"Men's Rights" cracks me up.

[WilliamPitt]

But then again, I'm from planet Earth.

[stone space]

1. Kinda' like "Gun Rights". (nt)

[CreekDog]

100. we have so many gun rights, that we end up with too many gun wrongs.

[Wounded Bear]

137. Profoundly said...

[Ligyron]

192. Now there's a sound bite which should be on many lips nationally. nt

[elleng]

2. Really!

[dballance]

3. I have to agree with you whole heartedly.

I'm a white male who grew up in the South during the dawn of desegregation.

I'm quite certain I am and have been privileged and got passes on things due to the fact I'm a white male. I know that because I showed up in court as a white male and had the ability to show up in a suit and tie I was treated differently than people who were of color and couldn't afford a suit and tie. Seriously, the judge confused me with a lawyer and didn't recognize me as a defendant because I had on a suit and tie.

I got treated white-glove as opposed to the people who were of color and didn't have the finances I had at the time.

[whatchamacallit]

4. Yeah, it's lame

It's like "king's rights".

[onehandle]

5. Years ago I worked for a big, big company and sat on our 'diversity board.'

As a reaction to the company African-American group and our LGBT group, a number of dudes came to us and formed a 'Men's Group.'

All straight white men like myself. I was horrified, but what could we do?

I luckily could decline to join, since I sat on the diversity board.

Yes, this was in the Deep South.

Horrified

[7962]

19. Why would it be a problem? Did they call it the "straight white mens group"?

If so, that would be wrong, otherwise who cares? Why couldnt men form a group? My mom belongs to the local "over 60 womens group". What would be so terrible about a group of over 60 men doing the same thing?

[newblewtoo]

22. They do

it's called the Freemasons.

[LanternWaste]

6. I'm often told that I as a male am losing rights.

I'm often told that I as a male am losing rights. When I ask which specific rights I'm losing, the only responses I receive are never more than irrational anger and hysterical prophecies.

So I'm left with little more than to metaphorically pat them on their heads, bless their little hearts, and giggle.

[nomorenomore08]

16. Terrific response. You nail it as usual.

[Damansarajaya]

53. You've lost the right to automatically get hired

because women should be at home having kids.

And that, we can all agree, is a good thing.

[Warren Stupidity]

7. I got misandried just the other day.

The barrista at 'bucks didn't flirt with me.

[hlthe2b]

8. Ok.. I had to laugh at that....

[nomorenomore08]

17. And of course, you know some dude somewhere is thinking the same thing in all seriousness...

[Damansarajaya]

54. <chuckle>

[hunter]

69. It's your white male, wasting money on coffee, right that female barristas should flirt with you.

[Warren Stupidity]

73. I paid good money for that flirt!

[randys1]

129. That is because she was busy flirting with me...

[Warren Stupidity]

144. Damn alpha males

I must go buy some gunz now to improve my status.

[panader0]

9. I must live too far out in the boonies.

I had never heard about the Men's Rights Movement until I read about it here.

[Skittles]

10. they're losing their right to be sexist assholes, WilliamPitt

real men like you, raised by stellar gals like Raven, would indeed find "Men's Rights" laughable

[etherealtruth]

11. Right up there with "white rights"

[el_bryanto]

12. Planet Earth isn't so bad. Good tacos, if you know where to look. nt

[JTFrog]

13. You finally posted something I can rec.

Thanks.

[KG]

14. