Could we please have a gender wars forum with rules similar to Israel/Palestine or the gungeon?
Please?
= new reply since forum marked as read
It would be a way to get rid of the multiple threads and battling groups who tend to "carpet bomb" general discussion with this topic. Because these threads take on a life of their own, and generate counter-threads, and in turn more counters, etc.
A forum devoted to it would be popular for the popcorn value alone! 
Have GD be just as open to gun discussions as well (note title of OP). Both topics opened in just the same way, no distorted SOPs, no policy hidden agenda, no censorship. If you wish to ban the "C word," fine; I'd ban the penis metaphor (which should eliminate half of the "debate"
.
What do you think?
however, you have stated something that I have repeatedly seen in these various threads that I do wish to challenge and get answers for.
First, the original Swimsuit Issue thread was started by a woman, yes, a woman. Are you and others in your outrage disparaging her bisexuality or agency to also be attracted to women? The photo in question was not pornographic nor was it particularly provocative.
Second, while it may have been more prudent to post the Swimsuit Issue thread in the Lounge with the weekly LOL Cats threads instead of General Discussion but how is this any different that numerous GD threads between 2008 and 2011 and perhaps even more recent (use Google yourself) that waxed poetic about a 'dreamy' President Obama at the beach frolicking in the surf in his swimsuits replete with his physically fit body in black trunks glistening with beads of seawater on his tight abs.
Why is one 'objectification' and inappropriate on a political discussion forum and the other is not? Neither are political in nature. Both show a man and several women that probably none of us here personally know in swimsuits looking 'attractive'. The sole purpose of both threads were not to discuss politics but to appreciate the beauty of the human form, right?
The reason many are tired of 'gender wars' and are pushing back against a small but vocal contingent of DU members is that this is hypocrisy plain and simple. If we want to respect everyone on this site, then it must be uniform and universal, correct? If swimsuit photos of women should never be here, then no male ones should either. Sorry, that also includes dreamy President Obama in his swimsuit. Due to health problems, I am currently obese, and I do not want to be subjected to viewing photos of a attractive and muscular men who are more physically fit and beautiful than I am currently.
And if the logic is that this is a political forum solely for the purpose of political discussion, then beginning immediately all forums that are not directly involving politics must be eliminated or heavily policed so that the topics are always kept on the political. This means no Arts & Humanities groups, no Entertainment groups, no Computer & Internet groups, etc. Sadly, that also means that we should get rid of the Lounge and those damned cute & adorable LOL Cats weekly threads because I am sorry, no matter how wonderful they are and how much I look forward to them, they are simply not political in nature and do not belong on this site. Period. This is a political discussion forum after all.
How was the posting of the 50th Anniversary swimsuit edition cover by a woman a poke at women who don't want to see it? That is a level of mind reading that is untenable.
This is not a workplace. It is not even remotely borderline sexual harassment, and bluntly trying to pretend it is so greatly devalues what is actual sexual harassment in any public arena. You are not forced or coerced in any way to click on any forum link and read any post made here. You voluntarily choose to do so with full agency. You financial security does not require it. Your families well-being if you stop posting here are not in jeopardy. No one is taking away your agency.
You are additionally making several gross assumptions.
First, no one including myself ever suggested that there should be a separate group for 'scantily clad women'. 
Two, only someone with their own personal issues (and I do not pretend to know what exactly those are) would attempt to equate three women in swimsuits on the cover of Sports Illustrated as being 'sexual images'.
Third, the reason I brought up Obama in a swimsuit photos already previously posted here at DU is that there is literally NO difference between those. They have no intrinsic value for political discussion, neither are overtly 'sexual images', yet one is of three women and one is of our male president. Why is one acceptable as it is on the face of it and the other is somehow magically imbued with hidden meanings such as 'overt sexuality', 'objectification', 'personal attacks on specific members', etc.?
And while I may agree that such frivolous and non-political threads ought to be in the Lounge or any other groups rather than in General Discussion, a blanket policy must be adhered to and properly enforced. Again, the reason why I brought up Obama in the swimsuit is that just like the SI cover, it too was posted in General Discussion. Why was it allowed there? Why was it not in the Barack Obama Group or the Lounge?
to be expressed.
I am sorry and I stand by my assessment. Not everyone would see such an image and immediately believe it was sexual. I will not bore the readers with a long discussion on the differences between sexuality, eroticism, and the like or how nude art is really not the same as pornography.
Several women here felt disrespected. The community as a whole did not including both men and women. The administration did not lock the thread. Juries did not hide the posts. If disagreement with a specific situation now means disrespecting all women in all situations, then yes, you are dealing with personal issues. That is hyperbolic and logically unsound. I will be sure to let all of the females who have relationships of deep respect with me including my partner, my mother, my sisters, my grand daughter, my colleagues, my clients, etc. know that you think it is otherwise. 
I respect that for other adults that may not be the case. In their space, they can completely control it. In mine, I am also free to do the same. Here in a community, we are given the choice to do both. We have the freedom to post (within reason of course), and we have the freedom to ignore users, trash threads, and even trash whole forums. Why is that so hard for adults to understand? 
Then I remembered I had hidden a couple dozen threads.
It makes a difference!
Just wanted to let you know!
I like my wife, my sisters, my grand daughter, my DU female friends, my ex daughter in law, her mother, her sister, my sis in laws all of them mean a lot to me. We can have a DU with out allowing wars of any kind here and thats what I suggest we do. I come here to learn and broaden my experience not fight. If I wanted to fight I'd head out to the local bar and pick on some hapless soul there, at least there's a good chance I'd get the shit kicked out of me and get it out of my system, if I had it in there to begin with 
Seriously. 
I've been here for over a decade, through several primary wars and all, but today was the first day I actually considered leaving DU. This is a difficult topic, and being told that objectification simply does not exist and that my concerns about it were evidence of my "stunted" intellectual capacity nearly sent me packing today.
I've not always agreed with you, sir, over the years, but I have appreciated your input.
It is not always easy to be a feminist here, especially given the fact that feminist groups are pretty fragmented here. Many of us have no "home" group, but we may still be feminists regardless. I'm one of those.
It's the way of the Internet.