Yes, I am a Feminist. Deal. With. It.

[TDale313]

I am so tired of Feminism being treated as a dirty word. For me, it's about equality. That's really it. One of my favorite definitions? Feminism is the radical notion that women are people. I sometimes still find myself shocked at how contentious this is, how vilified Feminists often are, even here on DU.

What it *doesn't* mean to me?

That I (or other Feminists) hate men (I certainly don't)

That I am responsible for every idea every other woman (or Feminist, or RadFem) ever had or spoke out loud. I support their (and every man's) right to their opinion. I don't have to agree. I don't have to shy away from criticizing them because they're also female. I am not responsible for every fringe idea out there. I will call out women who are spouting MRA or RW talking points that are hurtful. I will disagree with RadFem ideas that I think are hurtful. I will also point out that IMO, neither are mainstream or typical.

I find the gender wars here on DU really kinda puzzling and disturbing. Perhaps I shouldn't. It's not new. But it does feel like it's heated up in the last year or so. I guess I'm naive, but I still don't understand why a lot of this (like rape culture or white male privilege) are particularly controversial concepts.

Sorry for the rant. If ya read all the way through, thank you.

[PeaceNikki]

1. Sing it, sister.

Today on DU I read that the feminists' goal is not equality, but to stop men from lusting after women.

To be fair, it was deleted and the n00b was shown the door, but I strongly suspect it was a zombie and/or sock puppet.

[TDale313]

33. Thank you.

And glad that post/poster was dealt with.

[randys1]

2. Me too, count me in

[hlthe2b]

3. Rant well deserved and well delivered.

There are a handful here who I truly wish would see, read, and take your message to heart.

[TDale313]

34. Thank you. n/t

[AverageJoe90]

4. " I am so tired of Feminism being treated as a dirty word." Yeah, me too.

TBH, I can honestl understand why "white privilege", or even rape culture are so damn controversial; one has been widely abused and quite heavily twisted by attention-seeking radicals and the other seems to, at least sometimes, come across as accusing American culture in general as being "rape friendly", or whatever.

Feminism, however, absolutely *should not* be controversial. It isn't about tearing down men.....it's about building & maintaining equality for BOTH genders. And as for this:

.

What it *doesn't* mean to me?

That I (or other Feminists) hate men (I certainly don't)

That I am responsible for every idea every other woman (or Feminist, or RadFem) ever had or spoke out loud. I support their (and every man's) right to their opinion. I don't have to agree. I don't have to shy away from criticizing them because they're also female. I am not responsible for every fringe idea out there. I will call out women who are spouting MRA or RW talking points that are hurtful. I will disagree with RadFem ideas that I think are hurtful. I will also point out that IMO, neither are mainstream or typical.

I agree with this 100%.

[1StrongBlackMan]

55. Oh boyyyy ...

TBH, I can honestl understand why "white privilege", or even rape culture are so damn controversial; one has been widely abused and quite heavily twisted by attention-seeking radicals and the other seems to, at least sometimes, come across as accusing American culture in general as being "rape friendly", or whatever.

Really? "heavily twisted by attention-seeking radicals"? Really, now?

[bravenak]

104. Last time it was discontent idealists.

Something different every time.

[1StrongBlackMan]

111. But all meaning the same thing ...

a cohort not to be considered or valued.

[bravenak]

123. I noticed.

I find it too weird. Anytime certain topics come up for discussion, i wait to see who shows up. It is like comedy gold in a sad way.

[JustAnotherGen]

178. This was classic

This one was just classic.

[bravenak]

278. I can't believe it is still going.

The same suspects show up every time. I've been book marking them for future comedy.

[AAO]

144. We just can't win sometime. I am a proud radical.

I'm so sick of all forms of hate, fear of others, suspicious minds at all time. Sorry for my rant 1SBM.

[1StrongBlackMan]

145. Well ...

I'm a proud member of the "heavily twisting attention-seeking radical" community.

[AAO]

147. He may have been referring to the kkk types like cliven bundy

[1StrongBlackMan]

153. Somehow I doubt it ...

Nope, I suspect he is/was flashing back to our previous racism/white privilege back and forth ... Or he could have been referring to that other "twisted (but my) sister" Bravenak.

[AverageJoe90]

155. I wasn't referring to anyone in particular when I wrote that, if you *must* know.

[1StrongBlackMan]

157. Sure you weren't! eom.

[AverageJoe90]

186. Was actually being truthful with that.

But then again, you do seem to have a bit of a chip on your shoulder these days so I'm not surprised, sadly.

[1StrongBlackMan]

207. Yeah. Uh huh. Please pass the cornbread. eom.

[AAO]

311. Pass the cornbread, grits, rolls, and plenty of REAL butter!

[1StrongBlackMan]

315. But it's not REALLY cornbread ...

you have not provided me with any evidence that it is cornbread ... I say it's white bread and those grits are really turnips and the rolls; those are carrots ... never-mind the fact that I've never had cornbread, grits or rolls.

[AAO]

316. Crap, you don't what yer missin

[AAO]

229. Your interpretation is as good as any.

All I know is that racists, homophobes, misogynists, and just your regular pile of smoking shit - they all need to know that if they continue with hate, instead of making an effort to learn how to love people they will never meet - I don't need to hear their bullshit. I'm so motherfucking sick of all this motherfucking shit! (apologies to "Snakes on a Plane".)

[AverageJoe90]

235. " I'm so sick of all forms of hate, fear of others, suspicious minds at all time. " Me too.

I think the only difference between you and I here is that I consider myself a former radical.

[AAO]

310. Radical is a thought process, not an action plan.

[Squinch]

5. Well said.

Those concepts you name are controversial because there are still a few men out there (and I'd bet you could name all the ones here on DU) who fear women, and who fear that they cannot succeed in life against the added competition of women with equality.

[TDale313]

6. I think there's also a fear of imaginary blame.

With both of those, it's about systemic biases and ills, and things we as a society should be aware of. Some feel like they're being "blamed" or "punished", which is so not the point. So they treat attempts to discuss these issues as a personal attact on them.

[1StrongBlackMan]

57. +1 ...

and I suspect you will see plenty of examples of those feeling "attacked."

[AverageJoe90]

156. "Some feel like they're being "blamed" or "punished", which is so not the point" Unfortunately......

There have been at least a few, or perhaps more than a few, actually, who actually HAVE indeed gone that far. And that is a large majority of the problem here.

[hfojvt]

8. so it is all about fear?

It cannot be about people who just happen to disagree?

You know, basically decent people, allies even, who have a different point of view about some issues or concepts?

I don't have to fear that I cannot succeed in life if there is new, added competition. My active life is pretty much over. I have ALREADY failed. I realized that a dozen years ago, and pretty much gave up. I took my swings. I struck out. It is what it is.

And yet I am told that the failure that I am was privileged to have played life at the easiest possible setting and still has all kind of privileges associated with my gender, my race and my sexual orientation.

I am afraid that I take issue with that.

Maybe I am afraid I will get reincarnated as a white guy in the United States again.

[Squinch]

19. Jeeze! Did I forget to put you on ignore??? Silly me!

I really didn't need to be told that you would take issue with it. That was a given.

[hfojvt]

25. thanks for the substantive reply

I didn't just tell you that I take issue with it. I explained why I think your thesis about "fear", your smear of the people who disagree with you is wrong.

How can I be afraid of failing if I have already failed?

But I guess that some people "learn something new every day" and I learn about another failure every day. Like John Paul Jones "I have not yet begun" to fail.

In this case, a failure "to make friends and influence people."

[1StrongBlackMan]

62. Well ...

Maybe I am afraid I will get reincarnated as a white guy in the United States again.

I understand those that believe in reincarnation, believe you keep coming about until you learn the lesson that blocked your spiritual growth/success.

Think about it.

[hfojvt]

97. so if only I was not so defective

I would agree with you.

But as far as I am concerned, as much as I hate life on this planet, it's probably still better than nirvana.

Ever since I tried to read Sartre, nothingness really does not appeal to me.

[1StrongBlackMan]

109. No, maybe if you were open to consider things that ...

make you uncomfortable, you would be far less miserable in/with life. Maybe that close-mindedness got you where you are?

[AAO]

312. They don't fear women. They fear their own limitations will be exposed by a "WOMAN"!!!!!!!

And it's a good fear for them to have. I hate the MUTHIRFUAKIRS!

[Squinch]

313. I am becoming quite tired of them too.

Also bored. They never come up with anything new.

[loyalsister]

7. My sister

"Loyalsister is a feminist"
Me: Of course. Do you know what it means?
Her: "No."

Me: no words.

[MineralMan]

9. Yes. Thanks. Lots of us are tired of misogyny on DU.

[Coventina]

10. Feminist 'til I die.

And don't even DARE to say that means I don't love men!

My husband will happily set you straight!

[Skidmore]

11. "Feminism is the radical notion that women are people."

So borrowing that and spreading it around.

We need to have each other's backs. In some ways I find today's mysogyny worse than back in the day. I guess that is because we worked so hard and there is no excuse for it.

[TDale313]

13. Thanks.

I agree that in some ways it's worse. Maybe it's just the frustration that we're having to refight so many battles that we thought were settled a long time ago.

Oh, and just for the record, the "feminism is the radical notion that women are people" definition is apparently a quote by Marie Shear. It's a favorite of mine.

[TBF]

12. It is a war on women -

it came out in force in the last election but the Christian Taliban has been fighting this battle for awhile. In fact recently babylon sister posted this OP about one of the CT (as I call them) who has announced recently that women shouldn't have the right to vote -- http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024904214

We are in the midst of a culture war in this country and sadly some of the more Christian churches seem to be leading the charge in oppression of others - and they are particularly targeting women.

I honestly think this has heated up since Barack Obama took office and this is due to the fact that a certain segment of society has a great deal of difficulty dealing with change. I guess we shouldn't be surprised as this country was "founded" less than 250 years ago and at that time only white male land-owners over 21 had any say in anything.

I can share with you that as a feminist and socialist I feel very uncomfortable in this country sometimes. I know the CT does not speak for the majority but unfortunately they are vocal and loud.

Solidarity, sister.

[Louisiana1976]

27. +1 million

[Texasgal]

14. I'm with you!

The gender wars are puzzling...especially here.

[hfojvt]

15. is it a controversy when some people disagree?

Maybe it is just a generational thing.

Perhaps the younger generation will be indoctrinated with these ideas. However, I was not.

I was born in 1962, graduated from a class of 250 in 1980, went to the University of Minnesota until 1985, then worked a year, lived in the woods for a year and went to graduate school at Nebraska. Studied math and economics and physics.

Did a lot of reading, but mostly in science fiction and perhaps history. For example, in my 5th year of college, my roommate took a one year course in European history. I didn't but I read the 800 page book they used for the class. I also read his entire anthropology textbook.

Okay, so there is the miseducation of Lauryn Hfojvt. Never heard of this concept of "privilege" until DU. So hearing about something new which does NOT fit what I have previously been taught or observed. My initial reaction is NOT to embrace it. Intially I find it both to be insulting and wrong. So I dispute it when I see it.

Well, it's like most people, and I wish I had a source (or maybe not, if it is somebody odious) who said

"Given a choice between
a) changing their mind
and
b) proving that there is no need to do so,
most people will get busy on the proof."

[TDale313]

21. The word privilege may or may not...

Last edited Tue May 6, 2014, 04:27 PM - Edit history (1)

Be a new phrase for it. Not sure the concept that there are societal/systemic biases and pressures that tend to benefit some groups and disadvantage others is particularly new.

