers me
I don't know how many of these threads I've seen but it is a lot. I pretty much always go away from DU because I know I will only make it worse or get banned through my anger... In the best of times I am a vile and obscene man, I do not Deny that but I am usually smart enough to avoid getting suckered. I wish I had the words to rebut these shitheads in an acceptable manner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #433
498. "In the best of times I am a vile and obscene man"
Awesome.
:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #359
598. Interesting. This double-talk needs to be remembered the next time
you post in GD: P trying to sound reasonable.

Are you willing, since you have the go-ahead, to call out the apologists? Go for broke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:02 PM
Original message
Well, you telling a reasonable poster recently that he was in "victim mode" wasn't very helpful
Was it?

Since that is essentially what rightwingers say to any minority group fighting for it's rights.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=688889&mesg_id=689074
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
694. I have to agree saying someone is in "victim mode" is
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 07:09 PM by justiceischeap
demeaning and condescending. You talked about tenor in another thread in GD : P tonight and YOUR tenor leaves a lot to be desired CakeGrrl. You make some reasonable points but the tone in which you do so can and obviously is off-putting or you wouldn't have been mentioned specifically here. I for one didn't call you out to be an asshole but to hold a mirror up so you can see that for all your hints at being a supporter of the LGBT community, you often come across as the opposite.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #694
755. See my response to Ruggerson.
Bottom line is this:

If you don't buy my support for LGBT, that's all on you.

I will not visit LGBT threads. I don't have the time for this hash.

I do frequent GD: P. If a topic arises, I will post on it there.

We may or may not meet again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
736. So now it's off-limits to assert that?
I have seen the tactic employed in a number of arguments in real life.

I'm black. I don't need lectures on what minority groups are called.

When someone is shifting the argument to put the onus on the "opponent", for lack of a better word, implying that if not for their bad behavior, things would be different, I have the option to refute that and call it out.

Sometimes people play the victim, for sympathy, for guilt, for projecting negativity on the opponent.

I won't back down from making a point because someone wants to fall down and cry "foul!".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #736
778. Nothing is off limits
It's just disrespectful, rude, arrogant, patronizing and counterproductive. And yes, I'm aware of the fact that you are black. That doesn't mean you get a free pass at rightwing putdowns anymore than I, or anyone else does. It's irrelevant.

I don't get that you want an honest discussion about any of this, because in the past when I've tried having one with you it always ends up with you demurring from the discussion and proclaiming it to be futile - there is too much anger coming from various LGBT DU'ers. But you never want to dig deeper and explore whether and why any of that anger is legitimate or not.

Maybe you're right. Maybe this is all pointless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #778
802. I'm going to disagree on that characterization
I maintain that calling someone out for playing a victim is NOT a "rightwing putdown". I'm not looking for a pass. I'm making a rebuttal in a discussion. If calling out that tactic is that offensive, ask the mods to have the reference banned.

On that topic, I find it interesting to see people are happy to throw around banned terms on this thread, using one in reference to me, for example, because they've been given the freedom to do so. I have not reciprocated.

But if it the argument gets to that level of sensitivity, then maybe it IS pointless.

As to an honest discussion, what have I missed? That the administration has not done enough YET? Yes, I can see that in terms of things not YET being instituted. That said, I think they've done a hell of a lot RELATIVE to other administrations in the time they've been in power. But yes, I understand I will be lambasted for not saying it just isn't damned fast enough, period.

Do I know the administration's or the President's intent or attitude? No, and neither does anyone else, regardless of what "evidence" there is.

Do I think the President is a homophobe? No, I don't. As contentious as associations with McClurkin and Warren have been, I'd like to think I can put out the opinion that those were for political expediency without being tagged as supporting homophobia.

I have not questioned the LEGITIMACY of the anger. I do question the way it's targeted at people who really AREN'T in opposition.

If I'm missing your boat, then let's just agree to disagree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ohio Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #802
838. The problem is you are defending an in-defense-able action
"As contentious as associations with McClurkin and Warren have been, I'd like to think I can put out the opinion that those were for political expediency without being tagged as supporting homophobia."

I believe the idea was political expediency but it was a dumb shit idea. It gained President Obama not one single thing by doing it and he should have known it would not gain him one single thing.

What it did do was give a straight kick in the nuts to a group of his biggest supporters and he must have known it would be exactly that... it's shameful and there is no reason to defend such actions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #838
851. OK, so let's draw the "Agree to Disagree" line right there.
I'm not going to challenge your opinion on that, and would like in turn not to be labeled for expressing mine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ohio Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #851
862. But don't you see.... This is exactly what causes the label
I did not just give an opinion, I put out a fact to rebut your statement of expediency. To that... you just want to agree to disagree and walk away... Before you walked away, I've labeled you in no way, now though... To be honest I leave that exchange feeling you are of the opinion that equal rights for everyone is something that can wait and is of little signifigance... As a straight white male, I find that offensive, I can't even imagine what that feels like for someone being denied equal rights... I expect it makes them feel very angry.

That said, I do not know your real intention behind what you said, it's hard on a message board but I would ask you to look at it from the other side and then perhaps put up a real defense or rebut the facts laid out... or maybe even change your stance... It is ok to not agree with every move President Obama makes and let it be known when he mis-steps.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #862
909. That's a lot of (incorrect) inference from one post.
But that is a major risk of messageboard posting.

First, you and I are sticking on the "indefensible".

Don't conflate "defensible" with "approve" or "think it's good". It was obviously a perilous calculation and obviously it was offensive to many people, but my defense of it amounted to nothing more than to offering the "why": political expediency.

I have honestly not heard anything about the ramifications of those contacts beyond the reaction on DU, so I don't say much more on that specific topic than I have.

You're implying that I'm afraid to criticize the President. I wish things would happen faster as well, and there have been times in the administration's messaging where I'm thinking "I hope they have a plan to deal with that." Here's one of the big "rubs" on this board: When and what to criticize vary WILDLY. Arguments spring up in and of themselves over whether something SHOULD be criticized and how much.

Changing gears a bit: How the world do you draw the inference that I think LGBT rights are of little significance? Where in what I said is that implicit?

Again, another consequence of the boards. I don't post extensive, lengthy comments on boards; it's just my style. I suppose the fewer the words, the freer someone is to create an impression around them. And it doesn't much help when most of my time is spent responding to other posts - it's hard to form a real characterization.

At the end of the day, the people who know me, who are in my life, know what I think and where I stand. I'll rebut when people are forthcoming enough to say what they THINK they have concluded about me and if I think that characterization is incorrect, but I can't counter every imagination like yours that draws a pretty wrong conclusion. It's what I do AWAY from cyberspace that matters - at least that's the way it works for me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ohio Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #909
926. Perhaps
"Don't conflate "defensible" with "approve" or "think it's good". It was obviously a perilous calculation and obviously it was offensive to many people, but my defense of it amounted to nothing more than to offering the "why": political expediency."

Which is it, a "why" or a "defense", the two are not the same, it would not take much to be specific that you only offer a "why" and do not condone it. When you offer something up as a "defense" and do not say anything more, the obvious inference is that you approve.

"I have honestly not heard anything about the ramifications of those contacts beyond the reaction on DU, so I don't say much more on that specific topic than I have."

Have the fundies given so much as an inch or have they moved even further to the right? Answer... Further to the right, this cannot be denied. It was a bad call and an offense to his supporters, you should be able to see this clearly.

"Changing gears a bit: How the world do you draw the inference that I think LGBT rights are of little significance? Where in what I said is that implicit?"

It was implicit in your defense. If you had made it clear it was a "why" and an incorrect choice, I would not have gotten that idea. That you have still not clearly stated that it was a bad choice but rather hedged it by claiming ignorance of anything good or bad from it has not changed what I think.

"I don't post extensive, lengthy comments on boards; it's just my style."

You do not need to, you just need to be clear, a simple "I think his choice was wrong". You have said a lot more dancing around those words... It's simple, clear, short and leaves zero doubt for any readers. The way you hedge your words and go out of your way to not say it straight forward... and then defend that... is what gives people their impressions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:46 AM
Response to Reply #926
965. Sorry. There's just no nefarious intent to be read into that. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #802
848. I think I agree with most of what you wrote here
1. The President isn't a homophobe

2. Warren and McClurkin were about political expediency

3. The President has been the best one we've had so far for LGBT rights

4. Despite #3, he still have a long way to go, including (or especially) DoMA and ENDA, and it's therefore disappointing that more hasn't been accomplished

5. The anger toward President Obama is legitimate, although I am not as angry as some

Those points aside, and I say this in a friendly way, my sense of your postings the past couple days has been that they have been unnecessarily caustic at times. It is also true that some people who are openly critical of the President have been unnecessarily caustic--I alerted on two that suggested that people were saying what they were because they didn't like "fags" behaving as if they were equals. I guess I just believe we can all do better and try to move away from the binary thinking about "Obama supporters" vs LGBT DUers; it seems to me the repetitive haranguing or caustic commentary isn't the way for it to happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #848
852. Fair enough.
At some level, and depending on the context, I'm inclined to give as good as I get and try to stay within the rules as much as possible while doing so. I'd even submit that on this thread, most all of my posts would remain intact.

On the basis of the past couple of days, I'll go with that. I'm short on patience for claims that nothing has been done, and while that poster has not appeared here on this thread, it was clear yesterday.

I have NEVER said this President is perfect and has done no wrong, but defending assertions seems to create the implication. We'll see how it goes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #736
1176. You also asserted "GLBTers are NOT being attacked by DUers."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x688889#689121

I'll give the benefit of the doubt and assume that you really, really didn't know how bad it was until you read some of the nasty comments posted upthread.

Now that you have, are you willing to change your tune, or are you going to continue to squeeze your eyes shut and cry, "But I don't see anything bad!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #598
718. You all know who you are. So do we. You are painfully obvious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #718
742. Your opinion is duly noted, thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #598
1051. Check the mirror
:wave:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #1051
1329. Wave with one hand,
fling shit with the other.

Winning approach you have there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #359
1331. Criticize Obama on the facts, and I won't bite.
Stray from the facts, and I will call out on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ohio Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #1331
1429. The facts are that President Obama has not done enough for equal rights
Has he done some things? Yes. Has he done more then some other Presidents? Yes. Has he done all he should have done? No.

There is nothing more important then equal rights and anything less then wanting equal rights to be a top priority is bullshit. Those are the facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:46 AM
Response to Reply #1429
1447. No President has done "enough", IMNSHO.
As far as "There is nothing more important then equal rights", being dead with equal rights doesn't mean much to the dead, so I can conceive things that might be more important. Being so poor you cannot afford a marriage license is up there too.

That being said, I do not shirk from calling out lies, distortions, (etc.) when somebody steps over the line of provable statements and starts launching rhetoric that is demonstrably false.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ohio Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 07:22 AM
Response to Reply #1447
1463. So you want to eliminate death and poverty first?
How many other things have to be cured before your arrogant opinion will consider equal rights a priority?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #1463
1537. LOL, not quite, but interesting take.
Ongoing violence and the recession were what was on my mind, as opposed to (or in conjunction with) equal rights.... I didn't say it wasn't *a* priority, I was pointing out that some basic rights may be a greater priority than others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WonderGrunion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #1429
1529. Okay, it's that dismissive attitude towards the President that pisses me off
"Has he done more then some other Presidents? Yes."

Seriously? more than some other Presidents? President Obama has done more for for LGBTQI rights than ALL other presidents combined. The constant dismissive attitude towards what this President has done is what always raises the ire of party loyalists like myself. I will readily agree that more can be done and he has made missteps along the way. But I hear in this very thread President Obama being called a disgrace and a homophobe and then you wonder why the party is getting fed up? President Obama did not deny your rights from the beginning, that happened decades before he ever stepped up to the position of the Presidency. Maybe if when he corrected one of the hundreds of injustices that currently is inflicted on the LGBTQI community, try not to call him a fucking disgrace for not having done everything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ohio Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #1529
1541. And it's that dismissive attitude that pisses off equal rights supporters
Where was it I called him a disgrace? oh... I didn't

Where was it I called him a homophobe? oh... I didn't

This is fucking 2011, not 1950 and it is time for the party loyalists to step the fuck up and make equal rights a priority.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vattel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #359
1641. You nailed that one.
Can't believe I had to read that far down to see this pointed out. Obama apologists have really fucked up DU in so many ways. Discussions of GLBT issues have been paritcularly impacted in a negative way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #331
370. Woo Hoo!
Way to just lay it out there. :applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #331
392. Wow!
:applause: :applause: :loveya:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Call Me Wesley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #331
514. Exactly.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shireen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:25 AM
Response to Reply #331
947. +1
Equal rights ... the most fundamental value ... well said!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heidi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #331
1218. Agree. And DU is not the place for bigots to be brought around.
Marriage equality NOW should be the default position in a progressive community. Bigots should get their schooling elsewhere and return to DU when they're real progressives. Human rights are not a negotiable strategy piece. I'm sure many agree in principle, but unpracticed principles are just window dressing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OhioBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #1218
1409. I gotta chime in on this...
first of all if a person doesn't support full marriage equality it does not mean they are a bigot. Many, many of us have evolved in our attitude and thinking on this issue BECAUSE of the discussion on DU. I was not a bigot in '04 but I absolutely thought civil unions would be equal to marriage. I supported GLTB rights 100% but truly didn't GET IT regarding same sex marriage. Some of us grew up in very conservative, rural, areas and some of us grew up in more conservative eras. Truly... we don't always get it - we don't always understand... DU IS the schooling - DU conversations have made me understand more... and given me a better knowledge base.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zenlitened Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #1409
1501. I disagree, I honestly do. Opposition to full marriage equality IS bigotry.
I'm glad that you continued to study the issue, and have come to a different place now. And, for the record, I have acknowledged that civil unions could be a useful stepping-stone in the past.

But a stepping-stone only. Anything that falls short of true equality in name, spirit and deed perpetuates a sense of alienation and otherness. A sense that's based in bigoted thinking: "those people" are "not like us" and shouldn't drink at the same fountain be allowed to get married like we do.

Again, I applaud the work you've done on this issue. And I agree with much of what you say in your post. But I do feel it's necessary to point out this one area of disagreement, because I feel that anything that might seem to give a pass to harmful ideologies is an impediment to continued progress.

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gaspee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
332. The way I see it is...
I have stopped posting at DU because of the hostility toward GLBT posters by a small, but very vocal subgroup. Since they are allowed to get away with it, I definitely feel unwelcome by the atmosphere generated toward GLBT posters.

Shut up, sit down, wait, what do you want, a pony, poutrage! you never liked him anyway (liked, yes, trusted, no!)

Etc, etc, etc

Millionth verse, same as the first.

I am so sick of hearing how the worst anti-gay bigots are actually gay (a small percentage) and how gay people are one issue voters. Maybe, but wen your status as a third rate citizen is the one issue, it's not quite one issue since it affects every aspect of our lives.

Bottom line? I feel an outright hostility toward GLBT from a very vocal minority of posters and antipathy from a majority and great support from a minority. Also vocal - they are awesome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #332
358. One issue voter bullshit is, well, bullshit
If we were one issue voters, we'd never vote because the LGBT community is rarely a consideration except for when a boost in the polls is needed then we're sent off to Fairy Land with pats to our head just to be disappointed by broken promises yet again. Then reelection comes around and we see headlines about a certain President making nice with the gay community. If we're so fucking insignificant that our rights aren't a priority why is assuring our votes so important? I don't get the disconnect there.

Whew, sorry. I should have stepped back from the keyboard before venting.

(PS.. venom not towards you gaspee, I agree with you)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #332
368. and don't forget -- racists. lgbtiq people were brodbrushed and are still being broadbrushed
with that and those posts are allowed to stand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
340. I'll be more aware as time goes on...
If nothing else, this thread has allowed me as a straight male a much broader perspective than I've had before vis-a-vis the frustration and anger... and I'll say it, the betrayal by the current administration.

I don't have much to contribute to this particular thread, but I'll keep reading it as it expands, and I'll be more aware as time goes on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Safetykitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
356. Well, here goes...not going to be pretty.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 01:53 PM by Safetykitten
First, WHO THE FUCK do you people think you are? You know, the ones that are clueless that there was even an issue about LGBT issues. Have you lived under a fucking rock? I guess not because you are the first to:

Ask why we are pissed.
Ask why we can't just give it a rest.
Ask why we just can't separate our wishes to have the same rights as you and just vote.
Ask why we have to go through this shit every election.
Wonder why we get upset at coded and obviuosly homophobic pals of the President asked to speak, present, take the stage with him.
Give hideously lame snippets of how huge a friend our president is of the gays, and do you think you would do better?

No you don't get it. If you did, we would not be going through this shit year after year, time after time, election after election. You think the republicans are good at splitting people up into groups, well this place puts in a good showing every election time, every time an incremental thing that Obama does.

Yes, we LGBT people are greedy motherfuckers. We want THE SAME RIGHTS as you. If you have issues with that you a NOT A DEMOCRAT. You are a situational Democrat or poseur that likes to use us as the ends to your means.

Solution? Stop trying to sell the package. Yes we will vote for Obama. But stop trying to sell him as the cure all. He is not. When, and WHEN he comes out and says we have the same rights as everyone else, then only then will it stop. So this incremental polishing of his rather sad overall showing and tone deafness just ferments conflict.

And as far as the clueless of the LGBT nastiness, be it intentional or not, what do you want? What is it you are trying to prove? Did you not prove your epic stupidity by not listening to the Warren outrage from gays? Did you not get it with the Donnie shit?

Try listening to us from time to time to tell you that Obama's choices are suspect and hideously repulsive. Will Obama pick another questionable homophobe for a speech or event? Probably. So stop telling us we are full of shit.

That would help for starters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #356
364. Ahem.... Woohoo!!!!!!!! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #356
371. !!!!
:yourock: :applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #356
394. ~Standing Ovation~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #356
1707. Exactly ... and imo why wouldn't every democrat be outraged by Obama and Warren?
You don't have to be homosexual to be highly offended -- outraged -- at the

people he has selected --

Like first thing eloping into the White House with Koch Bros./DLC Rahm Emmanuel --

Wall Street and private banks making our economic decisions --


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:52 PM
Response to Original message
360. How about this...
Donald Rumsfeld is giving the president his daily briefing. He concludes by saying: "Yesterday, 3 Brazilian soldiers were killed."

"OH NO!" the President exclaims. "That's terrible!"

His staff sits stunned at this display of emotion, nervously watching as the President sits, head in hands.

Finally, the President looks up and asks, "How many is a brazillion?"

:hide:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #360
366. How about this? Dick Cheney is to the left of Obama
on marriage equality...

:hide:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
382. Here's the problem, Skinner - too many members here want us to be fairies and simpering queens.
Who sprinkle magic dust and what have you, you know, do things that ignorant Americans in flyover country (who are probably closeted themselves to a degree) think, stereotypically, gay people do or act like.

There may be some GLBT members who have no problem subsuming their gay identity, but frankly, gayness - whatever that means, implies, and even I don't know entirely what being gay means - is probably the most fundamental element of who I am, and I will defend myself and my interests from attack. EVERY. TIME.

So I don't know, a handful of your moderators seem to have a problem with that. So be it. I got deleted the other day, but it was unwarranted.

I don't know Skinner. What can I say. I think you will continue to have problems to the extent that your moderators possess a degree of homophobia. I am not optimistic that this is going to change.

I don't think you are a bad guy, nor do I think DU is a bad place, but there are WAY more problems with homophobia, both overt and covert, than there should be on a board which is supposedly home to progressives and liberals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #382
446. One tiny point
I live in Kansas. I am a founder of a growing, strong statewide LGBT organization. There are a lot of open closet doors here, a lot and very courageous ones. We have 11 active chapters, many in tiny rural Western Kansas farming communities. Just wanted to say, this famous for being a fly over state has become active and loud. KansasEqualityCoalition.org. It is not easy but we are chugging away and doing a good job, now with Brownback trying to hold on to our past progress.

Carry on
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #446
457. Good for you! You are a brave soul, and I mean that.
Kansas can't be an easy state to be out in. :hi: :patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #457
481. It isn't, but I am straight
so I am not the brave one here, just a helper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:54 AM
Response to Reply #382
1449. More LGBT mods are needed. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 05:40 AM
Response to Reply #1449
1461. OK, get some to volunteer
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #1461
1519. I have. Twice.
Signed agreement, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
398. OK here is my take
One, there are a number of posters who refuse, no matter what way they are asked, to refrain from pissing off gay posters. You know who they are, I know who they are, and they know who they are. How many thousands of times has the list been posted. A list, which is puffed up, gives Obama credit for things gays did, and is continually posted in the spirit of gay posters of DU refuse to behave as we think they should. We never see such lists posted toward African American posters, pro choice posters, pro Israeli posters, or any other group of posters. Only gay posters have this happen over and over and over again.

Two The cadre of people who, no matter the topic, will post irrelevent anti Clinton posts in the thread to hijack it. At the height of the anti gay bullying suicides a thread dedicated to those suicides was literally trashed by anti Clinton posts. We literally couldn't discuss suicides on this website without the usual brigrade of anti Clinton people using our pain for their purposes. The only posts removed were those of gay posters complaining about the above.

The simple fact is gay posters are sick to death of being lectured like errant school children by people who don't know anything about gay issues nor particularly care about them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thanks_imjustlurking Donating Member (462 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #398
686. +1,000,000
:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democrank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
424. Full equality.
Nothing less
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fearless Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:50 PM
Response to Original message
426. *Rushes into the room huffing and puffing*
Phew! Almost forgot the popcorn!

:popcorn:


But seriously, I really don't see what the issue is to be frank. Unless of course the moderators have been deleting much much more than I can imagine regarding anti-GLBTQ responses. Although this may be true, I do see a potential reason. GLBTQ issue threads pop up in the GD much more often than they ever have before. I think this is a good thing personally, being one to post them there from time to time albeit, because it creates dialog and doesn't sequester these issues to the LGBT forum, which, frankly, is only really visited by those who go out of their way to be there. If there are more negative outbursts than before, this is probably why. And, as far as I'm concerned, I'd rather them happen and sometimes be alerted or moderated. The most powerful equalizer in GLBTQ rights is personal investment in the issue. If you know GLTBQ people, you are more likely to support our rights. It goes without saying that I think this is a very good thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ej510 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:51 PM
Response to Original message
427. LGBT members of DU! You have a staunch straight African American Male
Allie. Do not let the ignorance and fear of others deter you from becoming full citizens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #427
430. Thank you!
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fearless Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #427
431. Wrong place. Del.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 02:55 PM by Fearless
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #427
437. +++++++!!
Thank you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:46 PM
Response to Reply #427
743. Thank you.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 07:46 PM by myrna minx
:yourock: Human rights for all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #427
1052. And you have a staunch Female White Bi supporter of your rights here too :)
We all need to back each other up. Thank you for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:57 AM
Response to Reply #427
1450. Wow! And I have loved your posts on everything!
I didn't know you are African American, ej510. No matter the topic I admire your posts a great deal. They brighten up DU! :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
429. DU's moderation ensures it is a hostile place for LGBTers
I thought this would change, but it clearly has not.

The problem is with about a dozen or so posters. Why is it never suspicious when an LGBT thread devolves into a condescending, homophobic clusterfuck, you can read it with a list of names at hand and check them off one by one? Why does no one on the moderating team take note of this? And it isn't a recent thing. This has been going on for years.

Frustratingly, when LGBTers finally get angry enough and respond our posts are deleted while the most egregiously offensive comments by straight posters hellbent on antagonizing us remain. I just saw a thread where the LGBT responses were swiss-cheesed right out of the thread while the posts calling gay people a bunch of racists remained. (WTF, mods!)

Here is a crystal clear example of the problem. Mark it well, because this attitude and behavior is legion on all sorts of LGBT topics, but on this issue, the clarity of the motives of various individuals could not be starker.

When the Obama DOJ defended DOMA, the LGBT community exploded. What happened on DU? The usual bromides. Pony, single-issue, you never loved him, you can't have everything you want right now, I don't disagree with you - only your tactics, you're ungrateful for all he's done for you (this, in the summer of 2009 already), you're just being hostile.

Now, the LGBT community protested, and pressured, and cajoled, and worked our ever-loving asses off. And you know what?

The President changed his mind and did the right thing.

Awesome, right? A reason for DU to unite and celebrate, right?

Wrong. The same people who posted all the offensive things above used it as yet another occasion to blast DU's LGBT community. That the President changed his mind wasn't proof of the community's correctness, it was proof that we were being evil and wrong in criticizing the President. It was proof that President Obama is awesome, and LGBTers are just bitter and hateful.

Even though we convinced the President. We fought for this. We made it happen.

Yet, we're still the ungrateful, hostile, useless assholes. For what, convincing the President to do the right thing?

Heads, the President's wrong stance is 100% correct. Tails, LGBTers are whining children who deserve disdain.

We, literally, can't win. And the selective moderation, where offensive, antagonizing comments by the usual suspects remain while LGBTers' responses are deleted ensures that LGBTers will not feel welcome or appreciated no matter what gains we make, no matter how much we affect this administration positively.

Why is it this hostility is crystal clear to many of us, yet the mods repeatedly seem totally at sea and unable to recognize when people who have been antagonizing LGBTers for years are at it once again? What blind spot exists here?

As far as that List, I made my thoughts known about it here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=178606&mesg_id=178611

That list is offensive as hell to me, and it would never ever be tolerated by anyone at all if it was directed at another minority community. The fact that that List keeps getting slapped down - no matter how many times LGBTers say it's offensive - is a perfect crystallization of the problem. Clearly, LGBTers don't know their own issues, feelings, or lives. We need heterosexuals to explain to us what is or is not ok.

And that, right there, is the problem, again and again and again. Heterosexuals know better what is and is ok to LGBTers' sensibilities.

It's as patronizing to many of us as white people have been and continue to be towards racial minorities when they push for dignity and equality.

You do not know better. Stop behaving as if you do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ohio Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #429
445. I do not think the problem is the mods but rather the technicality
In all honesty, I expect the mods sometimes delete with their noses held. Their job is to hold up the rules to the letter of the law and not the spirit of it... There is a reason I have never tried to be one... I could not do it in an impartial way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #445
582. I could at least understand it if that were the case.
Rules are rules, objective arbiter and all that. That would be perfectly fine. But, in the last two weeks alone, there have been several threads directed at LGBTers where personal attacks and all kinds of heinous intimations (gays are racist!) were allowed to stand while responses to them were not. What results is a very lopsided attack thread aimed at LGBTers.

If that's how the rules objectively come down time after time, something's very wrong with the rules.

But, I don't think that's it. I honestly believe the mods just do not see what an LGBT individual sees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #429
575. The fact that I posted a parody list aimed at another minority group
and it was deleted in five minutes is proof of how offensive "teh LIST" actually is. When it's pointed in the other direction it's offensive. When it's aimed at us, it's par for the course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #575
696. + a bazillion! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
432. I think this is an important experiement. I believe that people do get out of hand on occasion but w
we are all adults and should be able to handle it. I think this should be done more often. It's too easy for some here to scuttle a thread by misconduct.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Initech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
435. I think DOMA and DADT are two very evil and hateful pieces of legislation that
Are unconstitutional and need to be repealed immediately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ej510 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #435
444. To me those pieces of legislation can be seen a form of Jim Crow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:00 PM
Response to Original message
438. homophobic moderators
i do not enter this thread to throw down some sort of gauntlet but to enter into this dialog and hope to answer some questions. i hope i do not spill any of the wrong beans of the hot tub, but i think perhaps if people had a little better idea what it was like, maybe they would not reach some erroneous conclusions.

first i must point out that mods are volunteers. i know everyone knows that. but the number of hours that most of us work are long. some work the graveyard shift. some risk the ire of significant other, or bore them to death with the stories of the day.
but second, as a result of first, is that coverage is sometimes spotty. since nothing is ever done by a single mod, sometimes things can hang in the air for a while. other times there are lots of folks around and the turn around time can be very short. and that is just after we get the alert. sometimes things hang for a long time before they are alerted on.
third is that there are often difficult calls. they require a discussion which often requires a lot of time.
it is a creaky machine.

the most important things, tho, is to testify that every single moderator here is a thoughtful and decent person to the ends of their toenails. they do not only give to du. they give to all kinds of good causes. they work for all sorts of good causes. they help each other.
if some of our official actions give the appearance of a bias of any sort, i swear that it is a result of happenstance. a less biased bunch of people you will never meet.

peace to all.

(hope skinner doesn't make an exception and delete this post.)
(all of the above also applies to the big guys here.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lazarus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #438
458. an addendum or two
It's important for people to understand that every single moderator action is taken after we reach consensus of mods available at the time.

Nobody is ever banned, nor is any post deleted, nor thread locked, due to the actions of one lone moderator. The vast majority of the time, it takes at least three to take action. If it's a sticky situation, we'll let it go until we have four or five or more in consensus.

And if we can't reach consensus, if one mod disagrees, then nothing is done.

Something simple, like calling someone an asshole, we'll delete with just two mods agreeing.

As for bannings, if it's a long-termer or a donor, admin has to pull the trigger, we can't.

Also, I think people would be surprised to find out how many LGBT mods there. I'm one (the B part).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pinto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #458
469. Hi laz. (side post) Not sure if this is really about us, or should be about us.
I know it's come up in the course of the thread, but the intent seems to be an open discussion among members about how it goes for GLBT members here.

I'm open to discussing moderator stuff, as possible, but not sure this is the venue. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lazarus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #469
471. understood, just wanted to clarify a little
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TBF Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #469
523. Pinto,
Actually I think it's very helpful if you do explain the process a bit, particularly in light of this specific discussion. It doesn't have to be overly detailed but some guidance as to how you all work is helpful. Some of us have been admin/moderators at other websites (political and otherwise) and know. Some have no earthly clue. To say "not sure this is the venue" makes it sound like it should all stay hush-hush and that there are secrets behind the scenes. I don't think it damages your authority at all to be a little more open, and it may help people to understand a little more. It is a HARD job. Cheers!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #469
535. too bad - I think it needs to be out in the open - moderators are members too
I for one am tired of hearing about all these "homophobic moderators".

There's a logical fallacy called "undivided middle". Here's a nonsense example

All cows are brown.
My dog is brown.
Therefore my dog is a cow.

Now try this.

All of George's posts were removed.
George is gay.
Therefore, all his posts were removed because he is gay.

No, they were removed because they were copyright violations, graphic violence and half a dozen other reasons. It's bad logic to assume they were removed for a single reason.

There's plenty of other examples on both sides of the street (obscure pun intended).

Plenty of times we've sat in the Moderator Hot Tub watching the same scenarios over and over and be helpless to intervene either because we can't get a concensus among ourselves or we're so understaffed we can't get a quorum.

Don't like it? Volunteer!! We could use the help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #535
644. Please let me put my two cents in...I, too, was a moderator here back
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 06:22 PM by ScreamingMeemie
in the day. You are always going to be accused. I was accused of being Anti-Dean in the '04 Primaries, while actively campaigning for the man. Don't like it? Think about it before you sign up for another term.

I also believe that one can burn out from moderating. It was especially rough on a bunch of us after the '04 Primaries because, at that time, we didn't participate in any potential flamewars...and it was very hard to just shut up and watch. Too many times now I see moderators get involved on a personal level when they shouldn't. Twice it did happen when I was a moderator and those two were removed from duty...and then later banned from the site altogether.

Yes, it's a crap job, but we knew that when we signed up.

Many people do volunteer. And I am grateful to them, and you.

(used to be MrsGrumpy)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #458
472. "And if we can't reach consensus, if one mod disagrees, then nothing is done."
Does that explain the bulletproof status of those who have been allowed to attack and disrupt with impunity for so many years?

I'll say it again: the vast bulk of the ugliness we see on DU is the work of no more than twelve or fifteen people who seem to have made it their life's work to attack people here, because they know they can get away with it. I have even seen them taunt the people they bully by daring them to alert and see if anything happens. That's how confident they are that nothing will happen to them no matter what they do, and they have good reason for that confidence.

This place does not have an LGBT problem so much as it has a bullying problem. Deal with the bullies (which does not necessarily mean banning them) and the mood here will change for the better overnight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lazarus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #472
478. that only applies to mod actions
getting rid of bullies is admin's job.

And, truthfully, I can probably count on one hand the number of times any one mod has substantially held up an action that the rest wanted to take. It just doesn't happen that often. Certainly not often enough to protect someone, for the simple fact that mods aren't on all the time. Most of us have lives outside DU and only moderate a couple of hours a day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #478
494. Thanks for giving us some insight into the process.
Why is it that some people have spent upwards of a decade snarking and bullying and generally engaging in constant antisocial behavior and they're still at it?

I'm not going to name names, but anyone who has been here a while (and I joined in the very early days) knows who these people are. I'm not saying to throw out a bunch of people, but a come to Jesus meeting with Skinner would do wonders for some of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #494
547. Have you dealt much with bullies?
I have yet to meet one who has truly changed his spots. At best they learn how to camouflage better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #547
556. Oh yes, I had a lot of dealings with them in my childhood.
I am pushing fifty and I still do not like to think or talk about my childhood because it makes me sad. Fat, effeminate, Forrest Gump leg braces. That should paint the picture--I don't have to tell you what it was like.

That's why I recognize the dynamic here at DU. It is classic bullying, from the behavior of the bullies themselves to the authority figures looking the other way and covering for the bullies and telling their victims to toughen up and stop being such whiners.

The fact that I recognize the situation here for what it is explains why it makes me so angry. I know that people are hurt by it, and I came here in the very early days of the site, so I know that DU has not always been the snake pit that it became during the last primary, which was in most ways the beginning of the situation we see now.

You're right--bullies seldom change. They have to be removed from those they torment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pinto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #556
722. Hi QC. Appreciate your input. Seldom share personal info here, but I too have been different...
all my life. My user name, pinto, refers to me physically. I have neurofibromatosis (NF1). Cafe-au-lait spots are the common marker for the thing. In my case, I happen to look like a pinto. About 1/2 of my body is mottled brown, literally like the horse.

So, I know what it's like to an extent, to be other from the get go. Long before I knew I was gay, I was pinto - with all of the stuff that entailed. I've never met another person with NF1 in my life.

I've been fortunate along the way, though. Gay or not, pinto'd or not, while it's been a challenge at times, I've found people who take me for who I am. And are interested in who I am. And hold me in the same respect as anyone else, for better or worse.

More to the point of our discussion here, though - I'm acutely aware of differences among us all. I hope I bring this to DU as a member, as we all do. ~ pinto
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #722
752. Thank you for sharing that with us. I mean it.
It sounds like we both finally got the lives we wanted, more or less. I really can't complain now. But I do remember what it was like being bullied, and I recognize it when I see it here. It's gone on too long and good people are being hurt by it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #478
585. You don't need one lone homophobic moderator protecting the bullies
when you have at least three.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chemisse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #472
652. When an alert comes in we look at the post (or OP), we click into the thread to see
the context (just in case the meaning differed than what it seemed), and we (unless is crazy busy) look to see if those immediately around it are also offenses.

But what we can't do - and probably shouldn't do - is look at the sum total of what the member does or thinks or usually posts and the history of the relationship between members in the thread.

So let's say there is a snarky comment made, alerted upon, then deemed by at least 2 mods to be not require removal (maybe it's a little snide but not really an insult).

That very same comment, when added to the sum total of all the interactions between the members involved, could be wildly insulting to you, the target. It could be thick with insinuation, it could refer to old arguments, it could be intended to push an emotional buttons.

All that is clear as day to you but invisible to the moderators. Since it is so obvious to you, the only possible explanation seems to be mod bias.

That's the only explanation I can think of for why, when we all do our best to be fair and nobody is allowed to act alone, there would be the perception of bias or bigotry among the mods.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #652
678. That's an excellent point, and the bullies are very skilled at keeping their hateful remarks
just thiiiiiiiiis far within the bounds of what is permitted, so what you see is a slightly objectionable but isolated bit of snark.

What the people they have been attacking for months or years see is a continuing pattern.

You're right. It's a definite problem, and I don't really know a solution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thanks_imjustlurking Donating Member (462 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #678
691. Or the worst stuff, or patterns, gets disappeared.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #678
701. I have a solution.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #701
1044. mods do not make that decision.
let me say that again, mods do not make that decision.

banning is a very limited solution, anyway. you have no idea how much time we spend trying to keep people we have banned from coming back. and somehow, even when that doesn't happen, sadly, there seems to be a never ending supply of assholes stepping up to take their place.
but believe me, mods would like to tombstone a lot of people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #1044
1175. Well, to be honest, if they could
then there wouldn't be a single gay poster left on DU. Rasputin proved that fact back during the Purge of '09. And I'm sure a few of your "five minutes or less" actions would have brought about tombstones, too.

I think a lot of the problem was borne out by the actions of the Administrators this morning: institutional bigotry at the top level.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thanks_imjustlurking Donating Member (462 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #652
702. Yep. It's a pattern.
and a lot of it can no longer be seen because of disappeared posts.

I really think all posts should be left - perhaps lock the poster out of the thread, but leave the evidence there. Or require another click to see the evidence. Something.

But a lot of the patterns are gone, gone, gone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #702
721. And sadly, too often
the responses to the patterns also disappear. It's easy to sweep up the tracks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #652
1493. I have a question
Why is it that there are times where an obviously offensive post is left unlocked for hours or days yet we see individual posts wthin the threads being deleted. That's when it gets frustrating. When we knopw mods have seen it but instead of locking the thread they delete the posts within it (often the deleted posts are the angry responses to the op). Is there a different set of rules for deleting a post and locking a thread? I'm not being snarky here- I am just trying to understand the process.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thanks_imjustlurking Donating Member (462 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #472
698. "This place does not have an LGBT problem so much as it has a bullying problem."
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #698
705. Thanks!
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 07:21 PM by QC
And it's not as though the members haven't been trying to point this out to Skinner for quite some time.

In the member survey a plurality said that they do not participate as much as they would like because of incivility. There have been at least two survey threads (big ones with lots of participation) in which considerable majorities made the same complaint.

All that would strongly suggest that there is a problem, if only anyone would do the only thing that will work, which is to get a grip on the bullies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thanks_imjustlurking Donating Member (462 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #705
760. It's not just incivility, in this particular case.
It's repeated, to all appearances intentional, baiting. At least once by a mod. And then the *baited* get the boot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heddi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #458
747. Laz, I have to disagree with you on one point...There is a moderator who currently mods
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 07:49 PM by Heddi
who has deleted MANY threads without consensus, who has locked MANY threads without consensus, who does it knowingly (not recently, though) and who I and other mods have had to go to Skinner about restoring threads and unlocking threads. He even locked a thread 2x's after Skinner unlocked it 2x's. He has done this for the last year or so that I've been modding.

There are moderators who are biased. I dislike moderating with them. They are very open in their disdain for certain groups of DU'ers. I have spoken several times about these Moderators with Skinner. I have called these moderators out in the Mod Forum.

Skinner has assured me that these "issues" will not be an issue with DU3 and the new way of moderating.

I only hope so.

The only reason I have stayed on as a moderator for the last 3 or so terms is that there are several mods who I feel would be very dangerous without just one person there to say "NO! I am against a lock" or "No! I do not support banning this poster" (not an issue any more since we don't tombstone without Skinner's approval).

The last 3 terms have seen the loss of several very good, very balanced moderators because they were tired of the bullshit cliques in the lounge, the bullying, the superiour attitude, and the ability for bad mods to continue to be mods, and to continue to be bad mods.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #747
775. Nice to have confirmation of what was only strongly suspected.
Thank you for your honesty. Sincerely. When enough people tell you your own eyes are lying, you begin to suspect it. Thank you for making it clear we're not imagining these things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heddi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #775
810. I want to make it clear that I'm not trying to me me v them
I'm a human. I have biases and prejudices and pet issues. everyone does. but as a moderator I try my best to recognize my bias towards issues or posters and recuse myself from a decision if I feel I cannot be unbiased in moderating that situation or post or whatever.

and the biases I speak if aren't just or always gblt. it's r/t or guns or lounge posts...everything I guess. moderators are human and we have the flaws that every human has, but its okay to say ' I can't moderate this post or poster or issue fairly'. that's not a weakness but it's sometimes seen as such I think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #810
944. I always knew I liked you, even when we disagreed; which wasn't often.
YOU FUCKING ROCK!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:18 AM
Response to Reply #810
1016. .
:hug: Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heddi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #810
1063. because of my posts in this thread, my moderator privileges have been revoked
I am not shocked it happened, and I stand 100% behind my words, and I think my record as a moderator for several terms both recently and as far back as 2003 or 2004, as well as my posting history as a DUer since October 2001 speak for themselves as far as my dedication to DU goes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhollyHeretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #1063
1068. I was just going to ask you about that
I'm guessing the biased mods still have their mod status. I'm starting to remember why I left this place for a quite a while in '09. Thanks for saying what you did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #1063
1074. Sadly I'm not surprised. Thank you for stating the truth anyhow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #1063
1098. I wish I could say that I am surprised,
both by what you revealed and by what resulted from your revelations, but truth be told I am not at all surprised. You simply confirmed what many people have known for a long time.

And let me guess: the rogue mod is still a mod, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #1098
1108. Apparently, the three of them still are.
The two who are active in this thread still have their little "moderator" avatars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #1063
1104. Repeating my statements from down-thread

This is not a way to restore our trust in the system, by removing the only moderator who had the guts to admit that there is a problem, and what we have been complaining about for ages is actually going on.



If Heddi is gone as a moderator and cbayer, mopinko, and Skippy stay then it's proof that there is a problem, there is institutional homophobia on this site, and it lies at the Administration level.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #1104
1149. WORD!
Fuckin WORD!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hassin Bin Sober Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #1063
1128. You might as well tell us who YOU think are the biased/bigoted mods.
We all have an idea.

Hang for a penny, hang for a pound.

Thanks for your honesty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #1063
1148. I'm sorry....
....that your telling a truth, lost you a privilege at DU.
That is bad news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #1063
1201. Bravo, and thank you, for posting up.
It was apparent to many of us that there had to be one or two mods that were more than a little biased on some topics, and like you said, it was not just on GLBT issues.
:applause:
While the large majority of us understand that mods are volunteers (thank you so much) and that moderating is at best extremely difficult in many situations, and that almost every single mod does a commendable job here, many long time DUers are very aware that there is a mod or two that apparently lacks sufficient temperament and objectivity to be a DU moderator.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #1063
1257. okay, so we know that DU will act quickly if a moderator pulls back the curtain
it sounds like DU doesn't act so quickly, or maybe at all, if a moderator just breaks the rules.

it seems to be the speaking out (without naming names) that is the problem that gets dealt with.

is the greater priority protecting the holy of holies so that nothing from behind the curtain is revealed?

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #1063
1278. Seriously? That really sucks. So they won't delete posts, but will take away mod privileges?
Looks like one nasty poster was banned also.

Oh bah to admin for taking away Heddi's mod privileges for speaking out. Will my complaining about moderation now get ME banned?

So sorry Heddi and shame on them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #1063
1371. Wow! They locked the thread about how your mod privilieges were locked.
George Orwell would have something to say about this... and DU would lock his thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #747
801. This explains a lot. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #747
827. Thank you for confirming what has been obvious to many of us for a long time.
Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #747
839. Bravo for your honest braveness, while so many have been so dishonest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #747
957. This is incredibly brave.
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thanks_imjustlurking Donating Member (462 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:58 AM
Response to Reply #747
981. Thank you.
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #747
1047. gee heddi, why don't you just name names.
i have no idea who you are talking about. and i guess i don't work the fun shifts because i have no idea who OR what you are talking about. this term has been the most amicable since i have been a mod.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #1047
1112. She doesn't need to name names.
Four of them have been brought up elsewhere in this thread. And that the four of you are still moderators while Heddi is not proves that the problem is real, and our complaints have been both justified and ignored.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #1047
1263. if she does as you say, she may get into some trouble...are you baiting her?
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 03:48 PM by CreekDog
also, if she does as you say, then you will cause someone to be named as a homophobe or some other serious accusation on the internet.

i can't believe a moderator is encouraging this.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #747
1272. I am now going to exercise my ESP.
That particular moderator keeps jody, Cid_B, PavePusher, kctim, and others with a similar bent out of trouble.

How much of a Charles Xavier am I? (Use PM for replying if you prefer.)

P.S.: (Redundant but) :yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #747
1372. As a former mod for several terms, I stand with you, Heddi.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #747
1609. This is a game changer, and I appreciate your candor more than I can express
in words here.

Perhaps the DU3 will produce adjustments but it does not imo, explain why this was tolerated; "He even locked a thread 2x's after Skinner unlocked it 2x's. He has done this for the last year or so that I've been modding.

There are moderators who are biased. I dislike moderating with them. They are very open in their disdain for certain groups of DU'ers. I have spoken several times about these Moderators with Skinner. I have called these moderators out in the Mod Forum. (end)

I hope Skinner presents an explanation at some point.


Thank you again Heddi.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TK421 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #747
1702. there are mod cliques..I've known that for quite some time
but it is good to hear it from someone else
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #438
576. You know, Mo, if you're serious about the amount of work it is
and you want to do something about homophobic moderators, you could step down and solve both problems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #576
615. i honestly have no idea what you are talking about.
if i could know what it is exactly i have done, perhaps a conversation could start there. i feel there must be some misunderstanding, as nothing could be further from the truth.
i sincerely want to know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #615
623. "i honestly have no idea what you are talking about"
and therein lies the problem.

You have a long history with LGBT*.* posters here, complaints from us about your actions that have gone unanswered, and we can't trust you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #623
630. please give me an example.
if i have been ignorant, i would be happy to learn. i meant no offense to anyone here. least of all as a mod.
seriously, spit it out. i want to know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #623
734. Be specific
The "if you don't know what you did wrong, I can't tell you" routine is unfair to the mods you have smeared as homophobes. Be specific. What is your specific complaint about the mods. Why should I hate mopinko?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #734
745. Not mopinko (my real problems with her are mainly in the past)
but I can cite one from Skippy from just this week.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=689416&mesg_id=689416

Original post in its entirety:

The vast majority of gay people vote Democratic all the time. While there are some idiots like Log Cabin Republicans and the even more absurd GOProud, 70% or more of GLBTQ voters can be counted on to reliably vote Democratic, including, of course, support for all Democratic presidential candidates including Obama.

So what's wrong with straight people? I hope that you don't mind my asking this question. I'm really curious and I'd like to learn more. Can straight DUers help me understand? What's the problem? In recent presidential elections the voters have split close to 50/50. If we subtract out the ~10% of the population that is gay, we see that fewer than half of straight voters vote Democratic.

Now I don't know about you, but I find this appalling. What is wrong with straight people?! (No offense.) I'm just trying to understand. Why would fewer than half of straight people in the U.S. not see how important it is to support Democratic candidates? i don't have any problem seeing how important it is to support Democratic candidates. But then, I'm gay. Apparently we gay voters get it. Why can't straight people see this?

If you are straight, what are you doing to get your community to vote Democratic?


This was in direct response to another series of "ungrateful queers" threads touting all that Obama has supposedly done for us and why are we still angry about not having our rights. The OP was correct in its assertions. Gays HAVE supported Obama disproportionately more than heterosexuals. So why?

Skippy declared that this post was

Personal attacks, insults, name-calling, or questioning the character or motives of other DU members; discussing DU members rather than ideas.

Insensitive (bigotry, hate, ridicule, stereotyping) toward certain groups of people.


I'm hard pressed to see any bigotry, hate, ridicule, or stereotyping in that post. If anything, it's tame compared to similar questions that get lobbed at gays all the time on here and that Skippy, mopinko, and cbayer all turn and look the other way for.

Apply the rules evenly if you're going to have rules at all. And at least this week NYC_SKP has proven that personal bias prevents that from happening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #745
754. I don't see why the OP is overboard for DU but...
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 07:55 PM by Renew Deal
generally the "what is wrong with "XYZ" people" threads on DU will get locked.

Also, NYC_SKP may have been referring to the thread in it's entirety. There's a lot of deleted posts. We should also consider that NYC_SKP can't lock that thread on his own. If you have a problem with the moderation of that thread, then it's fair to blame the moderation of DU in general. But again, it's difficult to comment on what's not there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #754
762. And as we've been saying, it's a pattern.
This is not coming out of left field. This is just the most readily available recent example.

And the "why don't gays support Obama" threads DON'T get locked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #745
794. A few things members probably don't know about the moderation process.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 08:35 PM by NYC_SKP
One of them is the consensus required to lock threads.

Under most circumstances all mods on duty have to agree that a lock is appropriate and, in this case I'm certain that at least three moderators agreed on the action with none abstaining or disagreeing.

A locked post might not break every element of the rule cited. For example, this post didn't include an insult but did seem to push the limits of the "discussing DU members" part of that rule.

Similarly, it didn't include involve the "hate" element of the "Insensitive" rule, but might have involved some stereotyping (how do we know how such groups vote as a block, for certain?).

Take note that you said that this post "was in direct response to another series of "ungrateful queers" threads...".

Historically, threads that continue an argument from another thread have a tendency to expand the opportunities for insults to erupt.

Under different circumstances, on a calmer night without such high tensions, that post might have led to meaningful discussion.

We're not perfect but I think we all try our level best to be fair.

That's about all I have, I just thought that your description of perceived bias deserved some kind of explanation or response.

:thumbsup:

ETA: One additional thing members don't see are the zillions of posts that get deleted quickly. We only get "credit" for what you all see up for a while and is then removed. The longer a potential violation is up, the more likely moderators are struggling with making the correct decision. I wish all members could know the process.

NYC_SKP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #794
1122. A few things moderators probably don't know about a lot of DUers.
A lot of us were moderators as well at one time. The "veil" of moderating is about as thick as saran wrap. And, as a former moderator, I can also say that, while we do our best, the rules are very hard to enforce evenly. There are always exceptions to every rule.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #794
1261. We KNOW...and it's easy to figure out why you can't get sexist threads locked
because it only takes ONE moderator to say, "nah, that's not sexist".

and three admins to overrule it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fearless Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #745
1620. The topic in question is stereotyping straight people.
Just saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #438
590. Okay, let me clarify and extend my comments on this one.
Mo, there are at least three moderators: yourself, cbayer, and NYC_SKIP, who have been there for most of the pro-gay post deletion and thread locking and who have looked the other way when the homophobes post.

A number of us have complained about all of you numerous times. We have been ignored.

Whether or not you are homophobic in real life, your actions come across as homophobic. And whatever you might think about your actions and your "record" it all comes down to one simple point....

...we don't trust you.

We don't trust any of the three of you to be impartial. Honestly, right now I don't think ANY LGBT*.* poster here on DU has any reason to trust ANY of the current moderator pool considering past and recent actions.

Whether you think you are in the right, or have/can change your ways, we don't trust you, cbayer, or Skippy, and can never honestly accept any of you as impartial ever again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #590
643. +1000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #590
647. truth. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #590
679. well, lets keep talking
first, you never know who deleted your post. but at least one other moderator agreed, and no other mod disagreed.
and i swear, i pay almost no attention to people's orientation, so i barely know who is gay. honestly. even if i kept track, we never make judgements based on who it is. ever. honestly.
i suspect people are sometimes unaware of where the line is on some things. very often similar posts are differentiated by a snarky remark that mods feel goes over the line. often the poster does not agree. but we do the best we can.

locking, however, requires a larger consensus. and requires a mod to put their name on the decision. it isn't the person who feels the most strongly, it is the last person to concur on the thread. if cbayer locks a lot of your threads it is probably because she is here pretty much every waking hour. if i lock a lot of threads it is probably because of the timing of my daily "shift". the morning shift has moved on, i am usually late morning, so i am often the one to clean up the alerts.

do we sometimes make mistakes? of course we do. i, for one, am very glad that the guys have brought back the ata forum. do we sometimes see things differently from the alerting member? one mod often sees things from a different angle. and in case of doubt, speech wins out. does it sometimes get just too freaking busy to be as thoughtful as we would like to be? isn't that how it works at most jobs? again, we do our best.

i speak only for myself, but honestly, i have no malice toward any member here. i come here to be loved.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #679
712. The fact you bring up "you never know who deleted your post"
answers some of my questions. I hadn't accused you of deleting any of my posts. Methinks the woman doth protest too much. Feeling a little guilty?

Maybe I should start alerting on you to bring these things to your attention. Of course, since it feels to many of us LGBT*.* posters in here that "alert doesn't work for queers" I have no way of knowing that you would ever know or care.

In the case of the three of you -- yourself, cbayer, and Skippy -- the damage and bad blood is too deep. There is no fence to mend between us; it was burned down years ago.

It's Skinner's site and we can't tell him who to use as moderators and who not to, but as long as the three of you stay in place there won't be good feelings on behalf of a good chunk of us. And there will be no way we can ever trust the moderation system.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #712
738. And the thing is, on a normal day, your post would be deleted....
along with a "If you have any questions about DU moderation feel free to write the administrators".

And that, as they say, would be that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #738
772. You have no clue what post I'm talking about.
Skinner wanted an open dialogue. I provided it. Mo couldn't handle having a frank discussion in the open so she locked it. I took it to ATA where it got flushed.

The post we're discussing that was deleted is a whole other issue. And one that Mo brought up on her own suggesting her complicity in the decision.

And even if she was right in that decision, her history with gay members on DU along with cbayer and Skippy, has so poisoned the well that we can't deal with her in good faith because we can't trust her (or any of the others) to deal with us in good faith.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #772
832. What I mean is the post I was responding to in this thread would ordinarily be locked
I have no argument with any of your points. Not a one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #712
773. i brought that up to make sure you understood
the process that we go through.

and honestly, still, i have no idea what you are talking about. especially as, like most mods, i rarely even post any more. so if this is all based on a perception that my moderator decisions are biased, i am just trying to explain the process from the inside so that perhaps people will understand it a little better on the outside.

i am not the person you are describing, on or off the job. you don't have to believe or agree with that. but i had to say it.

peace out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #773
779. Mo, at best it's too little too late.
As we've been saying, it's all about patterns. Patterns of specific homophobic posters who post with impunity. Patterns of moderators ignoring repeated alerts on those posts. Patterns of moderators disproportionately coming down on gay threads and posts defending ourselves from the phobes.

If you can't see the patterns, then I feel very sorry for you. You must have been blinded by one thing or another. And if you're going to shove the blame for that pattern off on the process, then the process itself is broken and needs to be replaced.

Nonetheless, we've seen the patterns. And all of the deflection you want to do isn't going to change that. We don't trust you. We don't trust cbayer. We don't trust Skippy. And without trust this place cannot work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #779
1046. well, it sounds like trust will never be found
if everything here is too little too late. i have done my best to hold out an olive branch, but you haven't done anything but reiterate your dislike of me. as long as everybody holds onto their grudges, yes, it might be too late for those people. irl as well as here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:56 AM
Response to Reply #712
960. I've deleted LGBT posts, why not start in on me?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #960
1155. Really.
Lets have a list of your "work", and see, shall we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #438
640. Some mods are volunteers with abusive power.
Nuff said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #438
1100. One of the most fair-minded and decent people on DU lost her mod privileges this morning.
The obvious homophobes are still mods. She's not. All she did was state her opinion that there is a problem with biased moderation. She did not state examples, post links or name names. The mods insisting that there's not a problem are all still here.

And people wonder why equality-minded folks are pissed about the biased moderation on this site.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #1100
1153. My problem with Heddi losing her mod privileges is that at the opening of this thread
Skinner said the rules would not apply.


By getting myself out of the way, I hope that some of you might be able to hash this out.

So, I am posting this thread where interested DUers can engage in an unfiltered and uncensored discussion. I am instructing the moderators not to delete any posts, so don't bother alerting. This thread is for you all to actually engage in a discussion with each other, rather than sending tit-for-tat alerts in hopes of getting the moderators to censor people.


He broke his own rule (unless Heddi broke some special mod rule we're not aware of) and apparently, IMHO, censored a mod.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #1100
1159. Truth to power
In good faith. Does'nt get one far here.

Heddi, You're my hero today.


DU admins : transparent. Not a good move. Good Luck with this. Reap it, Dudes!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pinto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
441. Hi all. I think we've missed some opportunities in our various misunderstandings.
Many of you know me here - the DU thumbnail is moderator, Democrat, Gay, PWA and all around good guy... :hi:

Dissent, division and discussion can be an opening or a closing, depending on how it goes. A start or an end. I think we've all seen that, in one form or another.

I've really liked reading the comments about language and how we frame our POV. Not "gay marriage" but "marriage equality", not "gay rights" but "human rights", etc. While less pointed, I can see the benefit to setting our stuff in the bigger picture of all civil rights efforts. And I see the drawback, in that we don't make the specific point - we're here, we're queer and it's OK.

As far as discussion on DU goes I'd echo my opening - we've missed some opportunities. Members, moderators and administrators alike.

When any of us overlook the chance to say hey, here's my take on it all, we miss the boat. And whenever any of us bail, we fail as a group in some way. When we marginalize, ostracize or disrupt discussion, we fail. The point of a discussion venue is discussion, right?

I think we'll move forward, inevitably, one way or the other. As a country, as a party, as a GLBT component of our society and as members of DU.

Just a few comments. Interesting thread.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w8liftinglady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
443. Being Bi, I have always felt sort of out-of-place.
I generally keep things to myself.
I wish sexual orientation were a non-issue.Unfortunately,it is becoming even MORE of an issue as the 2012 elections are arriving.
In Texas, there is even more backlash against the GLBT community from the religious right.
fortunately,Stonewall Democrats are getting VERY active here,with a LOT of financial support.
There are a lot more GLBT here than you may realize.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ej510 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #443
453. Gay bashers say things like this, Gay activity isn't OK, because they will teach it
to the kids. I respond by saying what day did you choose to be straight, because I cannot remember the day I became straight. I remember getting a woody from staring, wrestling, and girls sitting on my lap in middle school.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #443
454. And more of us who support you are moving here every day.
:cheers:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hosnon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #443
953. I agree.
Anti-bi sentiments in the gay community blow my mind. I don't experience it much at all here but do to a sickening degree in the real world. "Self-hating gay", "not honest with yourself", etc. Some nerve coming from people who are still told by the straight community who they REALLY are attracted to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #443
1070. I'm bi as well
On bad days, I get it from both sides - the straights for being non-straight and the gays for "playing both sides of the street".

The local Pride Centre has all sorts of resources for gays, lesbians, trans etc. and almost nothing for bi's. There isn't even a weekly meeting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Major Hogwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
449. As Marv Albert would say --- YES!!
An open thread!!!!!!!
My dream come true!!!!!
This will solve everything!
No rulez, no mods, no mas!!

Actually I don't want to take up any bandwidth arguing with anyone about LGBT issues because I just found out that blondeatlast passed away this last weekend.
The news of her passing away hit me like taking a brick to the head.
She is the 3rd friend of mine that has passed away in the last 3 months.

As long as people treat other people like human beings and give them as much respect as they would like have shown to them, there should be no problems with any discussions.

But, it doesn't work like that on the internet.
So, there are rulez, there are mods, and I can't take no more of the beating down of LGBT members or the beating down of anyone else at this forum.
No mas!!

If you were born black, you'd be black.
If you were born gay, you'd be gay.
It's a fact borne out by science, not just a belief we have to somehow be taught to cling to.

When I saw Mr. Chas Bono on David Letterman's program last month, he explained a lot about it.
That program did a lot to dispel a lot of questions that people may still have about this issue.

We need to embrace the differences between fellow human beings and celebrate life as it is, while we are still here on this ethereal plane!!

I am not a mod nor an admin on ANY forum, and I was never a mod at the DU forum.
Yet, I post on 5 different forums arguing as best I can about equality between the sexes, whether they are gay, straight, bisexual, transsexual, or transgendered.
The government has NO business in our bedrooms, or wherever else we which to engage in sexual activity in our own abodes.
Not the Federal government, nor the state government, nor the county government, nor the city council, nor even the damned Harper Valley PTA!

Society says to keep it off of the street, so that is why NOBODY is doing it in the road, to answer John Lennon's esoteric question.

We are Americans, but I would feel the same in any country no matter where I lived!!
This country is being torn apart by issues like the LGBT issue, and I for one support those people wholeheartedly, unabashedly, and will NEVER turn my back on any human being looking for compassion, healing, or just a little understanding.

Elvis Costello was right.
What's so funny about peace, love, and understanding?
Nothing!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
451. The fact that there is a need for this thread is what is so very depressing.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 03:39 PM by ScreamingMeemie
I cannot wrap my head around the fact that some feel that equal rights for all is something that is debatable.
I cannot believe that there are posters on this thread that still think being gay is a "lifestyle".
I cannot believe that I sometimes feel that, as long as the politician has a "D" after their name, they somehow know better than us.
I will never forget the day I read a post in where a gay DUer was told to act more like that "nice man who cooks on television" if they wanted support.

I cannot believe that this is an issue for us. It shouldn't be. It should just be. Equal rights for all, understanding when policy hinders that and people feel abandoned by their party.

I don't want this board to sound like Free Republic, wherein we support the administration whether they support us or not. WE are better than that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JanMichael Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #451
468. I find it hard to believe too
I can't imagine this being an issue in 2012, but here we are. Sad.

Shoot us a note; I know Steph would love to hear from you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
455. Getting the whitewash out for the fence again....
Since you started this thread, that answers two of my questions from my posts in ATA, so I'll just proceed with the rest of them:

3. Why are homophobic moderators, who we have specifically complained about on numerous occasions, still in place?

4. Why are repeat-offender homophobes allowed to post their call-outs, homophobic statements, and other offensive remarks with impunity when any of us who made similar comments about any other minority group would be six feet under by now?


Since you claim that these problems have been exacerbated by "our efforts to enforce the DU rules," you seem to be missing the point. The problems are that you HAVEN'T been enforcing the rules, or when you have they have been enforced unilaterally or, at best, unevenly, against LGBT posts.

I mentioned to you (and you ignored) the names of at least one moderator and three users who are allowed to constantly go on anti-gay tirades or threads about how ungrateful we gays are for all that Obama has supposedly done for us, yet their posts are allowed to stand. Yet when I point out the absurdity of their statements with a parody post, it's gone in under five minutes.

When someone else counters an "ungrateful faggots" thread (as we've taken to calling them) by stating that since 70% of gays voted for Democrats in November, statistically speaking that means that straights voted against Democrats, so why did they do that, it was nuked for being "Personal attacks, insults, name-calling, or questioning the character or motives of other DU members..." and "Insensitive (bigotry, hate, ridicule, stereotyping) toward certain groups of people." If you apply that standard to that post, then you need to apply it as well to all of the postings of "teh LIST" and the "ungrateful faggot," "pony," "unreasonable and driven by childish impatience," etc. posts targeted against LGBT posters.

Skinner, the problem is not caused by the vast majority of DU members. It is driven by a few bigoted malcontents who love to take any opportunity they have to deride us. It is driven by a LACK of enforcement of DU rules or at best an uneven enforcement. It is driven by certain bigoted moderators who repeatedly abuse their powers or discretion, who we have all complained about in the past.

If the DU rules were actually applied to others the way they have been used to attack the LGBT community on here then at least two moderators and three repeat offender posters would have been banned ages ago, so I ask you hopefully for the last time....

5. MR. SKINNER, WHERE ARE THE TOMBSTONES?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #455
522. Well done.
+1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #455
543. agreed. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iggo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:33 PM
Response to Original message
467. GAY RIGHTS ARE CIVIL RIGHTS.
Fuck any and every motherfucker who doesn't think so.

Be-all-end-all, bitches.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
479. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Tikki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
482. As a straight married couple..We Support Same Sex Marriage
We can't think of even one reason why a loving, committed adult couple should not be allowed to marry.

Many years ago our now adult son was watching the television news with us and his father mentioned that women used to
be only the weather girls on television when we were younger and only later did they become news anchorpersons.
Our son seemed totally confused by this revelation and asked us, "Why?"We couldn't come up with even one reason.

We are looking forward to the day when people will be totally confused about why there was a time
when loving, committed adults could not marry...


The Tikkis
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scheming daemons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
483. I have a problem with one-issue voters of all stripes

During early 2009, while the economy was in freefall and the #1, #2, and #3 issues for America was the economy.... half of the threads on DU were about Rick Warren giving a prayer at the inauguration.

While that can be perceived as an affront to the LGBT community.... in level of importance, it was WAY down the list of things this country was dealing with in early 2009.


Yet it dominated the conversation on DU.


We got it... having Rick Warren was a mistake. But the level of discussion on this board was way out of proportion with the issue.



And that's what people were reacting to. We had a 5-alarm fire (the economic collapse) burning our house down and everyone wanted to ONLY talk about the fact that some asshole got a speaking engagement at the inauguration.


99% of DU supports LGBT rights. But that isn't (and wasn't) the only issue facing this country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #483
501. Well, perhaps if people didn't defend honoring a homophobe
It wouldn't have been such a vigorous discussion, hmmm?

And yes, one-issue voter is offensive and insulting to LGBTers.

So, well done there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #501
504. "One-issue voter" is like saying to oppose someone because he favors slavery is being a one-issue vo
voter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scheming daemons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #504
681. LGBT rights = BIG BIG issue... Warren speaking at inauguration = relatively minor in comparison
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #681
784. Warren speaking at inauguration =
BIG BIG fuck you to GLBT supporters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #501
516. No. Most LGBT DU'ers are not one issue voters.
It's not insulting to them. It's only insulting to people who feel that wars, dungeons, wiretaps, stolen elections, the theft of social security, and unemployed people starving and dying because of a lack of access to health care are comparatively irrelevant.

Civil rights for all will happen because a future supreme court will make it happen. That will only happen in the forseeable future if the guy who hired Rick Warren to speak is allowed to pack said court with progressives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #516
525. It is very much insulting to call them that, though
Calling LGBTers one-issue voters is the height of offense, because it reduces them to one characteristic rather than seeing them as whole people. And it puts the onus on them to ignore the harm done to their community. When the LGBT community is slapped in the face, and LGBTers object, throwing down the "one-issue voter" card is another way of saying "Your concerns aren't that important. Shut up."

You cannot say what is and is not insulting to a minority group. Sorry, not within your power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #525
541. Nor can you.
Progressives are a coalition. Single issue voters are not useful to any coalition. If you don't push their issue, first... they don't support yours. Once you accomplish their goal, they disappear into the woodwork.

Your concerns are as valid as any. It's time for full equality. It's also time to end the wars, support education, put people back to work and enact universal health care.

Most LGBT citizens are not single issue voters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #541
555. Then don't call their concerns single-issue
Which is exactly what the person I was responding to did.

It's not given anyone in the majority to tell what a minority group should and should not concern themselves with when it comes to their own community, and yet that is also what that person did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #483
503. Have you been active in countering the obsession with Anthony Weiner to the exclusion of
topics about the economy or the wars overseas? And if so, to what extent?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scheming daemons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #503
677. I have maybe made two or three posts about Weiner in 3 weeks...

I'm just not that interested in the story.


But I've learned that you can't counteract these things once they get rolling.


This place was crazy for two weeks when Michael Jackson died. It was all MJ all the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #483
530. This is what privilege sounds like. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #483
538. The problem with your "one issue" stance is that this should not be
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 04:34 PM by ScreamingMeemie
an issue. It should just be.

99% of DU does not support equal rights for all, I've seen too much to the negative. Our own party doesn't support equality on too many occasions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #483
540. It's way down the list because you don't fucking care.
You've got your rights, so fuck other people. 50 years ago, it's people like you who would be telling us that African American issues were "one issue voters".

It doesn't even seem to register that gay people, despite his disgusting stances on GBLT issues, STILL voted overwhelmingly for Obama. Because Gay people are foremost PEOPLE. They also have economic issues. That they're suspicious of people who continually fuck them ove and act like their rights aren't important is completely understandable.

If you couldn't vote. If you couldn't marry. If you weren't allowed to have kids. Would these be single issues for you? It certainly would for bigots 50 years ago, and it would be for bigots NOW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scheming daemons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #540
684. Rick Warren speaking had nothing to do with your rights.

Rick Warren has an incorrect world view.

But Rick Warren speaking at the inauguration had little bearing on LGBTs and their quest for equal rights.


The LGBT equal rights cause is just.


Focusing on some idiot getting a speaking engagement, at the exclusion of all other topics .... while we're in the midst of losing 750,000 jobs a month... was crazy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #684
720. No, it wasn't crazy.
It was justified, needed, and essential. Do you think GLBT people can't focus on both the fact they are losing their jobs AND the fact they get continually spit on with this religious bullshit?

Calling them one issue voters is disengenious and a means of belittling their experience.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #684
799. No, it was just an insult.
If a Republican President had invited the head of the KKK to speak at his inauguration, don't you think that African Americans would have a right to feel insulted?

So did we. It was not the speech that was the problem, it was the insult it carried with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillParkinson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 06:00 AM
Response to Reply #684
1626. Yes, yes, we get it...
YOU don't think our concerns are nearly as important as yours. We understand that. Really.

Because, of course, we're not capable of multi-tasking and being concerned about more than 1 thing.

Even if that 1 thing is our lives and the lives of our loved ones.

But thank you so much for your obvious concern.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ohheckyeah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:57 AM
Response to Reply #684
1685. For the outrage about Rick Warren
to be the focus of derision compared to the other idiotic topics that so often dominate the conversation here is crazy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:40 PM
Response to Reply #483
552. part of the reason the threads took over were the people defending warren
and the move to include him in the inaugural. :shrug:

Feeling upset about Warren--and even posting about it prolifically--has nothing to do with being a one issue voter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scheming daemons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #552
680. Well... for a month, that issue dominated DU above all else...
....meanwhile, we were losing 750,000 jobs per month and the markets were tanking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #680
767. that happens on DU all the time
But that doesn't mean that other issues can't be (or aren't) discussed, learned about, etc.

And (as I and others have pointed out) those threads were so prominent because there were many posters defending Warren and/or the decision to give him that role in the inauguration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhollyHeretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #483
572. One-issue voters? I'm guessing you were one of those posters flinging around "pony"
Civil rights are a core principal of real democrats not a fucking after thought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gkhouston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #572
1405. +1. It's too bad "pony" became a forbidden term.
We got rid of the pony but not the horseshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shireen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:09 AM
Response to Reply #483
955. economy ...
During early 2009, while the economy was in freefall and the #1, #2, and #3 issues for America was the economy.... half of the threads on DU were about Rick Warren giving a prayer at the inauguration.

While that can be perceived as an affront to the LGBT community.... in level of importance, it was WAY down the list of things this country was dealing with in early 2009.


Yet it dominated the conversation on DU.



Maybe it dominated the discussion because people who felt the economy was more important were not posting about it. :sarcasm:


Rick Warren's prominent participation at the inauguration was nauseating. It was disgusting that a self-righteous homophobe would be delivering the inaugural invocation. It was also my first clue that our new president's eloquent and moving speeches would not always be matched by his actions. I think a lot of people picked up on that sick sinking feeling, and that's why it dominated the conversation on DU.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:33 AM
Response to Reply #483
958. Enough with the "single-issue voter" crap. It's tin-eared at best.
:thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:28 AM
Response to Reply #483
1002. Therein lies the problem. Dismissing LGBT activists, civil rights actvists
as one issue voters is demeaning, calloused and will only get you shit in return. Rightly deserved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:41 AM
Response to Reply #1002
1004. Only straight white bourgeois males are qualified to say which issues truly matter.
Everyone else is just too biased, you know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ohheckyeah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:53 AM
Response to Reply #483
1683. Excuse me.....
Rick Warren dominating a conversation certainly isn't a problem when we have things like Sarah Palin's latest gaffe dominating the conversation or Anthony Weiners dick photos dominating the conversation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #483
1697. Calling LGBT activists one issue voters is offensive and demeans their work
and the real world impact of the institutionalized discrimination that still exists.

Imagine yourself writing something similar during the civil rights movement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
515. I'm not sure what this is in ref. to, but I support full equality incl. marriage for GLBT citizens.
And it needs to be done now. No apologies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
517. I'm not gay, but I'm tired of DUers treating Gay issues as anything other than vital.
Anybody who tells gay DUers not to talk about civil rights until after this or that election is not a friend of gay people. The problem is, there is always the NEXT election, and that NEXT election is always more important.

Enough.

I stand with our LGBT brother and sisters no matter what. I will never make their issues secondary, since I know that if I were in a position where I could not marry my fiancee it would not be acceptable. If I lived in a world, for example, where hispanic people like me couldn't marry...if DUers told me on a daily basis that it's not as important as the economy or whatever, I would be WAY less understanding that gay people on DU have been.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Call Me Wesley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
526. On a second thought, you know what?
It's just about civil rights and equality. Nothing else. Would anyone here tell Rosa Parks to get in the back of the bus because the time isn't right and there's still a lot of other work to do, before this can be addressed?

Would you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #526
546. People did then, and people do now.
People never change unless you fucking MAKE them change. It's the same shit repeated over and over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Call Me Wesley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #546
549. It's pretty sad, isn't it?
If you don't know, I'm Swiss. People here don't even look if two women/men kiss and hold hands. None of their business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #549
578. I'm Canadian. And here people do look...but it doesn't matter, because it's legal.
Took way too fucking long though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Call Me Wesley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #578
588. Took a long time here, too,
and we're not finished yet. There's still one issue left about adoption. Referendum this year.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #526
551. yes -- if the lgbtiq community were a single ethnic minority -- NO ONE would
have the temerity to drag out Teh List and brow beat us with it.

they would be able to see how weak those accomplishments are.

but we are the rainbow people -- which to most strong obama supporters has been boiled down to affluent white males who are racists.

that who the lgbtiq community is to strong obama supporters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Call Me Wesley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #551
561. Teh list!
I have it right here!



Rejoice with me! And no, you're not getting a pony. Stop asking for it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #561
565. ...
:rofl: :applause: :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FLPanhandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
533. I'm glad LGBT are impatient about their rights.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 04:28 PM by FLPanhandle
We are so much closer to this happening now, the nation's attitude is changing, it's inevitable. The "light at the end of the tunnel" probably drives the desire to get this done and increases impatience.

Impatience means the goal line is in sight and I don't blame LGBT for focusing on it.

If I were in their shoes, I'd probably be even less civil than some have been.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stevenmarc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
539. It's about time
As a gay DU'er I applaud a restraint in moderating posts dealing with LGBT issues. There appears to be a few rather thin-skinned, tight-assed posters that seem to take their perpetual victimhood to a level where they can manufacture homophobia in the sound of a pin dropping. And god forbid you call them on their total overreaction to nothing because they are the first ones to hit the alert button when they can't defend their position.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #539
557. Thank you for saying this.
I've tried to articulate this but not as well as you did.

But if I try to imply that this helps derail conversations in GLBT threads, I'm being called out as the attacker.

And apparently being straight gives me NO right to counter a GLBT DUer on anything, otherwise I'm a 100% Obama sychophant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #557
570. Honey, if the shoe fits.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 05:07 PM by Maven
I'm surprised you're not ashamed to agree with this antigay diatribe.

Oh wait. No, I'm not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #570
577. This is what I'm talking about.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 05:11 PM by CakeGrrl
You know NOTHING about me, who I am, who I have in my family, who my friends are.

I'm a Dem and vote Dem. I support LGBT rights.

You don't dare to presume ANYTHING about what shoe fits me.

But I can't say that some DUers are uptight and play the victim because they're fighting for their rights and they are therefore special and protected?

Bullshit. Honey.

The people who know me would laugh to see someone imply what you just did about me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #577
584. What I know is that you would sooner stop breathing before failing to defend Obama
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 05:22 PM by Maven
on any issue, including and especially gay rights. And if that meant stepping on GLBT DUers with a legitimate complaint by calling them whiny victims, you'd do it in a heartbeat.

You "support" LGBT rights only insofar as they don't interfere with Obama's image. All else is BS. You might as well own it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #584
591. Further mischaracterization.
I'll defend what I think are extreme criticisms, as in "hasn't done anything".

As for the rest of this accusatory shit, you are so far off-base I can't discuss this with you. You're offensive in your incorrect presumption of my level of support. You have no fucking idea, once again, about my life and the things that are important to me.

But maybe that's the idea? Use the scorched-earth accusation to avoid allowing other points of view.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #591
593. Please point out one post in which you criticize (or even critique!) Obama on a gay rights issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #593
604. I respond in threads to refute extreme accusations.
Of course, given your approach thus far, you'll take that and go "See? I was right!"

So since YOU get to ask, I will too:

What is the benchmark by which this administration's progress is being measured as a failure? Another presidential admin? Whose record on this is the example to follow?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #604
620. The benchmark is
justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #604
650. I second Pab Sungenis.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 06:21 PM by Maven
The standard is justice.

The standard is equality.

The standard is integrity.

The standard is two thousand fucking eleven, for God's sake. When a majority of the country supports equal marriage.

Obama has taken some positive steps but they have been overshadowed by a lot of really shitty decisions and appointments that undermined us for his own gain, and even more overshadowed by his overzealous devotees who have shown that ugly mob mentality and idol worship are not just for the Republican Party.

Since you asked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
great white snark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #650
657. So I hope by your standard Bill Clinton was a COMPLETE failure.
And couldn't you give Obama at least his full term to judge him?

Why would his supporters on a message board overshadow his accomplishments?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #657
700. For gays? Yes. Clinton was a failure.
And his backpedaling on his promises when the slightest bit of backlash came up set our rights back two decades.

DADT was a disaster and DOMA was worse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #700
706. Yep, pretty much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #650
660. And you just had to get a shitty jab in there about "devotees", didn't you?
Why don't you spend your time going after the REAL enemies of LGBT equality rather than picking pissy schoolyard cyber-fights on a DEMOCRATIC website?

And projecting like hell, I might add. This thread is all about the echo chamber of every complaint that's been raised and re-raised about GLBT rights and the (mis)perception of where fellow DUers stand, and the zeal with which they are backbitten, talked about and called out...until they actually show up. That's so brave.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #660
687. Sorry, there's no other word for it.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 07:39 PM by Maven
The level of, yes, devotion to this particular politician by certain individuals transcends support and is more akin to faith. To the point that when he does things that are spineless and inexplicable except with regard to political expediency - which all politicians do - they would rather gut their fellow Democrats than admit their guy did something indefensible and wrong. That goes double on GLBT issues, particularly since many of the same people are straight and deep down don't believe our goals are that important in the first place. Or worse, they wish we would just go away.

Frankly, I don't know what you believe except that Obama can pretty much do no wrong. I don't think you have any credibility as far as real LGBT support (as evidenced on this site, at least) because it's all contingent on what's good for Obama, and to hell with anyone who dares criticize him.

"Why don't you spend your time going after the REAL enemies of LGBT equality...?"

Obama has shaken hands and accepted money and given the national stage to those enemies, and you've defended it. No credibility.

"...the zeal with which they are backbitten, talked about and called out...until they actually show up. That's so brave."

You'll notice I called you out directly. So if you're talking about passive aggressiveness, look elsewhere. This thread is made necessary because a few DUers are consistently allowed to antagonize the GLBT community here and get away with it thanks to their "pragmatist" bona fides. That's the long and the short of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #660
717. The tire treads on the backs of our LGBT community are far deeper than
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 07:26 PM by ScreamingMeemie
any perceived toothmarks on your skin. Sorry. This thread is nothing about an echo chamber. You see...I was allowed to marry, my husband was allowed to visit his wife in the hospital. I was allowed to claim his benefits upon his death to help raise the children, children that neither one of our families sued me for rights to.

Sometimes it really is okay to get upset with a Democratic president... without being called names, or told to "get over it", or attacked with references to gift horses, wahmbulances and "fringe issues". These are people who fight along side us year after year, in hopes of getting Dems elected to office, only to be told, yet again, to wait their turn. To wait for something that should be a fucking given.

I'm sorry, they have a right to be pissed off and anyone who would dare laugh or denigrate them for it should took a long hard look in their "progressive" mirror.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #717
751. And when did I question any of that?
Will you please go find the people who are actually DOING that and give them the lecture?

Do you see me laughing? Denigrating?

But apparently, by any means, DO NOT say anything back if a LGBT DUer lobs shitbombs at you because, well, just because?

I think not.

Otherwise, put up a thread that says "NO NON_LGBT BEYOND THIS POINT" and be done with it if that's where this is heading.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #751
793. Look at the post of yours that I responded to...
and honestly tell me if you think you are part of the solution, or part of the problem.

I don't know, I'm not LGBT, and I have always been welcomed in threads discussing equal rights. Perhaps that is because I realize that they are right. It shouldn't be an issue, but it is. Anyone who can't see that is deliberately blind, stupid...or both.

See how I posted that, without being "pissy"????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #793
816. Good on you!
Although I did catch the condescension toward ME. ;-) Thanks for the etiquette lecture, but this is a gloves-off thread and I'm taking advantage.

I get that people are angry, but I will fucking well NOT be called homophobic.

The answer is simpler than you're trying to make it: I mainly hang out on GD: P. And there, the approach to matters GLBT, by the very nature of that forum, is in the context of the administration and what is has (or very frequently) has not done on that front. So there's a natural level of contention when there is disagreement on the level of progress being made.

With that, I think I'm done here. I was "invited" here by being called out. There was quite a bit of mumbling about "us" (i.e. the GD: P offenders) probably not showing our faces. I submit that attitude is "part of the problem" as well. And I showed up to this...event.

At the end of the day, it would serve some well to realize that the vast majority of us paying DU members are on the same side when it comes to equal rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #816
818. You detect tone through printed word? Wow!
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 09:01 PM by ScreamingMeemie
In answer to "the vast majority of us paying DU members", I paid (quite a bit) for 7 years of my presence here on DU. I was also a moderator (I changed my username under the amnesty) for 2 years, back in the '04 Primaries... And then this kind of shit started happening. I no longer donate, this is true. But that was earned by the posts of certain DUers, the banning of other DUers, and subsequent departures of still other DUers... and the refusal of the admins to do much about it.

Glad you made it to the "event". I see it as something rather different.

It would serve some well to realize that they truly are blind, stupid or both.

For the record, I did not call you homophobic. But it's okay if you want to call me a non-paying member. I want the admins to see what they have lost because of this. There's a lot of us.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #818
830. I didn't say you did, nor was I questioning your member status.
It was implied at the top of this sub-thread that I was happy to sign on to an "antigay diatribe". That exchange is what you jumped in the middle of.

I had assumed you read the whole exchange before you added your thought. If you do read it, that is where I'm coming from.

I'm just tired of the hyperbole and the accusations and the implication that as a non-LGBT, I don't have much standing to rebut it. The real fight isn't here on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #830
846. The fight is here on DU, as long as we all profess to be Democrats.
And, since you weren't questioning me, who were you speaking of when you mentioned "paying DUers"? I'm just curious. As I see it your exchange is with several people; there wasn't much to "jump into" the middle of. I have read the great majority of posts on this thread, which only emphasizes that there is a very real problem here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #846
867. I actually think this thread had pretty much spun out when you joined.
1. I was accused of signing on with an "antigay diatribe" and vehemently disagreed - the end;

2. It was asserted that I am willing to throw LGBT rights out the window at the expense of preserving the President's image (nowhere to go with that one, I will drop that line of attack);

3. It was asserted that the administration will not have done enough on LGBT rights until they're in place. There will ALWAYS be disagreement on the timetable.

I'm addressing the people with whom I had those exchanges and anyone at large who thinks that DUers are a problem; yes, I've seen people make incendiary remarks, but I've seen several people say the same thing: I'd assert that MOST of us who bother to hold a membership on this forum generally want the same thing. I was only using the "paying" membership to emphasize it. Obviously, the arguments will go on as to how committed or sincere people seem to be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:14 PM
Response to Reply #867
876. I don't think it had spun out. Really I don't.
I have seen my friends banned.
I have seen friends leave.
The timetable shouldn't be. It's really THAT simple. There shouldn't be a timetable on equal rights. Simple. The fact that the administration, and several (defend Obama at all costs) DUers can't see that and will wave around a list that amounts to nothing blows my mind.

I don't see you defending the rights of LGBT DUers here. What were they to think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #876
914. So, because I didn't put up a post
you're saying they were OK to imply that I like antigay jokes? That I'm an Obama sycophant?

Show me your LGBT bona fides, or else you get "the treatment"?

I'm not down with that approach.

As I said, I'm here because someone called me out, and I went ahead and came over.

Nothing done here today has changed my character, my attitude or my feeling on equal rights.

You may decide that's worrisome.

I know it's not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #914
931. I know your behavior on this thread is "worrisome"...
...if one were going to worry about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:52 AM
Response to Reply #931
966. Sorry you feel that way. Don't take the loss of your cyber-friends out on me. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:48 AM
Response to Reply #966
1007. Again, I suggest that you take a long, hard look in the mirror.
The "who me?" attitude doesn't suit you well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #1007
1323. I think I'll pass on that advice, thank you.
Another one of your buds tried to dispense that advice, delivering it with some hypocritically shitheel comments. No dice.

Others have visited this thread and noticed the same nastiness. So if you want to pretend that certain people are above it or are justfied in the insults they level, feel free. I think that reading this thread, an objective observer will see where the ugliness lies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #604
714. Puh-lease. You are the very problem.
You love Obama more than equality. And you are a perpetual ass about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #714
744. Unfortunately that claim can't be bolstered with any proof
But it's interesting to see your hostility come to the surface.

This will be taken into account whenever I see you posting on GD: P.

I didn't realize your feelings were so ugly, but this thread is an enlightenment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #744
897. Put me on ignore or do whatever you need to. I couldn't care less.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #897
911. 's ok
I don't need to shield myself from anyone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:53 PM
Response to Reply #744
1360. You are a vile, homophobic piece of shit. And that's all I'm going to say in this thread
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #1360
1504. Dupe
Edited on Fri Jun-17-11 12:28 PM by CakeGrrl
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #1360
1505. A very misinformed, angry, bitter and inaccurate pronouncement.
You bile can only eat at you, carrying so much anger you feel the need to spew invective that by all rights should have banned.

You lack of civility and those who would applaud it reflects on you.

Good luck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BillStein Donating Member (403 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #604
1089. OK...
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 11:06 AM by BillStein
you want to be judged as the person you are? Well, to fellow DUers you are what you post. We have nothing else to go by. And your posts show that you are, at the very least, tone deaf, regardless of who you are "in real life" or how shocked your friends would be to hear what some people here think.

I rarely post on these forums. I can honestly say that this is the first time I have felt compelled to call anyone out. So congratulations- you even stirred this lurker to action.

(edited for spelling)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #539
560. if this was about racial = rights - you would sing a very different song.
and to me when i read something like your post -- i'm looking at active homophobia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #560
589. now now
I am quite sure some his or her best friends are gay and agree with him or her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Safetykitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #539
564. So, fill us in on your thoughts on gay rights. How do you see it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stevenmarc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #564
596. What I believe in is Equal Rights
I find it frustrating when anyone in the LGBT community uses the term gay rights in the defense of our issues because they not only segregated us but also made the oppositions argument of special rights for them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Safetykitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #596
606. And....?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stevenmarc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #606
611. What part
Of Equal Rights do you fail to comprehend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #596
608. are you part of the lgbtiq community?
do you think our rights -- are confined be marriage equality only?

what about employment safety or not being kicked out of where you live?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stevenmarc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #608
635. Equal Rights is all encompassing
If you differentiate one right from another it isn't equal is it?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #635
639. can you be denied employment because you are lgbtiq or kicked out of your apartment?
if you have your rights -- hiding behind the shield of = rights while criticizing us is cowardly at best.

& for that matter -- when it comes to that stuff -- it isn't every ones rights -- they have them -- we don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stevenmarc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #639
654. Are you
Typing just to see yourself type, it doesn't appear you made the effort to read up thread, because if you had I already established that I was gay so I don't understand the whole "we" thing since I'm part of "we" and have been for quite some time, were talking Stonewall era.

I think I have a fairly solid take on our community's rights considering I have a pretty good historical perspective on the subject.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #654
658. age has no bearing on this topic -- & i'd be surpised if i wasn't older than you.
but not the point.

lgbtiq folk can be as wrong and anxious to turn strong = rightists into 'whiner's &
'bigots' as anyone else on this board -- it's happened plenty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #539
566. Who are you?
I've never even seen you opine on one of these issues. All of a sudden you're a "gay DUer" here to school all the "thin-skinned, tight-assed" GLBTs on this site?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stevenmarc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #566
599. I didn't know I had to submit my CV to you to post, my bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #599
610.  you wanna chime in our side -- it comes w/ bona fides. nt
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 05:40 PM by xchrom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DURHAM D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #566
676. I'm thinking its the Lesbian blogger from Damascus...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #539
667. Thank you.
I wrote a small novel up above in this thread, and didn't say what you did in a few words. And i didn't feel qualified to say what you did since I'm not gay. I see it just as you mentioned. Toughen up and realize that if something was said that is bothersome, well maybe it's your own reaction. And the real change is in civil rights.

I like a world where anything goes, but in combination with intelligence and sensitivity. Real sensitivity, which comes from intelligence and thought and empathy.

I see a world that could be so good. I really wish we could all live up to it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philly_bob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
542. Gutsy move, Skinner. Hope it works. After my own stormy posting drama,
I concluded that discussion of tactical differences (civil union v. full marriage) with absolutist LGBT posters was unproductive. I shut up, mind unchanged. What broke my heart in my particular thread was a guy who said, "My lover is dying and philly_bob doesn't want me to be able to visit him in the hospital." Which is just the opposite: I wanted a compromise that WOULD enable him to have visitation and survivor rights, while the absolutists, for tactical and ideological reasons, were blocking any compromise other than full marriage equality. But I said nothing, because the guy was obviously hurting and was sustained by the idea that he was part of a movement.

Two years on, I wonder whether that poster got to visit his dying lover.

I hope Skinner's initiative leads to some frank dialogue on LGBT strategy and alliances.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #542
568. 'absolutists' -- right up there with 'racists'.
the poster was right about you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philly_bob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #568
814. The poster said I wanted to deny survivor rights for gays...
... and you conclude he was right, that I want to deny visiting & survivor rights.

Again, a tactical difference leads to insults, distortion of positions, and self-righteous outrage.

I'm out of here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #542
618. Bob, there's one thing you overlook.
The compromises aren't working. I had a civil union and yet my husband was kept out of my hospital room if the homophobic security guard was on duty at the time. I have to prepare six tax returns every year instead of two because of the compromise. The compromise isn't working and we need for people who are championing it to understand that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #618
664. And why should we have to friggin' compromise in the first place?
Why is it the LGBTIQ community has to be the one's to compromise. How about the narrow-minded, tight ass bigots? It's their turn to compromise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #664
685. Good point
But whether or not we should have compromised we DID. And that compromise does not work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philly_bob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:52 PM
Response to Reply #664
815. And that's why we call it 'absolutist.'
Anyway, I'm out of here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 04:09 AM
Response to Reply #815
1590. You're clearly using it as a pejorative.
Good riddance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
do me baby Donating Member (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:06 PM
Response to Original message
574. Maybe I was Borne this way?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #574
819. Well, then , Bless your heart, Baby!
and welcome to DU
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
579. No mod deletions? Quick everyone, post all of your porn pictures!
Just kidding. Thanks for the open thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #579
592. ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aerows Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 06:56 AM
Response to Reply #592
1601. OMG
:spray:

In the midst of this heated topic, we get this :rofl:. That's freaking PRICELESS.

She kind of looks like the owl. I nearly ruined my keyboard and monitor when I saw that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #579
601. You are not helping
but we love you anyway. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Omaha Steve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:15 PM
Response to Original message
583. Elderly gay lost his home because the his partner died

K&R!

I just learned today that a older guy down the street lost his home. Mostly because he was gay. His life-partner was retired Air Force. No benefits for the love of his life. When the Vet died, his partner couldn't afford to keep their lovely home. No idea where he went.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhollyHeretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #583
613. That is horrible. I hope he's okay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #583
735. That's what it is all about man, right there. That is why delay is
cruel, because our lives are brief and time is the avenger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:23 PM
Response to Original message
586. There's never a wrong time to demand equality
and there's never a right time to ask people to defer that demand.

In solidarity,
~~~ suffragette.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RandomKoolzip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
612. Besides the rampant and ugly homophobia on display here and on other
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 05:44 PM by RandomKoolzip
threads re: marriage rights, you know what pisses me off? When hets and others derail these conversations by bringing up things like "I think ALL marriages should be illegal" or "why should anyone be married?" or "Why should the government be in the business of marrying people in the first place" or similar topics. IMMEDIATELY, as soon as those posts get stirred into the mix, the whole discussion goes to some other, less relevant planet. That shit is just...it's just dumb. And it belittles legitimate LGBT concerns about equal rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #612
621. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #612
626. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
617. When we throw love "under the bus" for political expediency, we throw the human race under the bus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #617
1377. That's about
as true as most anything that I can think of that is fit to believe in and keep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor Hurt Donating Member (472 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:48 PM
Response to Original message
624. What is this thread about? Simply allowing namecalling...
to blow off steam?


This will fail in an epic fashion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #624
634. Why not take a moment and read...?
It's worth a moment or two of your time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #624
637. actually, it may not fail.
if it can show deletions and bannings have not been equal in their application -- and force mods to take certain duers posts into consideration for that i would be happier.

though i notice the absence of certain strong obama supporters here with the presence of strong lgbtiq folk here as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #637
642. Its early
People in Mountain and Pacific time zones, should be returning from their day's work, and will be settling in soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #637
725. I unrecced this for the same reason I unrecced "Mending Fences."
I see this as a distraction. The Administrators are stalling for time at best.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor Hurt Donating Member (472 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #725
774. What should the admins do?
I guess I'm not clear on the dynamics at work here.

Forgive my questions, please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #774
783. What should they do?
(1) Enforce the rules evenly. Start locking and deleting the homophobes, and start tombstoning the repeat offenders like those I've named elsewhere.

(2) Either replace the bigoted moderators or the moderator process, whichever is the one that is broken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor Hurt Donating Member (472 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #783
892. sounds reasonable
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #725
836. I can't disagree - until certain strong Obama supporters are banned
For carrying out malicious mischief in our camp - things can't really be equal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:36 AM
Response to Reply #836
986. Let the witchhunt begin!
Are you now, or have you ever been a "strong Obama supporter?"

Where were you the evening of the 21st around 8pm?

Were you in the vicinity of the "camp" in question?

Your continuous calls for bannings and beheadings are becoming McCarthy-like.

If Skinner is taking requests, I have a few candidates for consideration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #836
1482. I'd prefer certain what Pab wrote right above here....
(1) Enforce the rules evenly. Start locking and deleting the homophobes, and start tombstoning the repeat offenders like those I've named elsewhere.

(2) Either replace the bigoted moderators or the moderator process, whichever is the one that is broken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #624
741. For me, it's about learning and widening my perspective.
"What is this thread about?"

For me, it's about learning and widening my perspective. But I imagine we all see what we want to see, and don't see what we don't want to see.

I'm fully confident your prognostication will be given all the credit it is due...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeSwiss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
631. K&R
- All I have to say is......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
638. In response to comments #464 and #495
Where the hell do you come off with your holier than thou attitude and think you have a right to call me a BIGOT?
You know nothing of my sexuality, my partners, my family, or my support and place in my local LGBT community.
I HAVE never said anything negative on DU regarding the LGBT community.
I have been attacked for supporting Obama - on a DEMOCRATIC website - which is ridiculous.
ONE of my POSITIVE OPs several months ago was locked due to "unknown intent" because folks on this website attacked it and I was found wronging guilty of some 'thought up motivation' which was ONLY in the minds of some DUers.

I find this situation of LGBT community members attacking other members and supporters highly disgusting and non-productive in solving problems or moving forward to do all the work that still needs to be done to achieve equal rights for ALL people which includes LGBT rights, womens rights, minority rights, immigration rights, etc.

Until ALL people are shown respect here on DU I can't see how the problems that Skinner and the moderators are having to deal with will ever go away.

p.s. I'm so pissed off that that is all I am going to say on this issue for now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #638
656. not homophobic
:eyes:

you're one of the duers who i've noticed absent from this thread.

and yes -- if lgbtiq folk were of a single racial make up -- you wouldn't post the 'pro-obama' stuff to put down lgbtiq people that you do.

you're song would be very different.

it's a peculiar hypocrisy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:14 PM
Response to Original message
645. The big problem is the relentless gay baiting - and the eight to ten worst offenders
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 06:21 PM by ruggerson
have not contributed to this thread (up to this point) which basically confirms what some LGBT DUers are thinking (and obviously I am only speaking for myself):

There are a handful of posters who don't care much about gay rights (they never pop up in gay rights threads) but they DO care, passionately it seems, that Obama's reputation as a gay rights advocate should never be questioned or challenged.

They are the people who seem to only care about LGBT rights insofar as how it reflects on Obama. They are in thread after thread, in GD-P mostly, making snide remarks about gay DU'ers, inferring that gay DU'ers are racist for criticizing Obama on LGBT issues, and, (because when they are blatant about their intent their posts are deleted) much of their recent missives are written with a wink and a nod.

As in "This is great news that President Obama had an Easter Egg hunt and invited some gay people, why aren't his critics applauding this? I think I know the answer." To which one onf their tag team pipes in: "We both know the answer."

What they attempt to do is just skirt the rules enough so they can get their digs in at LGBT DU'ers and not get their posts deleted.

The LGBT community here and elsewhere, from time to time, criticizes Obama. Sometimes harshly. This used to be called speaking truth to power. The DU participants that defend Obama at all costs then, in turn, criticize and mock gay DU'ers vitriolically. Gay DUers respond in kind and the unhealthy cycle continues.

Some here don't seem to understand that criticizing a political leader is a very different thing than criticizing a member of a minority group that is seeking equality under the law.

DU would be a much different place if this kind of behaviour was stopped. It is not productive, it is destructive and it creates irreparable fissures in this community.

Thanks Skinner. Recommended heartily!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #645
653. thanks for sharing this
I sometimes see and sometimes don't see the winking and nodding you mention here, but I don't doubt your word because I respect your opinion a good deal.

The cyclical, entrenched positions are troubling, but there's no way of overcoming them if one entrenched side refuses to even come to the table for the conversation. And they seem pretty resolute about staying away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #653
797. Thanks tisha
the respect is mutual. And I agree - without engagement, nothing will change. Which is why I have my strong doubts about some of the biggest offenders self proclaimed commitment to LGBT issues in the first place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stinky The Clown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #645
663. I think I know who you're speaking about
I agree with you completely, except to expand the scope a little. The ones to which you refer treat a wider variety of subjects, with respect to how it reflects on Obama, the same way. They are artful at skirting the rules, they are insidious, and they get away with it repeatedly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scheming daemons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #663
692. Heaven forbid there are people on DEMOCRATIC underground who defend a DEMOCRATIC President...

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #692
695. Heaven forbid there are people on DEMOCRATIC underground who
actually stand up for DEMOCRATIC principles and believe in holding a DEMOCRATIC president's (one they worked their asses off for) feet to the fire. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
great white snark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #645
673. Please read post #673
Last paragraph. Could that be a reason some avoid threads like this and NOT because they don't care about LGBT rights?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #645
710. This exactly. It's the gay-baiting.
And yes, a LGBT individual is going to be more sensitive to it and spot it where others who have no skin in the game may not. We see the gay-baniting every single day, but as this thread evidences, many heterosexuals - no matter how well-meaning - simply do not catch it.

The result is that we're expected to put up with it, or be nicer about it, or be the Christ-like figures who take slap after slap in the name of unity.

Stone cold sick of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #710
781. A recent example
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1299874&mesg_id=1303610
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demmiblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #710
787. As a straight person, I can't see how some here...
are unable to see the gay-baiting. It is very blatant.

I do feel that most of it occurs in GDP-- perhaps many do not visit that forum (I hardly ever do). This is not to say that it does not occur in other forums. Shoot, I have seen some of the worst offenders even post their shite in GLBT. Regardless of forums, it is always the same handful of DUers, IMHO. How they manage to still post here, I will never know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #787
790. +1
thank you. And yes, it's always the same handful of people and the overwhelming majority of it occurs in GD-P.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #787
918. Agreed...
my eyes have been OPENED and it's hard to see how people could miss it, it is so blatant. Like you, I don't frequent GDP either so maybe that's part of the issue (they are contained in there).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #787
1182. +1. It takes a great effort to somehow "miss" it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:39 AM
Response to Reply #645
964. This is indeed part of the problem
Some posters make remarks that push LGBT posters over the edge, who then post something (such as a blatant personal attack) that the mods cannot in good conscience leave up. Then the mods get accused of being homophobic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #964
1163. You seem to recognize the pattern
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 01:11 PM by Vanje
Yet you STILL delete the resultant defensive response, and leave the initially provocative post up.

Whats with THAT!?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #1163
1336. Rules. Learn them.
If somebody "takes the bait", and breaks the rules, they've lost.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:18 AM
Response to Reply #645
1017. Great post. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 02:40 AM
Response to Reply #645
1452. We've seen the same things, Ruggerson
Over, and over and over. I used to think I was alone in noticing. I'd post something and be told I was among DU's "Obama haters". I used to get pissed off at that because I was working for him and contributing to his campaign long before the fan girls and fan boys came on board.

I'm sorry Heddi got de-modded. I guess she talked out of school. I also hope something will come of this discussion besides people just blowing off steam.

We can multi-task. We can support equal rights as well as other important goals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vattel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #645
1655. perfect
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:17 PM
Response to Original message
648. This will be my last post for this evening. What it boils down to is this.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 06:17 PM by William769
We are mad as hell and are NOT going to take it anymore!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
649. I know I've angered a lot of people here in the past.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 06:24 PM by Unvanguard
On both "sides" of this debate, I think. But I won't pretend to neutrality; I'm decidedly more on the side inclined to take a positive view of Obama's gay rights progress (which matches my more general stance toward Obama), though I've also criticized him (and taken issue with his defenders) when I've thought it was merited.

I guess what annoys me most about the debate on DU is the tendency to present issues of tactics or political realities as essentially reducible to issues of LGBT rights themselves. It's true that this is what it's about---sometimes. There are people who see equality for people of all sexual orientations and gender identities as a triviality, something that probably would be good to have but isn't worth much sacrifice or attention. And those people will often couch their views in terms of tactics: because they don't think LGBT rights are very important, they won't think that efforts to achieve them where the going is difficult are worthwhile.

But there are also people who, in good faith, believe that some of the criticisms of Obama and the Democratic leadership on this issue are overstated: that the obstacles are sufficiently substantial that there are explanations for lack of progress beyond a lack of will or commitment. For instance, it's extremely hard to believe that a DOMA repeal bill could have passed last session---not because of Obama, Reid, and Pelosi, but because of unified Republican opposition and reluctance among conservative Democrats. There is room for debate even on the matters under sole executive control: the rule-of-law issues at issue, for instance, in the Obama Administration's defense of DOMA and DADT were/are not as simple as many people here and elsewhere tried to portray them. (In fairness, that was true on both sides of that debate.)

Many of the people who defend Obama on this issue recognize perfectly well the importance of equal rights. This is neither sufficient nor necessary for the previous sentence to be true, but some are themselves LGBT (for what it's worth, I am.) Sometimes their defense of Obama and the Democrats is itself, in part, a manifestation of that recognition. For my part, I want DOMA repealed and ENDA passed, I want both as fast as possible, and I think enthusiastic support for the Democrats is the most likely thing to generate the strong Democratic majorities that would be necessary for those accomplishments. (Necessary: not enough in themselves, as we've learned, but probably the best that can be done given the background conditions of the quantity of anti-gay and anti-trans prejudice that remains in the country and among our politicians.)

It's hard to ask people to give other people the benefit of the doubt on this issue. It's hard because we are at the point in this struggle where homophobia and transphobia remain rather widespread, but are socially unacceptable in at least their more virulent forms---especially on websites like DU. So people hide, and it makes sense that people are sensitive to the possibility that certain arguments are covers for bigotry. People ought to be sensitive to that possibility (not only in the arguments of others, but also in their own.) I don't really know if there's a solution to this problem, beyond the general principle that people (on all sides of this, and any, debate) should be thoughtful, fair-minded, and intellectually honest.

Edit: One final thought. One feature of the environment the DU rules create is that the main arguments we have about LGBT rights are tactical, and they follow certain standard lines. So we don't see as much how posters think and care about the core issues themselves. This necessarily results in a quite selective picture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor Hurt Donating Member (472 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #649
668. excellent analysis
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #649
670. Your post reminded me of a sad incident here
Back in December, I'd been traveling for the holidays, so I wasn't online much when DADT was repealed. When I finally caught up, I wanted to know what the reaction to DU was. So I flipped over to GDP and . . .

. . . it was like a giant gay bash. It should have been an enormously happy occasion, but it wasn't. Instead of being a victory for the LGBT community, it seemed like it was being presented as a victory over us.

That really crystallized for me that, at least on DU, we can't really win. Even good things, progress both major and incremental, are always attended by this snark and hostility towards LGBTers who have been criticizing and pressuring the administration to do the right thing.

On some parts of DU, there are no victories for LGBTers - only recriminations.

And so, at least for me, it's difficult to really even bother. Whatever nice things I have to say about the President are quickly forgotten as soon as the next LGBT issue comes around, and the hostilities begin all over again.

This is a toxic environment, when our happiest moments are taken away from us in this way. But it always happens, without fail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zenlitened Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #670
765. Totally agree. That was a big turning point for me, too.
That really crystallized for me that, at least on DU, we can't really win. Even good things, progress both major and incremental, are always attended by this snark and hostility towards LGBTers who have been criticizing and pressuring the administration to do the right thing.


That's where my amazement at the relentless assholery finally turned to disgust. Simple disgust, and nothing more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #649
1549. Best post in this whole long thread. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:30 PM
Response to Original message
659. My take on this, for what it's worth
First off, the LGBT community has been on the short end of the stick in so many ways for so long that it is now painfully obvious that rectifying this shortcoming is a top priority of our society.

The second point is that in poll after poll, time and again, it has been shown that the majority of people in this country want this issue addressed and corrected. It should be done, now, not later.

As far as Obama and the Democrats are concerned, they have been a disappointment, to say the least. Criticism of our leaders has been seen as an attack on the administration, and something that should be punished. That is simply wrongheaded. If we can't criticize our leaders, if we can't point out their shortcomings, then we are no better than 'Pugs and other RW idiots.

In fact Obama has stated himself when it comes to these sort of issues that we need to "make him do it". Well, criticizing, calling him out when he takes a wrong turn, pushing and prodding him to help him along, these are all ways of "making him do it". If this is what it takes, so be it. If more needs to be done, then let those chips fall as they may as well, because ultimately, the issue of LGBT rights needs to be addressed now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
apples and oranges Donating Member (772 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
669. I'm nervous, but I'm going to say my piece on here
For one thing, I know a lot of people may not, from fear of saying the wrong thing.

First of all, I am 100% in support of rights for everyone. This sounds cliche, but I, like almost every other American, do have gay friends and family members.

So that's real life. Now let's talk about DU, because interactions on here are entirely different than in real life.

On DU, if a hetero person says something the wrong way, or uses the wrong phrase, not out of spite or hate, but just because they don't know that a certain word was no longer acceptable, they are met with a tag team of users who calls them a homophobic bigot. The tag team forms a permanent opinion of the user and then continues to call the person a bigot in unrelated threads. Here's the thing, when people learn that a certain word or phrase is offensive, 9 times out of 10, they will change with no problem. The problem is the hurt feelings that come about during the "lesson." I'll give an example. On a post a long time ago, a member used the word "homosexual." There was no indication that the poster did it out of hate, and I don't think the person realized (just as I didn't know until I saw the reaction he or she got) that it was no longer OK to use that word. There are other words that I didn't realize until I joined DU were offensive, like lifestyle, etc.

Nowadays, to be honest, I just stay away from all threads related to LGBT issues because it's almost like walking on eggshells. And God forbid you mess up once, you're forever labeled in a negative way on here. So, I think the DU conversation will continue to be nasty as long as people can't teach others in a non-condescending, non insulting way. But remember that DU is not real life, and I'm pretty sure most members are actively working with others to improve LGBT rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scheming daemons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #669
689. Good post n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #669
724. Good post and I agree sometimes homophobe is thrown around too loosely here
but I do need to disagree about one thing that you wrote. DU may not be real life for straight folks but some of the attitudes that honest homophobe DUers take with the LGBT community is what we face in some way every day. It may not be as in our faces as it was ten years ago but it still happens in the media, in entertainment, in jokes or when someone thinks something is stupid and says, "That's gay!" Bigotry and homophobia are entrenched in our society because no one in an official way has said it's not okay for it to be.

When legislation is passed in TN that says teacher's aren't allowed to use the word "gay" that affects all gay people in their REAL lives. When we are used as a tool to "get out the vote" for Repubs, that's REAL life for us. When our President doesn't defend us or allows bigots a national platform to speak, that's REAL life and it affects us. Some of us come to DU to get away from that attitude, hoping that we'll get a little camaraderie from fellow Dems but some days it's just as bad here as it is in REAL life.

I'm sorry if you were called a bigot or a homophobe without reason. This has been an ongoing issue on DU for years and it seems to be coming to a head. Tempers and emotions are high and some of us are just tired of being implied to that we should be happy enough with what we have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #669
729. DU is not real life. For one, if you fuck up and let people know what you think or feel
and they misinterpret it, you don't get the shit beat out of you, lynched, bashed, or get your right taken from you.

I suppose that when your a gay person, you need to be a bit paranoid. It's a matter of survival.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #669
731. Let me make a suggestion, directed generally.
When someone corrects you on that kind of terminology, thank them, apologize, and use the correct language.

Don't act defensive. Don't start talking about how committed you are to LGBT equality. And certainly don't attempt to explain how the language isn't so bad after all.

If you are committed to the cause of equality---and I know that many straight DUers are, even those who aren't up to speed on every issue---then show, don't tell.

Again, this is directed generally, not personally at you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TCJ70 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #731
1208. That's good advice, but...
...your suggestion leaves all the responsibility at the "offenders" feet. The people teaching the lesson also have a responsibility to respond in a way at doesn't
put a person on the defense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #669
748. respectfully, apples and oranges, I don't think that description is accurate/complete
A few points here:

On DU, if a hetero person says something the wrong way, or uses the wrong phrase, not out of spite or hate, but just because they don't know that a certain word was no longer acceptable, they are met with a tag team of users who calls them a homophobic bigot. The tag team forms a permanent opinion of the user and then continues to call the person a bigot in unrelated threads.


(1) I'm not going to say that what you describe here has never happened, because nobody can be aware of everything that happens on DU and I have no desire to deny your experience. However, you present it here as inevitable, and that's simply incorrect. I've seen plenty of times where people have said something the wrong way and that didn't happen.

(2) Your language in these sentences suggests that this response you're describing is intentional and organized on the part of the LGBTIQ community It's worth considering that what you appear to conceptualize as a coordinated and deliberate (counter-)attack (a tag team of users) may in fact simply be a reflection that multiple people are offended by what the poster has said.

(3) Sometimes posters have a history of saying borderline things and refusing to change behavior (or stubbornly defending their word choices) when it's pointed out to them. Keep in mind that in many cases, there may be a history to these exchanges that you aren't aware of.

(4) Based on what I've seen, DUers are much more likely to point out why language is problematic than to simply call "the person a homophobic bigot." At least as a starting point.

Here's the thing, when people learn that a certain word or phrase is offensive, 9 times out of 10, they will change with no problem.


(5) Based on my experience, I think that claim is false; the "9 times out of 10" is a drastic overestimation.

(6) Please keep in mind (and this is related to #3) that some posters aren't using those things out of a benign ignorance. Some posters use such phrases because it isn't something that they care about.

Some posters here actually are not supportive of equality. DU rules prevent people from opposing it vocally on this site. But DU rules don't prevent posters from referring to "lifestyle choices" and so on. So that becomes one of the ways that opposing sentiments manifest themselves on DU. And long-time DUers have had years of dealing with that. The tenth or fiftieth or hundredth or whatevereth time that one has to explain to someone (on a site where one expects allies, as a general rule) that a given word or phrase is offensive because it fits the rhetoric that the right uses to oppress is bound, eventually, to appear a bit testy.

(7) Please keep in mind that, in the scenario that you describe, even assuming that your right in ascribing all the best intentions to the unwittingly-offensive poster, the people responding have much more at stake than hurt feelings. If their passions seem high, it's because the issue is a serious one with real world consequences.

(8) Finally, just as a general rule, I think it's a good idea to remember that it's not the responsibility of a marginalized population to gently train others to avoid bigotry. Rather, it's the responsibility of everyone to learn how to eradicate bigotry from our language, behavior, etc.

Generally speaking, if one unwittingly says something offensive to a given community, an honest apology and an effort to be more careful and considerate in the future will almost always receive a gracious response. Responding instead with something along the lines of "that's not really offensive--you're overreacting" will probably not.

Anyway, there may be points I'm forgetting, but that seems like a good start. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #669
769. Glad you added your thoughts.
The thing is, you shouldn't BE nervous about posting anywhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #769
1137. What do you think of Fishwax's response?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #1137
1232. I don't have a problem with that response.
But in the context of the fact that you in another post, took it upon yourself to advise me that I need to "look in the mirror" as you also were happy to advise me that people "cringe" when I enter a thread, you have a hell of a nerve coming at me as if I am in need of a lesson.

I came over here on a callout, having been challenged behind my back that I would probably be one of the ones who wouldn't dare show my face.

And you and several other posters have been nothing short of shitty to me.

Now, per my other post, I think there's some embedded "PUMA shits on the Obama supporter" dynamic at work while you all have the opportunity, but anyone who bothers to actually READ the responses I've posted will find it hard to justify the hostility I've received.

Anyone who thinks I'm anti-LGBT has their head up their ass. I'm here to say it. There's no reason to think it other than misinterpretation of my posts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #1232
1352. Oh poor you
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 08:18 PM by Marrah_G
You have spent alot of time baiting GBLT posters and then pretending you are innocent and the gay PUMAs (that don't fucking exist)are being mean to you. It's pathetic. You have shown through your actions who you are.

Try just never fucking showing up in a GBLT thread. Problem solved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #669
824. "Tag team"
Give me a fucking break. You poor poor soul. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:06 AM
Response to Reply #669
954. well said and thanks for posting that
that is very much how I feel. In real life I fully support all human rights. I had long talks with my daughter when she was in grade school about stupid phrases like 'o, thats' so gaaaaay' , and other hurtful sayings. I did my best to tell her how wrong that was and she did understand and passed it on to her friends. I've almost had fistfights with some of my bigoted acquaintances and relatives.

but I'm pretty sure I'm labeled some nasty anti-gay name here because I like President Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #954
1139. What do you think of Fishwax's response?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #1139
1142. who is Fishwax and what did he say?
this is a long thread, you want me to hunt and peck for something here instead of just linking or telling me what you are talking about?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #1142
1151. 3 responses above yours- I assumed you had read it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #1151
1160. I can relate to apples and oranges post.
and the fact that posting that made him/her nervous should tell y'all something.

just say the wrong thing in the slightlest way and you get pummeled and swarmed. that's why the nervousness I suppose.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #1160
1165. The nervousness is on both sides
I would like to add that the reason people jump so readily is that they deal constantly with a group of people who constantly bait them and then say "but, but it was just an innocent question" "I'm just posting a list of facts" "but it was written by a gay guy!"

Then someone else comes along and truly asks an innocent question and unfairly get growled at. Until those who do the baiting are told strongly by the admins here that they must stop- I don't see this changing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #1165
1186. I don't really see much of that baiting here you describe
doesn't mean it doesn't happen tho.

I do see a lot of Obama the Homophobe tho and that just rips my ass
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #1186
1204. It does happen and it happens often and by the same people over and over
And Obama is a bigot, just like Hillary and most of our party are bigots when it comes to Equality. He does not believe in marriage equality. The would put him on the side of discrimination.

Sadly I think it will be a while before we have a nominee who is Pro-Equality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #1204
1211. he personally does not believe in it, because of his religion.
(and probably because he'd never even finish the second primary debate if he did say)

his job requires that he act on issues the american people want. I don't think he is so small he would stop such important legislation for equal marriage.
I don't see him that way at all, he is not a petty little creature - and there lies the vast expanse of difference I guess. I think he is doing the best he can with what he has and I believe wholeheartedly he has no prejudice against anyone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #1211
1235. If my religious views were that blacks and whites should not mix
I would indeed be a racist.

If my religious views were that blacks were inferior and slavery was acceptable...

I would indeed be a racist.

If I said they should not mix just to coddle racists, then I would just be coward, preferring saying racists things then to stand on principal for what was right.

Obama has some really good qualities- but on this he is just plain wrong and his views are just plain bigoted.

My Nana had alot of good qualities. She was also a racist. I loved her and could give all sorts of reasons why she was racist...but that will never change the fact that she was indeed prejudiced when it came to people of color.

You either believe someone is equal or you don't. Hiding behind religion never makes it okay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whisp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #1235
1238. you forget this is America, where people think Jesus rode on dinosaurs.
no politician today can be elected if he didn't claim to be a christian, come on you know that.

and being christian doesnt' automatically make you a fiend. you should know that too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #1238
1348. Some people will excuse any behavior.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #669
1221. Good post, and.....
This thread seems to demonstrate your point. The nastiness is off the hook.

In fact, this is by far the most hateful thread I've ever seen on DU.

....and that's saying something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:11 PM
Response to Original message
697. What exactly happened?
I must have missed it? Can someone explain??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #697
716. Tracey Morgan opened his big mouth
and a bunch of homophobes rushed to defend him and started waving teh LIST around, and teased us about not getting ponies.

Seriously, these issues have been brewing for two years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #716
719. People here defended Tracy Morgan?
Ugh. Glad I wasn't around for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #719
723. Hyperbole on my part.
Like I said, actually, these issues have been brewing for two years. The Morgan bull just pushed a few of the 'phobes into high gear, we complained, we were ignored. Then some people retaliated against those of us who complained.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #723
737. What did you want done?
Why is it unacceptable to believe Morgan made several poorly conceived jokes? Who specifically retaliated against those that complained and what did they do?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #737
757. It wasn't just Morgan threads.
It wasn't the single raid on the Stonewall Inn that started the riots, it was all of the shit that had been heaped on gays for years, then Judy's funeral, and the final raid was just the final spark.

Here, it was Tracey Morgan's tirade that emboldened some of the homophobes. It wasn't Morgan threads specifically, it's a pattern of uneven moderation and institutionalized homophobia within the moderator corps (if not the Administration itself) of DU that has been building up for years.

A few of us dared to question that pattern of abuse. We alerted on thread after thread and they were left alone. We posted counter-threads ourselves and saw them locked or flushed down the memory hole. Basically, the moderators on DU seemed to decide that this week was "kick a queer" week and rushed to defend the righteous phobes who were calling us out while smacking us down for picking on our oppressors.

What do I want? I want the rules enforced EVENLY. But the current batch of moderators have proven they can't be trusted to do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #737
759. Oh, and I almost forgot.
ATA threads about these issues have been either unreplied to (keeping them hidden from general view) or deleted entirely. This is where I claim complicity by the Administrators.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #759
764. I don't understand why it's unacceptable to believe Morgan made bad jokes.
I don't think that makes one a homophobe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #764
770. It's NOT ABOUT MORGAN.
There were a couple of anti-gay posts around the discussions about Morgan. He has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT DU MODERATORS CAN'T BE TRUSTED TO NOT LET THEIR HOMOPHOBIA INTERFERE WITH THEIR DECISIONS, AND DISPROPORTIONATELY LOCK GAY THREADS WHILE ALLOWING WORSE ANTI-GAY THREADS GO.

THAT IS THE ISSUE, NOT TRACEY MORGAN.

As I've said, and you keep ignoring, THIS HAS BEEN BUILDING FOR TWO YEARS NOW. SINCE BEFORE THE FIRST GAY PURGE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #770
823. I don't dispute that this has been a long term problem.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #719
728. Proof in point
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 08:19 PM by justiceischeap
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1293268&mesg_id=1293453

For those that may be ignoring this particular poster:

bdo2007 (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-14-11 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
12. hahahahaha, poor Tracy Morgan. He should just say he was making bad jokes

rather than all this apologizing. He's a comedian, that's what comedians do.

Hang in there TM!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cronus Protagonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #728
780. I'm already ignoring that one
I'm sure it was a load of steaming crap anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor Hurt Donating Member (472 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #716
727. What's "the list"?
and how does Tracy Morgan fit into it?

Being new here, I'm afraid I'm not following.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #727
733. "teh LIST" is that "What the hell has Obama done for LGBT lately?"
list of eyewash, half-hearted sops, and stuff he is taking credit for but shouldn't (like the HIV Travel Ban being lifted).

So when we complain about soldiers still being discharged under DADT, or him comparing our marriages to pedophilia and incest in a filing defending DOMA, or "pallin' around" with people like Rick Warren and Donnie McClurkin, the usual suspects trot out teh LIST and scream "HOW DARE YOU UNGRATEFUL SO AND SO'S...."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #733
740. Didn't "the list" come from the Human Rights Campaign?
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 07:48 PM by Renew Deal
That means it's stuff they are giving him credit for.

Obama didn't write the DADT repeal. Blame it on Lieberman, Snowe, and others.

Obama didn't file the brief defending DOMA. That is a lie. If you want to blame him for the brief you should also credit him for not defending DOMA.

The "palling around" bit is Palinesque bullshit which is meant to incite.

And "the list" was put together with the Human Rights Campaign. There's nothing wrong with pointing out Obama isn't Fred Phelps when some people are convinced he is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #740
746. I think the original version came from Andrew Tobias.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 07:49 PM by Unvanguard
Who is gay, but is also the DNC Treasurer. If I recall correctly, it was originally an attempt to contest the movement to deny the Democratic Party and Obama donations until there was progress on DADT and DOMA.

I think "the list" has its place---it's important to remember that Obama has done many important things for LGBT equality---but its usage on DU has pretty clearly gotten to the point where it's little more than a disingenuous and condescending dismissal of serious criticisms that need to be responded to more substantively.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #740
749. And the HRC also suppored Al D'Amato.
It's like having a list coming from the Log Cabin Democrats or GOProud.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #749
756. Did Al D'Amato deserve their support on gay issues?
Are you saying the HRC is a right wing operation? Should the HRC avatar be deleted from DU?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #756
766. I'm saying I don't trust them.
Chuck Schumer had a better record on LGBT*.* issues than D'Amato. They endorsed D'Amato. That's the last time I donated to them, and I don't trust them.

Not to mention, as I said earlier, there are some out and out falsehoods on the list, and the rest of it is marginal at best.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #697
1190. Do you enjoy swiss cheese?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x688889
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:20 PM
Response to Original message
708. Excellent idea
Equal rights for all
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:24 PM
Response to Original message
711. Is there anything I can do to help?
Here on the forum, specifically.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackBeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
732. What turned me off from posting on DU
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 07:41 PM by JackBeck
wasn't my numerous attempts at educating people about LGBT equality and why social justice matters. When I was more active here, I never backed down from schooling a progressive bigot, giving a troll enough rope to hang themselves, or trying to sway someone who honestly seemed on the fence with a particular LGBT issue.

No, DU was made inhospitable by a group of L & G posters. Watching a handful of L & G posters incessantly complain about being victimized, while at the same time completely denigrating those of us who are active in working both online and in the real world for our equality, pretty much was my last straw. Instead of having a discussion about something I had written or a tactic that I was thinking about trying that may have differed from the way they wanted to approach an issue, it was more entertaining for them to hold me and a few others up as examples of just how nasty, in the name of 'satire', a few of them could be in order to make themselves somehow feel better about their own shallow lives. Some of them rightly earned their granite, but their lies had already been accepted by eager consumers, and you can't unring a bell.

But they helped me realize that my participation here was a complete waste of my time, so I thank them for that.

Trust me, they could never sour the work I do both locally and nationally and have zero impact on my presence elsewhere online. But I can sometimes empathize with posters who get treated the same way as I did. Obviously, some of these posters who openly disagree with LGBT social justice or just equivocate are trolls, some are bigots from both sides of the aisle who will never change, but sometimes there are people here who just need that one last push from us to finally 'get it.'

The posters I was able to educate on our issues are the ones I enjoyed talking to the most.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #732
812. With friends like you,
who needs enemies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackBeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #812
927. I followed your posts before you were banned
and my heart ached every time you would share how difficult it was to live openly and proud in rural, deep-red America. Even though we both have a different frame of reference, you might be surprised at how difficult it still is to be openly gay in NY and NJ.

If you would like to not only talk about what we share but also how our experiences are different, I look forward to that conversation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #732
878. Your decision to no longer post here is DU's loss. Truly
Rest comfortably in knowing you are but one of a LOOOOONG line of decent, honest folks who have reached a similar conclusion.

Personally, I've missed your posts. Are you posting anywhere else?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #732
1154. I knew you would stop by !!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhollyHeretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
761. Civil rights for everyone are a fundamental Democratic principle
You don't push off civil rights. People's lives are affected right now and our country is a worse place for it. For the assholes who want to tell LGBTers to wait: Why don't you give up your own fucking civil rights?

For those who don't get it and still call for civil unions: Separate is not equal. I think we've been over that before. It's also pretty fucking simple minded to think the bigots won't oppose that too. Educate yourself. http://www.boston.com/news/local/rhode_island/articles/2011/06/02/final_hearing_today_for_ri_civil_union_bill/
http://www.care2.com/causes/civil-rights/blog/group-moves-to-ban-illinois-gay-unions-with-constitutional-amendment/

Civil rights are always an immediate and necessary cause. It cheapens my marriage that not everyone has the same rights, protections, and chance at happiness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RandomKoolzip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:20 PM
Response to Original message
785. If you are hetero and you claim "I'm 100% in favor of equal rights for LGBT Americans
" and IMMEDIATELY follow it with a "but..." or a "however...." then you are lying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yawnmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #785
792. how about a non-hetero doing the same thing? eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:21 PM
Response to Original message
788. I think that it's sad that a progressive community even has to have this conversation.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know...not everyone here is really "progressive" or "liberal" which I think is also kind of sad, but to each his her own.

The very idea that ANY poster here, trolls aside (and you know who you are, douchebags), doesn't fully support his or her LGBT brothers and sisters is the saddest part of this at all.

And while we're being uncensored, any one of you that doesn't support those very same LGBT brothers and sisters in ANY issue that's an issue just because they happen to *be* LGBT...you fucking suck. Even your mirror hates you. This *is* a callout, fuck you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cronus Protagonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
789. In support of out Intersex brethren, it's LGBTI these days
Let's not exclude the restofus.

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #789
798. I've just taken to using LGBT*.*
so I don't leave anyone out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cronus Protagonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #798
800. lol that may catch on
I want to be a star! :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #800
805. Yes, but if you try too hard to be a star
you might be too FAAAABULOUS for some people. :)

As I said elsewhere, we need a new umbrella term that can encompass lesbian, gay, bacon, tomato, etc. We have too much in common with transgendered, intersex, questioning, etc. to break them off into nothing more than just letters tacked on to the end of an incomprehensible string.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cronus Protagonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #805
860. That's why I always preferred "Queer"
Partly also due to the fact that the one thing that unites us all is that we are not like the "normals", so Queer (capital Q) seems all encompassing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #789
1338. I like the Q.
Queer, Questioning, etc...

Some of us haven't totally adopted a flag yet, but they're still my brothers, sisters, and brothersisters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
796. Any of you who are looking for someone to blame for this thread
It's me. I dared to make a post in GLBT recently entitled "Mr. Skinner, Where Are the Tombstones?" (A nice wink to Keith Olbermann) in my belief that the Administration was still interested in having an open discussion about the problems GLBT people have here.

I preserved my original post, and include it here:

In the "mending fences" discussions, I've mentioned a couple of times that it almost feels like somehow gays aren't allowed to use the "Alert" function. At least, that's the net effect since so many of our complaints seem to bear no fruit and the offenders are allowed to go on with impunity.

The most galling part of this is that some of us see ourselves alerting over and over on the exact same people. In so many cases the offensive homophobic remarks, calling out of gay DU'ers, pony remarks, postings of 'teh LIST,' etc., are all coming from the same people. Even on the few occasions that their posts actually get locked, they don't get flushed down the memory hole like a number of our posts questioning Obama's commitment to our issues do within minutes of their postings. And where any serial rulebreaker or disruptor would normally find themselves getting the concrete pizza treatment, it seems that the DU policy about these offenders is "it's okay if you're a homophobe."

I know that's not officially the case, but it's the effective case.

I will not name them here, because I don't intend for this to be a call-out thread against those serial offenders. (The moderators can just look at the logs of the alerts many of us have sent that have been ignored.) What I AM doing is making a plea to the moderators and administrators who seemed so intent on "mending fences" months ago but have allowed things to continue to degenerate to this pass.

Part of "mending fences" is applying the rules evenly. By welcoming back the victims of the "purge" and other recent actions Skinner and company have stopped the part of the uneven treatment that saw gays being held to tighter standards. Now it's time for the other side of the balance. The homophobes and their sock puppets need to have the same scrutiny applied to them and the same fate that has met too many of our group.

In short, Mr. Skinner, where are the tombstones?


Mopinko locked it and told me to take it to ATA. That was NOT the deletion I referred to earlier although she seems to be deflecting criticism by claiming it is. I did take it to ATA, where it was not answered and eventually deleted.

There are a slew of threads about similar issues going unanswered in ATA at the moment. I am personally aware of two of mine and at least three others. I guess Skinner figured that it would be safer to move the discussion back out into the open.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
804. Well, this is a really good way to get rid of all of the WEINER threads.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #804
826. ROFL!!!!!!!!!
I wonder if that was Skinners intent. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #804
829. lol
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:19 PM
Response to Reply #829
834. I could think of a BRAZILIAN other reasons!
:P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:42 PM
Response to Original message
806. Okay, I'm done for the night.
Except for a break for a two-mile walk I've been at this keyboard for five hours. I have to file tomorrow's comic strip and get some sleep. If this thread is still here in the morning you'll see me then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #806
808. Good job, Pab! You did this thread proud today. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
807. I have issues with personalities here, not sexual orientation....
There are a lot here, especially in DU's LGBT community, who make a career out of playing the victim. they want rules to apply to others but not to them. They pick fights and then cry "homophobe!!!" when anyone dares to call them on their bullshit. .

This is a DU phenomenon, not an LGBT phenomenon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #807
822. Put them on "ignore"?
...and leave them be?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #822
859. Well then we wouldn't need this thread.
I've never put anyone on ignore, and I normally stay out of the LGBT vs who-ever fights because I'm generally supportive of their arguments. But I do think there is a vocal group of folks who hide behind LGBT cover to just pick fights. Personally I have no problem with that until they start whining about how unfairly they're being treated, all the while being huge hypocrites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #807
842. So lets see if I'm getting you here.
1. Gay person makes a criticism of Obama. Obama supporter calls gay person a hater. Or accuses them of "not getting their pony" Or tells them that theirs is a "fringe issue" (it's been done upthread) and the gay person is actually the one picking the fight. Alrighty.

and

2. DU is infested with gay folks who make a career out of playing the victim.

Why you're not called Joe the Revelator for nuthin!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #842
869. Again, it depends on where you sit...
1. Gay person makes criticism of Obama. Obama supporter points out what Obama has done for Gay people. Gay person calls Obama supporter a homophobe, makes 5 copy cat threads to drive the point home,calls mod a homophobe when the copy cat threads get locked, posts two questions about why that Obama supporter is allowed to keep breathing in the Ask the Admin forum, then yells again about how DU is against them.

2. Infested is a strong word. I can count on two hands the people I'm referring to. And as I've said down thread, the only issue I have with their tactics is the whining and hypocrisy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #869
879. But apparently only one side of it troubles you.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 10:19 PM by Puglover
Which your post seems to indicate. Here's a shocker. I see both. However I believe most of the troublemakers on the gay side have been TSed. Sorry, not so much on the "Obama supporter" (I'd call it something else) side. But certainly some. I was a mod for 3 years so I know pretty much how it goes.

Fact is this is a Democratic board. And an ardent supporter of the head of the Democratic party is going to be given more latitude then a pissed off gay person who might be just a tad impatient to be able to enjoy the same goddamned rights that you have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #879
887. I only see one side being hypocritical. Maybe they're just louder.
I said a lot of this downthread, but its not the anger or the 'inpatients' that bothers me. I'm normally on the side of the LGBT folks, as far as, I think Obama, who I'm ardent supporter of, could have done more to help the community. But like you, I see both sides, and can see why other supporters might think it strange that a President who has done more then any other president to further the cause gets shit on so heavily.

What bothers me is the fact that the LGBT guys/gals can't have that conversation without shouting 'victim!' when someone disagrees with them, or sides with what Obama has done in the last 3 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #887
919. Obama is a politician.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 11:32 PM by Puglover
And a good one. I cannot tell you how much I appreciate that he has a thicker skin then most of his DU "supporters". And how thoughtful of you to put "impatients" in whatever marks you put it in. Certainly put me in my place. And thanks for your GLTB support, even with the limitations and snark. We take what we can get. :thumbsup:

Has it ever occured to you that some GLTB's ON DU might just be victims? Me? But for the grace of God not so much. I'm 57 y/o white 6'2 and built like a brick shit house and still, even though I am completely out, sadly alot of people think I'm straight and mainstream when they meet me. And they kindly say things like; "what a waste". My partner and I are set for life as far as money goes. And our family is right with us. Thank God for all of that. However that doesn't blind me to other peoples issues and the fact that there might be be real live "victims" out there who are not so insulated against lifes difficulties.

Your casual use of the word "victim" pretty much shows me you have no idea what it really means.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #919
923. Response
1. I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic because I misspelled "impatient". I meant no snark then, I'm just really a shitty speller.

2. There is a difference between being a Victim irl and my use of the term 'playing the victim' as a figure of speech. Neither you nor I know 98% of the back stories of people on this board. I'm not sure how being a Victim in the real world gets someone a pass when it comes to hypocrisy on a message board. Maybe you can enlighten me.

3. I'd like to illustrate my bigger point by posting a link to a thread. Pay special attention to posts 2 and 3.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1303835#1303867
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #807
849. Oh really? Our folk went through a serious purge here - not yours.
And accusing us of that 'victim' shit is no different than accusing us of being 'racist'

I find this shit despicable. BUT YOU will be safe along w/ your privileges.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #849
856. Case in point.
You don't know my story. You have no idea what group I belong to. You don't know what privligies I may or may not have. But because some of your buddies were banned, you think you get a free pass from here to eternity, and if someone says 'thats stupid' you get to throw all sorts of red herrings and this 'privilege' horse shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #849
871. Interesting. When one LGBT is purged, ALL are "victimized." Hey, I'm an ass.
When another ass gets tombstoned, do I get to claim victim status?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #807
850. I remember your antics during the primaries, when you were one of the most snide and belligerent
members of our happy little community, having apparently made it your mission in life to help make DU as toxic as possible, so you will have to pardon me for not buying your Wounded Innocent routine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #850
854. I've never claimed to be a wounded innocent....and don't take disgragreeing with me...
...for toxicity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #854
858. No, you went well beyond disagreement.
I have rarely seen a person take such pleasure in meanness as you did then.

Much of the current ugliness here has its roots in the last primary, when this place was allowed to devolve into a cross between Lord of the Flies and the Stanford Prison Experiment.

Unless I am mistaking you for someone else. You were called "Wolsh" back then, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #858
863. I was and you're welcomed to think I was 'mean' and sadistic......
.....and you're right, the roots of this problem are planted in 2008. However,I make no apologies for any comments I made in 2008, and if we were to jump in a time machine and go back to the primaries I would do it all over.

I do disagree with you about my level of vileness. You're perception all depends on where you sit.

But again, I'm no innocent lamb, which is why I take issue with those of you who want to dish it out now, but cry and complain when others have the balls to disagree with you.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #863
1363. You were fucking vile, with a capital V
The fact that you aren't tombed represents the problem with DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #1363
1384. I seriously think some of you need to grow up and realize that there is nothing vile about someone
Who disagrees with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #858
1361. Oh wow that's wolsh? If there was ever a competition for nastiest DUer, wolsh def would have my vote
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 09:01 PM by Very_Boring_Name
I also remember him bragging on RW forums about how he trolls DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #1361
1385. That lie was the more vile then anything I ever said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #1385
1391. Not a lie at all. In fact I remember it quite clearly
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 10:08 PM by Very_Boring_Name
Someone on CU posted a link to a thread on DU, and one of the posters said they had gotten into it with Chovexani and that the thread had been deleted. A simple PM to Chovexani confirmed she had gotten into it with Wolsh. You can deny it all you want, but your nasty behavior has always been comically right wingish.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #1391
1396. We're really going to rehash this?
First of all I have no idea who chovexani is/was.

Second, the only way I even knew about cu, which,trust me, if I was going to have a right wing home base, I would have picked a much more exciting site,was from the puma idiots trying to stir up attention by dropping my name.

Third, my bonafides in this party are guaranteed deeper then yours. Of that I'm sure of. So accusing me of being rw is beyond comical.


What was your sn name during 2008, because I don't remember you at all.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tammywammy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #1391
1517. I know who Miss Mia at CU is and it's not and never was Wolsh. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #1517
1583. Memory....I can smile at the old days.....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6766136#6767874
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #807
1140. So when a minority speaks up about their civil rights they are "playing the victim"?
Your post is offensive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #1140
1386. Oh that marrah G.....completely missing the point.....
Again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 07:24 AM
Response to Reply #1386
1464. I just realized who you were
Back to ignore goes one incredibly nasty jerk!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 08:31 AM
Response to Reply #1464
1472. Keep up the good work.
And for the record, sweetheart,one doesn't come off of an ignore list because of a name change....you made the choice to read my posts again, if you were ever able to ignore me in the first place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNBrewer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #807
1481. "they want rules to apply to others but not to them"
Any examples of which rules you're referring to?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Traveler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:45 PM
Response to Original message
809. Skinner, I have to say this to you
You have become quite wise over the past few years, and I applaud this thread, its intention, and the ground rules you have established.

For me, the matter is simple. I am straight, and therefore gay people present no threat to me. At all. Further, gay people are indeed people so matters of gay rights are simply matters of human rights. The past 300 years are dominated by the struggle to extend man's knowledge, and the struggle to extend rights to all people. These struggles continue. "The righteous fight is hardly over ... just begun in the minds of some."

I thank you for all your work.

Trav
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zen Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
813. I'm a twice divorced straight woman, and I divorced one of them for being a homophobe.
When someone told me (early 80's) that I must never bring another Elton John record into "his" house because he refused to "support that lifestyle" -- well that was a ton more ignorance than I could stay married to. That was wrong on many fronts, and I had to go.

I adore men. I think all men of whatever orientation can be fabulous. I do not care who sleeps with whom, and I certainly don't care why. As to marriage, I believe that everyone who wants to give it a try should have the opportunity. I was never very good at it - long term - even though I was true blue monogamous until the end.

I think realizing gay rights is on the increase, at least from my straight woman vantage point. When I'm among a bunch of straight people, I don't hear anti-gay things said, ever. But, then I wouldn't be hanging around those people. I've divorced them.

There was one person in my life who was "iffy" - but he was my boss. Then, his 15 year old grandson came out and it changed everything. Now he's a champion. I love my family and friends. The sexual orientation of any of them, and whether I know or not, is so inconsequential.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
817. My views on this subject
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 09:25 PM by Renew Deal
I’m not sure what happened now to generate this thread, but it is what it is. I have a few things to say which I didn’t really want to. I think it’s better that I get them out there.

I have never been deeply involved in the drama part of the Gay/Non Gay stuff going on at DU. I don’t know the histories well enough. I haven’t been affected by some of the things going on in the background.

