How big is our tent here?

[hootinholler]

I'm asking about here on DU, let me explain.

For someone who lives on the edges of what people would call freaky, I'm sure more than a few here would call it deviant to use an archaic term, but what of say furries, or ponys along with other things like a pet-master on out to things with a high squee factor, oh that's not the good squee, more like nails on a chalkboard squee. Oh shit there I go showing my age again.

The thing is that I have more than a few friends in this community and I find some of the things being stated about gender roles in terms of absolutes shocking. I'm a little surprised, but it seems to be where my emotional reaction to the gender threads is based.

I think we could be a little better at acknowledging that spectrum by not being so black and white as we discuss things and leave some room for us freaks.

[geek tragedy]

1. TMI nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

30. He decided to share with us personal info

Whether we wanted to hear it or not which is fine, I guess. He wants a discussion. He is getting one. It is all good until it isn't ....

[1000words]

2. It's not the tent

It's the clowns

[liberal_at_heart]

3. I say let your freak flag fly baby.

My husband has a strong sex drive and he likes to experiment sometimes. I am a little more reserved and don't have as strong a sex drive as he does, but we have a trusting and respectful relationship so sometimes we do experiment. If I don't want to do something he is always okay with it. My daughter also is very open about her sexuality. She has a strong sex drive and likes to explore her sexuality with her boyfriend. I'm sure that makes him a happy fellow. Having a spouse and a daughter with different sexual preferences than I do has taught me to be more tolerant. I agree with you and frankly I find it a little surprising that some on DU expect such sexual purity of others. I thought that was what the conservatives did, not liberals. Sure liberals are suppose to promote respect for women as individuals and not just sexual objects, but that does not mean we have to stop being sexual. Being sexual is part of who we are. It is not all of who we are but it is part of who we are. We should not have to completely deny that part of ourselves. Some on DU are not as tolerant of differences as they claim to be.

[PasadenaTrudy]

5. Some of us

are asexual, too, and don't feel that being sexual is part of who we are...

[liberal_at_heart]

9. very good point. I do not have a strong sex drive, but I still consider

being sexual part of who I am because I enjoy the closeness of being intimate with my husband. If you don't consider yourself sexual at all that is okay too. What's not okay is to try and tell others they are not allowed to be sexual which I see some on DU try to do to others.

[bettyellen]

4. Tent or Dutch oven?

[hootinholler]

7. Whichever you prefer

Far be it for me to judge.

[Jesus Malverde]

6. Thank You...

From another freak.

[hootinholler]

8. Thank you!

Especially since the first reply was TMI.

Won't someone think of the Ponies?

[Drew Richards]

10. And which one Is you again? Im the one in the middle....

[hootinholler]

11. I would be Phat Phreddy

But that's not exactly the freak I was referring to.

[Drew Richards]

12. WOOT! I know but thank you for playing along :)

[one_voice]

13. I agree with what was said upthread...

Let your freak flag fly!

Happiness is so hard to find. I say if you find something that makes you happy hold on tight and to hell with what other people say/think.

[WillyT]

14. Hope It Applies... It Involves Tribalism... And A Way To Divide Us... But My Attitude Is...

There is only one race

The Human Race

We invite the rest of you to join us.





& Rec !!!

[Warren DeMontague]

15. If everyone's a consenting adult, it's your business, not mine.

but then, I'm supposedly a poopy-headed libertarian who doesn't care enough to tell other people how to run their personal shit, which is what REAL progressivism is all about, dammit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Tuesday Afternoon]

16. Define your own dignity and, live your life accordingly.

Respect the fact that DU3 is a public internet space and, not everyone wants your dignity shoved in their dignity.

Good fences make good neighbors.

DU3 is not your bedroom. It is a political message board and, I think for the most part we are here to discuss politics and, how to get more Democrats elected to office.

There are plenty of forums/groups in this large tent.

I am sure we can direct you to ponies down the hall to the left and, furries are downstairs in the basement keeping Grovelbot company.

[hootinholler]

21. Ah but this post isn't about my bedroom

Nor is DU my bedroom.

It's about the hostile environment created when there is no room for consensual objectification.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

23. What part of create your own dignity did you Not understand ?

[hootinholler]

25. The part where it's ok for others

To shove their dignity (as you put it) in mine but it's not ok for me to do the same, even though I don't do that very often at all.

Especially when the claims are made that even consensual objectification is always wrong, that there is something wrong with the person being objectified and that they need to be educated.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

28. Implied consent in your reply below.

And that is where the discussion is. Yes. Interesting. Room for many opinions.

[Kablooie]

17. As long as you don't want to be served tea it's all good.

[PowerToThePeople]

18. too big imo.

Oh, I thought we were discussing third way politics.

I could not care less what someone else does in their personal life.

[Egalitarian Thug]

19. It's escaped your notice, but tolerance for anything, except Riech-Wing nuttery of course,

is thin on the ground around here. You can be a racist, misogynist, bigoted, conservative asshole all you like, but seeing inequity and injustice is just wrong.

Parasites are good. Authoritarianism is good, Everything else that doesn't fit, not so much...

[jeff47]

20. It's about consent.

The thing is that I have more than a few friends in this community and I find some of the things being stated about gender roles in terms of absolutes shocking.

It's about consent.

If an adult consents to being abused, unusual sex acts, or following "Leave it to Beaver" gender roles, they are free to do so.

But that doesn't mean those things can be applied to everyone. Because not everyone consents.

In other words, objectifying a woman who wants to be objectified as her personal kink is fine. Objectifying all women is not. Because not all of them consent to that. And doing so in a public space (like DU) is objectifying all women.

[hootinholler]

22. I agree it's about consent, it's always about consent

The problem isn't when strangers are objectified, that's clearly wrong. It's when others do not account for consent at all.

Isn't there implied consent to be objectified given by a model when they pose for a photo shoot? That seems to be lost in the discussions here.

[jeff47]

27. You aren't just objectifying the model.

If it's just you looking at the picture, it's effectively you and the model. Everyone's consenting.

If you post a thread on DU, it's not just you and the model. It's you, the model, and everyone else on the board. Not everyone has consented to that objectification. And the objectification "spreads" onto other women who did not consent.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

29. +1

[hootinholler]

33. I'll have to think about the notion of spreading objectivism by proxy

I really don't have time to work through it this afternoon, but I will get back to you, I hadn't considered that before and I'm not sure I buy into it. At first glance it seems to be more of an I don't want to see you objectify rather than spreading it, eh? I'm not sure I see how it objectifies anyone other than the model. I can see how someone would think they might become a subject of objectification by the people who post such things.

Kind of like when a pony is pulling a sulky in public, or my pet is wearing her collar in public without tag covers.

[jeff47]

34. "Spread" is probably not quite the right word.

In that it's not literally objectifying the other women, but that the other women are being forced to participate in objectifying the model.

[snooper2]

24. Well, if we are all in the tent together, I'm sure SOMEBODY

would start complaining that they are allergic to dander

[L0oniX]

26. I'm sure unionists and corporatists can get along....

in some other universe.

[wocaonimabi]

31. As long as one is not a Pub or support Pub policies I say let your freak flag fly.

If you are a Pub or Support Pub policies be a Pub or something else.

[RC]

32. It is like those religious nuts in Kansas that think their religions freedom is being infringe by

allowing same sex marriages. Eh, no, it ain't. It is doubtful the same sex couples they are objecting to, belong to their church, anyway.

Well, the same thing is going on in DU, only it is not religion and not same sex marriages that is the problem. It is a Group of self-described "feminists" trying to decide for the rest of us what is and what is not objectionable. And they want to dictate to the rest of DU their way of thinking.
Well, some of us, of both genders, have a problem with that, just as most of us have a problem with religious people dictating their religious views as law, in the real world.
This is supposedly a Democratic, Liberal, Progressive web site and we should not tolerate some group or other trying to dictate to the rest of us what they think is and what is not allowed. Why should we be tolerant of being dictating to by fellow members? This is after all, a discussion board. There should be room for both, no matter how wrong one side may or can be.
They want tolerance from the rest of us for their views, but they object and have little or no tolerance, when we post something differing from their views.
That just seems so wrong for a Democratic Underground web site, to be so strongly dictated to by fellow members.

[bunnies]

35. I have a friend who liked to wear a collar and leash to a certain bar.

I had no problem holding the other end.