[Skidmore]

22. I honestly do not understand what your point is.

Last edited Tue May 6, 2014, 04:43 PM - Edit history (2)

Are you saying that mysogyny does not exist because you have not read it in the right book to satisfy your definition of sourcing?

I also find curious the notion of a generation "indoctrinated with these ideas." When you agitate now for change in response to social or economic injustice, do you consider conveying those ideas to be "indoctrination" of someone else? We fought and continue to fight very real battles for equality on many fronts, from the right to reproductive choice to the right to equal pay to the right to justice for crimes against us. You are only about 7 or 8 years younger than me. I so remember trying to find my first job out of high school and being limited to the "Women's Jobs" section of the classified ads. I remember needing my husband's permission to get a credit card. I was 18 when oral contraceptives became available, and they were available only to married women. I remember a lot of subtle and not so subtle messages in society about my place in it, and those messages came early in life. We fought these fights before and now we are fighting them again. We fought them for our mothers who didn't have choice and for out daughters.

Hopefully, I am misreading what you have written. If I have, my apologies. I hope that you have room in your worldview for the very real inequality of women here and in the world and the need for a feminist viewpoint.

[hfojvt]

42. well there are two questions

1. Do misogynists exist? Er, of course.
2. Is misogyny built into our social institutions and mores?

Although I would tone that back as, to me, misogyny is too strong a word. All misogynists are sexists, but not all sexists raise to the level of misogynists.

1. Do sexists exist? Of course
2. Is sexism built into our social institutions and mores?

First, let me say, whether it is believable or not, that I am against sexism and discrimination. And I do not deny that they exist.

The question is, do they translate into advantages for me, into privileges? When I was a part time janitor, my department head, three steps above me, was female, and so was my boss's boss.

So I am supposed to believe that I, a part time janitor am part of a "privileged group" and that my department head is part of an "oppressed group"?

Maybe a lot changed in those seven or eight years, but also nothing you mention seems particularly onerous. You needed your husband's signature to get a credit card? After five years in business in a small town, I needed a co-signer to get my first auto loan. That was in 1996 and it may have been my friend's wife who signed. Why not? She was a teacher making about 3 times my income. And the banker processing the loan? A woman as well. But I am the privileged one.

Sorry, gotta go with Fogarty on this. It ain't me.

As for "indoctrinated." Well, if young people who don't know any better are taught something that I think is wrong, why wouldn't I call it indoctrination?

[SunSeeker]

56. So because some women earn more than you, sexism is not built into our society?

That's like saying there is no institutional racism because we have a black President.

[1StrongBlackMan]

66. I seem to recall ...

He has made that argument, or one very similar.

But he feel to understand/see that his expectation to earn more, or not be treated as poorly as, women and PoC is part and parcel of his privilege, despite how sh!tty life turned out for him.

[hfojvt]

88. no, it is not about expectations

it is about actual facts.

The fact that a female department head has privileges and the part-time janitor way below her does NOT.

But by all means, keep looking for ways to disparage the janitor.

All the world is a stage, after all, and my role is to play the doormat.

I only disagree with you because I am a bad person.

[1StrongBlackMan]

106. As I have told you many, many times on this topic ...

the female department head got to where she is despite her gender ... She clearly had something in/about her that allowed her to overcome, in that specific instance, her gender. Just as that Black guy that took "YOUR" job, had something about him that allowed him to overcome his racial disadvantage.

And both that female and that Black guy, once outside of that specific instance, still is faced with the societal "straight, white, male=competent/non-straight, non-white, non-male=lesser qualified" default.

And stop feeling sorry for yourself ... it's most unbecoming.

[hfojvt]

256. swing and a miss, I guess

I tried to shame you for insulting me

and you used that as another opportunity to insult me.

[gollygee]

68. So long as there are any poor white men anywhere

there is no privilege.

I think that's the point here.

[hfojvt]

102. there is plenty of privilege

usually rich people have it, irregardless of gender, sexual orientation or race, and poor people don't irregardless of gender, sexual orientation or race.

Green privilege trumps white privilege every time.

[1StrongBlackMan]

271. Perhaps you should tell that to Oprah ...

When she was denied an invitation to join the county club that came with the purchase of everyone else's multi million dollar home.

Or, to this non - poor Black man that continues to get stopped by the police for being in the wrong neighborhood ... that I have lived in for more than 10 years.

[hfojvt]

281. oh no

I didn't realize Oprah had it so much tougher than I do.

How many times would you estimate you have been stopped by the police in the last decade? Do you end up with tickets to pay?

[1StrongBlackMan]

288. Being poor is, without a doubt, tough ...

Being treated like crap, despite one's riches, because of one's race is degrading ... it tells one that no matter how hard one works, no matter how closely one "follows the rules", it doesn't matter.

But it is clear you have you hands firmly clamped over your ears, loudly yelling, "La La La", so that you can safely wallow in your misery.

Fine ... It's still your world.

How many times would you estimate you have been stopped by the police in the last decade? Do you end up with tickets to pay?

For the first 5 years, I got stopped 4-5 times a month ... it has since tapered off to only about once a month. These stopped netted 1 ticket in the 10 years ... for a cracked windshield (not the customary "repair order&quot ... But not before being asked (over the years) "was I lost, where I was going, where I was coming from, did I know anyone that lived in the neighborhood."

[hfojvt]

303. oh please

she didn't get invited to join a country club.

That's pretty low on the scale of being treated like crap.

Especially for a woman who gets to spend lots of the rest of her life in front of cheering fans and gets to meet everybody famous in the world. "Yes, I got this autographed copy of Tiger Woods' book for free" she gloated on a TV show I happened to catch.

How degrading must that be to get free autographed books when you can already afford to buy a whole library.

Sure, it's MY world, not hers.

Truthfully, I'd much rather be riding high on all this supposed white male privilege I have than wallowing in any misery.

And four or five times a month for five years and STILL once a month? TANJ. That IS some serious bullsh*t. I am sorry that anyone has to put up with that. Maybe if you got a custom bumper sticker that said "why yes, I DO live on Maple Street." But if it was me, I'd probably have a dozen tickets for failure to wear a seatbelt on top of all the stops.

But still I am thinking that most lower income whites would gladly trade that aggravation in exchange for another $30,000 a year and a higher status job. For me that would only be 65K.

And for my misery. I kinda find it curious that if a billionaire like Oprah complains about something (or some writer complains for her) that you rush to her defense, but if an $11,000 a year janitor complains you tell him "stop feeling sorry for yourself, it makes you look pathetic".

[1StrongBlackMan]

305. Oh, I get it ... You're just pretending to be dense ...

in an effort to keep the thread kicked!

Bravo Performance Art at it's finest

[hfojvt]

78. no, it is more like saying

that regardless of whatever institutional racism exists, a black man who is President is still better off than a white man who is a part-time janitor.

That is, the President has privileges, the janitor does not.

[SunSeeker]

80. Compared to a female janitor, you do have privileges.

Privilege is when you get conscious or unconscious benefits from a demographic trait about yourself that you cannot control. These benefits may be overt (getting paid more as a man) or they may be covert (being able to walk down a street alone at night without fear of violence). I want to stress the last type of privilege. A privilege does not have to be something positive; it can simply be the lack of something negative.

http://groupthink.jezebel.com/to-the-princeton-privileged-kid-1570383740

I highly recommend you read the article at the above link. It explains it well.

[hfojvt]

91. again you are asking poor people

to ignore a whole bunch of people who are richer, and telling them that, in spite of their poverty, they are somehow "privileged" - compared to other poor people.

Just never mind that 80% of the country is richer than you.

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4153315

[SunSeeker]

126. Dude, I am the child of a motel maid. You don't need to tell me about poor people.

If you are saying the poor are the most screwed in this society, I agree with you. But that does not mean there is no institutional racism and sexism. Bigotry adds to the burden of the poor who do not happen to be white or male.

My mom was a janitor. But because she was a woman, she was afraid to take the late night jobs cleaning offices because she was afraid she'd get jumped on her way home (as a poor woman, she had no car). So, she had to take the lower paying, but day-time job of motel maid. My dad was a construction worker. He did not worry about people jumping him at night. And even though both of my parents worked bone-breaking jobs, my mom came home to be a maid to a construction worker. If us kids looked tattered, people would look askance at her, not my dad. We were her responsibility according to societal mores. My mom and my dad were poor, but my mom was way more oppressed in every sense of the word. Her oppression continued even at home. She had no respite. Things have not changed a whole hell of a lot as far as I can tell.

I know the indignities of poverty. But I also know how sexism heaps insult upon injury. As bad as your lot may be, it would be much worse if you were black or female. To refuse to acknowledge that because "80% of the country is richer than you" makes no logical sense.

[1StrongBlackMan]

272. +1000 eom.

[JustAnotherGen]

200. But

The black man who is President made all the right moves in his youth to be where he is today.

It's not like it was just handed to him - he had to run harder and faster than everyone else in his peer group to get where he is.

[AverageJoe90]

220. Some truth to this.

And believe me when I say that I honestly believe that our President is indeed a shining example of how people can overcome adversity.

[Major Nikon]

37. feminists routinely disagree with other feminists

The idea that if you dare disagree with someone who refers to themselves as a feminist, you must hate all of feminism is ridiculous. The fact that there's two feminist groups on DU should tell somebody something. Feminists also routinely label other women as "fun fems" and other derogatory terms if they dare to dissent from whatever ideological line they are promoting.

[Ms. Toad]

40. You might want to read this - it is a better explanation of privilege than most I've seen.

http://groupthink.jezebel.com/to-the-princeton-privileged-kid-1570383740

FWIW - I'm slightly older than you are.

[SunSeeker]

75. Great link. Excellent definition of male privilege.

Privilege is when you get conscious or unconscious benefits from a demographic trait about yourself that you cannot control. These benefits may be overt (getting paid more as a man) or they may be covert (being able to walk down a street alone at night without fear of violence). I want to stress the last type of privilege. A privilege does not have to be something positive; it can simply be the lack of something negative.

[hfojvt]

76. well, thank goodness it was not personal

"Otherwise you'll just look like a complete fucking asshole when you write a hypocritical article completely missing the point of everything."

And the kindergarten example is kinda missing the point, twice.

Point 1 - most people have two legs. To say that such people have "two leg privilege" is to look at things from the perspective of the very few who do NOT have two legs. But why should the perspective of 0.3% of the population be more valid than the perspective of 99.7%?

Further, since most people you actually WILL be competing against ALSO have two legs, the real world value of supposed two leg privilege is very close to zero.

Point two - the disparity between white/POC and male/female is not nearly as large OR as clear cut as the difference between two legs and one leg.

And the author seems to jump right over that "If our two legged man is black and our one legged man is white, he's still got white privilege."

Telling a one legged man how he's playing life on the easiest possible setting because he's a white male is gonna be insulting. Imagine visiting a while male in the emergency room, pulling up a chair and saying "let me tell you about your white male privileges".

Do you really want to make that argument to somebody who is in that state?

Yet that is where we are with this privilege notion. It's a notion that allows some people to be "victims" and it allows upper class white people to look down at working class and say "look at those ignorant bigots who won't admit or realize how privileged they are".

Except they might not be kind enough to just call them "ignorant bigots". Instead they might use a bigger gun. I dunno, maybe "hypocritical complete fu$%ing a$$hole".

But, unlike me, a guy going to Princeton clearly does have privileges. They just don't come from his whiteness or maleness as much from his wealthiness.

[Ms. Toad]

127. Wow.

The point of using two legged v. one legged is because it is a simple example that pretty much everyone to understands: If you have two legs, life is easier than if you have one. If you have two legs you are privileged by virtue of that characteristic over those who don't.

And you are right - the real world advantage of having two legs isn't much if you have two legs which most people do. Thank you for taking the perspective most people with privilege do - that of competing against everyone else similarly situated

"check your privilege" asks you to look at it from the other side. If you have only one leg, the real world advantage (privilege) of having two legs is tremendous, because you - with your one leg - are also competing against all of those folks who ""By position of a characteristic {they were} born with, {they} have been helped, or at least not hurt, more than others without this characteristic".

Once you get the concept down, in the really simplistic example used to make a point - and you can also look at the nuances the author does quite well. Contrary to your assertion of skipping over the relative impacts of privileged, here is what she really said:

Privilege isn't an on/off switch. You can have one type of privilege, while not having others. You can, for instance, feel like you don't have religious privilege while still being able to admit that you have white privilege and male privilege. If our two legged man is black and our one legged man is white, he's still got white privilege.

In other words - you may have been being helped (or at least not hurt) by being white and male. That doesn't go away just because you have other characteristics (like having only one leg) where your voice sharing how the lack of privilege associated with having two legs impacts you would be very useful to hear.

The one legged/two legged perspective actually is a very good match for my experience for much of the past year.

I have - all my life - been able bodied and take a whole lot of things for granted about how useful that characteristic I was just born with is. Out of the blue, I was hit with vertigo for 11 months. That experience - of learning how little able bodied people people (i.e. me just a few months earlier) pay attention to where their bodies are - resulted in panic attacks every time I went out in crowds because I could not trust those around me to understand that the bump that meant nothing to them (i.e. me a few months earlier) would now send me to the floor - or down an escalator. The outright scariest encounter when I was repeatedly jostled by someone behind me and at risk of falling from the shoving and I was simultaneously close enough to the floor I was heading to that I could not turn around and yell stop without risking falling and being crushed by everyone behind me - because it took concentration and the aid of a cane as the stairs folded beneath me to manage to transition from moving to stationary.

Now that I am again able bodied, I a grateful that I no longer panic at the thought of going out in a crowd, that I can balance on stones to cross the creek, and wear moderate heels. All parts of that privilege I took for granted in the past - ways I was helped by being able bodied. But I hope I don't lose the perspective that experience gave me of being made aware, in a very visceral way, of some of the ways I am helped by being able bodied - and of how I had been inadvertently making life more challenging for others simply because the experience of someone with vertigo when I gently bumped into them never crossed my mind because it was outside of my life experience.

That's all "check your privilege" is about. Listening (and asking others to listen) to how I (they ) are helped (or at least not hurt) by characteristics of groups they belong to. Although I was able to experience it first hand - and return to the privilege of being able bodied - most of us don't have that opportunity and walk through life oblivious to how others, in other skins, experience life as a result of being in those other skins - so we need to listen carefully to what they have to say without getting all defensive because it was just a harmful little bump.

[Vattel]

133. I have to agree that the concept of "white privilege" is pretty useless and tends to be divisive.

Of course, white privilege does exist, as does male privilege and healthy privilege and good-looking privilege and born into a wealthy family privilege and high IQ privilege and . . . Should we add them all up to figure out someone's net privilege? On some college campuses (such as my own) the concept has been used by "diversity trainers" (not professors) to shove certain viewpoints down students throats. I really think it is more productive to talk about racism and the injustices that disadvantage African Americans or other races or ethnic groups. I have yet to learn what is gained by talking about white privilege.

[AverageJoe90]

183. A fairly informative view of things, in my opinion.

Particularly this:

I really think it is more productive to talk about racism and the injustices that disadvantage African Americans or other races or ethnic groups. I have yet to learn what is gained by talking about white privilege.

This. This times 1,000.

[TM99]

189. Your questions answered.

http://rabble.ca: 9880/news/2014/02/check-your-privilege-rise-post-new-left-political-vocabulary

On Edit: damned smilies! Remove the space between : and 9 otherwise, you will get this -

[wryter2000]

60. As a white person

I had no problem recognizing white privilege the first time it was pointed out to me. Many of the men on DU have no problem recognizing male privilege. Privilege is a fact, not a debating point.

[hfojvt]

108. you see what you see

I see what I see.

You say it is a fact.

I disagree, and I say "prove it".

I am supposed to just accept it on faith because you say that you see it?

I am not playing at debate. I am sharing with you what I think. Others are free to share with me what they think.

[wryter2000]

159. Privilege

A white person can drive across town without being pulled over for no good reason. A man can go out at night without being raped and/or being accused of "asking for it" by being out at night.

A white person can apply for a job without having to worry that the employer might be biased against them because of their race. A white person is less likely to end up on death row or in prison than a person of color.

I don't have time to "debate" the obvious with you. I'm done.

[Maedhros]

250. Truly, the concept is not difficult to grasp.

This "debate" consists of simple, effective explanations of privilege being countered by long-winded equivalents of "nuh-UH!"

[wryter2000]

253. LOL

[hfojvt]

258. really?

Because what I just saw was a few typical, pointless examples, followed by the closer "I am not gonna debate with you."

Then maybe some insults thrown in too, to help "prove" the point.

[Maedhros]

273. Your posts are distasteful.

Time for the ignore list.

[hfojvt]

283. well I cannot argue

with logic like that.

I guess I can consider white privilege to have been proven.

[redruddyred]

61. your female counterpart "shakespeare's sister"

probably didn't get to go to graduate school at all, as her parents didn't think it was worth the investment for her to attend college in the first place.
she didn't get to read anthropology textbooks either, because she was too busy cleaning up after her slob of a brother or getting beaten up by her abusive boyfriend.
fortunately, the prozac cured her of her aspirations. modern-age lobotomy that is.

[hfojvt]

120. and here in the real world

my little sister and my female cousin have master's degrees.

Then let's look at a less privileged cousin. Also born in 1962, and graduated in 1980. Probably could not afford college, although I think my aunt may have offered to help. Worked as a waitress, perhaps still does (she does not talk about it on FB). Had a son born in 1982. Got married in 1989 to a postal worker and had two more kids, in 1990 and 1993.

Now here youngest is going to college and she has a new grandson. Also has been divorced and now in a relationship for about two years.

She could find an anthropology book at her local college library if she was interested. It's less than 15 miles away.

Nice that her brother is a slob in this fantasy and her boyfriend is abusive.

[DirkGently]

16. No one should apologize for or disclaim being feminist. Or liberal.

Just because the knuckledraggers achieved a level of knuckle-dragging success with their endless demonizing of anyone who disagreed with them doesn't mean any of US should be fighting amongst ourselves about it.

Feminists are RIGHT.

Liberals are RIGHT.

The hippies were RIGHT.

All of those things have degrees and variations and exceptions and addendums. None of them are shameful or embarrassing or wrong, except to stupid people.

Maybe stupid people should be embarrassed and ashamed and worried about people criticizing them, instead of the rest of us worrying about offending the stupid people.

[Louisiana1976]

29. Well said.

I am an unapologetic feminist. And liberal.

[AverageJoe90]

188. This, pretty much.

[okaawhatever]

17. Why have gender wars escalated here on DU in the last year? Because, people are here to divide us

and disillusion us with the Democratic party and it's supporters. The assumption that folks are here to support the Democratic party and its elected officials is naive. I think you understand that a lot of people are here to create discord, but many others do not. And no, they don't all act up right away. Many have been signed on for years but only become active every once and awhile.
We have to stay true to what the Democratic party supports and ignore those here to cause division.

But I agree with you, Feminism isn't a bad word and i'm one.

[1StrongBlackMan]

72. It's funny, too ...

Those arguing so vehemently against the existence of a rape culture and privilege, claim to be the Democratic base; while arguing with the two most reliable cohorts of Democratic voters.

I cannot claim to be a feminist (though many accept the idea of Male Feminists) because I really do not know what a "feminist" is ... I can only define it from my male frame, which by definition would be a distortion. I am, however, supportive of all people that are supportive of women.

[okaawhatever]

77. +100 nt

[Comrade Grumpy]

82. I think you are confusing radical feminists with women and...

...white privilege purveyors with black people.

Radical feminists, the folks who want to shout rape culture all day long, are a small subset of women.

White privilege purveyors are, I am willing to venture, an even smaller subset of people of color. They mainly seem to be found among over-privileged white college students.

Speaking of politics and the Democratic Party, how often do you see any of these folks ever addressing actual real world politics? They seem to have forgotten all about politics and policy as they embark on their endless cultural crusades.

[sufrommich]

93. Bullshit,rape culture is recognized by all feminist groups.

In fact,if you Google rape culture,the loudest deniers of rape culture are right wing groups and MRA groups like A Voice For Men. I invite everyone to Google "rape culture" and take a look at the cast of characters who deny it's existence,it's not pretty.

You don't think most black people think they live in a society of white privilege?? That's hilarious.

[1StrongBlackMan]

100. No, that's NOT hilarious ...

it's tellingly sad.

[JustAnotherGen]

201. Times 1000 - and I see you trying

to give insight to someone else here - it's probably a worthless endeavor.

[1StrongBlackMan]

216. And strangely enough ...

(per those two,) I am the "Radical" "troll" disrupting this thread about a woman asserting her feminist self ... by recognizing and supporting her against a pair that believe talking about feminism makes one a "radical feminist" (and talking about racism makes one a "purveyor of white privilege" ... because they object to my objecting to their claim to defining, both.

Amazing!

[FreedRadical]

279. No its not a worthless endeavor..

These conversations are amazing. Ignorance and denial do not invalidate truth. They attempt to preserve the status quo.

What I am seeing is vary intelligent people teaching the teachable. It's like a by product.

The way I learned to be an ally is by not talking too much and hearing what is said.

[1StrongBlackMan]

284. Which ...

The way I learned to be an ally is by not talking too much and hearing what is said.

Brings us back to another thread prominently featuring the unteachable twosome.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4880260

[FreedRadical]

297. Saw that thread too..

True, but that's rather different from outright exclusion, though, truthfully speaking.

I can understand that some people do get frustrated that the Left doesn't always do enough to face ethnic issues. And you know what? Sometimes we do mess up. Sometimes we do fall short.

Got that right in there near the top and never let up. I understand the not able to understand. It has a vary old point.

[TDale313]

110. +1

[redqueen]

162. "the loudest deniers of rape culture are right wing groups and MRA groups"

QFT

Too bad the significance of this seems to be lost on most here.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

173. Too bad the significance of this seems to be lost on most here.

They have a lot of influence, authority and power on this site from what I can see.

Just look at what gets hidden and what gets voted to Leave it Alone.

[redqueen]

177. Well they're very dedicated.

How many banned repeat disruptors have been trashed by admins and mirt just recently?

Does anyone honestly think they're gone for good, that they aren't just one of however many sock puppets, etc?

You've seen the kind of net-shitbaggery these types get up to when feminists piss them off online.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

181. Yes, I have. Sad to say that I naively thought DU could be "different" from the rest of the Net.

HA! The joke was on me, right.

[AverageJoe90]

191. We are, actually. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

192. You have not walked in my shoes on this board. eom

[AverageJoe90]

197. Well, TBH, I am indeed sorry if you've had a bad experience, btw.

It does happen. But we truly are better than most other places out there, our imperfections notwithstanding.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

226. You act as if you have not seen the call out thread

About me in TMG all taking place while I was banned. Yeah that ain't all.

[AverageJoe90]

269. You mean the Men's Group?

Yeah, I don't doubt there's some less savory people hanging around there, TBH; men's movement stuff in general tends to attract their fair share of malcontents. But these guys are hardly a significant fraction of DU. They don't amount to a hill of beans, really.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

294. you know, In a way I agree with you. They remind me a lot of GC&RKBA.

[pintobean]

306. How does that feel?

That seems to be perfectly acceptable behavior in your favorite group.

The good news is, you are no longer banned in TMG and that thread has been kicked. You have the opportunity to explain/defend yourself.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

307. I have said all I have to say about that incident in GD. Where have you been pintobean?

Please, try to keep up.

I am disappointed in you.

You seem to be in the know about every little thing around here.

Shall I provide the visual I have of your posting style?

[opiate69]

204. That's rich...

Oh... I suppose I better be ReallyQuiet, lest I come across as unReMorseful, and we all know, no guru in his or her right mind would find that to be any kind of fashionable inveigle.

[Comrade Grumpy]

171. And some women identify as feminists.

You know, I never see anyone asking a candidate, "What is your position on rape culture?"

I do hear people asking about abortion rights, access to health care, equal pay, and similar issues.

I think black people understand with crystal clarity that they live in a racist society. And so does any white progressive who has managed to make it out of high school.

Tennessee just passed a law that will criminalize pregnant women who use drugs if they have poor outcomes. The activists I've spoken to about it say of course poor women and especially poor women of color will be the ones most dramatically impacted (as if I needed them to tell me that). Meanwhile, the "activists" here on DU spend day after day and post after post fighting these stupid little range wars. Whether Monica Lewinsky is a "slut" or not is so much more important, apparently.

I'm done. I actually know better than wasting my time with this shit. But sometimes I fall off the wagon. You have fun, now.

[BainsBane]

227. Joe Biden just spoke out on the issue

but I guess he doesn't count.

Allowing a culture where rape is not prosecuted violates Title IX and has led to federal investigations and sanctions of universities for civil rights violations. Yes, women have civil rights. Not that all rape victims are women, but Title IX covers gender equity in education.

[Harmony Blue]

241. Not all feminists recognize rape culture

and a culture is something taught and learned by a collective. That is why rape culture is not even 100% agreed upon within feminist circles. To the outside public the idea of a rape culture is non existent.

[ancianita]

270. What is this all-or-nothing high school argument. This isn't "science." This is society. Finding the

Last edited Wed May 7, 2014, 10:55 PM - Edit history (1)

one exception doesn't apply here, Einstein.

Rape culture, since it's learned collectively, doesn't have to have 100% participation or opposition to exist. Your idea of 100% of feminist circles is nonsense. By your standard we couldn't talk about ANY culture existing because 100% of any "circle's" -- Democratic Underground, music, art, sports -- issue isn't "agreed upon."

I don't even know why I bother.

[Harmony Blue]

276. If you don't like the scientific definition

the anthropological definition of culture is the transmissions of cultural traditions and customs from ancestor to descendant..generation to generation in a lineagu of a group, ethnicity or society. For rape culture to be a true culture it must be transmitted and taught because no human being is born with knowledge about culture. Your cultural worldview is effected by what you are taught at an early age and you are continually shaped by these ideas till the age of 25 years old when your brain fully matures since humans undergo a long ontogeny.

For rape culture to be learned collectively it has to be taught by someone. The majority of teachers in the U.S. are females and that doesn't change until the university level and I reject the idea that female teachers of our country indirectly teach our children such a culture. The majority of voters in the U.S. currently are females and the average age of our population is increasing.

So ask again a simple question? Who or what group is teaching this rape culture?

Who is enabling such a culture to exist?

[ancianita]

277. It's not a matter of "like." Some cultures are real whether you believe in their existence or not.

If you're serious here, you'll read the answers to your questions here before you drip all your socratic challenge on anybody. For starters...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_Culture

[Harmony Blue]

308. If it is real then it has to be taught and learned

for it be a culture and supported. Show me a culture in the United States that supports rape culture? And worldwide you would be hard pressed to do so. So you can't answer the questions I ask which is a straightforward question.

Patriarchies and Matriarchies are cultures we can define and identify as to what is taught to children and a culture norm however. Rape culture has yet to be clearly defined and more specifically pointed out as to which group teaches this culture, but some would argue rape culture is a subset of Patriarchy. Fundamental problem with that is in Patriarchy women are supposed to be revered (eg Virgin Mary) which is why these religions control these women because they are under the misguided belief that is how to maintain an orderly society.

Feminists lose every time they perpetuate the notion of rape culture without a basis for it.

[ancianita]

309. You obviously didn't read the LINK. YOU LOSE. Willful laziness is the basis of all stupidity.

One can't reason with unreasonable, lazy people.

Nevermind all the crime statistics, media studies and systems research -- whole university courses and majors built on feminism -- that people here actually know beyond the simple intro link that you won't even bother to read on my post.

Feminists lose? Who are you, some game referee? Feminists never lose as long as you prove yourself the walking, talking example of 'nuh-uh' denial being the last refuge of scoundrels.

All the men and women on DU see you now.

[1StrongBlackMan]

99. No ...

I think you are confusing those that recognize, and are willing to call out, misogyny with radical feminists and those that recognize, and are willing to call out, institutional racism with "white privilege purveyors", as if either was some fringe group ... we are not.

Speaking of politics and the Democratic Party, how often do you see any of these folks ever addressing actual real world politics? They seem to have forgotten all about politics and policy as they embark on their endless cultural crusades.

Everyday, as our "endless crusade" are actual real world politics ... for us, even though it does benefit you (the status quo) ... you just can't hear us because we are (in your mind) just radical feminists and "white privilege purveyors."

To make the larger point, shouldn't it trouble you that you reduce the interests of two of the most reliable cohorts of the Democratic Party (which by definition would be the "base&quot as merely "endless crusades" that have nothing to do with "real world politics?"

[bettyellen]

160. He doesn't think racism and sexism are real problems in his "world"

Must be nice to be so blissfully ignorant.

[1StrongBlackMan]

166. Better to be Privileged ...

that way one can pretend to be informed, while using the institutional/cultural status quo to demonstrate one's ignorance.

[Comrade Grumpy]

169. That is an absolute and tendentious misreading of what I said.

Of course, that's no surprise coming from you.

It must be nice to be so self-righteous.

Of course racism and sexism are real problems, along with classism. Endlessly beating the rest of us over the head with your "enlightened" understanding does little to actually address those problems. Remember, this is a board for liberals and progressives; we already know about these issues, and have for decades.

[polly7]

172. Well said, Comrade Grumpy!!! nt.

[cyberswede]

184. We discuss issues DUers already know about all the time...

Should we stop talking about the failings of trickle down economics? Liberals and progressives already know about that issue.

Should we stop talking about voting rights? Liberals and progressives already know about that issue.

Should we stop talking about single payer? Liberals and progressives already know about that issue.

And really, if discussing racism and sexism manages to educate even one person, maybe that does help address the problem. Personally, I have learned a lot about both by reading DU - even though I've been aware of the issues since I was a kid. It can be edifying to hear about issues from people that aren't in my usual peer group.

[1StrongBlackMan]

212. +1,000

Yes ... we can all talk about progressive economics and single-payer ... but I'd like to point out that the jury is still out on whether we should continue talking about voting rights.

On the one hand, it involves racism and such, so because it does not directly affect this good group of "liberals/progressive", it does not appear to deserve much beyond, "That's a shame ... 'we've known about it for decades' but don't beat us over the head with that racism talk."

But, on the other hand, these good "liberals/progressives" need the votes of Black folks (and women) to get any of their national candidates elected ... so maybe it does merit more than a passing nod ... what to do good liberals/progressives?

[AverageJoe90]

219. This is very much a false dilemma.

I don't know what you've been reading, but I've yet to see anyone, at least any prominent denizen of this site, seriously argue that we should stop talking about voting rights.

On the one hand, it involves racism and such, so because it does not directly affect this good group of "liberals/progressive", it does not appear to deserve much beyond, "That's a shame ... 'we've known about it for decades' but don't beat us over the head with that racism talk."

Racism? O rly? Honestly, gimme a fucking break, pal. You honestly might as well just accuse us all of being covert Klansmen or Cliven Bundies for Pete's sakes.
Seriously, if you gotta say something, you might as well.

. what to do good liberals/progressives?

And thus the title of my response.

[1StrongBlackMan]

224. You are getting me to a point of flat out saying ...

with liberals/progressive like you, who need conservatives: you both argue the same damned points (e.g., misogyny and racism exist, you just can't seem to find it, even when others point it out to you.

[AverageJoe90]

233. "you both argue the same damned points" Not true. And you know it.

You are getting me to a point of flat out saying ...
with liberals/progressive like you, who need conservatives:

And frankly, I'm beginning to feel the same way about you, given the way you've been acting recently, especially with bullshit like this.

[AverageJoe90]

187. Sometimes, I don't even know why we bother trying to talk sense into radicals like that.

Endlessly beating the rest of us over the head with your "enlightened" understanding does little to actually address those problems.

This, pretty much. And a certain few others have a very serious problem with this kind of arrogance as well. That doesn't necessarily make them bad people, of course, but it does need to be addressed when it *does* happen, like when someone accuses you of devaluing their experience simply because you disagree with their POV(I know this has happened to me at least a few times in recent weeks).

Remember, this is a board for liberals and progressives; we already know about these issues, and have for decades.

Exactly! And yet we keep hearing that racism in particular(sexism, too) is supposedly a major overall problem on this site.....and yet, not one shred of real evidence ever comes up to support that. And honestly, these debates are about as circular as the ones I've had with climate doomers(and some of the more opinionated regular pessimists) re: what evidence really says about the potential severity of AGW and whether or not we can still mitigate it, etc. It gets tiring, especially since Skinner and the MIRT team have always done a good job of getting rid of the actual trolls.

[1StrongBlackMan]

214. Wow ...

Exactly! And yet we keep hearing that racism in particular(sexism, too) is supposedly a major overall problem on this site.....and yet, not one shred of real evidence ever comes up to support that.

{He said, with absolutely no sense of how ironic a train-wreak of a statement that crap is!!!}

[AverageJoe90]

218. Do I sense a personal attack?

By the way, I don't doubt the occasional misogynist or prejudiced dickhead *does* raise his ugly head and causes some actual problems, troll or not. But this hardly means that this is a major issue. The same thing can be said for (actual) climate denialists and corporatist apologism; they are out there, but hardly dominant, and they aren't the major problem that some make them out to be either.

I mean, all I'm truly doing here is just applying some critical thinking and common sense. It's really not that hard to figure out if you choose to put your mind to it.

[1StrongBlackMan]

223. Wait ...

the one calling another a "radical" and a "troll" protests personal attacks? When I merely hold up a mirror to how "to the point" your statement is/was?

Apparently, you believe that you hold the franchise on critical thinking and common sense ... despite, the many others that tell you that you are wrong. Rather, than pause to consider ... you just dismiss ideas that do not conform to your critical thinking and common sense world view.

[AverageJoe90]

231. "Apparently, you believe that you hold the franchise on critical thinking and common sense ... "

Not really. I've been willing to change my views before when I HAVE been wrong, even when it ends up being difficult in the short run. But so far, I've yet to see anything that really disproves any of the points I've made here.

(P.S., I didn't actually call you a troll. In fact, when I talked about trolls earlier, I was actually referring to the occasional malcontents who ARE racists, sexists, etc.; I honestly don't know how you jumped to the conclusion that you did, but it was dead wrong.)

[1StrongBlackMan]

210. Well ...

Doesn't this:

Remember, this is a board for liberals and progressives; we already know about these issues, and have for decades.

Suggest that "liberals and progressives" might stop viewing my (and other PoC ... and a whole lot of white people's) "understanding" as particularly "enlightened"; but rather accept it as truth? But that would, first, require you to stop viewing my (and other PoC ... and a whole lot of white people's) expressing that "enlightened understanding" as endlessly beating you over the head?

Then, maybe, you will be seen as the liberal/progressives that you claim AND that decades (actually centuries) old problem will go away.

[BainsBane]

259. No one forced you to enter this thread

Or to read any thread. No one hits you over the head with it or even invited you to participate in these threads. That is your choice entirely. You are angry that people dare post about issues that you don't want to read about. That's what trash keyword is for. Why don't you use it? Why enter threads you feel are "bashing you over the head"? It is easy to ignore things one isn't interested in, yet that isn't enough for you. You feel compelled to enter these threads and tell people there is something wrong with them for posting about issues you do not approve of.

I can tell you with absolutely certainty you have never once entered my head when posting an OP, and I would suspect that is the case for most others who post on issues you don't like. Perhaps you should consider that not everything is about you. We post to discuss issues with people who care about those issues, not people like you who resent our speech. You can happily avoid the threads and no one will mind one little bit. Yet you don't. You insist on telling people their concerns are illegitimate. It is unfortunate that you find the existence of people with concerns and lives different from your own so distressing.

[dionysus]

163. right on. that said, sadly it's also why the "crusades" are "endless"

[AverageJoe90]

190. .....

I think you are confusing those that recognize, and are willing to call out, misogyny with radical feminists and those that recognize, and are willing to call out, institutional racism with "white privilege purveyors", as if either was some fringe group ... we are not.

That's a pretty bad misreading of what he actually wrote, TBT.

[BainsBane]

232. That is a stunnig demonstration

of the very privilege and powerful sense of entitlement he insists doesn't exist.

[AverageJoe90]

196. True. So true.

White privilege purveyors are, I am willing to venture, an even smaller subset of people of color. They mainly seem to be found among over-privileged white college students.

I'd venture that would be true, however, as much as it does pain me to say this, from what I have observed, some(though by no means all!) of the worst offenders I can think of have, unfortunately, happened to have been individual PoC(Flavia Dzodan comes to mind pretty easily.).

As for radical feminists, Diana Boston on YT is possibly the nastiest I've come across; not only was she prejudiced against men, but she also attacked a Latina feminist(Divinity33372, who I happen to really like)over the other woman's sex-positive views on porn & sexuality. I can try to find a link for you if I have the time.....but I'll warn you beforehand; D.B. used some very nasty language, including even a few anti-Latino racial slurs.

[LanternWaste]

211. Oddly enough, a strong denier of rape culture was banned this past weekend for threatening rape

"the folks who want to shout rape culture all day long..."

Oddly enough, a strong denier of rape culture was banned this past weekend for threatening to rape another poster. However, I can certainly see how that could be overlooked by those who dramatically confuse civil rights with "endless cultural crusades..."

[BainsBane]

230. Clearly you don't read the posts in the African American group

Last edited Wed May 7, 2014, 07:34 PM - Edit history (1)

or pay attention to the few African American posters that remain on this site because they do indeed talk about white privilege. As for shouting about rape culture, the Vice President of the United States just did that this week. He spoke about universities violating the Civil Rights Act by allowing rape to take place at alarming levels on college campuses. These are civil rights issues and liberals are supposed to care about equality rather than working to silence anyone who cares about issues that don't relate exclusively to you and those who look like you. The fact is women and people of color are the majority in the Democratic Party. You want us to shut up about issues that concern the majority of the party because you, as a member of the smallest voting demographic in the party don't want to hear about them. That smacks of entitlement.

You could easily put words like white privilege, rape, and feminism on auto-trash if you don't want to read about them. Instead, you CHOSE to enter this thread to tell feminists how trivial their concerns are. Why is that? Why do you feel a need to control what others care about?

[Maedhros]

251. I am a straight white cismale.

I find the concept of rape culture to be easily understood and I see examples of it all around me, every day. I am definitely not part of a "small subset of women."

I also find the concept of white privilege to be easily understood and I see examples of it all around me, every day. I am definitely not part of "an even smaller subset of people of color."

I can only shake my head and fail to understand why these ideas are so contentious. To me, their existence should be obvious to even the most casual observer of American culture.

[LanternWaste]

18. Water is often the last thing a fish will think of... until the water itself becomes threatened.

"still don't understand why a lot of this (like rape culture or white male privilege) are particularly controversial concepts..."

Water is often the last thing a fish will think of... until the water itself becomes threatened.

[opiate69]

44. OOOOO... That's like, Deepak Chopra-level deep there...

That's like, Deepak Chopra-level deep there...

[1StrongBlackMan]

81. It's also ...

a commonly used analogy by those trying to explain privilege to the privileged.

[opiate69]

87. And Chopra's woo is commonly bandied about as well.

Doesn't make it any less vacuous.

[cyberswede]

89. You seem so defensive about this stuff.

What are you afraid of?

[opiate69]

92. lol. defensive? no. more like bemused.

"The things that pass for knowledge, I can't understand. "

http://m.

[cyberswede]

94. If you say so

But you almost always* appear in threads about rape culture, male/white privilege, feminism, etc. and attempt to deprecate the views of other DUers regarding such topics.

(*though not nearly as often as when 4th Law of Robotics was still here)

[1StrongBlackMan]

103. Like he/she said ...

"Things that pass for knowledge (he/she) can't understand." So therefore it is vacuous and inaccurate/wrong ... it couldn't possibly be that his/her world view is limited to only that he/she knows and refuses to attempt to understand?

[cyberswede]

115. It must be...

but the question remains: what is he afraid of? Why be deliberately obtuse, unless you fear what you might learn/understand?

Maybe he's trying to grab a piece of something that he thinks is gonna last...

[opiate69]

131. Hm. guilt by association now too.

Somehow I think I'll live.

[cyberswede]

132. ...when you lay down with dogs...

[opiate69]

138. I can somehow still sleep at night.

Knowing that at the least, I never colluded with him (or any other now-banned trolls) in order to help him get around his banning. Would that everyone who posts here could say the same.

[magical thyme]

95. why the need to try to hijack a thread about feminism?

and try to it into a thread ridiculing woo and Deepak Chopra?

You may have won in the jury system, but you've convinced me to put you on ignore. I have zero tolerance for thread hijackers.

[1StrongBlackMan]

74. 1+ eom.

[cer7711]

20. I Read All the Way Through. Well Said!

:::applause-applause:::

A White Male Who "Gets It" (Most of the time.)

PS. I abhor bigotry and prejudice of every kind, whether it be based on racial, sexist, LGBT-phobic or religio-cultural triumphalism. That is not to say that I am an ethical relativist. Simply that I believe in the dignity of every man and woman on the planet, and wish for them as much freedom as possible to pursue their particular brand of happiness and self-determination.

It all comes down, I believe, to a matter of intelligence, empathy, life-lived wisdom and experiences outside one's narrow parochial viewpoint and upbringing.

[TDale313]

23. Thank you. Beautifully put. n/t

[Raine1967]

24. Thank you.

I wrote something very similar to this before a forum we once had was shut down. I do not regret saying my words, and I totally support yours.

I too am puzzled and disturbed by the gender ways hewer on DU myself. It's actually why I don't feel comfortable posting in pretty much ALL of them. I shy away not for disagreeing with some people but rather because my words were often twisted, with responses that started with things like "so you… etc… fill in the blanks. I don't like responding to my words being misinterpreted, especially -- and perhaps more so that any other topic on DU, when it comes to feminism.

Rape culture and male privilege is something that is very real. It should be something we could talk about, but I am not sure it is possible here on DU.

You are not naive, sister.

[TDale313]

32. I don't post a whole lot myself...

and while I'll sometimes add a comment or two in the more contentious threads, I usually stay out of them. I guess I just needed to get this particular rant off my chest. I am very heartened that most of the responses have been positive and civil. I totally know what you mean about your words getting twisted. It can be so very frustrating.

Thanks for your post.

[yellowcanine]

26. I wasn't asking but you are welcome. That chip on your shoulder must get tiresome.

Must confess I don't see the point of this post. It might help if a specific discussion were cited. Are you upset about something which happened recently or do you just like to stir things up from time to time?

[Luminous Animal]

31. So, a person claiming that they are a feminist is stirring things up?

Interesting.

[yellowcanine]

36. That's what you got out of my post? Interesting.

[Maedhros]

49. "That chip on your shoulder must get tiresome."

That is a bit confrontational.

"...do you just like to stir things up from time to time?"

Yes, that is what one gets from your post.

[1StrongBlackMan]

83. I know, huh? ...

I was going to post something similar; but got distracted. Only I wouldn't call it confrontational ... I would have used the word "dismissive", or better, "typically dismissive."

[cyberswede]

54. WTF? A DUer can make any statement they want to.

The only poster* I see stirring anything up here is you.

(*well, almost)

[DesertDiamond]

28. Thanks for saying what I've been thinking!

[Kath1]

30. Right on!

Count me in.

"...it's about equality. That's really it." - Exactly. I define myself as a liberal and a feminist and I've learned to deal with all the false preconceptions those labels bring with them.

And, no, I certainly do not hate men.

[redruddyred]

67. feminists should not have to apologize for their political conventions with the phrase

"I don't hate men".

or, even worse, prefacing them with, "I'm not a feminist, but..."

ugh.

not an attack on you at all, rather the larger culture.

[Luminous Animal]

35. I'm a feminist. And a liberal. The right wing is near successful in demonizing both words

and contorting the concepts into unrecognizable positions to the point that liberals and feminists abandoned them and most people do not know what either one of them mean anymore.

[TDale313]

39. You're absolutely right about that.

And it's sad, particularly when younger people who have ideals that are liberal or are feminist don't feel like they can/want to embrace those labels because of the misconceptions.

[get the red out]

38. I agree with you

I don't get it either.

[Nye Bevan]

41. I believe that every DUer is a feminist. Including the men.

Who on a progressive website could possibly object to that?

[1StrongBlackMan]

85. Look above ... I see at least two. eom.

[hfojvt]

286. which two? or three?

Myself and perhaps averagejoe?

I don't disagree with the post you replied to here.

[1StrongBlackMan]

289. Yes ...

You were one of the 2 or 3 I had in mind (saw).

[cyberswede]

90. Don't forget...

[TDale313]

96. lol. n/t

[geek tragedy]

118. The misogynists here are not feminists. nt

[Nye Bevan]

165. I actually don't have any "friends" here. Perhaps you are confusing me with someone else (nt)

[Solly Mack]

43. Ayup.

K&R

[TDale313]

45. ...

[sufrommich]

46. Great OP. k&r

[TDale313]

48. Thanks. n/t

[rrneck]

47. It's easier to understand

if you interpret it as a religion.

[Maedhros]

50. I think not. [n/t]

[rrneck]

58. Why? nt

[Maedhros]

71. Feminism is a political philosophy.

Similar to Liberalism or Conservatism or Fascism: a set of ideals governing one's policies.

Religion is generally understood to involve shared fundamental beliefs regarding the nature of the universe. Most people have no problem confusing Catholicism (e.g.) with Conservatism (e.g.), even though individual adherents to each may share some common ideals.

I can't help but read your statement that Feminism = Religion as an implication that Feminists are dogmatic in the same way as some religious persons. I don't see that as analysis, but as a swipe at Feminists.

[1StrongBlackMan]

86. I read that a little differently ...

I can't help but read your statement that Feminism = Religion as an implication that Feminists are dogmatic in the same way as some religious persons. I don't see that as analysis, but as a swipe at Feminists.

I read that as Feminism=an illogical Faith in the unseen/untestable/unverifiable. But I agree, I saw it as a swipe.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

175. attitudes are being noted. so many tales being given in away. what a great thread for exposure.

Some don't bear up so well under the light of day.

[rrneck]

217. What does that really mean?

Is your evaluation of attitude a recognized standard of measure anywhere? Would it be recognized beyond the confines of the opinions of those with whom you agree?

Noting the attitudes of others seems to me little more than a sort of tribalistic separation of in-groups and out-groups. Why would you find it necessary to announce your determinations? What purpose does that serve?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

225. I wouldn't worry about it if I were you.

[rrneck]

237. Im not worried.

But I do find it interesting.

It sounds like a semantic game, but words have the meanings we give them. Frequently those meanings are handed to us by others. If we don't consider where people lead us with language who knows where we'll wind up.

It doesn't matter whether anyone wants to face the implications of an ideology so much as how they interpret it. The responses to the questions I have asked speak volumes.

At least two people consider what I have said as a "swipe" at feminism. Why would they be insulted if they had no emotional involvement? And is not emotional involvement in an ideology one of the earmarkes of a religion?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

262. And round you go again. With your circles. I got

Got bored with your merry go round.

[rrneck]

263. I can understand that.

It comes from chasing people around in circles.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

274. Chasing your own tail. Damned if you will chase mine.

[BainsBane]

238. So do I

It's really simple to me. Either one believes in promoting human equality or not. Denouncing feminism or "white privilege pushers" tells me those people do not value equality. Certainly people have different ideas and strategies on how to best combat inequality, but to deny the legitimacy of even discussing such issues is a serious problem, IMO.

[rrneck]

260. Well, let's have a look at that...

"Denouncing feminism or "white privilege pushers" tells me those people do not value equality."

I am guessing that by "white privilege pushers" you are referring to members of fundamentalist religions. Of course there any number of liberal and progressives believers who would take umbrage at that comparison. But of course you have elected to interpret religion in the worst possible light because I have said that feminism shares many characteristics with religion, which you consider a denunciation. Why would you take that interpretation? Why is it necessary to select the shortest route to umbrage? Do you not think it is possible to share values and objectives with religion?

"Certainly people have different ideas and strategies on how to best combat inequality, but to deny the legitimacy of even discussing such issues is a serious problem, IMO."

Of course at no time have I or anybody else denied the legitimacy of discussing the issue of human equality. In fact, I have equated feminism with religion, two important and legitimate forces for cultural progress. Why is that a "serious problem"? I suspect it's because I have opened the possibility that discussions of equality can be made outside of the auspices of your ideological involvement. If we don't discuss it within the confines of your orthodoxy, it can't be said.

There was a time when such a heresy would have made me guest of honor at a barbeque. The notion that a discussion of ethics cannot be had outside of a particular orthodoxy is an important part of fundamentalist rigidity. Somehow I have denounced feminism by associating it with what you consider a conflicting ideology. How progressive is that, really?

Don't worry though. I won't declare that saying such things should not be allowed.

[BainsBane]

265. "No time have I or others denied the legitimacy of discussing the issue of human equality"

False. People are doing so in this thread and in virtually every thread on sexism and many on racism. Perhaps your confusion comes with the phrase human equality? Humans do include women and people of color.

I know it will shock you that my comment to 1strongblackman might not have been related entirely to you. As much as you might imagine yourself the center of everything, my comments to him were about opposition to discussions of sexism and racism more generally.

As for your post, to equate feminism with religion on this site is a clear insult. It was intended and received as such. As for orthodoxy and heresy, you clearly don't know what you're talking about in regard to feminism and, it appears based on your sweeping generalization, religion either (during your nebulous "there was a time," religion was never confined to the dominion of the Santo Oficio or even to Christianity). I really don't care what you discuss. What I resent is being insulted as a zealot.

Additionally, just the other day you said that it was impossible to say whether threats of rape and death against a member were worse than posting a poll on pregnancy and marriage. How do you expect to have discussion with people when you think your inconvenience at happening across a thread you don't like is just as bad as threats to their life?

I have not now or ever sought to control your speech. You are free to discuss anything you want. I just don't care to participate further. Talk away--and by all means, do it as far from my auspices as possible.

[rrneck]

293. Okay, maybe somebody denied the legitimacy of discussing equality.

It's a long thread. I might have missed it. Got a link?

So if equating feminism with religion is an insult, what do you have to say to all the religious DUers reading your post? You might want to especially address your comments to all the religious feminists here.

"religion was never confined to the dominion of the Santo Oficio or even to Christianity"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition
The Tribunal of the Holy Office of the Inquisition (Spanish: Tribunal del Santo Oficio de la Inquisición), commonly known as the Spanish Inquisition (Inquisición española), was established in 1478 by Catholic Monarchs Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile. It was intended to maintain Catholic orthodoxy in their kingdoms and to replace the Medieval Inquisition, which was under Papal control.

As for claims about what I said or did not say - beats me. As I recall I asked repeatedly for links about that death threat and never got them and if you say I said something, I would expect you to produce links for evidence. Unsubstantiated claims about the feelings and opinions of others have a rich and checkered history here and in real life. But if I was wrong I will gladly retract or clarify.

Do you think there is a difference between the concept of justice for a particular group of people and the concept of justice itself?

[rrneck]

215. This might clarify.

#140

"Similar to Liberalism or Conservatism or Fascism: a set of ideals governing one's policies."

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Ideals
i·de·al (ī-dē′əl, ī-dēl′
n.
1. A conception of something in its absolute perfection.
2. One that is regarded as a standard or model of perfection or excellence.
3. An ultimate object of endeavor; a goal.
4. An honorable or worthy principle or aim.

Do you think feminist ideology should be a voice in the governance of public policy? Do you embrace every jot and tittle of feminist ideology expressed since its inception? If I (or anyone else) looked could we find something within feminist ideology that you might find extreme? Would those whom you consider extreme not be true feminists as you understand the term?

[Maedhros]

221. I'm uninterested in playing semantic games with you. Clearly your objective is to disrupt.

You belong on the ignore list. Bye.

[rrneck]

222. Okay. Bye.

Of course, you're not the only one reading this. If asking uncomfortable questions rises to the level of blasphemy, well, that pretty much proves my point.

ETA

I often wonder why people (not necessarily you) profess strong belief but seem unable or unwilling to defend their beliefs. Interesting.

[ancianita]

275. I love these questions! May I answer them?

[rrneck]

280. Sure. nt

[ancianita]

282. Okay, then!

Do you think feminist ideology should be a voice in the governance of public policy?
Absolutely. Lots of 'ideologies' already are.

Do you embrace every jot and tittle of feminist ideology expressed since its inception?
Yes. Every jot and tittle.

If I (or anyone else) looked could we find something within feminist ideology that you might find extreme?
Absolutely not.

Would those whom you consider extreme not be true feminists as you understand the term?
There's no purity test in feminism -- feminists run the widest range of pro-equality humans, from what I can tell.

My perspective is that feminists have their flaws, like anyone else -- since so much of patriarchy is both rewarding and hostile to feminists who are vulnerable by age, religion or socioeconomic level -- but those in no way disqualify their feminism. There's much discouragement 'out there' about living it well, but that in no way excuses the laziness of those who silently tolerate, or even joke about oppressive cultures because they benefit from -- even if they don't seem to actively participate in -- said cultures that repress, suppress and otherwise oppress others.

Thanks for the opportunity to share!

[rrneck]

285. Thanks for your replies.

Last edited Thu May 8, 2014, 12:34 AM - Edit history (1)

Absolutely. Lots of 'ideologies' already do.

I agree.

Yes. Every jot and tittle.

I would disagree. I've heard a lot about the whole "PIV" thing, so I can't agree with that. But I'm not going to go looking for extremists just to annoy you. (I can probably do that without trying.) To my mind every ideology is going to have extremists. That is not a bad thing. In fact, I think the left needs more of them. I would like to see the extremists on the left be extreme about economic issues and back off the culture war stuff a bit. I'm not aware of enough "bomb throwing anarcho communists" and I'd like to see more of them. While great strides have been made toward women's and lgbt rights and there is more to do, if we don't get our economic house in order the a victory in the culture wars will be of no use.

Cultural and political change requires fierce dedication to a cause. That dedication is an emotional involvement far beyond the easy rhetoric and armchair pontification that I see here and in real life. The dedication it takes not only to motivate partisans but to win over political opponents is to my mind indistinguishable to religious fervor. I think it comes from the same place for the same reason.

I have a few ideas about patriarchy that are at variance with what most people seem to think here. I guess that's not a surprise. But I haven't decided how to think about it yet.

Thank you for your kind reply. Good food for thought.

[ancianita]

287. Bring on the so-called feminist extremists! I love extremists! I am one!

I do have opinions about what you said above, but I'll save them for now.

[geek tragedy]

119. No, it's easier to dismiss if one ignorantly says it's like a religion nt

[rrneck]

140. What makes you think I dismiss religion?

Feminism is obviously an "ism", much like Protestantism, Catholicism, Satanism, and Buddhism. And all of those are "isms" like Capitalism, Socialism, Existentialism, and Platonism. In the fourteenth century there was only one real "ism" allowed, but since then we have developed any number of "isms" and the number is growing all the time. The diversity of "isms" is a response to the same human need for a unifying system of thought in which to believe. You've just let the theists fool you into thinking you have a god to have a religion.

The OP makes it abundantly clear what kind of feminist s/he is not. "I am not responsible for every fringe idea out there." How many times have we heard that exact same sentiment from liberal Christians here on DU? The No True Scotsman is alive and well in feminist discourse. Certainly feminism has experienced any number of permutations and factional splits in it's history. And it's not unusual for feminists to engage in discussions about what feminism is and what it means to be a feminist. Those discussions are really no different from ideological discussions within political parties, philosophical traditions and religions.

The language of religion occurs regularly in feminist rhetoric. Accusations of heresy and apostasy, condemnation of conflicting ideologies, exhortations for others to "see the light" are right out of traditional religious discourse. How many members have publicly embraced feminism right here as if it were a conversion experience and found themselves welcomed "into the fold"?

Does that mean that we can discount feminism? Of course not. Feminism is, like any other unifying idea, a way for people to find commonality and courage to go forward. And like any other ideology there will be traditionalists, fundamentalists, extremists, reactionaries, and authoritarians right along with true believers, charismatics and charlatans.

[Neoma]

149. Being welcomed into the fold?

Sorry, that just cracks me up.

[rrneck]

152. Yep, me too. nt

[Waiting For Everyman]

170. Surprised to find an interesting post

among the more predictable responses.

[redqueen]

176. So it's a religion in the same way political parties are?

Wow, so meaningful.

[rrneck]

205. Yes.

Spiritual leader at work.

?

Here are some questions you might ask yourself:

Do you believe in feminism? Do you believe that feminism carries with it a sense of moral certainty? Do you believe that the leading intellectual lights of feminist thought have an insight in the human condition? Do you believe that you gain an insight into the human condition through your belief in feminism?

Now, replace the word "feminism" with any other "ism" and ask those questions of anyone who considers themselves a devotee of that ideology. What kind of answers do you think you'll get?

Now lets take it one step further. I am personally acquainted with at least two atheist Jews and one Buddhist Jew, not to mention any number of other people that follow a mixture of ideological doctrines. Which is to say that we can carry within us beliefs from an entire spectrum of ideologies and use them in concert to make sense of the world. This, I think, is one of the greatest cultural advances in human history. That advance may free us from ideological extremism. How much blood has been shed because ideologues would brook no denial of their orthodoxy? And you can watch the dynamic between degrees of extremism play out right here every day. It's all in your head RQ, and that's where it belongs.

[Helen Borg]

51. At this poin in my life...

I dislike both terms, feminism and malinism. They are not the right names for a movement that wants equality. A movement that wants gender equality should not have one the genders in its name.

[kiranon]

63. Malinism? Have never heard that term before. n/t

[Luminous Animal]

65. This make's no sense. Feminism is a movement to advance women's rights equal TO men.

[davidn3600]

121. And that right there...is the disconnect

It's a generational thing, I think.

Most young women today believe in the core beliefs of feminism. But they don't want to be called feminists. You talk to young women about this and you will hear a very similar phrase from most of them, "I believe in equality, but I'm not a feminist."

Now I understand the older generation views it as the same thing. That feminism means equality between men and women. But today's youth wants to take a step further...they don't like the idea of being part of a movement that has only one gender in the name. They are not comfortable with that. They support women's rights, but they want to support men too. So that's why you see this trend, especially in the youth, dropping the feminist label but keeping the beliefs.

And I don't know if you can really ever fix that now. For one thing, the right wing has done a very good job tainting it. Second thing is the RadFems have done a good job tainting it too. And 3rd thing, women would just rather say they support equality for everyone.

[Luminous Animal]

128. Young women 18-29 are more apt to consider themselves feminists than any other age

group of women.

http://today.yougov.com/news/2013/05/01/has-feminist-become-dirty-word/

Democratic and Republicans women see the word differently. 48% of Democratic women but just 14% of Republican women would label themselves feminist.

...

But is it just the world or the concepts associated with the label? Poll respondents were given a dictionary definition of “Feminist” - someone who believes in the social, political and economic equality of the sexes. 57% then said that they would call themselves “feminists” with that definition. But once again, there were differences between men and women: 67% of women would now call themselves feminists, compared with 47% of men.

[redqueen]

167. Love this.

It's so awesome to see such excellent news.

And there are now pre teen feminists in the UK. They see discrimination based on sex at school and they aren't accepting it.

[Luminous Animal]

180. It is excellent news but the reporting on this poll was appalling.

Practically every person who claims that young women have abandoned describing themselves as feminists rely on this poll because the reporting in the press neglected the very detail that proved otherwise.

[laundry_queen]

202. Good graph

I don't know if DU skews to older, but when people say that young women don't want to be associated with feminism I say BS. My teen daughters and every one of their friends are hard core feminists...and so are most girls in their school and they are quite loud about it. They accept, completely, the concept of rape culture and male privilege. When I see DUers say those are 'radical' concepts, all I can think is they haven't talked to very many young women lately, have they.

[1StrongBlackMan]

52. I think ...

rape culture and/or white male privilege are controversial concepts, only to those that are unaffected by them.

[cyberswede]

64. +1

[shenmue]

53. I am too.

I am a people-ist. I like men, I like women, I like people. All I want is for anyone, male or female, to be able to build with their lives whatever they wish.

[redruddyred]

69. that's an unnecessary distinction, sir or madam.

it is my personal opinion that you are shifting the focus of the discourse unnecessarily.

[shenmue]

70. Yes, because being happy is a Communist plot

[redruddyred]

73. you got me.

clearly I am nothing but a right-wing troll, lurking on these forums for no other purpose than to take the wind out of the sails of all these deluded hippies.

to answer more seriously: I think it's okay to discuss problems. and then look for solutions to problems. especially if said problems are making you unhappy (now that's a patriarchal plot).

[kiranon]

59. Thank you. Count me in as well. n/t

[otherone]

79. kr

..

[BainsBane]

84. I'm with you.

I never heard the term radfem before being maligned as one countless times on DU. Someone pointed out that radical feminist simply means that one sees patriarchy and sexism as a factor not entirely attributable to class. Ideologically, I'm more Marxist than anything, but I am not a reductionist. I understand that gender and race are not simply manifestations of false class consciousness but factors in their own right that play a role in the structuring of society.

I certainly don't hate men, but I do have issues with people--men and women alike--who oppose feminism and other civil rights movements, who think feminists, people of color, and LGBT Americans are engaging in "gender wars" or "flamebait" for simply posting about issues that concern them. The idea that feminists and members of other subaltern groups shouldn't be "loud" (how one is "loud" on a message board, I haven no idea) or speak out is a highly reactionary one based in worldview that elevates power and privilege of white men above the majority of the population. It is not one shared by most white male liberals and entirely antithetical to the principals and demographic of the Democratic Party. Of course some of those most hostile to the voices and experiences of women and people of color are also those most critical of the Democratic Party and some have even expressed their intent to not vote for Democrats in upcoming elections, which only contributes to the electoral success of Republicans. If it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, then it's a duck, even if it believes its a swan.

[TDale313]

101. One would like to think...

That Democrats would tend to be supportive and sensitive on issues of equality. Sadly, not always the case (although I think most are).

Great post.

[LadyHawkAZ]

98. I agree

That I am responsible for every idea every other woman (or Feminist, or RadFem) ever had or spoke out loud. I support their (and every man's) right to their opinion. I don't have to agree. I don't have to shy away from criticizing them because they're also female. I am not responsible for every fringe idea out there. I will call out women who are spouting MRA or RW talking points that are hurtful. I will disagree with RadFem ideas that I think are hurtful. I will also point out that IMO, neither are mainstream or typical.

I absolutely love this paragraph.

[BainsBane]

105. Are you sure?

That paragraph isn't too "loud"?

[LadyHawkAZ]

107. "I will disagree with RadFem ideas that I think are hurtful."

Hope that was loud enough for ya.

[BainsBane]

125. Oh, so it's okay to be loud

if one opposes aspects of feminism but not when arguing for equality? Not all women should be seen and not heard, just the ones that have the nerve to disagree with you and/or care about those nasty "isms" like racism and sexism? Is there a committee I am supposed to consult before posting on a subject to find out if it meets the approval of my betters?

[LadyHawkAZ]

129. Depends on what you consider equality, I guess

I'm pretty convinced that some of those aspects like oh, let's say transphobia or homophobia or misogyny, isn't it. I'm OK with it being heard, since I like to know who the transphobes, homophobes and misogynists are. I'm just going to yell back. Louder. As every *feminist* should.

It's funny, though. Every time I have the audacity to speak out, someone shows up to tell me to shut up and stop disagreeing with them.

Maybe there's a committee I'm supposed to consult?

[BainsBane]

137. You are the one who declared certain members

hateful and nasty, not I.

They're loud and hateful and nasty
and so, like all extremists, they hog the publicity. They aren't feminists. Actual feminists work for equality, not hate and division.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=inbox&view=1477262

Do people actually tell you to shut up and stop disagreeing, or is the problem they have the nerve to hold a point of view that doesn't meet your approval? I have a bit of experience with that myself. I wrote this response to your post linked to above:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4914283

You chose not to respond to me but instead told another member my post was an "attack" on you.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4914347

Does that mean that proper behavior would have meant following your lead and instead using the terms you did in the excerpted post above?

[LadyHawkAZ]

148. You know what they say about when you assume...

Where in my post did I say anything about DU? I have no idea if any of them have gotten publicity or not. We were discussing public perception. YMMV.

[BainsBane]

150. That doesn't address any of the points in my post

or your referring to my post as an attack on you. It doesn't address why you felt compelled to agree with a poster who denounced all "isms" as illegitimate. It doesn't address my point about how what one chooses to denounce or not denounce reflects one's priorities: Why, for example, you insisted I was personally accountable for a comment made by someone I had on ignore, while you can't bring yourself to condemn threats of death and rape against one of these women you consider unfit to be considered a true feminist.

It is not an unreasonable assumption that your points were about DUers since you have on a number of occasions made clear your hostility toward women who derivate from your definition of acceptable speech. Why you feel yourself entitled to act as arbiter of who is and isn't a real feminist escapes me, particularly since you have acknowledged discomfort with the term.

A lot of the younger generation who say the same thing she did
also identify strongly with the core feminist ideals, if you present them without the label. I identify as feminist and have all my life, and even I'm starting to wonder if it's too corrupted a label to save. The extremist movements and the publicity they have gotten have done us no favors.

"Librul media" at its finest.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4914314

The point that people who use feminist as a pejorative and cast the movement in its worst light have an agenda that seeks to keep women from achieving equality seems lost on you. For some reason, you have decided the feminists you don't consider real feminists are a greater enemy than those who insist that it is white men who are exploited by women and people of color who have the nerve to imagine their concerns matter.

Given that you described my post as a personal "attack" and have on a number of occasions spoken very harshly about members I have never seen mention you, I can't help but question your claim that you have been told to shut up.

[LadyHawkAZ]

154. You didn't have any points to address

You want me to respond to a post that was nothing but you going "Hrmph! Look at you attacking women again!", which is the substance of many of your posts, and is in fact the substance of this one, whether anyone has actually done so or not.

And with that: as much as I have enjoyed seeing the words "audacity", "silencing women" and "half of humanity" copy/pasted ad nauseum, I think it's time to make you invisible. You can continue your little grudge match on your own.

Welcome to ignore.

[pintobean]

168. Nice ducky

Mine's bigger.

[LadyHawkAZ]

206. Yeah? Yeah?? Well...well...mine's spiky!

Now whatcha gonna do??

[pintobean]

208. Run away

That spike scares the shit out of me.

[LadyHawkAZ]

209. Duckiesharkicorn pwns all n/t

[AverageJoe90]

203. I've noticed this kind of behavior, too.

Although this is more from the hardcore literalist "white privilege" pushers than the radfems, TBH.....though I've seen from the latter as well.

[BainsBane]

242. The "attacking women" line is yours

One you have often given as a justification for your antipathy toward HOF members. I simply pointed out how you have contradicted that claim. You don't want to address those inconsistencies, so you instead choose to put me on ignore. So be it.

[msanthrope]

244. 1-6 to leave. nt

[pintobean]

246. I would love to see those jury results

[msanthrope]

252. here u go.....my comment "TLDR" didn't load.....

Democratic Undergroud
AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
Mail Message
On Wed May 7, 2014, 03:58 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

You didn't have any points to address
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4919084

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

She is using the duck image as an insult against BainsBane in reference to a site some DU feminists participated in months before BB even joined DU. LadyHawk already had a post hidden a month or so back for accusing Bains and another member of participating in the duckies site, even though sign up dates show it is clear they could not have even known about it. That she continues to use this as an insult shows malicious intent with no regard for the truth. It's one thing when it's used against people who actually participated on the site and another to smear those who did not and could not have even known about it.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed May 7, 2014, 04:02 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: quack quack? alert on a days old post? nope
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If you can't take the heat, stay out of the barbecue grill. (See what I did there?). Frivolous alert.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
Cannot reply to automated messages
Alert abuse Delete this DU Mail
« Newer | Return to My Inbox | Older »
DU Home | Latest Threads | Greatest Threads | Forums & Groups | My Subscriptions | My Posts
About | Copyright | Privacy | Terms of service | Contact
Advertise on DU
© 2001 - 2014 Democratic Underground, LLC. Thank you for visiting.

[pintobean]

261. Thank you. I was mostly interested

in the alerter's comments. They look very familiar.
Very familiar.
That's a lot of mind reading over the posting of a picture of a rubber duck.

Rubber ducky image = "malicious intent with no regard for the truth"

I think that line is more descriptive of the alerter's comments. Six out of seven jurors seem to agree.

[LadyHawkAZ]

254. LOL!

Do you have the results?

[msanthrope]

255. here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4922536

[LadyHawkAZ]

257. LOL! x2. Thanks n/t

[BainsBane]

245. You KNOW I was not on DU when that duckies site was operating

You know that I could not have participated because my sign up date is visible on my profile and you previously had a post hidden for falsely implicating me for participating in that site. Yet you post that image of a duck, knowing full well that the accusation is false. I take that as acknowledgment that you are unable to address the content of my post and instead turn to an unfounded and clearly false personal insinuation. That speaks volumes about who you are.

[polly7]

268. How would anyone know anything about your posting habits?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=302058&sub=trans I think you need to look in a mirror - "That speaks volumes about who you are." No-one here 'knows' anything about anyone else when it comes to profiles and participation ........ obviously.

[Texasgal]

112. So do I

I had never heard of "rad fem" or the Dworkin writer until it came up here on DU. Suddenly. a large portion of us were rabid fans.

I just know what I find simple and correct. I certainly do not agree on every facet, I am not fully educated on 'waves" and all that. I find my feminist opinions structured mainly around equal rights and sexism. It's quite simple actually.

Good post.

[LadyHawkAZ]

113. I had

My sister ran a small radfem board for a while over a decade ago.

I participated for awhile and then swore to myself I would never become like them. Extremists suck.

[TDale313]

116. Just to be clear...

My point in the OP was not to attack fellow Feminists. I hope it didn't come across that way.

[LadyHawkAZ]

122. No, it didn't come across that way.

I personally do not consider the extremist fringes of radfem as fellow feminists, but that is my stance and not yours. YMMV

[etherealtruth]

114. A wonderful post, thank you!

[scarletwoman]

117. I am simply a human being. I have no use for labels.

Labels are used to sort and divide: that one here is this, that one there is that. You go on this shelf, you go on that shelf.

I have no interest in being categorized. I am nothing but a human being; with all the complexity, paradoxes, contradictions, incoherence and dissonances that all human beings experience as they journey through their lives, whether they were born in a female body or a male body.

The only category I aspire to is to be a good human being.

[boston bean]

130. Actually feminism is not a label, it is more of an ideology.

A progressive one at that and is nothing that needs to be maligned here.

I'm not saying you do anything of the sort. I am just making a simple statement.

[scarletwoman]

136. The OP's declaration is, "I am a feminist".

My post is a response to that declaration.

[boston bean]

139. I'm a feminist to, and a democrat.

I don't see much distinction in terms of values anyhow.

[scarletwoman]

141. Everyone is free to call themselves whatever they want. (nt)

[eridani]

179. What you have no use for is what happens to you if you get the "wrong" label n/t

[scarletwoman]

243. Sorry, your reply doesn't make any sense to me.

What I'm saying is that I do not care to label myself.

If other people want to label themselves this thing or that thing, that's fine. Everyone ought to be to free to self-identify however they want.

[Waiting For Everyman]

185. I agree.

Very well said, scarletwoman.

[scarletwoman]

248. Thank you. That's very kind of you.

[polly7]

198. I also agree.

And I don't believe in putting one whole group down to elevate another. Every human being on this planet deserves the same human rights, and bigotry of any kind should be called out - but grouping whole nations/genders/races, etc. as being responsible makes no sense to me. Working together and punishing to the fullest possible extent those who are actually harming/abusing/killing people because of their hatred and bigotry, is something that requires all of us to work against. Trying so hard to alienate/vilify those who DO already believe in the same demands for equality, respect and dignity for all, is counter-productive, to say the least. I don't get it, and I probably never will.

I don't normally like labels either, but if I have to give myself one, I'm a humanist ... with "a strong interest in and concern for (all) human welfare, values, and dignity."

Wouldn't it be wonderful if everyone aspired to be in the good human being category! I think you're already there.

[scarletwoman]

249. Thank you. I like "humanist".

Wouldn't it be wonderful if everyone aspired to be in the good human being category!

Without doubt, YES!

I think you're already there.

Oh dear, no! I'm just a work in progress like everyone else!

Thank you for your kind words, from one human work-in-progress to another.

[LanternWaste]

213. Labels also allow us a convenient context from which to examine a premise

"Labels are used to sort and divide..."

Labels also allow us a convenient context from which to examine a premise. E.g., Fiction v. non-fiction, mathematics v. sociology, left-handed v. right-handed, etc.

[scarletwoman]

247. Okay. File me under non-fiction.

[WillyT]

135. Me Too... And I'm A Dude... With A Mom And Three Younger Sisters...

Plus... some of my best friends are female.

[AverageJoe90]

234. Roughly the same here, just with two younger bros. nt

[UTUSN]

142. Is there a problem? n/t

[Tuesday Afternoon]

194. Nope. No problem at all. Nothing to see here, folks. Move Along. Keep it moving.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

291. Is that why so many of my OPs make the Greatest Page? or what is it exactly you are trying to say?

When was the last time you were on the Greatest Page?

[Logical]

295. Lol, who brags about that? Defensive? Nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

298. lol ... nope. Honest and telling it like it is. Deal with it or without it. Done. Bye.

[Logical]

300. Ahhhh, some one seems grumpy! nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

301. it is a beautiful night where I am. I am sipping on a lovely reisling -

the stars are shining. and life is good. so very good for me.

I could go on but, seems some around here think it is bragging.

guess they are a little jumpy for some odd reason.

[AAO]

143. I'm a feminist too.

[niyad]

146. have been my whole life, and do not particularly care who is bothered by it.

every so often, time magazine used to run a cover story with the oh-so-hopeful question "is feminism dead?", to which my response always was, "not so long as I draw breath".

[dionysus]

151. cool. rec

[Laelth]

158. I'm sorry to hear that you find the "gender wars" on DU puzzling and disturbing.

Man/woman/other, power relations between the genders, who's sleeping with whom, and who's responsible for the children--these are probably the most important things that humans think about.

Why should we not "think out loud" about these things on DU? These are, at the minimum, very important issues.



-Laelth

[Tuesday Afternoon]

195. Discussing how to solve them is one thing. Arguing that they exist is something else entirely. n/t

[Laelth]

228. I think I know where you are coming from.

But given the choice between "more speech" and "less speech," 99 times out of 100 I will choose "more speech." Frankly, I am glad that these crucial issues are regularly discussed on DU. There are very few places on the internet where such a discussion can be had. This is one of them.

Cheers!

-Laelth

[Logical]

164. Who is slamming you here???? nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

193. you say that like you would do something about it.

[Logical]

264. You say that like you have proof. I am ready. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

292. Somehow I doubt it. eom

[Logical]

296. LOL, I figured. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

299. I know you. I remember you and Yes, I doubt it. and for that same reason you figured it.

A lot of cross over, for some reason.

[KamaAina]

174. So. Am. I. And. I. Am. Male.

Deal. With. It.

[Warpy]

182. It's been a long couple of months in the DU Gender War.

Your rant is on point and well deserved.

No, full civil rights for women should not be a controversy, but too many men feel their masculinity challenged when they are no longer to be overpaid and allowed to dominate women.

That sort of masculinity needs to go the way of the buggy whip.

Full civil rights means just that, nothing more. It means equality. It means that women are human beings. Think about that one really hard because as yet, we are not thought to be human beings. We are thought to be receptacles and house cleaning devices.

Misogyny on the left is nearly as pervasive and equally disgusting as misogyny on the right. Think about that one, too.

Feminism, at its heart, is the astonishing proposal that women are people.

[AverageJoe90]

199. My response.

The only thing I have to object to is this:

Misogyny on the left is nearly as pervasive.....as misogyny on the right.

That is actually not true, by and large. Misogyny isn't totally exclusive to any one subset, true, but truthfully, it is actually rather rare on the left compared to the right, particularly since left-wing thought in general very much depends on equality of not just the "races", but both genders as well.

With that out of the way, however, TBH, I'll be honest and say that, IMO, the rest of your post was indeed truly well stated and thoughtful.

[BainsBane]

239. What evidence do you have of this?

Do you have studies that show rapists or serial killers who target women are overwhelmingly Republican? Do you have evidence that Democratic men don't beat their female partners while Republicans do? I can tell you many of us have experience that contradict your assumption.

And what of some of the Duers who have flamed out by revealing themselves as misogynists? The recently PPR'd Vashta Neranda, who threatened rape and death against a feminist here, is the most recent example. Funny how the folks whom he so often sided with in debates about gender haven't uttered a word of disapproval about his intensely misogynistic threats, even when repeatedly brought to their attention, and even as they continue to bemoan the "radfems" (which evidently means feminists who dare to speak in public) they see as the bane to this site. What am I to make of someone who chooses to speak out about women who express concern about rape on college campuses or 30 day sentence for child rapists but isn't concerned that a member who threatened rape and death against a fellow DUer?

[AverageJoe90]

266. " What evidence do you have of this?" Where's *your* evidence, then? Also.....

BTW, I haven't commented on Vashta Nerada yet, because frankly, I don't know the whole story of what actually went on between him and whomever; but, I can say that if what you're saying is indeed true, however(and I'm not necessarily doubting you here, to be truthful), then it's indeed good that he was MIRTed.

[BainsBane]

267. My evidence?

My abusive ex-husband was a Democrat. Great numbers of women on this site have been either raped or subject to partner violence. You would have to ask them about the political affiliation of their partners, but my guess is most were Democrats.

YOU are the one who asserted misogyny was rare on the left. I don't believe that. If you are talking about official government policy, there is no question the Republican Party advances sexist policies. I am not accusing the Democratic Party of being misogynistic. The party is majority women and people of color. That is different from citizens who are on the left politically vs. those on the right. My view, and experience, is that such matters relate far more to how one is raised and how one chooses to comport his/herself as an adult rather than party identification.

As for Vashta Nerada, the exchange is visible in the subthread surrounding this post of mine. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4899193 Some have been deleted, but you can tell from comments by other posters what was said.

[babylonsister]

302. Thank you! I don't argue anymore usually. Equality works, for everyone. nt

[Jasana]

304. I call myself a feminist too and I don't hate men.

What I want is equality but it will never happen as long as guys have to act macho. Some of them want me to relieve them of this burden but never seem to realize that's work they must do themselves.

Some give me the excuse that women only go after "bad boys." I tell them they are interested in the wrong type of women then. Those women don't even respect themselves so why want one?

They give me the excuse that they are "nice guys." Well, I'm a nice girl but I still make an effort to speak respectfully, look good on a date and take an intellectual interest in expanding my knowledge. I want a guy that does the same. Why should I settle for less?

Equality requires effort from men as well and yet there always seems to be loads of them that don't want to do the work. Sorry guys... you need to stand up to your macho friends. Hear them telling rape jokes? Call them out. Hear them talking about women as if they're sexual conquests, call them idiots. And for FSM sake, see your friends cat calling a woman on the street, don't cheer and hoot and holler. Tell them to stop. If you can't do this pathetic minimum then nothing from me is going to help you so stop asking me.

[Caxton]

314. K...