There are two parallel actions going on at DU regarding gay issues. One is the political which includes Obama topics. The other is the (mostly) under the radar (to me) drama.
In regards to politics of gay issues on DU. I think DU is one of the best and most active pro-gay democratic political sites there out there. There is almost complete support for gay rights. I don’t think you can ask for much more than that. There are people that don’t support certain rights, but that’s a small group. DU is a large site, so it is understandable that some people have different views.

Issues like DADT or DOMA are easy. I don’t think I’ve seen a single DUer against repeal. Marriage is a little less easy, but still probably over 90% support on DU. Those are pretty good numbers. How we get from A to B is where things get tricky. An ongoing theme on DU is how and how fast certain things change. I agree that a right delayed is a right denied. I disagree with some people about how a political agenda should be laid out and about what’s “possible.”

There are certain people here that refuse to give Obama credit for anything. And some of those people are absolutely against giving Obama credit on gay rights issues. It’s like if they give Obama credit, then people they consider their opponents have been correct all along. It’s BS and intellectually dishonest.

There are others that are dishonest in their characterizations of Obama. The most notable person doing this is John Aravosis. He is a liar when it comes to Obama issues. He flat out lies and mischaracterizes Obama’s views and actions. There are gay members of DU that understand this and chalk it up to “bad apples” in the bunch. I can accept that, but it still pisses me off when people post Aravosis’s lies on DU. The admins should at least consider putting AmericaBlog on the banned list for this reason. It should go the way or Rense and Prison Planet.

I’d say there’s one DUer in particular that falls into the category of generally dishonest when it comes to Obama issues. That person is Bluebear. Bluebear is a long time DUer who deserves credit for being a pillar of this site. I love his non-Obama posts. It makes me happy when he’s focusing on someone else. But when it comes to Obama it ain’t pretty. I think it goes back to the McClurkin business in 2007. He was one of the main noisemakers about McClurkin with the long politically motivated Obama apology thread. At the time it seemed like a political tactic more than an honest complaint. Over time I realized that his distaste for McClurkin was legitimate. But his bitterness over Obama winning wasn’t. He has posted thread after thread of dishonest or unfair opinions about Obama. He is one of the largest sources of the bad feelings for some on DU. And after months of abuse to Obama about DADT repeal, I never saw a thread from him admitting he was wrong or giving Obama credit.

Bluebear claims to have me on ignore, so please let him know I said that. I don’t want to talk behind his back. I couldn’t post in this thread in good faith without bringing up my issues with Bluebear.

The other major issue on DU is the under the radar drama. I don’t have much to do with this area. There are people with bad feelings out there. It seemed like things got a bit better after Skinner posted the big thread in the GLBT forum and let back a lot of good people (Yardwork and Maven come to mind first). I, like others have been shocked at some of the people that have been banned, but I don’t know what’s going on behind the scenes. Some of that stuff has come up in this thread. I don’t believe there’s a single “homophobic moderator.” I don’t think that’s even possible. I’m a sports official and sometimes coaches will say “you called more fouls against us.” That’s likely true and the reason is that his team committed more fouls. In terms of soccer, if I foul you to take the ball away, and you punch me in the face, guess who’s going to receive harsher treatment from the ref? The guy that threw the punch. There’s not much I can say about the behind the scenes stuff other than people should give each other the benefit of the doubt. Someone that disagrees with you isn’t automatically a homophobe. A mod that shuts down a thread does so for a number of legitimate reasons (usually).

I don’t know if this thread will get us to a better place or not. My view is that we need to give each other more of a benefit of the doubt. Don’t take disagreements personally. They usually aren’t. If you don’t like the moderation, try to become a moderator. Maybe you’ll begin to understand the complex demands of this site. Don’t expect “even-handedness.” It’s not really possible. And if you hate this place because you think the members and mods are all homophobes, then why do you want to be in a place like that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #817
882. I'm sorry to hear about your opinion of Bluebear
I don't always agree with him, and sometimes I think to myself, "he's just LOOKING do dig up nasty stuff," but I know he's posting it because, like Glenn Greenwald and many other progressives, he wants Obama to do better. I'm an Obama supporter and have been since 2007; I want him to do better, too. One of the ways of getting him to do better, even according to him, is to hold his feet to the fire.

One thing that troubles me about your post is that you have a animus toward people who don't give Pres Obama credit for what he has done, but doesn't it also make sense to criticize him for what he hasn't done? Don't you think the intransigence on both sides is harmful, leading to more vituperative anti-Obama threads on the one hand and more hyperbolically pro-Obama threads on the other?

ITA about all the sturm und drang though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #882
899. My problem is more with partisans
There's lots of poeple on this site that don't give Obama credit for stuff. And I didn't bring up most "critics" of Obama. I have been critical of Obama here. But like I said in my OP, there are people in the business of bashing Obama and I don't think that's honest criticism. In theory we are all Democrats, so when Obama does well, I'd expect his "critics" to be most pleasantly surprised. That's not what it's about for some people. I agree that there can be a hardening of views with disagreement. I think the hardening has been one sided here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:02 AM
Response to Reply #899
1013. We give Obama credit
when he actually does something. But too often on important issues (not just LGBT*.* ones) he surrenders faster than the French during the Blitz.

The stimulus was way too anemic and had too many tax cuts to work. The Bush tax cuts should have ended. And let's not forget the public option. He seems too unwilling (okay, cowardly) to twist the arms that need twisting and thus we squandered a filibuster-proof Senate majority where we could have done real things to turn this country around.

Still, his economic policies have at least stopped the hemorrhaging of jobs. He's drawing down troops in Afghanistan (although I don't think anywhere near quickly enough). He got Osama bin Laden. He saved the auto industry. Those are, to quote Biden, big fucking deals.

But we're still going to push him to do all that he can, and should. On ALL issues, not just LGBT*.*. And people telling us to shut up because look at all of the crumbs he gave us ARE NOT HELPING.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #882
934. I'm backing up Renew Deal on this
I believe I'm on BlueBear's ignore list too for a similar scenario, so I've seen this in action.

Tisha, what I find interesting is that you seem to mainly be "coaching" the 'non-LGBTers', if I may. Maybe you're trying to be the unofficial liaison, but perhaps to a fault.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #934
939. that's a fair criticism
I *am* a liaison because, as I said earlier, I belong to both groups, but...perhaps you're right it's to a fault.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #934
1092. I suggest you take a long hard look at yourself
Then perhaps you can figure out why so many GBLT DUers cringe every time you hop into a GBLT thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #1092
1131. Really?
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 12:24 PM by CakeGrrl
I can't remember the last time I visited a GLBT thread in the specific forum. Is this "cringing" documented? If not, I'll chalk that up to even more hostile hyperbole.

Of course, we can't discount the PUMA factor. You might deny it to the heavens, but it's a big old elephant in this room.

At the end of the day, I can't get that worked up over cyber-hostility. I'm good with people who know me, and that's good enough for me. My mirror is A-OK.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #1131
1183. There is no PUMA factor
There is a reason why the GBLT community here has spoken out to you in this thread. They are speaking to you for a reason. Your comments and attitudes so often offensive, you are told this and yet you continue to jump into threads dealing with the issues of this minority knowing how already feel about your views. Why not just leave the threads alone? Why the constant need to pick at the scab?

PUMA had to do with a small group of people who were so angry that Hillary lost the primary that they turned to the Republicans. There are no PUMAs here. PUMA does not = GBLT. GBLT does not = PUMA

This is about GBLT relationships and not about a primary 2 years past. We are not traitors. We are fellow Democrats fighting to gain the same rights that you have just by right of your genetic makeup. Equality is not a pony, GBLT posters are not PUMAS and GBLT people taking offense at bigotted views is not "poutrage".

After reading all your posts here I have come to the conclusion that you are just a jerk who enjoys saying nasty, bullying things to a group of people you deem unworthy of common courtesy. You are part of what has gone so wrong on DU in regards to this issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #1183
1277. And yet she will go into another forum and cry she is being picked on.
That she has done nothing wrong. What a worthless watse of space she takes up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #1277
1315. Oh hi, it's you!
Of the "gee, I just posted this inocuous thread in GD: P and I'm just celebrating!"

You are just a nasty little backbiter, aren't you? The peas are quite rotten in this pod.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #1315
1320. Who's back did I bite?
What was said that was so terrible? Who's heart did I drive a steak through?

Come on now enquiring minds want to know!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #1183
1319. Says the person who says "people cringe when you enter a thread"
Truly, keep your mirror for yourself. Your words have been been unjustifiably nasty and a lot of people here suffer an advanced case of projection.

I have not said one goddamned thing on this forum that has been anti-LGBT. But if I'm insulted by a LGBTer and dare to counter it, I'm on the attack. You and several of your friends have insulted every person you talked about before they arrived on the thread, and I think it's no conincidence that any disagreement on LGBT issues and the President boils down to "You're either with us or you're part of the homophobic problem."

You're way off-base, and that's your problem, not mine. You need to pick your battles with a REAL enemy of LGBT equality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #1319
1350. Your actions speak louder then words
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #1183
1607. Word
"PUMA had to do with a small group of people who were so angry that Hillary lost the primary that they turned to the Republicans. There are no PUMAs here. PUMA does not = GBLT. GBLT does not = PUMA"

And with that single sentence you destroyed a completely dishonest talking point.

Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #1131
1289. PUMA my ass.
My disgust with Obama has nothing to do with Hillary. I was an Obama supporter during the primaries. I would say that I regret him getting the nomination over Hillary except for the fact that I really believe Hillary would have lost to McCain, which would have made things even worse.

But I can still be disgusted at what he has done, how he has acted, and what he has failed to do. The primaries have nothing to do with it.

You, on the other hand, grasp the "PUMA" factor like a miser clutching a $10.00 bill on his deathbed. Because you need a way to justify your disdain for us as something other than what it really is: petty personal bigotry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 04:43 AM
Response to Reply #1131
1594. PUMA! POUTRAGE! PONY! You guys are complete and utter morons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:50 AM
Response to Reply #882
980. Thank you very much.
You "get" me. :)

Also: Don't you think the intransigence on both sides is harmful, leading to more vituperative anti-Obama threads on the one hand and more hyperbolically pro-Obama threads on the other?

I think that might be a very valid observation!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:05 AM
Response to Reply #817
962. Dude, you're getting a Damn Skippy
I couldn't have said it any better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:33 AM
Response to Reply #817
978. Greetings, thank you for allowing me to respond.
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 05:35 AM by Bluebear
I saw my name and took you off ignore in order to converse with you. Thank you for calling me a pillar of this site and that you like my non-Obama posts.

Now, if you are interested, you are totally wrong calling me "bitter that Obama won".

I voted for Barack Obama. Why would I be bitter that he won? Yes, McClurkin was an irritant. Rick Warren added onto it. But to tell you the truth, as you call ME dishonest in your post, I think Obama has been dishonest about a whole hell of a lot of things. And my only interest in posting in any political forum is not whether our side "wins" or not, but are things getting better?

When I hear Obama campaign that he will close Gitmo, that the bill he signs "must include the public option", I take him at his word. Silly me, with any politician, eh? But then to be told that my own ears didn't hear those things and I must "not have been paying attention", or Obama "doesn't have a magic wand", or I am "whining" because I didn't get my "pony"....in a word or two, fuck that.

As to giving Obama credit for DADT, listen. It's STILL not over. And Dan Choi (another whining loser, according to many here) this week has been the first person to be prosecuted for a White House protest since 1917 for picketing the White House of President Wilson in support of women's suffrage. Fierce advocate? Whatever. And as far as DADT, I sure as hell did not expect Obama to stand for surveys of the troops, then surveys of the troops, and the troops pastors, to see what they "felt" about repealing DADT. Fucking lead. Please.

I said I was thrilled when Obama won. I believed him. The crowds in Chicago at the victory celebration brought tears to my eyes. I thought and still think it remarkable and high time that a person of color was elected. But I still think Barack Obama represents Wall Street more than me. Will I vote for him again? Of course. Obama will always be better than any Republican.

So you think I am dishonest, and a noisemaker, and a tactician, and bitter, and the harbinger of bad feelings. Sorry. I'm just a progressive idealist that wants to hold Obama's feet to the fire AS HE ASKED US TO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #978
1093. I love you for being all those things :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #978
1228. Maybe I was a bit harsh
There's been years of this brewing and I wanted to get it off my chest. I think the truth about Obama falls in the middle somewhere. Obama made certain promises and kept them (DADT, Afghanistan, health care reform). Those are usually things he could control. He made others that he didn't keep (gitmo, public option, no mandate). Then there were some disapointments (Vilsack!!!, others).

You have a problem with Obama on the process of repealing DADT, but in the end he got the result we all hoped for. And it's a better course than DOMA going through the courts. I guess I don't understand why you care how sausage is made if it's exactly what you ordered. :9

Sorry for taking this out on you. It's not really fair and obviously not something I would normally do. I guess I should have taken my own advice and given you the benefit of the doubt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #1228
1438. So we both inched a step forward here.
Very glad of it! I'm sure we will continue to disagree on some points but dialog is good. Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNBrewer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #1228
1485. Note: the DADT promise has yet to be fulfilled
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNBrewer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #817
1484. I usually agree with Bluebear 100%. I agree with his criticisms of Obama
Edited on Fri Jun-17-11 09:58 AM by MNBrewer
and his gay rights policies
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NuttyFluffers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:01 PM
Response to Original message
821. is it time for the "Viper Pit" solution? grow up and have resident "Kill File" sub-forum?
quite a few forums have an "anything goes" sub-forum where people may spew forth invectives into the abyss as much as they desire. the venom is not allowed to escape from it, yet has a place to exist. this is just one topic post in the same vein, and while potentially useful, will likely be not enough. and no, moderated dungeons are not enough, either; the place must be utterly lawless.

let adults be. sometimes they want to be mature and participate in civil conversations. sometimes they want to act like petulant brats. and if you're really spineless and foolish they'll suck you, the nannies, in to help fight their wars. and there's no way to outsmart or out-civilize them because the nature of life is to circumvent restrictions. it's better to have a small area of lawlessness -- a release valve -- and retain the peace everywhere else. when there are places with boundaries, there always has to be a liminal place (a place without boundaries) to offset the gathered tension. let people condemn themselves until they grow tired of their own nasty behavior.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #821
828. I don't think this is what DU has ever been about
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 10:11 PM by Renew Deal
If that happens it's admitting that a civil Democratic site isn't possible. I don't agree with that. Also, DU is a very good site for discussion when you compare it to other forums on the internet. That's because of the rules and mods.

Of course, you may be right and it might work. Let's take it outside! :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NuttyFluffers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #828
861. certain ideas sound beautiful as ideals. and then there's the reality of humanity.
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 09:55 PM by NuttyFluffers
there's a reason the Age of Reason ideals have yet to sweep humanity into a millennial long logical utopia. George Lakoff's "The Political Mind" is a good place to start on why such notions should be thrown to the wayside as we learn more and more about the nature of human cognitive thought. we are not being who operate solely on logical self-interest, let alone logical altruism -- and further more, logic isn't so very logical at its core (it has core emotive conceits just like everything). sounds pretty, ain't real. and it's time for us to get real.

and no, I do not thing DU is a good site for discussion anymore compared to other forums on the internet. it used to be in the earlier years, but that was due to having a smaller community. anything smaller is easier to manage because the community is more subconsciously coordinated to self-police. what made DU good (and still retains its utility) is the amount of posters who are either tenacious researchers, well-versed on their field of expertise, or have excellent intuitive sense to make sense of disparate data and ask the really tough questions. that happens in spite of the rules sans release valve and the overwhelmed mods.

but there's a real (and unproductive, nor will be easily resolved) splinter within the community. there will be no amount of satisfaction available for either party involved (oh, they may say they will be contented by certain grievances satisfied). but really, this is a play for power -- who gets to say what and when. and the only way to solve those is to provide a powerless place where all the venom may be expiated. afterwards people may choose for themselves to come together in civil locations (the rest of the website) and express their agency to solve problems with communal power. but internal power struggles should never be awarded power as the spoils of their irreconcilable spat. people should be allowed to reveal themselves where they cannot mutually abide and then be free to walk civilly, but separately, their own ways.

edit: and yes, we should take it outside! Round one, Fight! Hadouken!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #821
864. I've seen this idea work elsewhere....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marlakay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:22 PM
Response to Original message
840. I support equality for all
I think either marriage and or civil unions should be available in all states. No one should have to worry if someone is sick or dies that their partner isn't taken care of. No one should be made to feel less than others because of who they want to share their life with.

I didn't start out honestly believing that. I used to be very religious when I was younger and over time and opening up myself to other beliefs and views I have changed. I don't go to church any more either. One can only hope in the future that more and more
will change and be more accepting of others that are different from what you were raised around.

Like others have said, the older you are the more it is a problem. I am 54 and have changed but my mom 84 even though democrat and a gay cousin she was close to still wouldn't vote for gay marriage in CA. I think in 20 years from now this will not be an issue
all of the young people I know are more accepting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generic Brad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
853. LGBT issues are everyone's issues
You have my full support.

This is an issue I have remained silent on for too long. But my DU friends have taught me that keeping silent only emboldens the trolls and haters. No more.

I am in a long term interracial relationship. We may be heterosexual, but we have had to put up with discrimination and overturn laws banning such unions in my lifetime. I don't see any difference between LGBT relationships and interracial relationships. We should all be able to legally love who we love. Anything less is a denial of humanity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNBrewer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #853
1486. Hi fellow MN person
Remember to vote "NO" on the anti-marriage-equality Constitutional amendment in November. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Corruption Winz Donating Member (581 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
870. I have no problem with homosexuals..
Doesn't bother me, worry me or cause any concern within me. I don't see how it could.

I think gay people have the right to love and marry one another without being harassed. I don't see why you'd waste your time bothering people you claim to not like. Seems to make no sense.

I think gay people should be allowed to adopt without having to jump through hoops that other people simply don't have to jump through.

The only type of gay people I don't like are overtly-flamboyant homosexuals. And I don't hate them, I just find them to be annoying at times. Not because it's coming from a gay person. I don't like overtly-masculine straight men. Likely, I dislike them even more. I dislike overtly-feminine women. I don't hate anyone who seems to be trying to prove something that no one is questioning. But, it's rather annoying.

In any event, I can't truthfully understand why this is an issue. If someone is gay.... so..... the fuck..... what? Who cares?

Let them love each other. Let them live. Let them enjoy life. Let them get married and then divorced. Let them argue over how the property is going to be split. Let them adopt. Move on.

Pretty much all I got on the issue as I just don't feel it's an issue. Or, at least, shouldn't be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #870
941. There are plenty of overtly-flamboyant heterosexuals
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 12:14 AM by Hippo_Tron
And there are plenty of uber-masculine homosexuals too. I've said this before and I'll say it again. Gay people are just people, end of story. I realize you didn't mean to be offensive and support equal rights and I think that's great. But there's no need to associate homosexuality with overt-flamboyance and no need to associate uber-masculinity with heterosexuality. Sexual orientation is completely independent of these characteristics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Corruption Winz Donating Member (581 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:05 AM
Response to Reply #941
961. I understand... I should probably rephrase..
I dislike anyone who is overtly anything. The reason I mentioned flamboyancy in this instance is because of my personal experience with some homosexuals. While that might seem a bit short-sighted or perhaps close-minded, I simply have only my personal experiences to reference. I've met few flamboyant heterosexuals and quite a few flamboyant homosexuals.

I obviously understand that homosexuals are people that simply prefer their own gender and that's about all there is in terms of differences. However, I was simply mentioning an aspect of my interaction with some homosexual people.

Still, I will say that an overtly-masculine heterosexual is even worse. "I'm going to go drive my pick up truck to go kill a defenseless animal and then drink beer in celebration with my shirt off."

.............Vomit inducing.

Regardless, I dislike anyone who is overtly anything. It's too one-dimensional and over-the-top for me. That's all. But I get what you're saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #961
1173. Better put me on Ignore...
....because I am overtly something.

Ya know what, I dont like people who are overtly NOTHING.

Do you find NOTHING in your world worth being Overt for?
If not, than I pity you. I pity you very much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #961
1282. Do you mean "overly"= flamboyantly, or "overtly"=openly?
"Still, I will say that an overtly-masculine heterosexual is even worse. " Do you mean a hetero who is openly masculine or flamboyantly?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dappleganger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #870
1376. You should make it your goal to get to know more flamboyant people.
They are the spice of life and you will be much richer for taking the time to look past your prejudices and get to know them for who they are, which is just people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:07 PM
Response to Original message
872. It's pretty badass Skinner was willing to try this
Oh and people should be able to love and marry whoever the fuck they want.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
juxtaposed Donating Member (388 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #872
883. agree!! marry anyone..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Green Manalishi Donating Member (426 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:08 PM
Response to Original message
873. Simple: homophobes, which is ANYONE against marriage equality
are pieces of shit. May they die horribly. preferably after watching their family do so.

Under no circumstances should they be regarded as humans, like Nazi's they should be hunted down and hung. Anyone holding the gender issues of any LGBT person against them, anywhere, in anyway should be beaten to within an inch of their life and dropped into Uganda, sans parachute, from at least 30,000 feet.

No room for compromise, no room for ambiguity; this happily hetero guy will gladly back up any of my gay friends who choose to lay down as ass whoopin' that would horrify a Roman Centurion on any asshole who would deny a gay, lesbian or transgendered couple full rights and privileges, anywhere, anytime.

If I can disambiguate further, please let me know!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #873
875. I find this post distasteful in the extreme. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rowdyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #873
930. Hate much?
You're very good at it...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #873
950. Did you have a defense of ANYONE against marriage equality?
I'd love to hear it, bloviation aside.

And yes, in advance of your idiotic response, anyone against marriage equality as you've stated is a piece of shit. You included, if that's your take. Not that bigots should die horribly, they should just understand that as bigots...they are indeed bigots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #873
1150. Wow.
The freaks come out at night.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Codeine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #873
1415. jeez.
That's helpful. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #873
1483. And this piece of hateful tripe is helpful...how? Good grief.
Either it is mocking hyperbole or just plain nasty bigotry. I hope you heal someday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
juxtaposed Donating Member (388 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:17 PM
Response to Original message
880. Hi! I'm new here... What you all talking about!! My names Mike:-)
Is this shit still going on ???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
884. How can anyone call themselves a progressive
and still work to deny rights to anyone in this country regardless of their race, age, gender or sexual affiliation. How can we still be debating this issue?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #884
896. They can't and those bigots should just go fuck themselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mvd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #884
916. I don't understand it at all
Edited on Wed Jun-15-11 11:18 PM by mvd
Why does it matter to people if they can marry and have equal rights? What does it do to them? This discrimination is even breaking families apart. My cousin is gay, and his parents had a hard time accepting it. It's well known that being GLBT is how they are born. I've generally had no problems with sensitivity, I am happy to say. What a world this could be without the ignorance. It's time for discrimination of groups of people to die out. Another thing: I will never tell any GLBT person how high their priorities should be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ramulux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
885. Whats going on?
I've never seen anyone say anything negative about LGBT people on this site. What happened?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wetzelbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:35 PM
Response to Original message
895. All I know is my fiance'
was TS'd for being outspoken on LGBT issues. God I love that woman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #895
913. We all do, brother.
We've lost too many. And she's one of the really good 'uns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wetzelbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #913
915. Yup
Serious note, that era is a big reason why I am rarely around here anymore. Ugly time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:31 PM
Response to Reply #915
922. I know, me too.
Shame that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mikelgb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:49 PM
Response to Original message
902. I am a gay DUer but I am not active in the LGBT forums
I have never had nor seen any problems with the breeders harassing me or my like, so I don't see what all the drama is about, but you know us, we can find drama in anything. :evilgrin:

On a slightly unrelated note I appreciate this open thread and I wish it was open to all topics, but I will not hijack it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullwinkle428 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
905. Extending civil rights to everyone is a little more important to me
than making Obama the fifth face on Mt. Rushmore, so I now welcome the inevitable "Good luck with President Bachmann" responses!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #905
917. But you wouldn't be mad if someone who cared about the poor voted for a pro-social program
Antigay president?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #917
1083. You were wondering why you were getting so much invective upthread.
Posts like that is why.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe the Revelator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #1083
1095. I don't recall wondering that....
...and what is so wrong with that post? I think its an extremely valid question when we're talking about not supporting democrats and the basis of anger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullwinkle428 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #917
1174. That's not even a very good strawman argument.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cheneyschernobyl Donating Member (137 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:38 PM
Response to Original message
924. Has anyone noticed how often
people are editing their comments on this thread? It gives the impression of typing/posting something they quickly regret. I started counting the number of "edits", and stopped when I reached 30 (halfway through the thread).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #924
928. I often edit right after posting because I forget to use the "Preview" function
And I realize that I've made typos.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #924
956. I spelled "too" as "to" a couple of times. And then I had doubts about
using "wherein" so I removed it...and then decided to use it again. I used to put a reason for my edits. Maybe I'll start doing that again. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:10 AM
Response to Reply #956
971. My favorite is when I edit a typo or something and then get accused of editing...
the content of the post to hide something heinously offensive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:43 AM
Response to Reply #924
975. Typos, baby. Typos! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-15-11 11:59 PM
Response to Original message
936. Part of the problem is that DU doesn't do nuance well with regard to Obama
Well we don't do nuance well at all.

Personally, I recognize that Obama is a politician and in order to prevent President Palin/Romney/(insert scary person here), Obama needs to straddle the fence and play politics. I also recognize that he has a zillion other things he has to get done and has to make value judgments. I also think that's a crappy excuse to not deal with the fact that it's a fucking disgrace that gay people are second class citizens in the United States in 2011.

Put another way, I think Obama is doing a good job and I don't think I could do any better. But it's not my job to justify his politically motivated decisions nor recommend that he make them. He has people who bill for the hour what I make in a week to tell him that stuff. And I'm glad we have those strategists, as winning elections are important. But the last thing we need is a nation full of armchair strategists telling the President "It's okay that you don't pursue full equality for gay people, I understand that you need to win NASCAR dads in the next election." What we need is a nation full of people saying "Mr. President, equal rights, RIGHT FUCKING NOW." That way he can weigh that voice against Joel Benenson or David Axelrod telling him "You need those NASCAR dads". If everyone is telling him the same thing, he will never do anything but try to please the NASCAR dads.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deacon_sephiroth Donating Member (315 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:13 AM
Response to Original message
942. wow, I've been a bit disillusioned
When I saw the headline I thought: "Is there REALLY? I haven't noticed any division on this issue, what hard feelings?"
It only took scrolling down the IMPRESSIVELY long string of replies this got in a relatively short time to see I might be a bit blind to something around here.

For the record, I don't see the big deal and I never did. Who you date/marry/sleep with is none of my business, or anyone else's as far as I'm concerned. I've always preached equality, so why stop here?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
urbuddha Donating Member (266 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:44 AM
Response to Reply #942
959. We must respectfully agree to disagree in order to progress.
Just like all realms of society WE have different opinions. That is only natural. The key is to respectfully agree to disagree. We must if we're going to move forward in progress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #959
1091. There is not, there CANNOT be, respectful disagreement when speaking of
equal justice under the law. It is either equal, or it is not, and those who are against full, unconditional, and immediate equality ARE NOT RESPECTFUL BY DEFAULT.

Furthermore, there is no way to cast the stones in a respectful manner. No matter how you put it, no matter how polite you are, no matter how many gay friends you have- if you are against our full, unconditional, and immediate equality, you are a bigot and you deserve to be treated as such until YOU change YOUR tune.

Editorial 'you', there. But if the shoe fits, you'll not only wear it, but I and others will force it onto your feet whether you like it or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #959
1105. there is no need to be respectful of bigotry n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #959
1215. Would you extend that same hand of respect to a racist?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
From The Ashes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:30 AM
Response to Original message
963. kick for later...
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tripod Donating Member (534 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:50 AM
Response to Reply #963
970. Every one said I was wrong.....
The earthquake, surname, in Japan, will kill 500,000. a half a million when years roll bye. Sorry! I didn't do it. I just told the long time story! DU said I was wrong, I hope I am.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tripod Donating Member (534 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:36 AM
Original message
Comtec, where are you?????
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 03:40 AM by Tripod
I have some things to say to you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tripod Donating Member (534 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 03:16 AM
Response to Original message
1454. oops, never mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tripod Donating Member (534 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:36 AM
Response to Original message
969. Where do I sign up...LOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:42 AM
Response to Original message
974. Ten questions for everyone, while we're all gathered here.
No one has to answer any, if they don't want to. But I think that we all have answers, if we work together.

1. Do you think that anyone who supports President Obama is, by definition, a homophobe?

2. Do you think that DOMA will be totally eliminated during either a 1st or 2nd Obama term?

3. Other than New York, what other states seem more than likely to enact Marriage Equality in the near term?

4. Can the success of New York be duplicated in other states fairly soon?

5. If Obama can't be depended upon to bring about full equality by either unilateral action or as a leader, who do you think will do a better job?

6. What is the best way to garner otherwise disinterested public support for full equality?

7. Do you live in a state that has full marriage equality protected by law?

8. Is the Obama Administration conducting the correct policy to eliminate DADT once and for all?

9. Who do you think are the most dangerous opponents to Full Equality and how must they be dealt with?

10. Is Skinner's thread helpful overall?


If anyone has any questions as well, they should ask.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:31 AM
Response to Reply #974
977. 10 answers and ten more questions
1. Do you think that anyone who supports President Obama is, by definition, a homophobe?

No. But, it does disprove the adage, "there are no stupid questions."

2. Do you think that DOMA will be totally eliminated during either a 1st or 2nd Obama term?

Nope. If anything, there will be promises and surveys, but little else.

3. Other than New York, what other states seem more than likely to enact Marriage Equality in the near term?

Possibly Mass. or Vermont.

4. Can the success of New York be duplicated in other states fairly soon?

Doubtful.

5. If Obama can't be depended upon to bring about full equality by either unilateral action or as a leader, who do you think will do a better job?

Someone who can bring about full equality.

6. What is the best way to garner otherwise disinterested public support for full equality?

Over 50% of the population supports "gay marriage."

7. Do you live in a state that has full marriage equality protected by law?

No. But, thankfully, they have protected us from the 14 Muslims in the state from enacting Sharia Law. (Oklahoma is OK! :eyes:)

8. Is the Obama Administration conducting the correct policy to eliminate DADT once and for all?

:rofl:

9. Who do you think are the most dangerous opponents to Full Equality and how must they be dealt with?

Bigots. For some, education will work, for others, they are just too fucking stupid.

10. Is Skinner's thread helpful overall?

Yes. It has exposed a number of homophobes, "baiters," and other enemies to justice for GLBT folks.


Ten more questions....

  1. Should homphobes be protected at DU because they are "good democrats?"

  2. Should gay DU'ers be accused of racism because they disagree with Obama or the actions of his administration?

  3. Should GLBT equality be "put on hold" because it is "better" for getting democrats elected?

  4. Do you live in a state where your rights are subjected to the whim of the voters of the state?

  5. Can you kiss your partner in public without being worried/concerned about being removed from a public pool?

  6. What should "allies" for the GLBT do to actually help?

  7. Should the opinions of national GLBT groups replace the opinions of individual GLBT DUers?

  8. Who should decide what is "homophobic" or not?

  9. How should gay DUers express disappointment/anger/fear/sadness without being accused of being "thin-skinned/wanting a pony/reminded of how good we got it/racists?"

  10. Where should all the "ungrateful" gay DUers (the "Obama haters") move on to?


As with your post, no need for you to answer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:40 AM
Response to Reply #977
979. Question #1 was a hoot
I don't know who posted it, but my god.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:19 AM
Response to Reply #977
982. Turnabout is fairplay
So, I'll answer yours too. Thanks for replying



Should homphobes be protected at DU because they are "good democrats?"
Since you've quoted "good democrats", I take that to mean that they really aren't good. If their homophobia is disruptive, then they should not be protected.


Should gay DU'ers be accused of racism because they disagree with Obama or the actions of his administration?
Only if they engage in racist rhetoric.


Should GLBT equality be "put on hold" because it is "better" for getting democrats elected?
No. We have to work with what we've got… Even with a president that some people find problematic. But that won't preclude getting more effective Democrats elected to Congress while current efforts are ongoing.


Do you live in a state where your rights are subjected to the whim of the voters of the state?
If you take this to mean are voters able to vote to disenfranchise LGBT citizens and not straights, Yes, I live in Michigan. We had a marriage inequality referendum here that I voted against. This affects my family members who are gay and lesbian. Anything that affects them, affects me. Not directly, as I readily admit, but I oppose what has been done in my state just the same.


Can you kiss your partner in public without being worried/concerned about being removed from a public pool?
Between me and my wife, probably not. If it were a gay of lesbian couple here in Michigan, I have no way of knowing either way


What should "allies" for the GLBT do to actually help?
The same things that GLBT will do. Vote, protest, get the right people elected, take the matter to the courts when ever possible. Work together as one team for full equality.


Should the opinions of national GLBT groups replace the opinions of individual GLBT DUers?
Everyone has a right to their own opinion. If GLBT DUers don't feel that those national organizations reflect their best interests and opinions, it behooves those DUers to take up the matter with those organizations. who are supposed to be their advocates.


Who should decide what is "homophobic" or not?
Everyone, through consensus.


How should gay DUers express disappointment/anger/fear/sadness without being accused of being "thin-skinned/wanting a pony/reminded of how good we got it/racists?"
Catharsis is perfectly natural and should be encouraged. However, some may use the cover of catharsis to further a disruptive agenda. Especially if articles are linked from people who are known liars and mud flingers. If that's the case, it should be confronted. But getting something off ones chest is fine and to be expected. Only fair and honest criticism should have merit.


Where should all the "ungrateful" gay DUers (the "Obama haters") move on to?
Wherever they want to. The choice is up to them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 02:27 AM
Response to Reply #982
1451. Corrections and Clarifications
I need to correct one of my answers. It is my fault I answered incorrectly because I was sleepy. As soon as I posted, I went to bed. I should have paid closer attention. I apologize.

3. Other than New York, what other states seem more than likely to enact Marriage Equality in the near term?

Possibly Mass. or Vermont.


I should have answered another New England state, maybe California, but as in my answer in the next question, I don't hold much faith it will happen soon. Being tired, I misread and answered with two states which already have marriage equality.

Should homphobes be protected at DU because they are "good democrats?"
Since you've quoted "good democrats", I take that to mean that they really aren't good. If their homophobia is disruptive, then they should not be protected.


Your assuption is incorrect. I used quotes to set it off as an example of why they are protected. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. However, I am still concerned by your response and am requesting you clarify. Do you not think homophobia is disruptive by nature? If a poster is homophobic, shouldn't that be enough to remove them from this site?

Do you live in a state where your rights are subjected to the whim of the voters of the state?
If you take this to mean are voters able to vote to disenfranchise LGBT citizens and not straights, Yes, I live in Michigan. We had a marriage inequality referendum here that I voted against. This affects my family members who are gay and lesbian. Anything that affects them, affects me. Not directly, as I readily admit, but I oppose what has been done in my state just the same.


Again, perhaps I wasn't clear, but I wasn't just talking about GLBT issues, especially since you are not gay. Are your personal rights and equality at the whim of voters?

Should the opinions of national GLBT groups replace the opinions of individual GLBT DUers?
Everyone has a right to their own opinion. If GLBT DUers don't feel that those national organizations reflect their best interests and opinions, it behooves those DUers to take up the matter with those organizations. who are supposed to be their advocates.


I find your answer evasive and insulting. Therefore, I will ask again to allow you to clarify. If, as you claim, we are entitled to our own opinoin, then why should the opinion of a national/local gay organization (or celebrity, for that matter) trump the opinion of a DUer's opinion? We shouldn't be required to accept the opinioins/positions of national groups determine OUR positions/opinions.

Who should decide what is "homophobic" or not?
Everyone, through consensus.


I disagree. There are many here who wouldn't know homophobia if it reared up and bit them on the ass. Why should they have input? Consensus is not needed. There may be disagreements on some particular issues as to whether they are homophobic or not, and that is fine; but, it really comes down to what we, as GLBT, feel is homophobic.

You don't have to answer (re-answer) the questions. (Pardon spelling errors, the spellcheck appears to be "hanging.")
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #1451
1515. I don't mind replying at all.
About homophobia on DU.

It, in itself, here on DU is, in fact, a disruptive element. It's not welcome and we should not have homophobic posters posting their homophobia here.

Can any of my rights be taken away by other voters?

All I can say is that I honestly don't know. It hasn't happened yet. If anything, it's only been our politicians who have done such a thing.

If someone uses the the position of national organizations to trump your own opinions, then that person is not respecting your own opinion. That's wrong, of course and the differences of opinions should be noted but not used as a wedge. As I mentioned before, if those organizations do not appear to be working in your best interests, I would hope that your would take that up with them as a side measure outside of what's happening on DU. But no, no one has the right to do that to you.

I don't exactly know what, in your experience, drove you to ask that question. However, I'm hazarding a guess that it was over a heated discussion about the Tracy Morgan incident. Although this particular thread that I started doesn't refer to the Morgan discussion, I think that it applies somewhat to the situation. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1256194

I apologize that my previous answer insulted you.

Who is to decided what is homophobic?

Most things have a clear definition of what they are and what they aren't, but not all. The mere fact that you asked about who should decided whether something is homophobic or not places it in the always-not-too-clear category. And that's because some of those definitions can be quite subjective instead of completely objective ones. That subjectivity can even come into play between people who appear to be of like mind as things are described as one thing or another based on the slightest of minutiae.

Should we use Gay X's definition, or Lesbian Y's? Should we use your definition, or a somewhat different definition from any of our other GLBT members?

That's a recipe for confusion.

Thus, no one disputes what a tree of a rock is, correct? Because those things are understood by everyone. However, if we question who's definition to use, then there exists the possibility that are some of us who may not recognize something when we see it.

What I was actually suggesting by consensus was that a definition of homophobia should be completely objective and, of course known by everyone who posts on DU. It should meet specific criteria understood by everyone, including those who you feel wouldn't know it if it bit them on their asses.

What I suggest is that the GLBT DUers should sit down and formulate a concrete definition of homophobia. That, definition should be presented to everyone else on the site, which in turn should be respectfully discussed and finalized before it's established as what we all believe what it is. Some people are going to have questions. As long as those questions are asked honestly and respectfully, they should be answered.

I think that this is an opportunity for those who know what it is to give everyone else the benefit of a teaching moment.

Now some may object to what I've suggested. There may be a claim that you wouldn't question black people about their definition of what racism is, correct? However, the fact is that the black definition of racism is questioned all of the time in this country, though mostly by people who have an agenda to quash it, but not all of course. But we should determine if something is true or not and for all of us to see. To know the truth of something, I believe that they are only worthy and strong enough of believing in them if they are able to withstand tests. If a "truth" falls under scrutiny, then people find out that they were merely believing in a fallacy.

The key to finding if something or not something passes the smell test is to smell it…. Honestly and respectfully.

We all know what honesty and respect is.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:41 AM
Response to Reply #974
987. Here are some answers:
1. Do you think that anyone who supports President Obama is, by definition, a homophobe?

No.

2. Do you think that DOMA will be totally eliminated during either a 1st or 2nd Obama term?

"(T)otally eliminated" makes this question harder. It seems likely that the Supreme Court will rule on the constitutionality of DOMA within the timeframe of a second Obama term, but the court challenges target Sec. 3, not Sec. 2. Between the chance that the Supreme Court will strike down Sec. 3 and the (substantially lower) chance of legislative repeal, I think DOMA may well be nearing its end, but it's far from the point where I could be confident making the prediction you suggest, or even a narrower one concerning only Sec. 3. (Sec. 2 is far less important, because states probably have the power to deny recognition to same-sex marriages even without DOMA.)

3. Other than New York, what other states seem more than likely to enact Marriage Equality in the near term?

Within the next five years, I'd say Hawaii, New Jersey, Maryland, Rhode Island, Maine the next time it gets unified Democratic control, California (by court decision or at the ballot box), and maybe Washington; Minnesota has a good shot too if the amendment there fails.

I haven't looked at a list recently, but we're pretty soon going to get to the point where there are no more liberal-leaning states without anti-gay constitutional amendments, and progress will get harder. We'll probably need a few referendum victories before people get confident enough to try overturning those; Maryland, California, Maine, and Minnesota are good bets for where those might happen.

4. Can the success of New York be duplicated in other states fairly soon?

New York is not yet a success. Let's not get too confident before the bill actually gets through the State Senate. The Senate Republicans could still keep it from the floor, and there could still be no 32nd vote. As for other states, I don't know about "fairly soon" if you mean within the next year or so. Maryland and RI are the only real possibilities there, and the lack of success this year does not spell well for the next attempt.

5. If Obama can't be depended upon to bring about full equality by either unilateral action or as a leader, who do you think will do a better job?

Obama does not have the power to bring about full equality. Neither does anyone else. It's quite possible that a different Democratic president would have been more aggressive about LGBT equality than Obama, but it's hard to know, and the fundamentals of the situation don't have much to do with Obama's particular personality and ideological traits.

6. What is the best way to garner otherwise disinterested public support for full equality?

Time. ;)

That, and being out, and talking about the actual lived experiences of LGBT people in a way that combats fear nad prejudice.

7. Do you live in a state that has full marriage equality protected by law?

No, and that's unlikely to change.

8. Is the Obama Administration conducting the correct policy to eliminate DADT once and for all?

It seems likely that DADT will be eliminated "once and for all" by this fall, so in that sense, yes. But repeal went on the back-burner, it was a much closer thing than it had to be, and that was unfortunate. (I am less annoyed about the compromises Obama struck with the military; the "study" and much of this delay was almost certainly unnecessary and probably motivated by prejudice at the Pentagon, but without military cooperation it's hard to believe Congress would have gone along.)

9. Who do you think are the most dangerous opponents to Full Equality and how must they be dealt with?

Strongly religious Republican voters. They can't be dealt with; they must be endured. They do not make up a large enough segment of the population to stop full equality forever, and (slowly) support for full equality is rising among them too.

10. Is Skinner's thread helpful overall?

I have no idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:49 AM
Response to Reply #987
990. Great answers. Thanks very much nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:07 AM
Response to Reply #974
994. I'm just gonna answer #9 for now
9. Who do you think are the most dangerous opponents to Full Equality and how must they be dealt with?

The most dangerous opponents of equality is anyone who doesn't declare the need of and their support for full equality (Dem, Repub, Independent, etc.).

IMO, no minority movement can move forward without the help of the majority. If the majority doesn't step up and say to their politicians that this is an important issue for them, then it will continue to be used as a wedge issue by the Repub party and it will continue to divide the nation (as a wedge issue is known to do).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:09 AM
Response to Reply #994
995. Thanks. I hope that you'll answer the others
And feel free to add your own
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:44 AM
Response to Reply #974
1005. You want answers?
Giving you the benefit of the doubt that this isn't just more of your usual troll-bait....

1. Do you think that anyone who supports President Obama is, by definition, a homophobe?


No. At this point I support him for re-election since I don't see any better options. If by some fluke Fred Karger were to win the Republican nomination I would back him. If Huntsman reaffirms his anti-war stance and ends up supporting full marriage equality I will vote for him.

An Obama supporter isn't a homophobe. One who keeps telling the ungrateful faggots that they should stop criticizing him because he's feeding us scraps from the table is.

2. Do you think that DOMA will be totally eliminated during either a 1st or 2nd Obama term?


No. The slog through the courts will be slow at best, and his nomination of self-loathing closeted lesbian Elena Kagan and Devout Catholic Sonya Sotomayor doesn't help the case's chances in the Supreme Court.

He's too cowardly to force it through the Congress, too. Our chance to do it was when we had the House and a veto-proof Senate majority, but he was unwilling to fight for it the way LBJ fought for the Civil Rights Act. (Hell, he was too cowardly to fight for the public option, which had better poll numbers than marriage.)

3. Other than New York, what other states seem more than likely to enact Marriage Equality in the near term?


No. I doubt even New York is going to do it.

4. Can the success of New York be duplicated in other states fairly soon?


No. The only way to effectively do that is to end DOMA. Once DOMA is ended then states will have to acknowledge and recognize same-sex marriages performed out of state.

5. If Obama can't be depended upon to bring about full equality by either unilateral action or as a leader, who do you think will do a better job?


Right now, no one. But we're trying to hold Obama's feet to the fire to make him fight for us so knock it off with the "shut up ungrateful fags" bullshit.

I think Obama may have had a wake-up call in 2010. Gay support for Democrats dropped 20 points and I'm sure that in at least a couple of districts that helped get rid of a Blue Dog or two. There are approximately 20,000,000 LGBT*.* Americans, and let's say half of them are of age and vote. In 2008 90% of them went for Obama. Right now at least 2,000,000 of those 9,000,000 voters have abandoned the Democrats. He knows he can't alienate many more of us.

And for the record, if gays had voted along the same lines as most other demographic groups in 2008, McCain would have won. Think that over.

6. What is the best way to garner otherwise disinterested public support for full equality?


We don't need to. We already have majority support nationwide. All we have to do is get rid of DOMA and force the hands of the states that are blocking it to recognize out of state same-sex marriages.

By the way, if interracial marriages had been forced to use the same state-by-state strategy that same-sex marriage is being forced to fight, nearly half the states would still have miscegenation laws.

7. Do you live in a state that has full marriage equality protected by law?


No. And it was Democrats who blocked it.

8. Is the Obama Administration conducting the correct policy to eliminate DADT once and for all?


No. He could have insisted that Byrd's amendment that turned it into a kinda-sorta-wink-wink repeal that can be blocked at any time. He's also refused to use stop-loss to prevent discharges during the repeal process. Hell, there are discharges STILL going on.

Worse, the route that Obama used can actually make things worse. Coming so close (if it ever comes) to the Presidential Election, if he loses in 2012 then President Romney, Palin, or Gingrich can sign an executive order going back to the pre-Clinton policy. He should have stopped defending the law and let the courts strike it down.

9. Who do you think are the most dangerous opponents to Full Equality and how must they be dealt with?


Complacency.

10. Is Skinner's thread helpful overall?


No. Not if DU doesn't start enforcing the rules equally, which it does not now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #1005
1009. Thanks for your answers. I really appreciate them. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hosnon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:42 AM
Response to Reply #974
1024. Okay.
1. No.
2. No.
3. Not really sure, but I'd place the New England states and Pacific coast states above the rest of the country (relatively).
4. Probably.
5. The Supreme Court.
6. Make it personal. We have an obligation to put a human face on the issue to our friends and relatives.
7. No.
8. Yes.
9. Supposed allies who ask us to wait our turn.
10. Very much so.

I'm pinning my hopes on the Prop 8 case reaching the SCOTUS, where I'm hoping Kennedy votes with history (and I think he will).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #1024
1259. Thanks very much for your answers nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snooper2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:11 AM
Response to Reply #974
1034. Dude, I didn't even read past #1, what kind of stupid question is that
"1. Do you think that anyone who supports President Obama is, by definition, a homophobe?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #1034
1035. It's either yes or no
What makes the question stupid?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #1034
1041. It has been said a few times. "I dont understand how anyone in favor of gay rights can be in favor
of this President." Question #1 could be seen as a rephrase of this statement.

Granted, it has been a while since that has been said, but I distinctly remember it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #1034
1043. It really isn't a stupid question 'cause there are people that have said that
on this site. So it's valid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #974
1076. answers
1. Do you think that anyone who supports President Obama is, by definition, a homophobe?

No. Obama is not a homophobe. I do believe he's sent some dog-whistles he didn't intend.

2. Do you think that DOMA will be totally eliminated during either a 1st or 2nd Obama term?

Yes.

3. Other than New York, what other states seem more than likely to enact Marriage Equality in the near term?

No idea,.

4. Can the success of New York be duplicated in other states fairly soon?

Yes. Precedent exists.

5. If Obama can't be depended upon to bring about full equality by either unilateral action or as a leader, who do you think will do a better job?

No idea.

6. What is the best way to garner otherwise disinterested public support for full equality?

LGBT people are your friends, neighbours and family.

7. Do you live in a state that has full marriage equality protected by law?

Yes. Canada.

8. Is the Obama Administration conducting the correct policy to eliminate DADT once and for all?

Yes. Proper procedure needs to be followed.

9. Who do you think are the most dangerous opponents to Full Equality and how must they be dealt with?

The Rabid Religious Right (see website below). Exposure.

10. Is Skinner's thread helpful overall?

Yes, even the bare-knuckle brawling above.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #1076
1254. Thank you for your answers nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BillStein Donating Member (403 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #974
1107. OK..
1. Do you think that anyone who supports President Obama is, by definition, a homophobe?

NO

2. Do you think that DOMA will be totally eliminated during either a 1st or 2nd Obama term?

No, but I don't blame President Obama

3. Other than New York, what other states seem more than likely to enact Marriage Equality in the near term?

None, considering how difficult it's been there. NJ looked good for a while, but with Christie there, it's doubtful.

4. Can the success of New York be duplicated in other states fairly soon?

No.

5. If Obama can't be depended upon to bring about full equality by either unilateral action or as a leader, who do you think will do a better job?

How can anyone bring equality about by "unilateral action"? Last I looked, we had three branches of government....

6. What is the best way to garner otherwise disinterested public support for full equality?

Come out- and yes, I do favor outing politicians like Craig who vote against us

7. Do you live in a state that has full marriage equality protected by law?

NO

8. Is the Obama Administration conducting the correct policy to eliminate DADT once and for all?

I'm willing to give him a time on this.

9. Who do you think are the most dangerous opponents to Full Equality and how must they be dealt with?

Closet cases who vote against LGBT* rights to preserve their cover

10. Is Skinner's thread helpful overall?

If nothing else, the hateful posts have helped expose the problems
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #1107
1255. I appreciate your answers very much, thank you nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #974
1144. I'll play
1. Do you think that anyone who supports President Obama is, by definition, a homophobe?

No- I do think the President himself is a bigot when it comes to GBLTQI.

2. Do you think that DOMA will be totally eliminated during either a 1st or 2nd Obama term?

No

3. Other than New York, what other states seem more than likely to enact Marriage Equality in the near term?

Possibly RI

4. Can the success of New York be duplicated in other states fairly soon?

Which successes specifically?

5. If Obama can't be depended upon to bring about full equality by either unilateral action or as a leader, who do you think will do a better job?

I don't know- I can't even say with any confidence that the Dem party would nominate a leader in the near future that believe in GBLT equalty.

6. What is the best way to garner otherwise disinterested public support for full equality?

The president could push the military to move more quickly with DADT, He could apologize to Lt. Choi and all the others, He could speak out loudly and often against DOMA and most importantly......HE COULD COME OUT AND ADMIT HOW WRONG HIS VIEWS ON GAY MARRIAGE ARE.

7. Do you live in a state that has full marriage equality protected by law?

Yes- I live in MA

8. Is the Obama Administration conducting the correct policy to eliminate DADT once and for all?

They are dragging their feet.

9. Who do you think are the most dangerous opponents to Full Equality and how must they be dealt with?

The religious right and they should be dealt with by having a government who says loudly and with conviction that discrimination of GBLTQI people will not be tolerated any more then racial discrimination is tolerated.

10. Is Skinner's thread helpful overall?

It's good to be able to respond to the baiting and bigotry of others without fear of being banned for standing up for yourselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #1144
1256. Thank you very much for your answers nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lyric Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #974
1316. Answers
1. Do you think that anyone who supports President Obama is, by definition, a homophobe?

Define "supports" a little more narrowly. Technically I "support" Obama because theoretically, I'd slightly prefer that he win than a Republican...but I sure as hell don't spend my time defending him or trying to spin everything he does as "Super Ninja Chess".

2. Do you think that DOMA will be totally eliminated during either a 1st or 2nd Obama term?

Not unless we force him to do it.

3. Other than New York, what other states seem more than likely to enact Marriage Equality in the near term?

California, hopefully. Maybe Rhode Island after that?

4. Can the success of New York be duplicated in other states fairly soon?

I honestly don't know.

5. If Obama can't be depended upon to bring about full equality by either unilateral action or as a leader, who do you think will do a better job?

Whoever we force to do it. Obama is a symptom, in my view. He wouldn't BE there if WE weren't willing to put a low priority on gay equality. When WE start standing up and accepting pain and sacrifices in order to obtain equal rights for all, there will be a candidate who presents him or herself for us to elect.

6. What is the best way to garner otherwise disinterested public support for full equality?

By living your opposition to gay oppression. Refuse marriage. March in the streets. Refuse to patronize businesses whose owners give money to anti-equality candidates. SACRIFICE.

7. Do you live in a state that has full marriage equality protected by law?

No.

8. Is the Obama Administration conducting the correct policy to eliminate DADT once and for all?

No. It should have been ended by now. They're stalling, either to avoid acting on it before the election, or to wait until the last minute to pass it and get a big "liberal" boost.

9. Who do you think are the most dangerous opponents to Full Equality and how must they be dealt with?

We are. The apathetic, complacent mob. How do you remove apathy? I honestly don't know.

10. Is Skinner's thread helpful overall?

I suppose it's cathartic to get to call people assholes without getting your post removed, but helpful towards reconciliation? Probably not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #1316
1342. Thanks for your answers, Very Much,
By the way, I'll just state that the definition of "support" is completely subjective. Feel free to interpret it as you will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Creideiki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #974
1344. I won't answer
I try to ignore the flypaper. I'm not always successful, but I do try.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #1344
1498. Thanks for taking the time to reply anyway nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fearless Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #974
1622. Hell, its late and I'm awake... let's try this...
1. By definition no. The two groups overlap. Neither is mutually exclusive or inclusive of the other. Not all homophobes are Obama supporters and not all Obama supporters are homophobes. Frankly, I'd say there are far fewer homophobes within his supporters than within his opponents' supporters.

2. DOMA will not be touched. It will have to be ruled unconstitutional and that will take the Supreme Court and probably thirty years (maybe fifty), when the popular opinion is around 75-25 for gay marriage. There are too many Congressmen who are either against gay marriage or who are not willing to fight for it for this ever to be dealt with by the Legislature.

3. Rhode Island and New Jersey are likely. California may but not without controversy at first. Otherwise I'd look to Oregon perhaps or Maine in the next decade. The rest are far longer term... probably beginning with Hawaii, Illinois, Virginia and Washington State.

4. New Jersey and Rhode Island primarily. California won't be undone by the Legislature but by the courts, so that doesn't count.

5. He can't be an no one can. Politicians work to gather people together to vote for them. The avoid "controversial" issues. Nationally, this is too controversial for him to take a stand on. Unfortunate for sure, but true. Activists will do the best job. GLBTQ people being out and public are necessary to change public opinion.

6. They need to know GLBTQ people personally. This defeats the stereotypes about them that they fear.

7. Massachusetts.

8. We will see.

9. Those looking to divide us instead of bring us together. Within our own party too. Those who claim that you're anti-Obama for being disappointed in his actions thus far are just as hurtful as those who say we are un-American by supporting GLBTQ rights. They divide us when we should be gathering allies.

10. Undoubtedly there are those who spend a lot more time here at DU than I do. They will blow off steam. For me personally, letting the crazies run the asylum for a day doesn't sound like a very well thought out idea. It sounds like the admins don't know what to do and are gathering information. That's a good thing, if true. Otherwise, I couldn't care less. I personally don't spend enough time here to become so invested in the future of this site. I like it, but it's not my life. I am not invested. Additionally, meh, I think that a lot of people are making something out of nothing. We're all basically on the same side, but we look at the minor differences we have and then amplify them in absence of real differences. Some people in life are out looking for a fight. They have a chip on their shoulder, so to speak. And that comes in all packages, pro-GLBTQ and anti-GLBTQ, and a million others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #1622
1638. Thanks for all of your answers. I really appreciate you taking the time to answer them nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueIris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:57 AM
Response to Original message
976. Regardless of what happens here on DU, the Democratic Party will pay dearly in the next election
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 04:59 AM by BlueIris
for ignoring, neglecting and actively participating in the continuing persecution of LGBTIQ voters.

Just had to get that out. Democrats here can continue to insist the situation "isn't that bad," or that pro-equality folks are "just overreacting," etc., but the political consequences for this last decade will be bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #976
1039. I don't think so. I think more LGBTIQ voters are like Ruggerson and less like those who
are still claiming to be outraged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #976
1237. My granpa used to say, "Don't cut off your nose to spite your face".
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 02:18 PM by Zorra
Frankly. I've given up on Obama, but I'm still going to vote for him, and hope he makes me eat crow.

What else can I do? Sit back and let a Mormon republican take over the WH?

No fucking way I can do that.

While I completely understand and feel, the anger and disappointment at/with Obama, not just within the LGBT community but within the progressive community overall as well, the alternative is incalculably worse.

I'm hostage, and the situation galls me to no end, but it is what it is.

For now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:41 AM
Response to Original message
1003. Questions
Why does the LGBT community feel the need for society to recognise their relationship with the title of marriage? Does it change their relationship with their loved one either way? If it were not for our unjust employer based health care system and the difficulties this poses LGBT, because they are not married, do you think the marriage issue would be as much of a problem as it is? In other words if you had Universal Health Care regardless of if you were married to someone with a good job with benefits or not, would the marriage issue still be so important?

I know most of you will say "Yes, the marriage issue would still be important", but I have to admit I find this completely dishonest and misguided.

I do not support the oppression of any group that is not oppressing others. If you respond I am not going to argue, just want to hear your thoughts on this reasoning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:45 AM
Response to Reply #1003
1006. Let's take this back a step (and I hope you do respond.)
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 07:47 AM by Unvanguard
Why do you think straight people want to get married? Do you think it is only the legal benefits? (Those legal benefits, incidentally, extend substantially beyond health care.)

In European countries with universal health care where cohabitants get substantial rights, why do you think anyone marries?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #1003
1008. Marriage issues are fundamental in our society
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 08:26 AM by MrScorpio
There are far reaching legal and social ramifications involved.

The other side knows this. By denying same sex marriage they are, by extension, relegating same sex couples to second class citizenship through discriminatory means.

Unless full equality is achieved, those rights will forever be denied and LGBTs will be susceptible to other types of discrimination as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WhollyHeretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:17 AM
Response to Reply #1003
1015. Really? You don't know why it's important? Besides the fact that everyone deserves equal
fucking rights. If equality isn't enough for you how about these:

Status as next-of-kin for hospital visits and medical decisions

Joint insurance for home, health and auto

Immigration and residency for partners from other countries

Automatic inheritance in the absence of a will. Even with a will, the surviving partner must pay inheritance taxes, where a heterosexual spouse doesn't.

Joint parenting, Joint adoption

Joint foster care, custody & visitation including non-biological parents

Joint leases with automatic renewal rights in the event one partner dies or vacates

Inheritance of jointly owned real and personal property through the right of survivorship

Survivor Benefits such as Annuities, Social Security, Pension Plans, Medicare

Exemptions to property tax increases upon the death of a partner who co-owns a home

Spousal discounts on medical care, education and home loans

Joint filing of tax returns

Wrongful death benefits for a surviving partner and children

Bereavement or sick leave to care for a partner or child

Funeral decision making power for deceased partners

Crime victim’s recovery benefits

Judicial protections and evidentiary immunity (gays can be forced to testify against their partners, heterosexuals can't).

Mandatory economic privileges and benefits from employers

Retirement Savings - married spouses can roll 401(k) funds into an IRA without paying taxes while gays pay up to 70% in taxes & penalties even when claimed as a beneficiary.

Home protection - Laws protect married seniors from being forced to sell homes to pay for high medical or nursing home bills while gays & lesbians have no protection.

Divorce protections such as community property and child support

Joint filing of customs claims when traveling

I find your position completely dishonest and misguided. Actually I just did a quick search and found you stating that you don't think LGBTs are being denied any civil rights. So your position is just pure bigotry. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=8022732#8035053
I'm guessing you really wanted to use the term "special rights" in your post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hosnon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #1015
1023. Homerun. Talk about dishonesty.
"If you can get healthcare, what's the big deal?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dmr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #1015
1081. That compelling list deserves it own thread.
This is what it's all about. No ifs, ands, buts about it.

Maybe those who support equality don't think about what is really at stake. A reading of your list is a sobering reminder.

I thought I understood, until 2 good friends were separated by a shunning family as one was dying in a hospital bed after an auto accident. Without making this too wordy, I know for a fact both men were heart broken over this callousness; and it makes me emotional as I type this.

The surviving friend was banned from the funeral; & had to fight like hell just to recover his own belongings in the shared home his partner owned & now his family claimed. Eleven beautiful years cruelly snatched away. That family even contested the will that gave everything to his partner. The family that disowned him, by golly, if they couldn't control him before, they sure as hell were going to do so now.

How pathetic & sickening & unloving & dishonoring is that?

My friend gave up. He took his life less than a year later. I hate, hate, hate that others had the power to do this to two decent men at their most vulnerable time.

Anyway, I think your post deserves it's own battle-cry thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #1081
1094. "I think your post deserves it's own battle-cry thread."
Done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #1015
1117. Tiny thing, "joint filing of tax returns," huh?
Income-wise, we are very close to a traditional household in that we have one breadwinner and one whose income just supplements some things.

In the past three years alone we have ended up paying about $4,000.00 more in Federal taxes than we would if our civil union in New Jersey were a Federally recognized marriage.

For some, marriage IS an economic issue!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #1117
1225. Same boat.
And some of my straight married pals ask me why we have not moved yet. Each April 15 I am sent into a bleak, broke mood.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue-Jay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #1015
1164. Perfection.
That can not be repeated enough. (and I'm stealing that list *yoink* for when I feel the need to use it elsewhere.) That list is a great tool for those who don't fully understand the day-to-day difficulties that many our brothers and sisters face by not having basic equal rights. It's so much more than "Sure, let 'em get married, fine with me, who cares?"

/proud ally
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #1015
1195. ^^^ READ THIS if you don't "get" marriage equality ^^^
Outstanding! :applause: Thanks for posting this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #1003
1018. Do most straight people get married for health care benefits? I must have missed that memo.
I would not presume to tell people- straight or gay- why they want to get married, or to question their reasoning as an excuse to bring up another policy issue I found more important. I find it telling (and, to be honest, spectacularly dismissive and rude, as well as "completely dishonest and misguided") that you did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:04 AM
Response to Reply #1003
1030. Your questions do not deserve an answer.
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 09:12 AM by William769
It it appearent in how you posted what is in your mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #1030
1037. Oops… I'm sorry. Wrong thread
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 09:22 AM by MrScorpio
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #1003
1072. "marriage" is a Sacrament in the Anglican and Roman Catholic churches
(probably Orthodox as well).

To be refused this Sacrament either by law or religious Dogma is generally done under the banner of "functionally disordered" or "unnatural" which it is not (see my website below, to lengthy to get into here).

I had the strange experience of visiting my partner in hospital. The administrator on board that day said I could visit a "spouse" or a "friend" but not a "partner".

As long as there is a distinction between "marriage" and anything else, this kind of thing will continue to happen.

I'd be interested in hearing your definition of "marriage".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #1003
1073. dupe - ignore
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 10:37 AM by TrogL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #1003
1109. marriage is a legal conract that gaurantees certain rights, protections and privileges
Same sex couples are denied the right to those rights. This extends far beyond healthcare- The list posted below is something you should read.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #1003
1133. why do you assume dishonesty?
It's a rather disingenuous way to pose the question, no? It is also, as others have already pointed out, based on ignorance, since there are many benefits society confers upon married couples aside from health care. You said you wouldn't argue, but I hope you'll at least respond to some of those posters in order to acknowledge the refutation of your assumption.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumberjack_jeff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #1003
1152. "Separate but equal" never is.
The marriage issue is important because "equal protection under the law" is supposed to mean something.

That the amount and style of "protection" is too low for everyone is a different issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #1003
1280. Are you married?
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 04:22 PM by Maven
Have a serious girlfriend?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #1003
1284. That is like asking if black people feel the need to share a water fountain with everyone else rathe
rather than using the one dedicated to them. After all, they have a source of water available so why do they feel the need to use the one everyone else uses?

Yes, it would still be important because (using small words here) it is not equal. Marriage equality is needed, as a civil right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #1003
1358. I would just like to thank those who took the time to explain to me their reasoning
to my questions. It has improved my understanding of your point of view. For those who got emotional instead, I hope you don't take it personally or hold a grudge against me for asking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftistboy Donating Member (89 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:59 AM
Response to Original message
1011. economic leftism OUT and social leftism IN. So say TPTB
and ye must quote them chapter and verse lest ye be branded....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unvanguard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #1011
1014. I refuse to choose between those two.
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 08:12 AM by Unvanguard
Whatever the powers that be---or you, or anyone else---says.

Justice is justice for all people: gays, trans people, immigrants, women, the poor, racial minorities, the disabled, workers, and everyone else too. No one excluded; no one left behind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
economistman Donating Member (16 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #1014
1071. I agree
Justice for all - how did this whole thing get so out of control on a democratic site?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftishBrit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #1014
1138. Agreed
I always say that social and economic leftism are indivisible. The 'social liberal but fiscal conservative' is really only socially liberal for those who can afford it. The 'economic leftist but social conservative' is only left-wing for certain groups.

Being left-wing means supporting the rights of the less powerful against being trampled on by the 'strong', whether the 'strong' are so because they are rich, well-connected, physically strong, members of social majority groups, or often enough all of these. Both economic and social conservativism are at odds with this principle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dotymed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:52 AM
Response to Original message
1026. The LGBT "issue" is just a diversion.
Why in the hell does it matter? We are all Human Beings and Deserve to be treated with respect.
IMO, it takes an idiot to discriminate.

Most homophobes I have known, eventually come out of the closet.

I may be straight, but some of the best people I know are not. I am comfortable with my sexuality. Who in the hell thinks that they have the right to legislate sexuality? Idiots.

:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hassin Bin Sober Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #1026
1033. "The LGBT "issue" is just a diversion. IMO, it takes an idiot to discriminate"
It takes and idiot AND an asshole to believe what you just wrote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dotymed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #1033
1049. Please enlighten me.
I see people as people, regardless of their sexuality. If you do not think that "they" use the LGBT issue to divide and pit us against each other, then I I believe I am responding to the idiotic asshole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #1049
1050. Unfortunately the laws don't see people regardless of their sexuality.
If you can't see that then "I believe I am responding to the idiotic asshole."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hassin Bin Sober Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #1050
1055. I wouldn't bother.
He's like Stephen Colbert - he doesn't see sexuality and has gay friends. The difference is Colbert plays a moron on TV.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #1055
1057. As to a moron not on tv. Thanks for the clarity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dotymed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #1050
1058. That is my point.
I clearly stated it in another post on this OP.
ALL people, according to our constitution have inalienable rights.

Even if it were not in our constitution, it is a fact. You are no better than me. I am no better than you.

"They" have done the same with any number of minorities(?) over the years. "They" deny people their basic human rights in the name of Gawd (or whatever) and use prejudice as a tool to divide us.

In reality, there is no difference. Because some races have a different amount of melatonin, because others believe a woman should be able to have sovereignty over her body, because someone loves or is attracted to someone of their own gender....IMO, these are wedge issues. They are intended to divide us, to make us easier to control. If we are fighting among ourselves, we are not going after them.

IMO, the way you have responded to me, makes my point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gormy Cuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #1058
1064. Those are only wedge issues to people who aren't members of the affected groups.
Was civil rights for nonwhites a wedge issue? How about women's rights? Disability rights? Each of these was dismissed as a wedge issue during the heat of the political fight. Each was also described as a distraction keeping "us" from fighting "them" on some other topic. At one point does a human right become important enough to rise above your definition of a wedge issue?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dotymed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #1064
1075. I am obviously not expressing myself very well.
When I use the term "wedge issue", I am saying that they are intentionally violating peoples humanity by even suggesting that ANY person (I am disabled btw) should be treated as unequal to anyone else.

By being a proponent of anything less than full equality for all, they are using people to attack or entrench "wedges" between people. Everyone should realize that we are all equal, regardless of our differences. We are humanity.

Obviously, this tactic works wonderfully. Here I am, a person who supports the civil rights of every person, arguing with someone I suspect feels the same way.

IMO, that is why they are winning. Each person, as Thomas Jefferson eloquently put it, has the Right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Where does that right stop? IMO, at the point that it harms someone. Being gay, being a minority, disabled, etc.. does NOT infringe upon anyone else's rights.

Being wealthy does not infringe on my rights unless you acquire that money by taking advantage of fellow humans or destroying our environment, etc. Unless you use your wealth to do harm.

I have tried to explain my comment, if you feel I am an idiotic asshole, that is your right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #1075
1088. I think you just had trtouble expressing your point of view
Even I found your post confusing. I think your intentions are good, but like myself, sometimes they just come out all wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gormy Cuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #1075
1090. I don't recall describing you as "an idiotic asshole."
Ignoring that for a moment, IMHO arguing with those who have the same core beliefs on equality is productive in that it helps all parties refine the rhetoric for debates with those who are not of a like mind --- IOW, not a wedge at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
1031. Self delete.
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 09:24 AM by William769
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #1031
1040. Hey William, if I recall correctly, that sub-thread
had nothing to do with LGBT issues. Someone was just being an ass. But I understand your point, people posting just to be asses in LGBT threads should be highlighted too. I guess what I mean is that it had nothing specific to do with this conversation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
1036. Thank you for this thread.

After reading most of the 1000 previous responses, I am more conscious of how I failed to support LGBT folks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Festivito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
1062. It's nice to see a post where the word Deleted is not the most seen word.
I gather that all that is needed to destroy DU is a couple of people with a quick-change-identity computer program, and a desire to bother people -- by following the rules.

Hey, for some, gayness is a daily hourly struggle against foes.

For others the economy is a daily hourly struggle against foes.

Which victim gets to be snider and snippier is up for grabs. Toss in some organized trolling, and the dynamite gets its blasting caps.

Sigh.

Reading a post without deletes is refreshing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #1062
1082. And for some of us
both gayness and economy are daily hourly struggle against foes.

And for some of us they go hand in hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Festivito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #1082
1114. And for some, neither is a struggle. So? /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #1114
1115. Well, you brought it up.
And I concurred and expanded.

An issue that affects the least of us is an issue that affects ALL of us, and needs to be addressed as such.

And by "us" I mean the human race.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lightningandsnow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
1086. I think people need to realize that ally is a verb.
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 11:11 AM by lightningandsnow
I honestly get sick of posts, well-meaning as they are, where the OP totally has gay friends and is not homophobic and supports same-sex marriage. I shouldn't have to give people ally cookies for being decent human beings. And another thing, there are issues facing the LGBTQ community that go well beyond same-sex marriage. If people are interested in allying with us, they should learn about them, and give concrete support instead of waving their ally flag all the time so people can say how great they are. Yes, it shouldn't always be on us to call out homophobia, but make sure what you're doing is actually calling out and not just looking to be congratulated. Heck, I don't even like the word ally for that reason. Let's be in solidarity instead.

That being said, as a queer person with a lot of intersecting identities on top of that, I get sick of the unexamined privilege all over this board including among LGBTQ folks. If someone calls you on your white privilege, or tells you that you sound racist, maybe listen for a second. Do not go into another unrelated way you are oppressed. That's derailing, and it's not cool. This also goes for classism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or any other privilege or prejudice that a person may have, just in case it sounds like I'm singling people out here.

I honestly think DU needs a more anti-oppression ethos, but I just don't think most posters on here are there yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #1086
1126. I think DU needs more people like you.
Where've you been? Or is it just me that hasn't been here much?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lightningandsnow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #1126
1132. I wasn't on here for a while, but now I'm back!
And thank you! :hug:

Do you have facebook? I have a lot of DUers on there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #1086
1145. Speaking up for the allies here
I am one of them. I never used the word, let peoples ideas and thoughts about me and who I am fall away. That did not matter. It was the people in my organization who told me to speak up and tell people I was an ally because allies are necessary in all fights for civil rights. I understand this, it still bothers me but I ask others to do the same.

The cookies are nice because every time I stick my neck out and say something I am scared. My hetero privilege is hard to work around. It take learning and time to get around it. The cookies give me encouragement and that helps me to continue. Being not of the group it is hard to know when I should just shut up and stand back or if I should throw my two cents in.

I understand what you are saying but from my perspective the ally tag is useful to gain others who may not have had the courage in the past to be a part of this and the cookies are as useful as a scolding is. They help direct us in the manner we may help out. I have been in both situations and I grow stronger from each of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lightningandsnow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #1145
1166. *nods* I do get your point.
However I feel like it often falls on oppressed people to educate the privileged, which is unfair. It's great to be encouraged, and it does sound like you're one of the one's who's Doing It Right, at least most of the time. :)

I feel like there's still a difference between genuinely calling out bigotry and working in solidarity, and expecting tons of praise for doing what all people should be doing. You seem to be mostly in the first group, so keep it up! :hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #1166
1187. YIKES!
See, this is what I mean. I need to clarify what I said. Not from your response but because I was feeding the goats and realized what I said could easily be taken the wrong way.

I said, "stick my neck out". I did not mean stick my neck out for the bigots to chew on, I could care less what they think, but speaking about equality and maybe making a mistake that could be used against us. That scares me a lot and makes me feel like when I say or write something I am doing just that.

When I said I was scared to speak I again did not mean "scared to speak" because of the bigots. I am scared for the same reason I stated above.

I wanted to make that clear, especially in regards to your speaking of working in solidarity. I feel no difference between you and I except that I have privileges that you do not. We both want to change that. I hope that does mean solidarity or at least a good start toward it.

Back to chores :) :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
1102. Here's one example of the problem.
Heddi came in here and admitted that there are homophobic, bigoted, or at best "rogue" moderators who get away with what we've been accusing them of getting away with.

So this morning we are down one moderator...

...the whistleblower has been removed. Heddi is no longer a moderator.

This is not a way to restore our trust in the system, by removing the only moderator who had the guts to admit that there is a problem, and what we have been complaining about for ages is actually going on.



If Heddi is gone as a moderator and cbayer, mopinko, and Skippy stay then it's proof that there is a problem, there is institutional homophobia on this site, and it lies at the Administration level.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #1102
1106. Let's not forget Rasputin
The whole purge got started because a bunch of uppity gays disagreed with him. The nerve.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #1106
1110. I thought I was being just a little snarky with my "whitewashing fences" post in GLBT.
Now I can see just how right I was. This thread, just like "Mending Fences," was a distraction to keep us busy while things went on behind the scenes to further consolidate the institutional homophobia on this site.

If the four moderators (I had forgotten about Rasputin, since most of the recent crap didn't involve him) aren't gone within 24 hours then it will really show where the priorities of the Administrators are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #1110
1113. FWIW, I don't recall a mod ever being removed mid-term before.
I know of one who had done some pretty egregious violations of the rules of mod behavior being asked not to moderate for the remainder of her term, but her mod status was left up to allow her to save face. She's straight, inexplicably popular and has a metric fuckton of money though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #1113
1125. Two of them were removed, midterm, when I was a moderator.
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 12:11 PM by ScreamingMeemie
One for good reason (couldn't stay out of super hot I/P issues... and one for no good reason. She (kaitykaity) was also banned from the site.

On edit: Three were removed. I still miss Dookus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #1125
1146. I miss Dookus, too
he was so funny, smart, and almost always correct. He and NSMA are the two DUers I miss most.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #1102
1120. I guess that one action answers all our questions
Boy have I been fucking stupid for giving the benefit of doubt about "mending fences".

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.

What a fucking disgusting thing to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #1102
1199. Well, if we were waiting for a response from Skinner...
I'd say we just got it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #1102
1220. Yeah.
That stinks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #1102
1365. Delete, I've been brought up to speed
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 09:41 PM by Very_Boring_Name
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
1134. Skinner
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 12:27 PM by MuseRider
Equality is not an issue. Equality is a Right in this country although we are not very good at it are we?

Skinner, this is going to have to be your fight. Since this is your website you are going to have to make some decisions. You keep talking about it but seem conflicted about where to draw lines. I appreciate that this is a hard thing to do without catching hell all around. I think you have to decide whether the right of equality is something we can fight about or not on this site. Is it a right and one not subject to abuse? I guess it is your call.

Like Obama who seems to not want anything to do with this subject you have to decide. In a manner you are a leader here as well as the owner, what you say goes. If you come down with a set of rules we have to abide by them and you have to be willing and able to take the flack you will get, no matter what you decide.

I do not see you as a bigot. I see you try to resolve things but it really does not change. Here we have a discussion that has brought about a lot of support, some nastiness (most of the real problem posters are not coming into this thread), and a lot of side tracking. The side tracks are useful, they educate but they do also distract. Can you decide from another round of this?

If you see equality as a right then the choice is simple. Nobody seeking equality should ever be abused for it. Nobody seeking equality should ever have a list of minimal changes for the better waved in their face and called ungrateful. Small changes can be good and they can also be bad as I said in a post upthread. Small changes are essentially pats on the head. They should never be called names for speaking out about this. These are not "special issues" to those who are not equal. These are not ponies or distractions from the big worries of the majority. These statements are insulting, aggressive taunting from those with privilege.



This is a huge problem. The taunting, bullying is unbearable. The minimizing of an entire group of people. The attitude of, here is a tiny taste of what I have, see how nice it is? See how nice we are being to you now shut the fuck up and crawl back into your pitiful little life and be grateful. THIS IS HOW IT FEELS TO ME as an ally, I can't imagine how it feels when directed at you. The people who do this are the problem, not the emotional responses from those being targeted but the targets seem to get the brunt of the deletions and bannings. This is not right, you know it is not right. You know who routinely baits people and they need to be shut down as quickly as the mods can do it each and every time so that actual discussion and planning and educating can take place. Otherwise this right of equality just becomes emotional in the extreme and we all end up flipping out and the cracks get wider and wider.

The lack of empathy on DU amazes me. The lack of courtesy amazes me. The lack of respect amazes me. Equality seems to be the one place that all of those things come out and are used as a bat to strike at those striving for a better life, an equal life. How can we let this go on?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #1134
1143. I just don't know what to say to you.
You brought tears to my eyes (in a good way).

Thank you.

Peace
Bill
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #1143
1158. Just say
:hi:!

:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #1134
1147. seem pretty nasty posters have re-appeared who haven't been heard from for a while.
the whole exchanges about lgbtiq folk being whiners and in a state of 'victim-ness'.

those posters as well as the regular people who like to sir the pot should go.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #1147
1156. Agreed.
I am having problems keeping up today. Too busy, RATS! Did not see that.

Yes they should go. Anyone who cannot in the very least empathize and shut the fuck up if they don't agree is a problem. There is a way to talk about all of this without baiting and being offensive. None of it has to be like this, not a bit of it. They do just like to stir it up. Sad to get your jollies this way, very sad. If I was not so angry about it I could feel sorry for them. Nah, they do it for fun and jollies.

Bullies all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #1156
1161. it's weird game -- say the most outrageous thing you can or can get away with
and watch the ensuing reaction.

it's limbaugh -- on a progressive board.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #1161
1227. "it's limbaugh -- on a progressive board"
Perfect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #1147
1162. That's my new "pony" phrase--"victim-ness/victim role"
If we try to point out a bigoted/homophobic comment, we're playing the victim. It's just another way to belittle the commenter. If you argue that you aren't playing the victim role, they just protest louder that you're being a victim.

Well, you know, LGBT*.* kids that are bullied so much that they kill themselves, I'd say they are a victim. LGBT*.* folks that get fired for being LGBT*.*, are victims. LGBT*.* folk that get beat up for holding hands or kissing in public, are victims. LGBT*.* folk that get thrown out of public pools are victims. Each and every one is a victim of prejudice, hatred, bigotry and homophobia.

That said, it doesn't mean because the majority of LGBT*.* folk are victims in actuality that we come across as victimized. Sharing a point, having an opposing opinion on something does not mean we are playing the "victim" card anymore than we are whining because we didn't get a pony.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #1147
1240. Quite a few bullies are returning for the upcoming primaries.
That had a blast last time, when they were allowed to turn this place into the Stanford Prison Experiment, and they're back for more fun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #1134
1286. +1000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #1134
1306. That's it. Exactly.
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 05:40 PM by yardwork
I've been traveling and haven't been online much since this thread was posted. There isn't much to say anyway. Skinner has to decide whether he wants his site to be a place where equal rights are valued and minorities treated wih decency OR a site that pays lip service to equality while looking the other way as a small handful of bullies taunt gay posters and figure out ways to post homophobia while hiding behind barely plausible deniability. If David didn't know this was happening on his site, he does now. Next step is up to him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #1306
1328. Good luck wading through it.
I am getting a headache from looking at post numbers and scrolling up and down and I just blew off a bunch of steam and became a lecturing asshole. Time for me to step away.

Welcome back from your travels, I hope they were pleasant :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
1167. Is this thread really unfiltered and uncensored?
I'm curious why there's a tombstone in this thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #1167
1171. jberryhill uses one for his sig pic
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #1171
1180. I was referring to notesdev
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #1167
1172. Since I'm not a moderator, I have no way of knowing if the TS'd member
got TS'd from this thread. They just happened to be participating in this thread, of course, if you read some of this commenters posts and don't agree that he should have been TS'd from his comments, then that says a lot.

I would hope if I went that far off the deep end in a thread that promised non-moderation, I'd be TS'd too. Sometimes too far is too far.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #1172
1177. Uncensored and unfiltered means just that.
This entire thread is full of gang ups, false labeling and call outs of other DUers. Why should any participate in a thread deemed open while applying selective discipline?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #1177
1178. Doesn't feel good when the shoe is on the other foot.
To fucking bad!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #1178
1200. I assumed ignored was just some angry asshole
After double checking, my suspicions was confirmed. Thanks for proving me right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #1200
1202. Well your almost right
You meant to say Gay angry asshole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #1202
1210. Nope, I was right the first time
But thanks for trying to label me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #1210
1217. Damn! And I thought I was on your ignore list.
Oh so telling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #1217
1219. I guess you missed the part where I removed you off the list to prove my point
I don't mind keeping you off for awhile. I do enjoy a good argument. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #1219
1226. Now if you could only prove your point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #1226
1239. Boring...
I already did. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #1239
1241. You know BklnDem75, I haven't seen you say one constructive thing in this thread
that could lead one to wonder about your motivation for wandering in.

I took the time to look at some of your other posts here on DU and I think maybe you think words are expensive. Please use your intellect to expand upon "Boring... I already did." I'd like to know more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #1241
1243. I'd feel out of place if I said something constructive in this thread
Attacks dominate this thread, don't kid yourself. But please, don't beat around the bush. Tell me what my motivation is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #1243
1249. I'm not assigning any motivation and I'm not egotistical enough to pretend
I can read your mind. I was just stating a fact. The fact that what you refer to as attacks dominate this thread, that implies there are some constructive threads as well, you just don't seem to be contributing to them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #1200
1231. You're on a suicide mission
This is another post that shows why the DU rules and mods are so important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #1231
1244. Um... did you read this thread?
Are you honestly going to tell me that 1,230 posts later, you now see the need for rules and moderation? My response to a rude post makes me suicidal? Really?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #1244
1246. I recognized the need for rules since I got here.
Your post is a nice reminder. You can't call other people a-holes normally on DU. And just because you can do it here doesn't mean you should.

Notesdev's response was also to a rude post. Guess where he is now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #1246
1250. You also can't call out...
interfere with moderating, question the motives of other DUers, be disruptive and say crude things about Democrats. How nice of you to overlook all of that to focus on me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #1246
1269. notesdev had other problems
and a bit of a history. Now if they could only apply the same standards to the other constant trolls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #1177
1188. The poster make remarks that went way over the line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #1188
1193. What's the point of this thread?
There's not suppose to be a line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #1193
1197. Why are taking your anger out on us, those of participating in this thread
don't have the power to TS someone. If I understand the new rules correctly, Skinner has to approve TS'ing now, so if you got an issue, take it up with him. I happily put the TS'd poster on ignore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #1197
1205. Perhaps that's why my question was to the OP?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #1193
1198. ~facepalm~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #1177
1285. U mad?
Good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #1285
1322. Actually I'm not
I'm laughing at you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TriMera Donating Member (885 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #1167
1184. The person had 3 posts and was an obvious troll. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #1184
1212. I'm referring to notesdev
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #1184
1715. k/r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #1167
1185. Because the poster made some very nasty, bigoted remarks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #1185
1191. And nobody else did?
A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs.

What do thinking passing the 'homophobe' label is?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #1191
1196. My goodness, did you just say that calling out a bigot for their intolerance makes one a bigot?
:rofl:

Calling a person racist for racist behavior is also being intolerant about their right to be be a racist............
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #1196
1203. Not at all
Calling people a homophobe for not being 150% behind your issue or supporting this President is bigotry. Get it right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marrah_G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #1203
1206. You can never be more then 100% for or against anything
No one is called a homophobe for supporting the president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #1206
1213. And if an Obama supporter has been called a homophobe for supporting him
please post the link... I had one link posted as proof and though the guy really did say Obama's done "nothing" for the LGBT*.* community, he also, upon further inspection, posted any negative thing he could about Obama.

Hanging your hats on one or two disgruntled posters and then banging your drums on this issue is kinda silly. For example, just because there are some anti-LGBT*.* assholes on DU, I don't think all DU'ers are that way. I'm actually intelligent enough to figure out if someone is just trying to stir shit or if it's consistent behavior on their part.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #1206
1216. You better pass that memo to William769
He's getting awfully close to doing just that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #1216
1222. Doing what pray tell?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #1191
1229. Did anyone else say this?
"May the misery you wallow in be lifelong, it will be well deserved." and then refuse to apologize?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #1229
1242. Context helps
Was he referring to the GLBT community or that specific poster?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #1242
1248. Specific person.
Does it matter?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #1248
1314. Actually it does
If you follow the post that brought that response, you'd see it's the same bullshit labeling I've been talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #1167
1407. Um, no. It's actually a diabolically ingenious
troll trap.
:bounce:
The bait is time tested, 100% guaranteed, and free of charge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #1167
1631. For the mods, in case they're not reading alerts: do an IP check between BklnDem75 and notesdev.
You know, just in case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #1631
1654. LOL!!!
Please do
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
1170. Does anyone have any updates on Heddi's dismissal?
I know the Admins are lying low in this thread, but I think this time they need to step forward and explain themselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #1170
1179. He/She is still here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=107741
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #1179
1189. I know that.
Probably not for long, sadly.

I meant has anyone in an official capacity said a single word about it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #1170
1194. FWIW
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 01:45 PM by Puglover
When you become a moderator at DU you sign a confidentiality agreement. It's serious stuff. In essense it says that nothing that goes on in the moderator forum can be shared outside the forum. And rightly or wrongly Heddi's post shared Mod forum stuff on the public board. So I have no doubt that Heddi was well aware of the possible or probable consequences of her post. I also want to say that her post about her moderator status being revoked was as classy as posts come.

As President Obama said when asked about Anthony Weiner. "I can only speak for myself" And speaking for myself and as a former moderator if a number of people had a negative impression of my bias, enough to cause problems for DU it would be a no brainer for me to simply resign. My modship simply isn't important enough to be a cause for disharmony on this board.

Having said that, moderators are bitched at and about on a daily basis so I would really hope to be wise enough to be able to tell the difference between the two situations and act accordingly.

Skinner is fiercely protective of his moderators. Thank God. It is a thankless job and the pay ain't so hot. So please before you demand heads think about this post. He isn't going to hang out a moderator to dry in front of the whole board because of perception by some of DU's members. It is, I believe, ultimately up to individuals to determine what serves the interest of DU the best.

On edit: add "for to 2nd paragraph. I never seem to be able to post without a damned edit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #1194
1207. Lets just thank our lucky stars that people have the courage to stand up to their convictions.
Something that has been sorely lacking.

I have more respect for Heddi than just about anyone else right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #1207
1214. I loved modding with her.
And what you said. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #1194
1223. He's already hung a moderator out to dry.
The one who dared to tell the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #1223
1236. Look I know you're angry.
So am I. Heddi is a friend and a great advocate for equal rights. However please try to see the difference here. As I said, I am sure that Heddi posted that knowing full well what the consequences would likely be. Believe me, I am well aware who has integrity around here and conversely who needs to take a hard look inside and ask themselves some serious questions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hassin Bin Sober Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #1236
1247. Let me ask you something:
Can you HONESTLY say Heidi was the only moderator posting in this thread their "inside knowledge" of how things work backstage? Or was she the only moderator showing DU in a negative light?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #1247
1251. It's Heddi not Heidi
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 03:11 PM by Puglover
although Heidi was a great moderator as well. :)

I got eye strain reading through this thread however "how things work" inside the forum and actual specifics are two completely different things.

LOL I love how you capped "HONESTLY" FWIW it's not a big secret that I agree with Heddi's take on things.

:hi:

I should also say here all of this is my take and nothing more on why Heddi is no longer a moderator. Simply my take based on the mod confidentiality agreement. I am not privy to what goes on in that forum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hassin Bin Sober Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #1251
1265. It's Hedley Hedley!


Hope you didn't take my "stress capitalization" as saying YOU aren't honest. I type how how I talk. Don't mean nuttn by it.

I still disagree with your characterization of the two posts. One said there are mods who act WITHOUT consensus and the other said mods can ONLY act WITH consensus. No names were given and no conversations were given. She only noted that HER version of events CAN and DOES happen and she alerted Skinner.

Now where's my froggy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #1247
1402. Several mods (including me) posted "here's how it works"
...which is fairly common knowledge. Heddi posted stuff about individual moderators.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lars39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #1402
1412. She didn't name a single name.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #1412
1437. You're right, I misread it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #1402
1416. Really? Please tell us a SINGLE "individual moderator" she posted about
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 10:59 PM by Very_Boring_Name
You're being incredibly disingenuous at best, and a straight up liar at worst.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #1236
1274. goes to show how fast DU can act on a problem they really consider serious
other problems...???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #1223
1291. All things considered, I'm actually relieved she was just de-modded and not banned.
And her post is still there. Hmmm, C&P time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heddi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #1170
1403. Hello, I am still here and some additional comments/clarification
1) Puglover, a former mod, up thread was correct regarding why my moderator privileges were revoked. I knew when I made my post that I was, in essence, violating the "what happens in the mod forum stays in the mod forum" privacy clause I agreed to when I signed up and was accepted as a moderator. I hoped that because I named no names, gave no specific links, thread titles, or identifying information that I may have been able to slip under the enforcement of the rules, but I wholly expected that directly or indirectly because of that post, that my moderating privileges would be removed. I am okay with that, and I stand behind what I wrote 100%, and I can be backed up by other moderators (current and former) who will ascertain that the information I presented is accurate and true. I did not exaggerate or make false claims.

2) I made the fatal post because I felt to NOT do so was dishonest on my part. I could not call myself an advocate for GLBT issues if I did not address a concern that had been addressed NUMEROUS times by posters over the last year or so that I've been a moderator--unfair moderation. In my mind, silence was complicity.

Skinner has stated several times that he felt that the claims by posters of unfair moderation was in part due to moderators having to be held to a set of poorly worded rules (hence, the re-write a few months ago), and being asked to work with a poorly-designed system (hence, DU3 launch in the future) that limited our functionality as moderators. I, and I think most moderators agreed with that. But I also felt, and still feel, that a bad set of rules, plus a bad system design is only made worse with bad moderators. I think that any changes that were made to the rules, or the alert system, or the notion of civility is undermined when you have people who cannot see beyond their own set of privilege due to their gender, skin colour, or sexual orientation as the ones who are interpreting those rules.

3) I am going to state that I do not feel that any of the moderators I have worked with are what I would ever call "homophobic". That is, I do not think that they fear or hate people who are GBLT...I'm going to use an analogy that I used before with some mod-friends of mine in a PM

...My grandad doesn't have a bit of hate in his heart. He's in his 70's and would tell you that racism isn't a problem anymore because blacks can vote, and can get pretty much any job they want, and so the issues of race are gone. In his mind, that's progress from the time that he was growing up in the South, a time of separate but equal, different water fountains, and Niggers Need Not Apply. However, he just cannot grasp that racism can be institutionalized, and insidious, and sneaky. That having a job isn't the same as having equal access to all jobs. That being able to vote doesn't negate the disenfranchisement that goes along with being black, and poor, and trying to vote.

So What I'm saying is that I think the moderators that I worked with that I felt were biased towards GLBT issues weren't biased because of hate of gays, or fear of gays. I think that, in their mind, they feel that progress has been made! You can be gay and open! Many places have civil unions! Your business probably won't be burned down if you fly a Rainbow FLag on the flag pole.

But they don't get the meat and potatoes of issues in the GLBT community. They are pragmatic, and feel that since things are different than they were in 1960, and "fag" is a bad word to use, then things are BETTER, and BETTER is better than NOTHING, so what's all the fuss about? They feel that political progress is slow and planned, and that once we end these wars, and get people back to being employed, and get the Republicans out of office, and end the recession, and get the debt under control, and get some universal health care, and get insurance reform, and the housing market bounces back, and the midterms are out of the way, and the 2012 election is done, and those midterms are out of the way, THEN we can get to the serious business of DADT repeal and gay marriage and anti-discrimination laws.

With that being said, I am also mindful that while I am a bisexual woman, married to a heterosexual man, in a polyamorous relationship, I have no business telling someone who does not have the "pass as hetero" status that I do what is and isn't, or who is or isn't homophobic. I can't tell a black person what is a racist comment, and I don't dare to tell you all, either. Aside from right now, my sexuality and the relationship that Mr. HEd and I have has been a very private matter, known only to those who we are sharing that aspect of our lives with, and entering a sexual/dating relationship with. I'm not throwing this out there to gain "street cred", I just am stating who I am, and adding the caveat that I would never assume that my take on a person or issue is the "Right" way to look at a situation or person.

Ooh and finally...

I'm HEDDI..not Heidi. She's married to that Wesley fellow. I'm married to a non-DU'er named Mr. heddi. :) I think she lives in some exotic foreign land, and I live in Seattle, also known as "the city that spring forgot". sigh.

I appreciate all the wonderful words and PM's I have received. But let's get back on track. This issue is not about *me*. I lost my ability to be a moderator...my GLBT brothers and sisters still do not have equal access to civil rights, to partner benefits, the ability to be a designated next of kin for a dying partner, adoption rights, job security, housing security, SECURE security. THAT is the issue.

I lost a little gray shadow by my user name...you all have lost, and continue to lose so very, very much more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #1403
1422. Much admiration to you, Heddi
and thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enigmatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:07 AM
Response to Reply #1403
1430. I have tremendous respect for you
You told the truth, and I greatly admire you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 03:37 AM
Response to Reply #1403
1455. I admire your integrity.
It's so scarce these days/ They say sunshine is the best disinfectant, and you've brought more than your share in this thread - in every possible meaning of that word.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kiva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #1403
1478. Applause!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #1403
1490. This is perhaps the best post in a thread with many, many fine posts.
I agree with you that what we are dealing with is more a matter of privilege (and, I would add, a rampant bullying culture) than outright homophobia.

Some posters here are outright, stone-cold homophobes, but you can count them on both hands and have a few fingers left over--not bad for a forum with so many members.

Most of the issue, as you say, is privilege.

Only from the dizzying heights of privilege does Dan Choi resemble Veruca Salt and basic human rights a pony, but that is the perspective of those who cannot see how grotesque it is for people with full legal rights to shout at those without the same rights that they should stop whining and be happy with what they have.

We need to talk about privilege here, but it's hard to have that conversation when there's a pack of bullies patrolling the place 24/7 determined to make meaningful conversation impossible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BillStein Donating Member (403 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #1403
1492. Thank you, Heddi
For writing a thoughtful and honest post. And thank you, most of all, for taking full responsibility for your actions.

I promise to try to live up to your standard
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duncan Grant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #1403
1527. Thank you for your leadership. You're an inspiration.
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #1403
1547. Well said my dear.
Perhaps not homophobic per se. However the moderators that you speak of are too smug, too entitled, (at least one of them too clueless and ALL of them too entrenched in the insular environment that is the mod forum to ever ever consider your points.

:hug:

I hope hope hope that DU3 solves this never ending discord.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DURHAM D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
1181. self-delete
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 01:40 PM by DURHAM D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #1181
1192. See #1040
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1299874&mesg_id=1306385
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DURHAM D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #1192
1209. thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
1252. well, do you have moderators that abuse their authority on board or not?
do you have mods who lock things without consensus or who ban members without proper authority moderating at DU or not?

a lot of us have suspected this and now we are hearing that in fact, not only was this a problem in the past but that it's ongoing.

what gives?

we already know that there are moderators who will vote against locking a thread deemed sexist. we see those threads get moved to sub forums and it's pretty obvious that in many cases, moderators were mostly wanting it locked but there was a holdout who wouldn't agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CabalPowered Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #1252
1270. It's ridiculous to suggest
that mods act out unilaterally. The only time you would see unilateral action would be late-night zombie/troll cleanup.

It's really a shame there's no way to have a be-a-mod-for-a-day event because most of the membership has NO idea how much work goes into keeping this place running. The last thing any mod wants to do is to cause more work for themselves or Admins. They're in it to keep the peace and that's it. To suggest that there's some conspiracy of a subset of mods to promote a sexist agenda really doesn't move the conversation and only dishonors those that graciously volunteer their time. It has been my experience that DU mods are the most intelligent, witty and caring group of people you will find in an online community. Is it a perfect track record? No. Is it a perfect system? No. Do they do a good job of keeping the peace and hunting trolls? YES.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #1270
1275. We had one moderator
who came in here and ADMITTED that there are rogue operators in the moderator pool and that the Administration does nothing about them. For her trouble, do the Admins get rid of the troublemakers? NO. They get rid of the WHISTLEBLOWER.

We learned in the Purge of 2009 that Skinner can't be trusted to be on the right side of gay issues. We thought that some progress had been made with the "Mending Fences" and unbanning, but now we're finding out that not one damn thing has changed.

Skinner, get your ass in here and explain yourself. Silence = consent, dammit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CabalPowered Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #1275
1294. nm
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 05:30 PM by CabalPowered
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #1270
1279. Your post fails on so many levels.
The cats out of the bag. Back peddling now only makes you look more insincere than you already look.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CabalPowered Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #1279
1297. I wasn't trying to win
If that means I fail by default, so be it. As for being insincere.. who's the one being insincere here? Some mods donate up to 100 hours each week. Are you saying that sort of dedication shouldn't be acknowledged?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #1270
1281. well a moderator with knowledge has said that's exactly what happened
and we have lots of longtime DUers who have been watching over the years that have observed things happening too.

and the thing about sexist posts...that's true. we had a series of sexist posts in recent months and tons of us were alerting and i confirmed with one moderator that they couldn't get consensus to lock it.

someone is a holdout on sexist threads. i don't need to be inside to legitimately know that. no, i don't know who, but somebody does.

and in the meantime, threads stay open that say that women aren't raped until they prove penetration and threads that call women gold-diggers are kept open for the same reason (at least i think it's basically the same reason).

someone just can't or won't see that as offensive, sexist or not in accordance with DU standards.

but if you said any of that about Obama? blam --locked.

and this doesn't come out of nowhere, these issues i've asked in Ask The Administrators.

look for those threads and you tell me if the questions were answered, or even attempted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CabalPowered Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #1281
1298. Hmm..
I'm sorry but I didn't follow the threads you're referencing and I don't keep tabs on ATA. If you'd like to send me some links, I'd be happy to share my opinion here or in private.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lone_Star_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
1253. When we are divided we are weak
However, when were divided over an issue as clear cut as equal rights for all people I find myself wondering if we may be weak to the point of breaking. That this could even be an issue on a Democratic website is mind numbing to me. Yes, I know there are bigots who are Democrats, but this specific environment (DU) is not supposed to be tolerant of such blind fools.

It would be a lie to say I fully understand the situation and all the nuances of what's been taking place here, so forgive me if I'm a bit off base. From what I've been able to read here we really shouldn't have an issue, though. It is a violation of the rules for anyone to be baiting our GLBT members with inflammatory OPs and comments. It is not a violation of the rules to express disappointment/anger over Obama's and the Democratic Party's general failure in bringing equal rights to every single person living in the Untied States. Yet it would appear that somehow the system of moderation on DU is failing our GLBT members. I find myself wondering if this could be due to a lack of empathy on the part of some of our moderators, perhaps combined with the overwhelming fatigue of the job, leaving them with a case of tunnel vision? Or if it's just a flaw which has been discovered and exploited by those on this board who like to disrupt for the sake of starting flamewars? I don't know the answer, but I'm glad this is all out in the open for everyone to discuss.

We should all be pissed off that there are Americans who don't enjoy the same rights and privileges as the rest of the population. It should not ever be tolerated, not should it ever be an issue which is put on the back burner for the sake of political safety. What we're talking about here is a basic right. A right all Americans should hold equally. Any person who is not angry about the injustice being served to a portion of our population, simply because of their sexual orientation, is no better than a selfish rich person who supports cutting social services and busting unions to keep their taxes/expenses down. It's the same "I've got mine, screw you" mentality. We're either in this fight together or we're all going to lose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harmony Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #1253
1262. Good post
I think Civil unions for homosexual couples will become a reality for all of the country when my generation takes over (eg. Reagan babies) in the next 10-15 years. But the rights for homosexual couples may take longer, because as you point out that there is still some lingering bias involved.

The argument that heterosexual couples deserve more rights than homosexual couples because of the ability to procreate doesn't work anymore. As the last ten years have shown, homosexual couples have shown they are just as good, probably even better, at raising children than traditional heterosexual couples. Furthermore, the demand for adoptions, and foster homes is there, and if a loving homosexual couple is willing to take care of these children, it would be foolish for the country not to allow them foster, and grow these children into productive members of our society.

Having visited Europe, we are far behind in our attitudes towards sexual topics, and homosexuality which saddens me. To take it a step further, the ancient Greeks were far more progressive about it than our current society. Look at the poetry of Sappho from the island of Lesbos just for a glimpse of how far we must go, or how Philip of Macedon honored the Sacred Band of Thebes with a Lion statue in the face of death (150 male couples that fought to the death with valor). But as I stated above, I strongly believe my age group will change that. I was born the year of the Care Bears (1983), and I am determined to fight for LGBT rights. Fighting for the progress of all our society, and country, is what being a progressive is all about IMVHO!

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #1262
1288. Harmony, Civil Unions don't work.
I'm in one and I'm still treated by officials and individuals alike as if I'm in nothing more than a shacked-up situation.

From having my husband kicked out of my hospital room when I was unconscious to having to prepare six different tax returns instead of two every year, to paying about $1,000.00 more in Federal taxes than a married couple, to not having the benefit of exemption from inheritance taxes, to the inability to declare joint bankruptcy, and on and on. Until recently he couldn't even serve on our County Democratic Committee with me and we might put him forward in two years just to make a point.

And I could go on and on.

Until we have full marriage equality and DOMA is struck down, then we will not have justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
1292. Okay, I'm dropping out of this discussion here.
It's painfully obvious that we aren't going to solve anything.

We have the phobes whining about how they're the victims and how dare we and "you can't prove anything." We have the homophobic moderators who are denying their complicity. We have Administrators who won't say a fucking thing but will shitcan the one moderator who had the guts to say "you folks are right."

In the end? We're doing nothing but name calling, finger pointing, retrenching, and setting ourselves up for the inevitable nuclear blast. We are too far apart to ever come together, and we have an administration on this board that has made it plain they have no interest in making sure the rules are applied fairly.

In the end, this thread has become pointless, if not harmful. And I know it's sent my blood pressure through the roof if no one else's.

Skinner, we've told you how to solve this problem. We've named names. Now we sit and wait. The ball is in your court; there is no point in arguing further.

If you want me, I'll be in the Lounge. We're having a discussion there about how it's plain that there are bad feelings about kudzu on DU. If Skinner does anything to resolve the problem, you can find me in there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DURHAM D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #1292
1305. Thank you for your efforts.
You have proven that something suspected for months and months is true. Most of us either found new homes or stayed here and just quit posting.

I am so glad to know unequivocally that I am not crazy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
1302. The struggle that GLBTs must endure is more inclusive than just rights and laws
It speaks to accepting and validating the worth of other human beings, without regard to sexuality.

Laws that discriminate can be struck down and new ones passed that codify equality, but overall it's that which is in the hearts of those who own the reigns of privilege that must be converted.

All encompassing and unconditional acceptance is the ultimate goal.

The Pride movement is one that says, "We have worth as human beings and you're not acknowledging that, so we have to acknowledge our worth for ourselves". Its implication is that, "We're not there yet, but we should be".


All in all, as laws and politics do count, it's really about hearts and minds, isn't it?

Countering an evil that relegates other human beings to second class citizenship status for no other reason except fear, hatred and bigotry is something that should be each of our life's work. We have to stand TOGETHER against evil.

Yes, as a straight man, I never have to walk in the shoes of any GLBT person. I'll never understand what is felt and feared by someone who is always reminded, in either overt or subtle ways that they're not supposed to be good enough to be classified as an actual human being.

I must confess to you that there have been times that I've asked myself, should I stand aside? Should I be silent? I'm not used to doing that when it comes to matters of injustice. Are any of us? But I remind myself how important for me to value the worth of others and acknowledge that worth, even if I'm limited in one way or another to help it along. And that, although I don't have the same trepidation in my own heart which is constantly in the hearts of our brothers and sisters, I have to keep it in mind that others do.

We all have equal worth. If that's all I can offer, I hope that it's accepted.

For those in action, It won't be easy achieve consensus as to how worth is equalized IN FACT, DEED and WORD… But that shouldn't mean that divergent points of view should be marginalized. What of those who have a different understanding of a thing? What's to be said?

Some of us may lose sight of the end goal, which to be expected. After all, all of us are human and all humans are flawed.

But each of us must understand that respect, an unconditionally accepting heart, and a keen mind, which is open, is mandatory to achieve victory over our flaws and the evil of those who would deny the right of humanity to others.



Please forgive me for my rambling… I'm very tired and I tend to ramble when I am.

Later and take care of each other.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #1302
1313. Speaking for myself only
I could care less about the hearts and minds right now. We can take care of that later. This is due, overdue and should be done, NOW. Freaking now. I am sick to death of this. Hearts and minds that are being programmed in a church are never going to be changed easily and I am outta patience waiting for them.

If people don't like it all they have to do is accept that it is. It IS right to make all people equal. It is the basis for our society and our country. Change our country officially to accept bigotry or shut the fuck up and get over it.

This is not directed at you MrScorpio, just at the one part of your post. If we wait it will never happen because people can be such thick headed assholes and too many make money off of programing them.

Are we or are not a society who accepts all people and pledges equality?

Is this website supportive of equality or not and if we are supportive why do people get to bait and bully those seeking it?

*I am sorry, I have just come to my wits end reading this thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #1313
1318. Impatience impels action
All of us together should be similarly attuned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #1318
1321. Then the next time you
or you see anyone else questioned about something they/you said or the way they/you said it stop and listen. STOP and LISTEN then move forward from there. No need to defend yourself, you made a simple mistake. If your heart is in the right place they will know that eventually. All the help you will ever need is right here.

Do you have a local LGBT group? PFLAG? Peace and Justice coalition? If so join them and bring this up. Next time you go to a rally carry a sign about it. Be prepared to answer the inevitable questions and stand there with pride and certainty and move on and away from the bigots who taunt.

As someone who is not LGBT just do what is needed. House people traveling to meetings. Attend meetings. Hand out fliers, sit at tables and learn. We HAVE to get this done, it is the only right thing we can do.

So if you are doing these things already then great, if not try to start. You will never be sorry. Everything else is hogwash if we do not stand up for the most basic of principles. :)

Now I am lecturing. :eyes: I need to get outta this thread for a while. Can I? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lyric Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
1304. There are a lot of people here who support gay equality when it doesn't cost us anything.
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 05:28 PM by Lyric
There aren't very many who support it when it DOES come with a cost. People are willing to give vocal, ideological, theoretical support to the idea of equality, but are they willing to risk anything substantial in order to help people get it? Not usually.

Some people call themselves "pragmatic" about equality issues, as if there's some higher virtue in thinking long and hard about the consequences before helping someone who's being abused. In my view, the "pragmatic" label is similar to someone who says, "I oppose rape, but I'm not going to risk getting hurt by intervening if I happen to see a rape occurring." In the end, do you think the rape victim gives a damn whether or not you "theoretically" support her right to NOT be violated? Either you helped her or you didn't.

Hardly anyone is willing to RISK anything. Hardly anyone is willing to give something up or sacrifice something meaningful. Not a tarnished political image. Not money. Not the loss of some political capital. Not droopy poll numbers. CERTAINLY not an election. One example: if straight people who believe in gay equality would just refuse to get married themselves until marriage was available for all people equally, how fast would the government reverse its position on this issue? And some of those straight couples HAVE taken this stance. But not many...and not nearly enough. Why? Because giving up marriage is a major inconvenience that can cost you money, dignity, and lots of marital perks. It COSTS something to refuse marriage. There just aren't many people who care enough to bear that cost along with us.

The battle for civil rights has COSTS. It requires sacrifice--REAL sacrifice--and not just from the oppressed people, but from their allies in the majority community. When you tell gay people, "I think you should have equal rights, but I just don't care enough about it to give anything up or sacrifice anything in order to help you get them", WHAT do you think that says? How do you think gay people are going to interpret that stance?

DU'ers: Some of your fellow citizens are over here in this dark alley being sexually violated by the government and by the closed-minded bigots that the government is pandering to. Either you're the kind of person who's going to run into the alley and RISK something to help us, or you're not. And if the latter is the case, then PLEASE stop fucking crowing about how "supportive" you are, and how much you "believe" in equality. If you don't care enough to actually help us, then what good are your words?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
A-Schwarzenegger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #1304
1308. Good post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #1304
1317. Very nice. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #1304
1334. You win this thread.
:loveya:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kaleva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #1304
1339. I believe Cindy Sheehan said pretty much the same about the anti-war movement.
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 07:08 PM by Kaleva
It's easy to have people give lip service to the anti-war movement but when it comes down to making real sacrifices in order to advance the peace movement, then one hears crickets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #1339
1343. Yes, do you remember how much admired Sheehan was just a few years ago?
Sadly, no one told her that she was supposed to cease criticizing the government at noon Eastern on January 20, 2009, so now she is a figure of ridicule and contempt among the Pragmatic Sensibles.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #1304
1345. I'm so glad you joined this thread. You always bring thoughtful wisdom to the discussion.
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #1304
1413. Nice!
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 10:57 PM by Zorra
IMO, you just put this thread into the top 10 best DU threads ever category.
:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Safetykitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:44 AM
Response to Reply #1304
1446. Amazing post. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 02:57 AM
Response to Reply #1304
1453. I did it...my gf and I said we wouldn't get married till gay marriage was legal.
Fortunately, it happened here in Canada. So we're engaged. I don't think her parents were too happy about it, lol, but oh well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressIn2008 Donating Member (848 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 06:07 PM
Response to Original message
1325. You know, noone who claims to be liberal or progressive should need coaxing to support civil rights
It shouldn't need to be discussed or hammered out, and people who are uncomfortable with civil rights should not be gently rocked and made to feel better. That is true if those people are on DU or in the White House. Those who claim to be liberal or progressives, in contrast, should be shouting at the top of their lungs and refusing to stop until all civil rights issues are won. Full stop. Political pandering and the downward spiral of so-called pragmatism has only made this country more and more messed up, until we have a system where everyone is pragmatically being turned into a serf who dare not peep about their rights and the pragmatists line their pockets.

Finally make some progress? Progress means full civil rights. End of story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 07:50 PM
Response to Original message
1347. Ok - here is how I see the issues when it comes to LGBTQ on DU - by SOME people
My goal has never been to offend or demean the hopes/ideals of others here in any community.

I have been called a homophobe because I did not agree with some posters on things like the snicker's ad - and subsequently followed around by self proclaimed gay police and harassed in threads.

I don't know what I have to do to convince some folks in that community that I care, stand with them, and am all for their rights. I don't think Obama has done his best, but I do feel more progress has been made under Obama than bush.

One does not have to agree with someone all the time - my best friend and his partner thought said ads were funny as well - so are those two gay guys also homophobes?

It is the same on other issues here - I get labeled a libertarian by some if I am not for every new law here, called a liberal wacko by those on the right on FB, etc so on.

We can disagree without the labels, and just because I don't agree does not make me a hater.

I have posted on many internet boards over the years. One thing I have learned is that if people don't see things the same way does not make them evil or a hate filled person who does not care.

Heck, just the other day here on DU I saw a thread in GLBT where someone said basically they were glad they were not straight (re: Wiener threads) - should I take offense at that? Are us straight folks somehow not able to understand certain things because of our orientation? If I posted something in GD like "I am glad I am not gay..." how would that be perceived?

Basically I don't want to post or reply to anything here on DU when it comes to gays anymore because I am not sure if what I will say will upset someone and lead to me being branded as a person who just does not get it, does not care etc.

Excuse me - maybe I have not grown up as a gay person, but I have seen several of them suffer growing up with it. I want things to change for them, it is a human rights issue, but I sure as hell also listen to them and their problems are not always about who post what on an internet message board but about the real world problems they face. They recognize their friends and don't sit around finding reasons to rip those friends apart because they don't agree on every single freaking issue.

People who don't agree with you about some comedian, some politician, some commercial, are not out to keep you down - we just cannot agree all the time about the impact of something - just like folks here don't agree with me about the whole damned smoking in bars issue (it is about freedom to me and personal choices - ban it in hospitals/stores/etc places people have to go - no one has to go to a bar...).

Just because your feelings are hurt over someone not agreeing with you does not mean they are against you.

It does not mean they don't want you to have the rights you should have.

I have traveled across country with a gay couple, stayed in their home, they have watched my kids as they grew up, and never once did they question me or label me as a homophobe because I did not agree with them on something.

But here on DU - disagree on an issue/idea/post/commercial/etc and suddenly people feel you hate gays and don't respect them.

Sorry - but folks won't always agree with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #1347
1357. For me personally, Straight Story, I don't think everyone who disagrees with me is a phobe
My main issue is when I point out that something could be perceived as being homophobic and then suddenly I'm accusing said poster of being a homophobe. There's a huge difference between letting someone know something could be PERCEIVED as homophobic and calling a person a homophobe.

I've seen this "war" go on for some time on DU between us LGBT*.*ers and the rest of DU and I've listened to folks who say they are tired of getting painted with the homophobe brush. So I try to inform that it's either the language or tone that can make some people perceive them as such. That though they themselves may not be homophobic that their statement certainly was. I try to give folks the benefit of the doubt because I don't know anyone in real life and maybe they don't get that their language or tone may be offensive. Is that wrong of me? Should I stop doing that? I don't think I should because how will those sincerely interested in learning and/or changing do so if someone doesn't let them know? And maybe there are more LGBT*.*er's that try the same approach as I have and repeated comments in a thread lead to the eventual proclamation of homophobe. I mean, if LGBT*.*'ers tell you over and over that something is homophobic and you keep saying the same thing, we can only really come to one conclusion--that poster is a homophobe.

Hell, I encountered that very thing in this thread when someone referred to some LGBT*.* folk as "spectacles" at gay pride parades. I stated that was the kind of language that starts trouble on DU. Did the poster say, "Oh, sorry, didn't mean to start trouble," or "Thanks for letting me know." Nope, this person got defensive and went on to say that they couldn't say anything at all anymore (I think the exact phrase was heigh ho, whatever the hell that means). I didn't then jump back into the thread and call that person a homophobe, I replied that I wouldn't go out of my way to use certain language about other minority groups because it's a matter of sensitivity.

So, how are we supposed to let straight folks know when their comments come across as homophobic without them getting snarky or defensive? There's got to be a point, if we're to all get along, that straight folks are open to some education. And there's got to be a point where LGBT*.*ers on DU aren't so quick to jump to the homophobe label (though I will say, after participating in discussions on this board for some time, you get an idea who IS really homophobic though they'll deny, deny, deny--that or they get off on stirring shit up when it comes to LGBT*.* issues and then you have to wonder about the motivation for that).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #1357
1369. Thank you. And to yout point:
"So, how are we supposed to let straight folks know when their comments come across as homophobic without them getting snarky or defensive? There's got to be a point, if we're to all get along, that straight folks are open to some education."

Gays are just as diverse as straights - a comment I make to you, or someone else, may come across as homophobic but may be simply a difference of opinion on a particular issue.

I, and other straights, cannot possibly cover all of the bases when it comes to what some see as homophobic. For example, going back once more to the snicker's ad on the superbowl. I knew gays who laughed at it, and others who took offense.

I cannot possibly cover all the bases - on the one hand if I thought it was funny I am seen as homophobic here, on the other hand my gay friends saw it as funny as well.

Who should I side with? And why should I even have to take sides???

I have been best friends since I was 13 (I am 45 now) with a guy who is gay and when I told him that people here thought I was a homophobe he laughed. He personally knows me, but here some thought - because I did not agree with their assessment - that I was against gays.

Why is it I cannot disagree on some things without being labeled?

I am a friend of gays, I want my gay friends to be able to marry, have all the same rights as others, etc - why is it here on DU if I don't always see things the same as others I get labeled and treated as though I don't get it or understand?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:53 PM
Response to Reply #1347
1359. That's a whole lot of words for the "some of my best friends are gay" defense.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Creideiki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #1359
1362. Personally, some of my best friends are straight and I don't think they're quite as good as me
Right, Straight Story?

Or does the lens of Privilege that you wear like permanently implanted contact lenses keep you from seeing that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #1359
1364. Nice try - what are you really trying to say?
Why don't you reply with a few more words.

Are you gay? Do you feel people here on DU who don't agree with you all the time are somehow 'against' gays?

WHAT do some people here want from me and others who are not gay?

We have your back on many issues, we want gays to be able to marry. We want to have gays to be able to go through life not being bullied.

Are YOU saying that because I have friends who are gay, and that I have some understanding from them of their problems, that I am not able to understand things???

Tell me and others here what you expect of straight folks - because I still don't know.

THIS is the problem I see - there are many straight people here who are on the side of gays and we get reduced to sentences like yours.

YOU cannot possibly understand MY life and all I have went through. Nor can I yours or those of glbtq folks here.

Do YOU have friends who have parkinson's disease, who have died in car wrecks, do you have a son in Iraq right now?

Maybe not - but I still respect your opinion and ideas.

You cannot please some people - I give up. No matter how much I care, no matter what I can do, have done, will do, because I am straight to some I will always be 'one of them'.

I give up - no matter what I say or do it is not good enough. I get regulated to the 'you are straight and have gay friends' bus.

And all someone like you can say back to me is that I am using a 'defense' of having gay friends???

At least my gay friends treat me like a real person and respect what I do for them and with them.

Here on DU I guess being a friend to gays is bad if you are not gay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BklnDem75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #1364
1388. +1000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #1364
1389. Wow, did you start up with the wrong assumption.
Since I guess whatever my credentials are on this issue are are somehow at issue now, here they are: I got involved in the fight against Prop 8 back when it was a ballot petition called Limits on Marriage. I stood in front of grocery stores where paid pro-LOM petition gatherers were collecting signatures, made sure they weren't lying (they were getting paid an unusually high amount per signature and a lot of them were claiming that they were circulating a petition about something else to get signatures) and talking to people about why they shouldn't sign if they were interested in hearing both sides. When LOM made the ballot and became Prop 8 I recruited young voters, wrote articles and LTTE, gave a speech in front of a few thousand young voters on the issue, chipped in to fundraisers, passed out buttons, stickers and signs, and got a hug from a young man wearing a homemade Bibleman costume who loves his two moms. When Prop 8 passed I organized rideshares from a suburban college campus to the rallies at the capital, donated materials, organized sign making parties, and wrote still more. I wish I could do more. I tell you that not to brag or to question anybody else's commitment to the issue, but because I want you to understand how fucking important to me this is, okay/

And since it's apparently an issue, I'm straight and happily partnered to somebody who cares about these things as much as I do, I do have a friend with Parkinson's, a relative (my step-uncle) died of a head injury after flipping a dirt bike in a remote area a little over a year ago, and my son is ten and six feet away from me right now petting one of my rescued cats.

The problem with what you posted is that your past behavior strikes many people as being somewhat homophobic. Expecting people to disregard that because people they do not know would vouch for you is silly. I can tell you that, any evidence my posting history might turn up (like that I'm a 5'2" woman with less than zero athletic ability or inclination) that I can bench press a small car and run a four minute mile. I can tell you that somebody somewhere you don't know would swear it's true. That's absolutely no reason to believe me, and I'd be awfully disappointed if you weren't skeptical of the claim.

If you wanted me to type more at you I guess you got your wish. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #1389
1395. Ok, so let me ask you this
If you did not agree with someone here who was gay, given all that you have done, and they called you a homophobe - how would you feel?

You said "The problem with what you posted is that your past behavior strikes many people as being somewhat homophobic." what past behavior? What does that even mean? Are there folks here on DU that track people??

I don't spend my time here tracking people and what they post. I tend to post (when I posted here a lot) on a thread by thread basis, You might not agree with me on one thread, but that had nothing to do with another.

I give up - I have done all I can to be a friend to gays, and yet nothing I do seems to make people happy.

I will stick with being there for those I love and having them know that, because here on DU I am just some straight guy who does not care.

Out in the real world I am a friend of gays.

I am damned tired of being beat around here by the very people I am trying to help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #1395
1426. If you do that I will be very disappointed in your action, Sir. (Same goes for other Straight folk)
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 11:53 PM by Divine Discontent

I sure as heck won't beat you up. I have always liked your posts, and I am stepping out of the shadows to post in this thread. I was a Mod from Nov til just a few months ago, because of a few issues that made me not wish to continue sacrificing so much time on DU. But, one thing I want to make clear is I don't like losing an advocate - and if you stopped being a friend/advocate to GLBT people on the net because of opinions of some, who may not understand why you said a particular thing in your past, and maybe didn't even care to ask you why, then I would be surprised and saddened. You seem to be a very good person, and I call on all people who actually are setting foot in this emotional disaster of a thread, who happen to be Straight, to stand proud and be counted as being clearly a person of conscience and someone I'd gladly go to battle with in any situation against an enemy that hates change and certainly hates us for who we all are as people who carry about hopefulness in our hearts that things can change. I have stood up for people not like myself several times in my life in my personal/work life, and I am glad I did, and I hope you continue to do so, as every little bit helps bring about the turn of the tide!

I'm not posting another thing in this thread, Good Lord Jesus knows the last time I posted in the big one, while as a Mod, I was attacked for speaking up that my months in the Mod Tub were without concern that there were bigots in there with me (heaven forbid I give factual commentary about my own personal experience sitting in for a hundred plus hours of mod alerts) - however, I know that I didn't know what went on during the early parts of the day, and frankly, a few mods can make a consensus and shut something down or remove things (which is a valid concern), but for the people I modded with at night, and in reference to my opinion of the two guys who run the joint, I saw nothing that gave me concern - just simply that I knew it was being run by people who knew there were problems who were working on DU3, and maybe weren't as often available as we hoped, but certainly, are thinking ahead to their new platform for us to communicate upon, so these problems become a thing of the past.

I really must get back to my summer, lol, but again, reading your posts, I wanted you to know personally, I think you're a very supportive advocate, and for a while I didn't know your personal situation (Gay, Straight, Bi, etc) because you just seemed like someone who was open-minded to whatever circumstance someone "is", and whatever belief they may hold. Please, don't stop being helpful to GLBT in all walks of your life, on the net & in your area - I appreciate it, and I'm sure some others do, too.


God bless,
DD
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #1364
1425. Well said.
I'm done with the pissing match. I'm sick of being called a homophobe by people who don't know me when the people who do know I am anything but.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #1347
1494. you weren't branded a homophobe because you disagreed -- you were aggressively dismissive
of people's concerns about the snickers ad. You compared people offended over apparent gay bashing (though you didn't see it that way) to evangelicals being offended over evolution and cat lovers being offended over puppy bowl. You also ported the Snickers controversy into other threads by using it as a punchline, so it's a bit disingenuous to then complain that other people mentioned snickers to you in other threads.

If a group of posters who regularly face discrimination made legal by the state and the elevated threat of violence from random strangers through gay bashing say observe that a commercial on the most watched television event of the year evokes gay bashing attitudes, do you really think "gosh, some people will be offended by anything" is an appropriate response? Or one that is likely "to convince some folks in that community that I care, stand with them, and am all for their rights"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #1494
1555. What is sad to me is that you remember such specific details
But let's address this:

If a group of posters who regularly face discrimination made legal by the state and the elevated threat of violence from random strangers through gay bashing say observe that a commercial on the most watched television event of the year evokes gay bashing attitudes, do you really think "gosh, some people will be offended by anything" is an appropriate response? Or one that is likely "to convince some folks in that community that I care, stand with them, and am all for their rights"?

Gay people I know did not take offense. Others did (here on DU). No matter how I felt about the issue I would be on the 'wrong side' to some.

People DO get offended over things - as I have been over the characterizations of Christians here on DU (Some of them are asshats, others are not, but folks still treat all based on the few) - hence my comparison. Why is it we can, in some cases here, blast a whole group of people on the actions of the few and be with ok with it on one hand, but then turn around on the other hand and say doing so is wrong?

I give up here on DU - I can't please everyone all the time on everything.

If I don't agree 100% of the time with the gay community here on DU I am a homophobe who does not want you to have the same rights as everyone else.

Grow up - I am now, and always will be, a friend to those in the gay community. But here I get tossed to the side, ridiculed, and followed thread to thread and badgered if I don't share the outrage over x/y/z.

Do you and others really sit around all day with a scorecard and follow my posts and those of others? Do you keep a log of what people post and discuss it just so that you can complain later that so and so did this that and the other? Really?

I am a friend to glbtq folks - I have been since the 90's when I had an IRC board where I welcomed folks in. I had more than one transsexual in my chat room who felt happy and safe because I would not put up with the crap they got elsewhere on dalnet.

Now, here on DU, I am seen as someone who hates gays because I did not agree with some about a damned commercial?

Jesus on a jump rope in Kansas.

Today at work I took a break with someone who is a lesbian and we talked about her and her partner - she needed help with ssdi/long term disability/etc and wanted my help. I am helping them both with the process and I am one of the only people she opened up to at work about it all.

I am DAMNED glad she did not judge me based on some stupid ad during the superbowl, she actually knows me and cares about me.

If she treated me like some on DU do she would think I was the devil and never speak to me and call me a hater.

I'll leave DU and spend my time helping my gay friends in real life, because here I am just some jack ass who does not always agree and am therefore a homophobe. In the real world people in the gay community like me and respect me as I do them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #1555
1562. lol (but yes, let's address this)
You've directed a good deal of frustration and some ridicule towards me in this post. I'm not sure why. I think that my post to you was very measured. If I'm wrong, I'd be happy to address that. At any rate, to address some things in your post.

"What is sad to me is that you remember such specific details"

I guess it amuses me that this makes you sad :shrug: (Amusing puzzling, mind you--not amusing ha-ha.)

This appears to be, rhetorically, an opening gambit designed to ridicule me. That's fine, I can take it.

To come clean, though (and, of course, to assuage your sorrow), I didn't remember any of those details. I did remember that there were a number of posters (as there almost always are in such cases) who responded with something along the lines of "don't be so oversensitive! it's just a joke!" And I wondered, after seeing your post, if your response were along those lines. So I checked a few threads, and saw the comments that I posted. Perhaps that makes you sad as well. I don't know.


"Gay people I know did not take offense. Others did (here on DU). No matter how I felt about the issue I would be on the 'wrong side' to some."

Not really. I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with not being offended. As I tried to make clear in my previous post (and perhaps I failed) it's the attitude that (in my experience) is generally offensive.

Let's imagine two possible responses (understanding, of course, that there are a range of responses not included here):

Response A: "I wasn't offended at that, but I appreciate that you were and you've made me look at it in a way I hadn't thought of before." I'd be willing to wager that this wouldn't offend anyone. This demonstrates what you apparently (based on the initial post I responded to) would like others to believe of yourself: that one "care(s)" and "stand(s) with them." You still don't even have to be offended. Empathy! It's cool!

Response B: "I wasn't offended at that, and I don't see why anyone else should be." This response represents not simple disagreement, but a dismissal of the concerns of those offended. And that's fine, I suppose, if that's where you're at, but let's not pretend that it's a case of simple disagreement. It's expressing something more than simple disagreement. Similar forms might include "My gay friends weren't offended by this, so I don't see what the big deal is" and "That just goes to show that everything is going to offend someone" or "some people will be offended" or "If you want to be offended, you'll find something to be offended about."


"People DO get offended over things - as I have been over the characterizations of Christians here on DU (Some of them are asshats, others are not, but folks still treat all based on the few) - hence my comparison. Why is it we can, in some cases here, blast a whole group of people on the actions of the few and be with ok with it on one hand, but then turn around on the other hand and say doing so is wrong?"

If by "my comparison" you're referring to the one I pointed out (i.e., comparing being offended at the Snickers commercial to evangelicals being offended by evolution), than I think your comment is off the mark. I guess I know only vaguely what you mean by the last sentence/question, but don't quite see what it has to do with the issue at hand or the issue of the Snickers commercial. If you want to elaborate, I'd be happy to address it if I can.

To clarify my earlier point, though--evangelicals being offended by evolution is an example of taking offense at science. People in the gay community being offended at gay bashing is an example of being offended at violence directed at one's person based on nothing more than who one loves. Those two things aren't remotely equivalent.


"I give up here on DU - I can't please everyone all the time on everything."

I don't think anyone expects you to please everyone. To be honest (and I hope you don't think this is snark, as it's not intended that way) I don't think you've invested much effort in that. I don't think most people do, and don't necessarily think most people should.

All I'm saying is that if, in the face of the insurmountable odds of pleasing everyone, one decides to dismiss and make light of the concerns of a specific community, then it is a bit disingenuous to turn around and say "it doesn't matter what I do, I can't make them see that I care."


"If I don't agree 100% of the time with the gay community here on DU I am a homophobe who does not want you to have the same rights as everyone else."

I find this response odd, because (a) I'm not gay and (b) the gay community is varied and (c) I'm not sure that I (or anyone else) agrees 100% of the time with the gay community here on DU (see point (b)) -- and YET (d) I've not been been subject to this attack that others are identifying whereby anyone who disagrees with the gay community 100% of the time is a homophobe.


"Grow up - I am now, and always will be, a friend to those in the gay community. But here I get tossed to the side, ridiculed, and followed thread to thread and badgered if I don't share the outrage over x/y/z. "

I don't know what the "Grow up" is in reference to. Can you point to where my role in this discussion has been immature, or is this just a flailing "royal you"?


"Do you and others really sit around all day with a scorecard and follow my posts and those of others? Do you keep a log of what people post and discuss it just so that you can complain later that so and so did this that and the other? Really? "

No. Do you?


"I am a friend to glbtq folks - I have been since the 90's when I had an IRC board where I welcomed folks in. I had more than one transsexual in my chat room who felt happy and safe because I would not put up with the crap they got elsewhere on dalnet.

"Now, here on DU, I am seen as someone who hates gays because I did not agree with some about a damned commercial?"

I don't think it's because you didn't agree about the damned commercial. I think it's more likely that your tone was dismissive (as outlined above) and you then used the subject as a source of humor. Honestly, TSS, if you posted about something that was painful to you, and then someone responded with something akin to "that's no reason to be offended" and then proceeded to use the thing you were complaining about as a punchline in several other threads, would you consider that person a friend? I want to clarify: I'm not saying that you're a homophobe (I'm not good enough at following usernames to make that case about any but the most egregious offenders); rather, I'm just trying to suggest that maybe your perceived persecution at the hands of the gay community has something to do with your behavior, and not just the alleged oversensitivity and alleged vendetta of that community.


"Jesus on a jump rope in Kansas. "

I think Kansas is the last place that Jesus would be caught on a jump rope, but that's reflective of my own attitude towards Kansas, a state which has never been kind to me ;)


"Today at work I took a break with someone who is a lesbian and we talked about her and her partner - she needed help with ssdi/long term disability/etc and wanted my help. I am helping them both with the process and I am one of the only people she opened up to at work about it all.

"I am DAMNED glad she did not judge me based on some stupid ad during the superbowl, she actually knows me and cares about me.

"If she treated me like some on DU do she would think I was the devil and never speak to me and call me a hater."

You really think some on DU would call you a hater for trying to help them? Or, on the other hand, is it possible (just possible mind you, that you are more personable and understanding and helpful to that individual than you have, at times presented yourself to the gay community on DU? Particularly when they were talking about what they, themselves, see as problems?


"I'll leave DU and spend my time helping my gay friends in real life, because here I am just some jack ass who does not always agree and am therefore a homophobe. In the real world people in the gay community like me and respect me as I do them."

Helping people in the real world is a good thing.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #1562
1584. First - A nice reply and well thought out and handled, thank you.
Not like some of the replies I have seen (or have given myself).

While I could attempt to elucidate the way you did in your reply let me try to just sum up in less words how I feel.

You stated: I don't think it's because you didn't agree about the damned commercial. I think it's more likely that your tone was dismissive (as outlined above) and you then used the subject as a source of humor. Honestly, TSS, if you posted about something that was painful to you, and then someone responded with something akin to "that's no reason to be offended" and then proceeded to use the thing you were complaining about as a punchline in several other threads, would you consider that person a friend? I want to clarify: I'm not saying that you're a homophobe (I'm not good enough at following usernames to make that case about any but the most egregious offenders); rather, I'm just trying to suggest that maybe your perceived persecution at the hands of the gay community has something to do with your behavior, and not just the alleged oversensitivity and alleged vendetta of that community.

I will admit that perhaps I was dismissive of the feelings of some here (and to be honest and open, this was shortly after my mom died and I was pretty fucked up) and in that regards I apologize to those I offended.

But to be honest it was not a big deal to those I knew in the gay community - but it was here. Compared to the bigger issues (like gay marriage and DADT) it really was nothing to many in the gay community I hang out with.

The whole thing snowballed here - I was followed around in threads and called a child molester by people who had an avatar that read gay police. Did I bring it up elsewhere? Yes - but mainly because it kept following me around. It did not matter what I posted, someone who had the avatar gay police would show up and bash me no matter the topic.

I don't know what else I need to do here on DU to 'prove' myself to folks in the gay community. I cannot, and will not, always agree with folks here on certain issues - whether it be an ad on TV or some comedian. And neither will other folks who are gay.

As noted before I give up as far as DU is concerned. I will spend my time supporting my gay friends elsewhere, but posting here is not something I want to do anymore on a regular basis.

When I am seen as the enemy, the bad guy, I am done. No matter how much I support gay rights and equality it means nothing to some here if I do not tow the line on x/y/z.

I have people in my family in the closet, they are going through hell and they rely on me as their outlet. I watch as they suffer and they want to get out of this life they are in.

But hey, I did not agree with some folks over a damned ad - so I am an asshole and need to be more sensitive.

Am I mad and a little pissed off? Yes I am - Because I am trying damned hard to help those in the gay community yet here on DU I am marginalized because I don't always see things the same way.

Fuck - it does not matter what I have done for others. When my best friend's partner had testicular cancer and I was the one who took him to the hospital and then took him home and cared for him - well, that does not matter because I did not agree with some here about the outrage over a damned commercial.

It does not matter what the hell I do or have done for others - it only matters that at some point I did not agree with some that a god damned ad was offensive to them while not being offensive to others.

I just cannot please some people here - so I am going to leave this place and make those in the gay community here on DU happy.

I will keep advocating for those I love, but I won't bother doing it here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 03:54 AM
Response to Reply #1555
1589. Name dropping your millions of "gay friends" in every sentence doesn't help your argument
Edited on Sat Jun-18-11 03:55 AM by Very_Boring_Name
Just an fyi. "Some of my best friends are gay" is the oldest line in the book.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #1589
1615. Just an FYI back at you
Dissing an argument by claiming someone used 'some of my best friends' is not an argument.

Try to elucidate a little bit more.

The idea here is that one can see the affect of laws and such without themselves being directly affected.

Hence - my best friend (and a family member) is gay, I am not, but I see those I love affected directly.

I have folks telling me, wishing perhaps, that I could understand their point of view. And then when I say I do it is dismissed with some trite post like yours.

OK - I guess I will not try to understand gays and their problems based on the people I know and seeing what they go through.

This is the crap I am talking about. Having an advocate and then telling them that even though they think they understand they really don't.

Not sure what else I can do to show my support - but it is obvious it will not be here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #1615
1616. From reading your posts in this thread, it is clear your goal is not to understand anybody's POV
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #1616
1618. And from reading your response here
it is clear you have nothing other than some header to go on.

I am always open to seeing the POV of others.

Let me lay it out like this:

I am a progressive and will do whatever it takes to make sure gays have the rights they should have. There is NO reason they should not be able to marry and serve.

BUT when it comes to DU this is all a different story. And DU is what we are talking about.

If someone does not agree with you it does not mean you are a hater. It does not mean you do not care. It does not make you a homophobe.

Here on DU though it seems that if you do not agree with someone it is ok to label you a hater and such.

It does not matter what you do in real life. If you do not agree with someone who is gay on some issue you are seen as some homophobic person.

Tis no matter what I do outside of this website for gays, on here I am seen as someone who (by some) is against gays when I don't agree with some who are gay on some commercial or post.

At some point it gets tiring, at least when it comes to DU, to support my gay friends. The ones I have in real life have no problems with me, they value me and respect me.

here? Not so much. And here is just a website.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #1347
1700. I was wondering when you'd arrive to pontificate on something you have no clue about.
Wait, let me get my Werther's Originals. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 08:27 PM
Response to Original message
1353. Check out jefferson_dem's homophobic post...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=592601&mesg_id=592604

If jefferson_dem made a racist post, would he still be a member of DU?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #1353
1367. so he's saying that gay marriage is like wanting an Oompa Loompa now
impatient pouting?

wow. :banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #1367
1378. Is oompa loompa the new pony now? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #1378
1417. I have my regrets here, but at least I never compared Dan Choi to Veruca Salt
Edited on Thu Jun-16-11 11:03 PM by CreekDog
and later, after it got deleted, blamed anyone who was troubled by the comparison that they were wrong and that it wasn't offensive. :eyes:

(and remember! this is someone who is HELPING OBAMA. Imagine that!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #1417
1421. The president is very badly served by his self-appointed loyalty enforcers here.
If these people actually do ever volunteer in real life, I hope they are allowed nowhere near the public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:57 AM
Response to Reply #1421
1440. OMG
You said it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #1440
1441. Can you imagine being phonebanked by one of the chronic hatefuls?
Let's not even consider what would happen if they drive people to the polls!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:19 AM
Response to Reply #1441
1442. You never loved him!!!!1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:23 AM
Response to Reply #1442
1443. You just want Sarah Palin!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 05:04 AM
Response to Reply #1442
1458. Drips with irony.
Watch the video of Choi, if you haven't already. That may put your mockery and your "anger issue" in a whole new light.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #1458
1473. Watched it,
agreed with his response. The only petulance I see is the petulance from those who think a person should allow themselves to be treated over and over again like a piggy bank whose life matters nothing after the money is deposited by the party. It seems that many have decided to fight back. Good for them, good for Dan.

While I or anyone else might behave differently or might disagree entirely with his response is of no matter. It is his personal choice to make. Your arrogance at his frustration and anger just shows that you have little tolerance for the difficulties of others. You also seem to think that you can treat people dismissively and somehow lure them back to the little box you have all prepared for them. While people here rail at the ineffectiveness of the Democrats messaging I think it might do all of you good to look at how you deliver those messages. For a moment last night I could have sworn Veruca Salt was wearing your face.

It must be really heavy dragging the bat of privilege around here all day.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #1473
1509. Cute.
Edited on Fri Jun-17-11 12:44 PM by jefferson_dem
Set up straw men made of fantasy and simple-minded conjecture ... then try to knock them down.

I explained my post upthread.

Hey, if you are not already convinced what the *right thing to do* will be on November 6, 2012, that's on you...and a cross you'll have to bear. I can't help you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #1509
1523. No straw man that I can see here.
Cute, indeed.

Forget it, deleted my response to you. It is just not worth my time. When you really want to help then you are going to need to ask. Until you stop acting like you are the only one who knows what should be done you will be on the outside of it. Many people say they want to help, few actually will do it. ***hint*** straight people do not get to run it

Dan Choi is putting his neck out there now. Dan Choi put his neck out for all of us and look what that got him.

I bare no crosses. What I do with my vote is none of your business and I do it with a clear conscience as I assume you do. I am totally convinced of my decision as you are. I am not sure where that came from but there is my response to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 04:13 AM
Response to Reply #1441
1591. I'm sure "pony" and "poutrage" go over real well while phonebanking
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #1367
1390. No I did not say that.
A hint: We all want the same thing, policy-wise.

We might disagree, however, in how we respond to people who

- deny fact-based reality

- offer up petulant, counter-productive ultimatums

- promote enabling Republicans if we don't get everything we want when we want it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #1390
1401. not credible...Dan Choi rips up Obama flyer out of frustration and you compare him to Veruca Salt
wanting gay marriage is just petulant whining to you.

perhaps you're part of the administration and you have to defend the purposeful delay.

i dunno. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #1390
1404. Interesting that Obama's greatest supporters here are always arguing how little he's capable of
i've always found that odd.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #1404
1406. I heard one of the truest of true believers say, in absolute seriousness,
that if the president were to apply pressure to Congress, that would violate the separation of powers doctrine.

Seriously. And this was coming from someone who seldom passes up an opportunity to remind everyone that she goes to a very exclusive and expensive college.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #1406
1408. was it frenchiecat by any chance? the shit that comes out of her mouth is unbelievable
I still remember she was obsessed with wes clark in 2004, when 2007 came she made several posts (when she was still hoping clark would jump in) about how unqualified obama was. Later, she jumped ship to Obama and anyone who called him unqualified was branded a racist by her. She viciously defended everything he did, including mcclurkin/warren.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #1408
1411. No, but that's an excellent guess.
This person's username sounds a lot like the word vapid, fittingly enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 03:40 AM
Response to Reply #1408
1457. Oh wow!!!!
I remember that, since I was onboard with Obama in early 2007.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #1408
1495. I have no idea...
...how she survived past the primaries.

Several times, I have had her posts deleted by alerting mods.

If you are not 100% lockstep with her on Obama, you are a racist, and are called one without hesitation.

I supported Edwards during the primaries (as did the majority of DU) but said clearly that I would be happy with Obama or Hillary.

But that was not good enough. I was a 'racist,' a 'troll,' a 'Republican plant.'

I watched as one after another, Hillary supporters were goaded into self-destructing.

There were ringleaders to speed this process and that's all I will say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #1406
1520. Just for you QC. Enjoy!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1316338
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #1520
1521. Brilliant! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 03:39 AM
Response to Reply #1404
1456. They do it all the time.
The cheerleaders say Obama can't do this, that or the other so often, that I started wondering if the 2012 slogan should be 'No, we can't.'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Indykatie Donating Member (416 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #1353
1368. What is Racist About Jefferson Dem's Post?
I certainly don't see it as racist. I took it as a comment on Choi's tactics especially his threat to NOT vote for Obama unless he endorses full marriage equality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreeState Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #1368
1370. Re-read the post - it's says IF it was not that it is n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #1368
1381. The post was homophobic, not racist.
I said if it was racist, as opposed to homophobic, it may have resulted in a ban.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #1381
1387. Bullshit.
The post was neither. But that's ok. Carry on...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #1387
1423. your first response to Dan Choi was to post Veruca Salt wanting an Oompa Loompa NOW!
it's childish to want things now.

he lost his job because he's gay.

his frustration with Obama that this is still the law of the land is responded to by you comparing him to Veruca Salt is like saying to someone you kicked in the teeth that you just wanted them to take a closer look at your shoe.

but that's okay. see you're helping Obama and with each and every post like that last one, you're pushing people away from Obama --perhaps not those who respond to you (they may have decided long ago) but those who are wondering what all this is about.

they are the ones who see your Veruca Salt video in response to the honorable service of Dan Choi.

but go ahead, continue to think that you're helping. this is probably helping *somebody* i'm just not sure it's who you think it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #1387
1424. If you really mean that, then your post was a profound failure for appearing so bigoted. .
Everyone who commented on it, and the mods who reviewed it, all considered it to be homophobic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:38 PM
Response to Reply #1353
1374. Did you get a screenshot? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreeState Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #1374
1375. This n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #1353
1380. Its GONE!
"There is no homophobia on DU."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #1380
1383. Yes, fortunately, it was deleted. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cronus Protagonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 09:47 PM
Response to Original message
1382. Can't we all just get along?
Sorry, someone had to Rodney King this thread. Might as well be me... I've been accused of being a homophobe and I'm actually gay, I've been accused of being a GOP shill and I spent 8 years of my life satirizing Bush and chronicling his misadministration of the country. I've been accused of being a bleeding heart liberal and I am, apparently, also just like a right wing nut job.

I've been here since the start, thereabouts, and I'm still here, and no-one has ever pegged me accurately, which just goes to show that drunk people, stoned people, angry people, dumb people, the uneducated, the illiterate, the angry, the stupid and all the others will post dumb shit on DU and elsewhere on the Internets.

I just don't take them seriously. This is a web site, not a court of law. So chill out, people, and remember that the person who just mortally offended you is probably sitting across from a blaring TV in his skid-marked underpants, his beer-belly sometimes accidentally pushing the space bar, with a beer in his hand, a joint in his mouth, a cat lying on his "athlete's" foot and another one walking across the keyboard. If you saw him in real life, would you care much what he says or thinks?

Then give him the same credibility on here and walk on by!

:toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast: :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kaleva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #1382
1420. DU is a forum and nothing more then that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
1400. I'm a straight guy who likes Broadway Musicals so all I have to contribute is a song...
'If You Were Gay'
from Avenue Q

ROD:
Ahhhh, an afternoon alone with my favorite book: "Broadway Musicals of the 1940's". No roommate to bother me. How could it get any better than this?

NICKY:
Oh, hi Rod!

ROD:
Hi, Nicky.

NICKY:
Uh, hey Rod, you'll never guess what happened to me on the subway this morning. This guy was smilin' at me, and talkin' to me...

ROD:
mmm, that's very interesting.

NICKY:
...mmmhmm, he was being real friendly. And, I think he was coming on to me. I think he might have thought I was gay.

ROD:
Ahem...So, uh, why you tellin' me this? Why should I care? I don't care? What did you have for lunch today?

NICKY:
Well, you don't have to get all defensive, Rod...

ROD:
I'M NOT GETTING DEFENSIVE! Why do I care about some gay guy you met, okay? I am trying to read.

NICKY:
Well, I didn't mean anything by it, Rod. I just think it's something we should be able to talk about.

ROD:
Well, I do not want to talk about it, Nicky. This conversation is over.

NICKY:
Yeah, but Rod...

ROD:
OVER!

NICKY:
Well, okay. But just so you know...

If you were gay
that'd be okay
I mean 'cause hey
I'd like you anyway

ROD:
Argh.

NICKY:
Because you see
if it were me
I would feel free to say
That I was gay
...but I'm not gay.

ROD:
Nicky, please, I am trying to read....What?!?

NICKY:
If you were queer

ROD:
Oh, Nicky.

NICKY:
I'd still be here

ROD:
Nicky, I am trying to read this book.

NICKY:
Year after year

ROD:
Nicky!

NICKY:
Because you're dear to me

ROD:
Argh!

NICKY:
And I know that you

ROD:
What?

NICKY:
Would accept me, too

ROD:
I would?

NICKY:
If I told you today,
"Hey, guess what, I'm gay".
...but I'm not gay.

I'm happy just being with you

ROD:
High Button Shoes, Pay Joey...

NICKY:
So what should it matter to me
What you do in bed with guys?

ROD:
Nicky, that is gross!

NICKY:
No, it's not
If you were gay

ROD:
Argh.

NICKY:
I'd shout horray!

ROD:
I am not listening.

NICKY:
And here I'd stay

ROD:
LA LA LA LA LA!

NICKY:
But I wouldn't get in your way

ROD:
AAAAH!

NICKY:
You can count on me
To always be
Beside you everyday
To tell you it's okay
You we're just born that way
And as they, it's in your DNA
You're gay.

ROD:
I AM NOT GAY!!!

NICKY:
If you were gay.

ROD:
ARGH!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dept of Beer Donating Member (957 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:11 PM
Response to Original message
1418. It is strange that any intolerance of LGBT issues would exist or be tolerated

on a board that prides itself on Democratic/Progressive principles. I would believe that any Democratic/Progressive board worth its salt would hold fast to the principles of human rights first (any human's rights), and would be found a cold place for a bigoted individual or group of individuals implying bigotry towards any.

Since you have stated unEquiVocally that no posts on this thrEad will be deleted I commend you for that, and I will also expect to hold you to your word...as would the majority of Non-troll DUers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 07:39 AM
Response to Reply #1418
1466. Yeah, that's pretty much what we're trying to do
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:12 PM
Response to Original message
1419. How much of this war is from Divide and Conquer GOP internet-ninja tactics?
It would be mega easy to pose as a LGBT and write inflammatory crap about (say) gays being more oppressed than (insert group you want to anger). It would be easy to pretend to be a member of another oppressed group and say "Gays have it pretty good in this country. They need to wait their turn, not rock the boat and let those of us who need it most get some equality".

During the Obama/Clinton wars we had a lot of outside agitators claiming that women/Blacks have it worse. That kind of political rhetoric benefits only the right wing, and usually comes from the right wing.

Whenever I see two groups under the Democratic umbrella bickering, I always assume that there is an outside agitator. The same ones who will always call for violent/illegal activity at an otherwise peaceful protest. We all know that the latter guy (or gal) is a police plant. Shouldn't we assume that the one playing Divide and Conquer is also a plant?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DURHAM D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-11 11:44 PM
Response to Reply #1419
1427. Probably none.
The problem is between those that process politics and choices through policy and those that see politics through personalities (Obama).

Obedience is simply expected (required)from us folks with the policy issues. The Others know what is best for us - I know this because they have told me over and over again.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 05:22 AM
Response to Reply #1419
1460. A handful, at least.
Hopefully, the mods have a keen eye for disruptive tactics by trolls posing as serial complainers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 07:08 AM
Response to Reply #1460
1462. They were certainly keen to your bigoted assholery in the Dan Choi thread,
Maybe they'll start noticing the rest of it now, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #1462
1467. You don't wear projection well...
The "bigoted assholery" you speak of is in your own mind.

I suspect your comments were among those that got deleted in that thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #1467
1468. Actually, I never got to see the thread, it having been deleted before I arrived.
And I might well be an asshole, but I would never, ever compare a person who is denied equal rights by the nation he swore to protect to Veruca Salt.

That requires a near-sociopathic kind of ugliness that you have perfected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #1468
1470. You never saw it...
but that didn't keep you from judging others with venomous, half-baked insinuations. That does seem to be par for your course, however, troll around ... calling out and insulting fellow DUers who you think you disagree with. Enjoy that, eh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 08:25 AM
Response to Reply #1470
1471. There's a non-hateful way to compare Dan Choi to Veruca Salt?
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #1471
1487. Are you talking Charlie/choc factory Veruca Salt or the band?
Dan Choi is simply a spoiled little rich boy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #1487
1488. The choc factory one.
It was in poorest of tastes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #1488
1507. The author of that post
Is the poorest of tastes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #1488
1511. I don't see any accurate way to compare the two that isn't nasty
Thanks, wanted to make sure
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #1511
1512. Apparently oompa loompa is the new pony. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #1512
1522. Ah, thank you for clarifying that, had seen the phrase but missed wtf it meant
Equal rights = wanting candy, bigotry vs whiny child. Good grief.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #1522
1604. Yes, wanting to be a free and equal citizen is just like being a petulant, whiny little girl
demanding an impossible present.

And I'm sure there's nothing homophobic about applying misogynist stereotypes to gay men: whiny, petulant, clutches the pearls, gets the knickers in a twist, etc., as the bullies have been doing here for years. I'm sure that it is purely coincidental and only someone who is too sensitive and needs to toughen up would think there was something bigoted going on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #1470
1727. i saw it and word gets around
you posted the Veruca Salt video of her wanting an Ooompa Loompa now.

take responsibility for what you post.

if you post that in response to Dan Choi, then show some strength and accept the consequences.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kaleva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #1419
1469. At a site that shall not be named, people brag about the disruption they cause here.
Edited on Fri Jun-17-11 08:32 AM by Kaleva
To them, Skinner, apparently, is a right wing stooge and DU is infested by freeper trolls or Repub operatives.

Edit: I don't know if any of them have posted in this thread and I don't have the interest to make the effort to find out. Just saying there are folks who have a burr up their ass about DU for whatever reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 09:06 AM
Response to Reply #1469
1474. Oh they're here, alright...
Edited on Fri Jun-17-11 09:11 AM by Bobbie Jo
Just a few posts up, calling DU'ers out by name and talking trash amongst themselves.

"was it soandso?" " Good guess, etc...."

This thread has turned into an exercise in jr high pettiness.

AFAIC.....let 'em show their ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zenlitened Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #1419
1514. I think the No-Criticism-Allowed types have done far more to disrupt and disillusion.
The small core of Cheerleaders-in-Jackboots who rush in to stamp out even the mildest criticism or expression of concern... they've been a highly effective voter-suppression mechanism, it seems to me.

If anyone is to be suspected of being a "plant," let's not overlook the hard-core "supporters" (past and present) whose words and deeds have had the effect primarily of eroding support and cementing ill-will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jumptheshadow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
1510. Well, time to tick everybody off here... :)
Edited on Fri Jun-17-11 12:58 PM by jumptheshadow
From my perspective as a long-time gay DUer, there have been issues on all sides.

There have been blatant homophobic remarks and, also, a fly-beneath-the-radar insidious homophobia that is missed by "non-family" but seems pretty vicious and aggressive when you have weathered the difficult path of being gay in a homophobic society.

Sometimes the sensitivities are pretty high. At times a statement which I don't personally consider insulting will rankle others in my community, and vice versa. Sometimes the fact that a thread is started by a certain person who seems to cross the line a lot is enough to sour any attempts at honest and considered discussion. (Hint to one poster: You are a very cool man at times, but you might consider changing topics. Your gay threads simply become flame fests because people don't trust your intentions.)

The LGBT community has its own internal debates -- believe me -- witness the heated reactions to the writing of the late Randy Shilts in some quarters. Larry Kramer is a walking flamefest.

It is a diverse community and has its share of thoughtful, intelligent thinkers and of articulate, nasty lunatics. I have seen both types on here. Although most of our brethren fall into the first category, there are one or two who have been self-aggrandizing shills. You may not have seen and read the context for this if you are newer, you may not agree if they are a friend and you know them personally, but I have been here for a long time and have reached this conclusion after seeing them in many situations...

They aren't necessarily current posters... Kudos to my brothers and sisters who fight the good fight and who have persisted throughout the years. I won't name you because I won't remember you all.

There has seemed to be a less-than-subtle change in moderation in the recent past (year and a half, two years?) My hat is off to the diligent people who volunteer to pull thankless moderator shifts but there was a jaw-dropping change in the way a couple of moderators started communicating a little while ago. A distinct air of patronization set in. I haven't seen that much of it lately, but granted, I am a busy woman and look at a fraction of the threads on here. I can easily see how some actions and comments I've observed on some threads could set off bombs on other threads dealing with highly sensitive topics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jamastiene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
1513. We can't cyber or post nekked pictures on DU, but
it is sure nice to know that there are Sensual Nontoxic Toys for Empowered Adults here, despite the no sex rule on DU. :rofl:

I also see a Deleted sub-thread by Name Removed above.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1299874#1302407

I see that whole don't delete anything rule for this thread changed midstream. That happens a lot around here. Remind me never to play hopscotch or soccer with you. The ever-moving, ever-changing lines and goalposts would make for an infuriating, frustrating, soul-suckingly miserable game.

I see Heddi has been de-modded as well. :( De-modding Heddi might have been within your rights because of whatever confidentiality agreement that may have been made, but, IMNSHO, she did the right thing to tell the truth about something y'all always swear never happens behind the scenes. The difference is that some can break the rules without any worries about repercussions. Others? Immediate loss of mod functions for one of the best mods on here or immediate TS or immediate lock or deletion of post.

If you want to know why we feel you have several sets of rules going on simultaneously, that apply differently depending on who breaks those rules, just look at the moderation actions in this thread and look at your nice $ coming in from the dildo ad on the Greatest Page.



DUers, get yer dildos here:
(A link to the site just to be sure not to cut into any DU revenue that might come from that ad.)

If I were to post a nice shiny glossy HD picture of a dildo in a thread at any other time, it would be locked and deleted pronto, most likely by GAOT, who takes great pleasure in stopping all things sexual on this site. Her head must be exploding seeing that ad on the DU Greatest page right about now, because she cannot lock or delete the ad. I love that! :rofl: :evilgrin:

For the past couple of years, I have been getting some serious mixed signals when it comes to rules on DU. On the one hand, I'm pretty damn sure I MUST follow them to the letter. I've seen enough great friends on here get TSed for things as simple as posting Gray Duck or 7. I still don't know why those were bannable offenses. I just see that some of us must follow the rules and then some, or else.

Others?

Not so much.

Some of us see that uneven application of the rules and just know we are screwed. That's why I hardly take part in these gab sessions any more. It's kind of like when Toto pulls back the curtain in the Wizard of Oz. "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain."

I miss the old DU where gay people were not seen as outright pariahs who won't just STFU. For many, that's what they want us to do, just STFU. Sure DU has tons of great GLBT allies, but there are many many rule breakers who always make it clear, and not in those exact words (but we get their point nonetheless), that they just want us to STFU. Even the Lounge has been purged of all the fun that used to happen there.

If you really want to fix this shit, go back and read Sappho's post in the Mending Fences thread, listen to those who are pointing out that some mods DO hate quite a few of us in the GLBT community here on DU, and reinstate those who were banned in the Lounge relating to the Gay Purge as well. We all know there were more purged after that original purge. Yes, the other purge, that hasn't been talked about much at all, because everyone is so afraid to bring it up.

For anyone who is wondering, just look up LeftyFingerPop's picture of his nail fungus or any of his burp and fart threads, then go forward from there and look at the dust-up that happened not long after some of us complained about his filth stinking up the Lounge. Bodily functions threads are usually locked or deleted, but not when LeftyFingerPop was posting them relentlessly and gagging the rest of us. Oh, but God help me for posting a screen cap of the current DU greatest page, because there is a dildo picture on it. Are you beginning to see the pattern here? I am.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #1513
1516. I have a trowel that looks remarkably like that dildo.
I will never see it in the same way again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #1516
1518. ...
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #1516
1524. Wow so do I!
Who knew?

*running out to scrub it off and think of the possibilities* :blush: :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chovexani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #1513
1525. ...
I like that the purple dildo ad is next to an ad for WoW, the one with the night elf on the box.

...of course, my first DU post in god knows how long would have to be about dildos and WoW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #1525
1533. Dildos and Wow go together like...
(fill in the blank!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #1525
1534. HI HI HI HI
You are back! At least for a moment.

I am so happy to see you :)

Too bad this thread sucks so badly and several others.....well it has continued as it was before I suppose.

Just wanted to say hello, you have been missed by me and many others. I hope all is well with you :hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chovexani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #1534
1544. I've missed you too hon
Been ok though! I hope everything's going well for you too. :hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #1525
1542. Hey!
You've been missed!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #1513
1530. ...
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chovexani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
1526. Really, bro? Seriously?


Let's see, we've got a heaping helping of false equivalency syndrome, in which a marginalized group is asked to "hash it out" with our oppressors, with no acknowledgement whatsoever of the major role that admin apathy and willful misconduct played in fostering a climate where homophobic bigotry is the rule of the day and queer people are asked to "make nice" with the trolls throwing rocks at us. Those of us who aren't currently enjoying delicious granite pizzas in the various purges, that is. And that there's wide swaths of people posting in this thread who genuinely have NFI what's going on is very telling. What did we just learn (again) from Weinergate, anyway? It's always the lying and the coverup that makes things worse.

This thread is pretty much why I'm not here anymore. You let this site--it's not a community, it hasn't been since 2008--degenerate into an absolute fucking mess, and you want us to clean up the mess. Unbelievable. DU is a fucking joke. You broke it, you own it.

Jesus, there's more intelligent progressive political discussion going on in fucking /b/.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNBrewer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #1526
1528. Chovexani!!! U Rock!
Tell it like it is and take no prisoners!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chovexani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #1528
1531. ty
xoxoxoxoxo

:loveya:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JanMichael Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #1526
1532. I wondered where you were
Thanks for this post!

Wish you would post more often-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chovexani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #1532
1543. I am still around the internets
Good to see you too. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #1526
1536. Great seeing you again
You nailed it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Call Me Wesley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #1526
1538. Dupe, delete. (nt)
Edited on Fri Jun-17-11 04:57 PM by Call Me Wesley
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Call Me Wesley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #1526
1539. Hey, good to see you (I just broke my oath to stay out of this thread ...)


;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chovexani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #1539
1551. omg
:loveya:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #1526
1546. !!!
I'm so glad I came back to this thread. Always a pleasure to see your posts, and bittersweet agreement with why this place has gone to hell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MerryBlooms Donating Member (940 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #1526
1548. Stellar post.
Very much like the victims of bullies in school required to 'confront' their tormentors in a sham meeting with a 'counselor' present, and the victim is supposed to feel all safe during and after.

This huge thread is horribly disappointing and not conducive to improvement of the situation at hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #1548
1550. Amen. And your bullying metaphor is perfect because that is precisely
what is going on here. DU has developed a bullying culture, and the members have been trying to tell Skinner that for years, not only in his official user survey but in numerous other poll threads and discussions and ATA threads.

In return, they have been given the standard replies so familiar to anyone who has ever been bullied: What are you talking about? I didn't see anything. You're too sensitive. You need to toughen up. If you didn't act that way he wouldn't hit you. Etc.

This thread strikes me as being much like the old 50's comedy cliché of dad sending squabbling kids out to the back yard with boxing gloves to "get it out of their system." I hope it does more good than that, but the way to resolve a bullying situation is not to treat the bully and the bullied as equally at fault and tell them to handle it and get back to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chovexani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #1548
1552. seconding the good use of the metaphor
Got bulled in school, (barely) survived, and I recognize the pattern very well. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #1552
1554. It's all so obvious to someone who's been there, isn't it?
Nice to see you again!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chovexani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #1554
1559. No kidding!
And check your PMs. :hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreeState Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #1526
1553. + 1000000 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #1526
1556. Miss the hell out of you.
Hope life is good to you these days! xo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chovexani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #1556
1558. back at ya hon
I'm doing well, I hope life is treating you the same. :hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
1557. Wow! great moderating going on right now in the GLBT forum (sarcasm)
Time for new mods skinner
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TransitJohn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #1557
1564. Yeah, it's always great when a thread is locked by 'Moderator'
Rules, what rules?

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreeState Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #1564
1566. I only see one locked thread and I don't see why it was locked
It is discussing a homophobic saying many of us hear over and over, it does not mention a poster yet alone the statement being posted on DU, not sure how that's a call out as the lock mention says. Sadly it's par for the course - we can't even discuss homophobia without it being seen as a call out. It's absurd and offensive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:05 PM
Response to Reply #1566
1568. This afternoon several threads got raptured.
I only know because I was reading one, reloaded the page and saw it gone, tried to post to another only to have it disappear, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #1568
1569. Yup, I had about 3 raptured. One was simply asking if anybody would be willing to start
an invite-only GLBT forum. I'd really love to hear why that one was deleted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #1568
1587. "raptured"
I'm sure I've just missed that usage, but it's a new one to me. And it gave me this: :spray: :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #1566
1571. I had one deleted this afternoon which asked if anybody would be willing to start an invite-only
GLBT forum. It was deleted within minutes, apparently the prospect of leaving DU is not encouraged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreeState Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #1571
1575. Thats the main problem, contrary to this threads stated purpose the problem lies with moderation
We have been told over and over LGBT posters are treated the same, and as anyone who has been here as long as I have will tell you that's simply not true. There are major problems on DU with moderation and there have been for a while now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #1575
1738. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #1566
1572. Several threads vanished completely. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #1564
1567. Threads that weren't violating the rules were being deleted
One thread was asking if anybody would be willing to start up an invite-only GLBT forum, it was deleted within 3 minutes. Another thread asked why people claim GLBT is being "forced down their throats" as being a "call out" thread :eyes:

Somebody explain to me how this constitutes a "call out"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x179063
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TransitJohn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #1567
1570. I am in solidarity with the GLBT community here, and elsewhere.
This is a persistent problem on DU, and it goes way beyond the GLBT community here. I see what goes on.
Take care.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #1570
1574. Thank you! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:12 PM
Response to Original message
1573. If you do a search-by-author on the worst offenders, you'll see consistency among issues.
- GLBT rights
- Labor
- Reproductive rights
- Health care
- Poverty and income inequality
- Criminal justice
- And a handful of others I forget.

You'll see a number of posters who are all right wing all the time. Oh, they'll throw the pro forma "Yay, Democratic candidate X won!" or "Wow, what an asshole right-winger Y is!" posts every now and then to keep plausible deniability. But when they talk about issues, they always take the right-wing side. Always.

Why are they still here? I (and, I'm sure many others) alerted on dozens and dozens of offending post from those, sometimes for years. Given the "needs unanimity" policy, I can only assume they survive because of one or two moderators who think right-wing assholes are just fine. New information in this very thread only confirms my suspicion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TransitJohn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #1573
1576. And they supported Charlie Crist over the actual Democrat, Kendrick Meek.
Edited on Fri Jun-17-11 11:19 PM by TransitJohn
All the time.

edit: sp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #1576
1578. Oh, the people I'm thinking about did much worse than that.
Like, for instance, trying to paint birtherism in a credible light. Or expressing "fears" that Democrats may "confiscate guns."

Here, take a look at this cool six-wheeled racing car.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #1573
1577. Have you seen what goes on in the education discussions?
Teachers really are the enemies of the people now, according to a small but very loud and belligerent faction here, one that includes a few moderators who have taken to swarming madfloridian's threads. I've been here for over ten years but I had never seen a modswarm until just last week, when madfloridian had the unmitigated gall to criticize Arne Duncan. (Apparently the president's cloak of perfection now covers his basketball buddy as well.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #1577
1579. That's a forum I really don't go much. I can imagine what it's like, though.
Hint: do a search by author (spanning all forums) and take a look at those people's opinion on unrelated subjects.

With some of them, you won't find anything too startling. Those are the "Obama can do no wrong" people and aren't really right-wingers. Much.

But others...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:33 PM
Response to Reply #1579
1581. What makes me sad is to consider how many good people
have been put on the road in the same time the ones you cite have been working their ugly magic on this place.

You know, I used to learn so much about politics, world news, and such at this site that friends would ask me, "How do you know so much about all that stuff?" and I would send them here. This place was Politics U.

Now, sadly, most of those people one could learn so much from are gone, voluntarily or not, and I would never send anyone I cared about to a place where a vicious little pack of bullies will be permitted to abuse them with impunity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lars39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #1577
1580. Looked that one up....that was bad...
mods shouldn't be posting at all while they are mods, imo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-11 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #1580
1582. There definitely needs to be a serious review of mod policies.
We have too many people here who cannot decide whether they want to be moderators or message board warriors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #1573
1588. +++
Why oh fucking WHY can't an Admin take the time to review these patterns, if it's above the paygrade of a Mod?

:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vanje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #1573
1608. I post most often about income inequality and other subjects
Edited on Sat Jun-18-11 01:39 PM by Vanje
I am usually critical of Obama's policies.
I post most often about subjects of income inequality, poverty, these fucking wars. I post much less often about gblt issues.

Its the same posters, very strong Obama supporters, who usually disagree with me, whether I'm posting about GLBT issues or other issues. Their names have been repeated in this thread. Some have even contributed.

I can expect strong disagreement from the same DU members,most threads I jump into.
Thats okay. Its discourse. Points are made. Thats what we're here for.

BUT .....
its ONLY when I'm disagreeing with the Obama administration's stance on GBLT issues, that I'm accused of being a pouter, a whiner , having a "pet" issue.
The word,"whine", and, "whiner" comes up every damn time.
Its usually accompanied by this awful emoticon ::nopity:

Yeah. This one. I HATE IT. :nopity::nopity::nopity::nopity::nopity:
To generate this emoticon you need to type "nopity"

I guess I should be grateful that the President's DU Support Team doe'snt respond to the subject of joblessness and poverty with the 'nopity' emoticon, and the belittling charges of "whining".

These are saved specially for the gays.
Thanks.
:nopity::nopity::nopity:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zenlitened Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #1608
1612. Also the terms "poutrage" and "didn't get a pony."
These insults were spun up and deployed over and over again against anyone who dared to express sympathy for LGBTI rights in a way that might even imply criticism of Pres. Obama on matters of concern to the community.

That these terms gained currency at all on DU is testament to just how hostile the climate was allowed to become, driven primarily by a core group of Cheerleaders-in-Jackboots who made it their mission to stamp out any and all discussion they didn't deem sufficiently enthusiastic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #1612
1613. +1
The same hostile takeover happened all over the progressive blogosphere: the same sudden influx of aggressive cheerleaders storming in and dispensing the same trite insults, high-fiving one another all over the place, etc.

Amazing coincidence, isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zenlitened Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #1613
1614. "Hostile takeover." That describes it PERFECTLY.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #1614
1617. It certainly felt hostile.
Thank you for your concern!

I guess you didn't get your pony!

Your concern is noted!

ad nauseum
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CrossChris Donating Member (641 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #1613
1729. Alll around April of '09, when Rahm's Message Discipline team was formed.
I noticed it, too, as a lurker.

The Dennis Kucinich smears were the first to stick out like a sore thumb. Then Hamsher, Greenwald, Michael Moore, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #1729
1732. Yep.
But we're supposed to think that it's purely coincidental when the same crew bashes the same person at the same time in the same terms. Posts point out the obvious coordination are swiftly deleted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #1612
1701. Eh. I'm a vet of the Palestine/Israel forum and I call those insults BREAKFAST.
People who dismiss and belittle the real emotions and feelings of others bring out the raptor in me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullwinkle428 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #1573
1711. Remember how long it took paulsby and his other little buddy/sock-puppet
to get tomb-stoned? It had to be literally close to a fucking year! I know I alerted on that jagoff on multiple occasions, for one particular reason. When he disagreed with particular posters (which happened far too often), he went to incredibly rude and insulting personal attacks in an effort to defend his own position.

I was gob-smacked at how long this was allowed to continue at DU. Were the mods asleep at the switch, or was someone actively working to protect him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #1711
1713. There have been many people about whom you could ask the same question.
Some finally got banned, but others are still around and still attacking anything that moves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Newsjock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
1585. Oh well, 'Day Without A Gay' got locked while I was replying
And I lost the reply, and I'm not going to bother trying to reconstruct it. But I wanted to acknowledge here the many thoughtful responses (and the many less-than-thoughtful responses), and my hope that if nothing else, this whole sordid affair at least has folks thinking about what it really means to support LGBT equality.

Peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Very_Boring_Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 04:54 AM
Response to Original message
1595. Some good background on the "gay purge" and anti-gay mod bias for anyone interested
Edited on Sat Jun-18-11 04:54 AM by Very_Boring_Name
http://news.lavenderliberal.com/2009/05/04/democratic-undergrounds-night-of-the-long-knives-the-gay-purge-begins/

That is a summary of the "gay purge". A blog post on examples of mod bias by homophobic mod Rasputin (there's been some discussion about him up above) in the following article, aswell:

http://rantingsofanamericansocialist.blogspot.com/2009/05/interesting-happenings-at-message-board.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oberliner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 05:25 AM
Response to Original message
1596. You should start one of these for the Israeli-Palestinian discussion
I think some of what you described here would be applicable there as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Violet_Crumble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #1596
1619. I'm not sure if it'd be any more successful than this thread has been...
Edited on Sun Jun-19-11 12:42 AM by Violet_Crumble
I'm not sure how successful this thread has been. I haven't read all of it, but some things I read aimed at LGBT DUers are disturbing, and I'm also equally disturbed at the point in the thread where one mod's being accused of homophobia, but when asked for examples of why they'd think that about the mod, come up empty handed and get really nasty. I think that level of stuff would just drown out the good faith stuff if Skinner started one for the I/P discussions. I could be wrong, but I suspect it wouldn't turn out well at all..

on edit - fixed up shonky grammar...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 08:48 AM
Response to Original message
1603. This thread is too hard to read for those of us with older computers.
I wish it were possible to bring up one subthread at a time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-18-11 02:10 PM
Response to Original message
1610. There is an expression I'm going to garble, s.th. like, "Hundreds of people can't ALL be wrong."
When hundreds of people here have stated that some of the mods and board here are homophobic, then some of the mods and board are indeed homophobic.

I realize they are volunteers, but that's not our problem. The truth is the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dipsydoodle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 05:04 AM
Response to Reply #1610
1625. "hundreds" of people here
have not stated that some of the mods and board here are homophobic.

Its more so bland indifference which is prevailing given 172,256 user registrations on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
closeupready Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #1625
1627. I put you on ignore for a reason. I'd forgotten why, but now I remember.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Safetykitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 01:05 AM
Response to Original message
1621. There is a move afoot to make sure we as gays know that we and only we will be responsible
for choices and outcomes this election. Some postings elsewhere are right in the face about it.

It's like this thread has made certain people more brazen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 02:09 AM
Response to Original message
1623. So Segami posts an article about gays being a "special interest group" who wants "special treatment"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1325383&mesg_id=1325383

Very helpful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 02:12 AM
Response to Reply #1623
1624. He's just being pragmatic and sensible, that's all.
To say nothing of bold and serious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Philosopher Donating Member (621 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 01:26 PM
Response to Original message
1629. If a member of a hate group...
came here and posted racist messages, would the person be banned and the thread deleted? Would it be locked? Or would the mods decide to do nothing because one mod said there was no problem and leave the thread open and the poster alone?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #1629
1630. I'm afraid your question does not quite qualify as ''hypothetical''. -nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 08:40 PM
Response to Original message
1632. I had promised that I was taking a hiatus, but....
...having heard that there were finally some answers (although none to me) in ATA, I decided to poke my head back in. I'll return to my temporary exile shortly.

Referring to EarlG's answer to Vanje: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=437&topic_id=3280&mesg_id=3304

You mean will we be firing any other moderators?

We have no plans to do that at this time.


So our answer is, nothing will change.

Can I give my star back?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ohheckyeah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 03:37 AM
Response to Reply #1632
1692. I'm going to reply here because I'm
too lazy to scroll all the way back up to the top to reply to the OP. Hope you don't mind.

I think a terrible injustice was done by de-modding Heddi. I understand there is a non-disclosure agreement BUT there is a more important principle at work in this situation. Screwing with anyone's perception by declaring something to not be happening that is happening is cruel. It's one of the cruelest things you can do to a person or in this case a group of people. As someone said up thread they were appreciative of Heddi's admission because now they know they are not crazy to believe that something wrong was going on.

I grew up in an alcoholic home and one of the most damaging behaviors was telling us kids that nothing was wrong or that dad had the flu when he was in fact drunk....we learned to distrust our own perceptions. I'm so very sorry that anyone had to wonder about their perceptions and I'm glad they had their suspicions confirmed.

Thank you Heddi and in this instance I say to hell with the non-disclosure agreement.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FloridaJudy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 04:56 AM
Response to Reply #1692
1693. Thank you! eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 02:23 AM
Response to Original message
1691. There has to be a SUMMATION of what homosexuals think they NEED from DU ....
Edited on Mon Jun-20-11 02:23 AM by defendandprotect
Imo, it's more MODS -- MODS who are pro-human rights -- pro-equal rights --

because females have the same problems here when feminism comes up --

bullying --

On all human rights issues more MOD watchers --

Also any question of any biased MODS has to be responded to --

and I think if we are all members of the DU community then we all need input

into rule making -- and MOD considerations --

No MOD should repeat --

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 07:08 AM
Response to Reply #1691
1694. Simple answer fair parents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #1694
1695. Well ...
there's no answer without challenging the MODS -- and increasing the MODS --

if there are biased MODS who have been aiding attacks on the homosexual community

here then they should never repeat their service.

And certainly this overlaps as well with feminism here -- and the bullying that

connects these two issues.

Anyone concerned with female rights who has done a bit of time traveling these

boards knows that --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #1691
1698. Lots of people have "the same problems here"
Not just feminists or women. Christians. Jews. Believers in general. Southerners and Texans sometimes complain about it. And others.

And the moderation of some of those topics is uneven too. The funny thing is that there are people on the correct side of this issue in this thread who are on the wrong side of the issue in religious threads and they don't see the hypocrisy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #1698
1705. Being female or homosexual isn't a choice -- adopting male-supremacist religion is ....
and while Southern's may complain so might those from NJ -- whatever --

Texas is under Bush control which has brought on a lot of the poor feelings.

Religion is a personal choice -- No comparison to being female or being GLBT

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #1691
1699. Why shouldn't a mod repeat?
We have enough problems getting mods as it is. It's a volunteer position and not everybody has the time, skillset or inclination. I'm posting from work during my coffee break. It takes time for a mod to get good at the job. Why waste this expertise?

Moderation is by consensus. No member acts alone or they're in shit with Admin and whatever was done is un-done (if possible). It is the nature of the software that you only get to see the username of the mod who actually did the work, not who was involved in the decision making. If there was individual moderator bias, we'd end up dead-locked and nothing would get done one way or the other.

Incidentally, what is a "MOD watcher"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #1699
1706. "Because familiarity breeds contempt ... "
Edited on Mon Jun-20-11 10:27 PM by defendandprotect
And because i think it possible that the power can go to their heads --

Especially because it can be authoritarian types who self-select for the MOD positions --


And because we allegedly have tens of thousands of posters here at any given time --

perhaps we should have more MODS serving shorter hours?

Because MODS don't act alone doesn't relieve us of the responsibility to question them --

AS ANOTHER MOD HAS ACTUALLY DONE IN THIS THREAD AND BEEN RELEASED FOR TRYING TO EXPLAIN

TO US WHAT HAPPENS AND HOW BIAS CAN BE INTRODUCED ---

I admire that kind of whistelblowing -- otherwise we might all sit around feeling a bit

overconfident at administration's assurances -- !!

Also I think the homosexual community here should register their complaints against the

list of MODS they feel are prejudiced -- and that the administrators should consider

limiting their terms --

Questions about MOD biases have been raised -- we can't ignore them --

What's your suggestion?



Also see the post below this one re the administration letting the MOD --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #1699
1722. Answer.
There is not a reason in the world why a moderator should not serve repeat terms. However there are a dozen reasons why a moderator should not be a permanent fixture in that forum. As as far as "expertise" is concerned. Sorry but it ain't rocket science.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
1703. I've tried to write this several times, but writing isn't
my strength. So, here it goes:


What the hell did you think this thread was going to accomplish? And what did firing Heddi mid-term accomplish? So, mods can come in & state that everything is Rah Rah Rah in the mod forum & one mod begs to differ & is given the boot? I know there's a confidentiality agreement. Is it ignored if a mod posts that everything is done to the letter, but to anyone who disagrees then the confidentiality agreement is waved in their face? Hed didn't name names, she just pointed out that the 'consensus' part can be BS. I guess I can't point out the number of times either consensus was ignored or consensus was reached so fast via PM to spin one's head because that would be a violation even if I name no names or list no threads or give no dates.

As far as homophobia, no, I can't remember seeing any outright homophobia. Well, there was one mod who was later banned, but the homophobia didn't show up during their short term. (Did I violate the confidentiality agreement?) I have seen outright dismissal of concerns. (Violation?) And I would bet this month's poker money on some of the comments in the mod forum. "Tedious", "Tiresome", "I can't be bothered", "They don't understand how it works". (Violation? I'm not a mod and haven't been so I'm just taking an educated guess here.)

There was a time when mods weren't automatically reinstated. (Violation?) What is wrong with that approach now? It seemed to work fine before. Once there were enough screw ups then the mod wasn't chosen again. (Violation?)

I also remember Padraig/Cuban. I wasn't a mod then or for long after so this cannot be a violation. Anyhow, many members insisted that they were the same person & you guys refused to acknowledge it until there was irrefutable evidence. If enough members tell you there's a problem shouldn't you give it some credence? I know, DU3 is going to solve all ills, but that's like watching part of the house burn down & say that it doesn't matter because the next house will be fireproof. I got news, nothing is fireproof. Nothing is ideal. Nothing that I can possibly dream up is going to cure all ills.

I'll never mod again after the crap that came down my last term. I don't donate & I rarely, rarely, rarely log on. So, like Brigadoon, I'll go back to sleep for 100 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #1703
1708. Interesting --
Just wanted to let you know someone read your post --

Anyone here who doesn't think that biases work their way thru needs their

BS meter turned waaay up --

That's why I think that there should be more limited hours -- more MODS and

more respect here for the GLBT community and their concerns, especially re

MODS they feel have been biased. And no one repeating in a MOD position.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Heidi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #1703
1710. That was my experience during my -- what six? seven? -- mod terms.
I'd probably help the Admins however I could if I were convinced a) They truly wanted this to be a liberal community; and B) They were interested in what liberals thought. But, as much as I like the three of them, I've had no indication they're interested. So I'm far from convinced. (Sorry, guys, but that's where I am.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 08:53 PM
Response to Reply #1710
1726. it's exactly how it looks to many of us long timers --we see the priorities
we see that a moderator says that there is bias, without naming names, as we all suspected.

the admins act within minutes to revoke her moderator status.

meanwhile, it took 2 years and countless tombstonings and departures for us to even be allowed to even *talk* about the problems and reasons associated with the flight of most of the longtime GLBT community here.

what took two years? what took less than two hours?

what's the higher priority? getting it right, or keeping whatever happened a secret?

we all know NOW. before Heddi was demoted, we may not have been 100% sure, now we are.

and as for secrecy, there are exceptions to the policy. AND HOW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Call Me Wesley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #1703
1712. That's my experience as well.
:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
1709. K/R -- Part II?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Call Me Wesley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #1709
1720. I wish.
I can load the whole thing, but I've seen that people can't on older computers or with dial-up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #1720
1724. Exactly ... at 1/3rd of the thread it was too unweildly for most posters to keep up with ...!!
And I'm sure that kept a lot of opinions from being reflected here -- !!

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Danger Mouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
1714. Just going to say a few things here...
First of all, I understand that a lot of people have concerns about the job the moderators are doing. That much is clear. If I've ever done wrong by DU as a community, I'd expect to be called on the carpet for it, by the members and the administrators. I have always done my best to do the right thing even when the right thing isn't always a bright line.

As a human being, certain issues are more important to me than others. I think some of you recognize that I am pretty pissed off about Barack Obama's education policies. I'm sure some of you saw my participation in the mending fences thread last term and probably can get an inkling of where I stand on those issues. I know what is important to me, and I try to keep it in mind even as I try to avoid having it sway me too heavily. I'm a religious guy, and when religious issues pop in alerts, I don't always keep my head. That's when mods with a different perspective can balance me out and give me another way of looking at things.

That's why I value my fellow mods. Everybody brings something to the table. I'm going to be perfectly clear: there is room for improvement. There is ALWAYS room for improvement. And you know what would be a big improvement? More moderators. New moderators. Fresh perspectives. Seriously, volunteer for a term in the mod forum. There's a lot of people here that would make fantastic mods that have probably never even considered it. We are constantly shorthanded, and we don't get enough volunteers each term. You don't have to be a big time Obama supporter, either. All perspectives and outlooks are welcome in the MF. I'm a fairly outspoken critic of Obama myself, and I'm a mod. :hi:

(Seriously, volunteer next term, we need people!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #1714
1716. I was told to wake up & wade into this one more time, so
here I am. :sigh:

Bullshit. I'm sorry, but it's bullshit. You know we butted heads in the beginning then kissed & made up & I still like you, but you're wrong. I can think of several members that have applied several times, never to be picked. The guys have the same 'go to' group that they pull from every.single.term. I also know two mods who took off a term, never to be taken back. I have no idea what they did. And without breaking this confidentiality agreement then I can't even speculate - not that my private speculations have come to any conclusions. I find it almost impossible to believe that either mod created as much drama as some of the current crop that the complaints are about.

The mods you see are the mods you get. There will not be any new ones nor any removals other than Hed. I guess the confidentiality agreement is the be all and end all of what is important. And DU3 is going to solve all. Until then, everyone can just suck it up & either participate or move on or wait for ..........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemeupwhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #1716
1717. Oh, ignore this. According to EarlG in the ATA forum, I just
have a personal beef. I guess all former mods in this thread just have a 'personal beef'.

Uhm.............
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #1717
1721. LOL as Harvey Fierstein would say
"Now that's a kick in the rubber parts." Wow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #1714
1719. How do new mods have a chance when the same ones reup
term after term after term after term after term...you get the idea. Perma mods. I don't feel as if I'm breaking any confidence here as I've always been clear with my feelings about this. If you spend years in the moderator forum you cannot, repeat CANNOT have a decent perspective about what happens out on the boards.

Moderating is like shoveling shit. And even the best of us become biased and jaded when we shovel shit day after day. I know, Ive been there and done it.

Like Heidi, I like Skinner and Earlg. They have always been good to me. But on this one they are misguided. I know a member that applied for this term because she said she was going to in the "We Need New Mods" thread. But no, not chosen. And while opinionated she would have done well. Until there is some fresh air in that forum, I don't see any chance of a change for the better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Danger Mouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #1719
1725. From what I understand, there were very few applicants this term.
In theory, I support term limits for moderators...just to keep the blood circulating, so to speak. Unfortunately, I don't think we have a large enough crop of possible mods to implement something like that.

In any case, it's a moot point now because DU3 is on the horizon. At the very least, it'll change our broken system of moderating, but beyond that, I have no idea what the future holds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #1725
1728. Some of us
got tired of being turned down, only to have a couple (definitely in the minority, and this is in NO WAY pointed at nor in reference to you) of the same ones chosen to serve time and again.

Yeah, to be honest, I never expected I'd get picked as I'm a little too "outspoken" on certain issues but I'd be a hell of a lot better than a couple of the biased assholes ruining this place. Yeah, I said it. Worst part of it is, DU isn't a vacuum. It gets talked about "elsewhere" on the internet. When one can readily read that so and so has a mole who is/was a mod on DU, or that such and such mod is a laughing stock for doing this or that, one loses a bit of trust when the actions of one or more back that up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ohheckyeah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
1718. This discussion
has really opened my eyes to those who post just to be condescending, provocative and insulting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
1723. I miss so much.
I mostly hang in the lounge so I miss a lot of the subtle shit that people here are speaking about. I know what I saw in there during the dust up last year was pretty convoluted and hard to discern and I do understand some of it originated in the "purge" but I want to say that whatever went on there in terms of "sides" I have always been and will always be pro-equality, pro-transparency, pro-inclusion, and pro-accountability.

Finding and seeing patterns of bias can be VERY hard to prove so I can understand the administration's inability, on the other hand arbitrarily punishing someone who tries to provide a little transparency while not addressing the actual points they brought up leaves a real sour taste in my mouth.

I am looking forward to seeing how DU3 will manage these issues. Good luck.

Oh and I vote for locking and starting a second thread on this if you are going to continue - I can barely load the permalink version and then have to click every single post I want to read (and I read most of them)

I wouldn't complain but I know there are at least afew more poor souls like myself still stuck on dial up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TriMera Donating Member (885 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-11 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
1731. So, we have over 1700 responses and now the thread is
Edited on Wed Jun-22-11 02:09 PM by TriMera
too cumbersome to wade through. The folks that have been the major instigators and that are responsible for most of the gay baiting on this site have stayed away. I'm not sure why that is, they seem to be bulletproof anyway. This thread will die and, as was the case with the one in GLBT, nothing will change. I debated signing off on this thread with the same condescending "Good luck" that Skinner put at the end of the OP, but honestly, luck's got nothing to do with it.

Edited to replace to with too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 07:00 AM
Response to Original message
1733. Kick
in hopes that those most responsible for this thread being necessary might drop by and pay a visit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
William769 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 08:42 AM
Response to Reply #1733
1735. Don't hold your breath.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #1735
1737. Hope springs eternal....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TriMera Donating Member (885 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-11 05:29 PM
Response to Original message
1736. Kick. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
1739. Kick
...for this encyclopedia. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ieoeja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
1740. I stopped posting in GLBT threads because
There they become dominated by mean-spirited posters. Out of 1755 thread posts, we have....

Posts Poster
76 Pab Sungenis
68 QC
63 defendandprotect
47 Marrah_G
41 uppityperson
40 justiceischeap
38 William769
38 MrScorpio
36 CakeGrrl
32 Vanje
30 MuseRider
30 mistertrickster
29 Pacifist Patriot
25 xchrom
23 Renew Deal
22 boppers
21 BklnDem75
21 tishaLA
21 TrogL
20 Very_Boring_Name
20 MineralMan
19 Maven
19 lumberjack_jeff
19 Puglover
19 ScreamingMeemie
19 fishwax
18 el_bryanto
18 tekisui
17 Bluenorthwest
17 Joe the Revelator
16 Mimosa
15 Bluebear
15 Zorra
14 CreekDog
13 Call Me Wesley
13 LeftyMom
12 Ohio Joe
11 mopinko
11 Safetykitten
11 Commie Pinko Dirtbag
11 Ignis
11 Whisp
10 flvegan
10 Dappleganger
10 Shagbark Hickory
10 Luminous Animal
10 Prism
10 myrna minx
9 Nye Bevan
9 snooper2
9 thanks_imjustlurking
9 Chovexani
9 JanMichael
9 ZombieHorde
8 Ikonoklast
8 closeupready
8 The Straight Story
8 texshelters
8 Unvanguard
7 Wetzelbill
7 scheming daemons
7 seabeyond
7 ruggerson
7 notesdev
7 boston bean
7 Creideiki
7 jefferson_dem
7 LanternWaste
7 Evoman
7 Gregorian
6 Hassin Bin Sober
6 DURHAM D
6 Bunny
6 Aerows
6 stevenleser
6 Stevenmarc
6 TriMera
6 Zenlitened
5 WhollyHeretic
5 mitchtv
5 MNBrewer
5 muriel_volestrangler
5 Missy Vixen
5 Behind the Aegis
5 Doctor Hurt
5 dotymed
5 Cronus Protagonist
5 FreeState
5 JNelson6563
4 Jamastiene
4 Jefferson23
4 jberryhill
4 LaurenG
4 fascisthunter
4 Fearless
4 Heddi
4 Hippo_Tron
4 Hosnon
4 CabalPowered
4 bullwinkle428
4 Marcel
4 LiberalAndProud
4 ohheckyeah
4 phleshdef
4 Tripod
3 TransitJohn
3 wakemeupwhenitsover
3 WilliamPitt
3 Starry Messenger
3 RandomKoolzip
3 philly_bob
3 pinto
3 Occulus
3 nichomachus
3 lightningandsnow
3 Lil Missy
3 Lorien
3 madinmaryland
3 McCamy Taylor
3 chervilant
3 blue_onyx
3 Bobbie Jo
3 BillStein
3 Duncan Grant
3 ej510
3 Heidi
3 H2O Man
3 gkhouston
3 GodlessBiker
3 Gormy Cuss
3 eridani
3 lazarus
3 Kaleva
2 Le Taz Hot
2 juxtaposed
2 harun
2 JackBeck
2 FloridaJudy
2 Festivito
2 great white snark
2 handmade34
2 Hell Hath No Fury
2 dsc
2 Divine Discontent
2 Corruption Winz
2 customerserviceguy
2 City of Mills
2 Danger Mouse
2 Blasphemer
2 auntAgonist
2 awoke_in_2003
2 BeFree
2 Bragi
2 carolinayellowdog
2 mvd
2 Lyric
2 Lars39
2 NNN0LHI
2 NuttyFluffers
2 onehandle
2 readmoreoften
2 Still Sensible
2 shireen
2 slackmaster
2 Strong Atheist
2 suffragette
2 supernova
2 TaupeDem
2 Taverner
2 TBF
2 Vattel
2 WillParkinson
2 Snoutport
2 woo me with science
2 xmas74
2 yardwork
1 yawnmaster
1 yodermon
1 Zen Democrat
1 SoCalDem
1 The Traveler
1 Tikki
1 The Green Manalishi
1 The Philosopher
1 treestar
1 TK421
1 tomfodw
1 Tuesday Afternoon
1 Tx4obama
1 WonderGrunion
1 Warren DeMontague
1 WCGreen
1 whatchamacallit
1 Violet_Crumble
1 w8liftinglady
1 urbuddha
1 TCJ70
1 tammywammy
1 smokey nj
1 Stinky The Clown
1 Recursion
1 semillama
1 Quantess
1 Ramulux
1 RetroLounge
1 rhett o rick
1 Rowdyboy
1 NYC_SKP
1 oberliner
1 Octafish
1 Number23
1 namahage
1 Name removed
1 Newsjock
1 pipi_k
1 Pisces
1 ProgressIn2008
1 ProgressiveProfessor
1 Proud Liberal Dem
1 OhioBlue
1 Omaha Steve
1 OmmmSweetOmmm
1 Pale Blue Dot
1 patrice
1 Peacetrain
1 personna au gratin
1 Lex
1 Loki
1 Lone_Star_Dem
1 Macoy
1 MadHound
1 Maine-ah
1 Major Hogwash
1 malaise
1 mwooldri
1 murielm99
1 Morning Dew
1 MerryBlooms
1 mikelgb
1 markpkessinger
1 marlakay
1 Chemisse
1 cheneyschernobyl
1 Codeine
1 christx30
1 A-Schwarzenegger
1 Beam Me Up
1 aikoaiko
1 Amaril
1 apples and oranges
1 aquart
1 Arkansas Granny
1 Blue-Jay
1 BlueIris
1 bluestateguy
1 deacon_sephiroth
1 delunapark
1 demmiblue
1 democrank
1 Dept of Beer
1 DeSwiss
1 dipsydoodle
1 DainBramaged
1 CrossChris
1 divvy
1 dmr
1 do me baby
1 Dogtown
1 elleng
1 enigmatic
1 Dutchmaster
1 economistman
1 EFerrari
1 hifiguy
1 Iggo
1 Hissyspit
1 hootinholler
1 Harmony Blue
1 hamsterjill
1 FLPanhandle
1 etherealtruth
1 From The Ashes
1 G_j
1 galileoreloaded
1 gaspee
1 Generic Brad
1 girl gone mad
1 Indykatie
1 Initech
1 JoePhilly
1 joshguitar
1 jumptheshadow
1 justabob
1 JVS
1 lapislzi
1 LeftishBrit
1 leftistboy
1 Kali
1 kentauros
1 kentuck
1 KittyWampus
1 kiva
1 Kurovski
1 Lance_Boyle
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-24-11 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #1740
1741. Heck let's make my post count here an even 20.
:hi: You put a heck of alot of work into your list. Did you draw any conclusions from it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Philosopher Donating Member (621 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #1740
1742. Er, what?
I'm mean-spirited? What are you referring to?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #1740
1743. Are you calling me "mean spirited"? What conclusions do you draw from your list
It seems you are saying those of us who have posted many times are "mean spirited". Is this right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #1743
1744. What is most noteworthy about that list is the names missing from it. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 08:22 PM
Response to Reply #1744
1745. Yup
Now was this a post listing the most mean spirited and our count? I posted on this thread 30 times so I have a big mouth AND I am mean spirited? Looking at your numbers QC I can see why I like you so much!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #1745
1746. you and me. Fine, I snark but don't see you as mean spirited. QC was left off?
Awwwww. I'll agree "name removed" should be on the list though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #1746
1747. QC was #2, lol.
I have been trying not to be too snarky but I have had some moments that I am not proud of.

I don't really think you snark either, at least not a lot.

This is amusing to me. I mean really, if anyone has a reason to snark or be mean it would be the victims of the bullying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #1747
1751. ah, missed that. Well, looks like quite a club and indeed, those who are "mean spirited" are most
likely really frustrated with the bullying and inequality crap. Oh crap, this will up my number again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 09:36 PM
Response to Reply #1746
1748. Goodness no! I am one of the most mean-spirited of all,
according to this statistical analysis.

Interestingly, the people who spend most of their DU time antagonizing DU's LGBT community are not at all mean-spirited, since they carefully avoided this thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #1745
1750. It's you and me babe, the meanest of the mean.
Edited on Sun Jun-26-11 09:40 PM by QC
As for those people who do little to nothing besides attack LGBT people, well, they are just sweet as pie, aren't they?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MuseRider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:33 PM
Response to Reply #1750
1754. Shoulder to shoulder
we will lurk the dusty halls of the DU making mean and nasty comments to all who dare to not agree with us.

OK, seriously. I am pretty stunned by this "list" and the very fact that anyone who has spent any time at all here does not know why things get bitter and, well I would not say mean since I see the mean coming from elsewhere. What seems I guess to others as mean seems only to me as hurt as hell and angry about how others could be so callous and dismissive.

But that is just me........

Get on with your mean self, I will stand with you cause I don't think you are mean.

OK, just hijacked the thread (sorry Skinner). The cause, solidarity. Dan Choi has me fired up :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 09:38 PM
Response to Reply #1744
1749. who?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalAndProud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #1740
1752. Oh, I get it, it's a list!
:rofl:
I'm thrilled to be on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Philosopher Donating Member (621 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #1752
1756. I hope it isn't a hit list
Considering the way things seem to go around here.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreeState Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-26-11 11:53 PM
Response to Reply #1740
1755. Imagine that! Gay posters post the most in a thread about how shitty they are treated on DU
And get called out for it. How dare they - they should just shut up and do as they are told. Really the nerve.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-27-11 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
1757. People change.
I have changed my own opinion since I have been posting on DU. Once upon a time I thought marriage equality (formerly called gay marriage) was a negative for the Democratic Party. I have changed my opinion over the years. Now, I think it is the right thing to do. It is the constitutional thing to do. Also, I think it is a positive for the Party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Electric Monk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 11:40 PM
Response to Original message
1758. kick nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TriMera Donating Member (885 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 11:45 PM
Response to Original message
1759. Maybe the continuation of this thread should be started in GDP.
After all, that's where most of the problems crop up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 11:24 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC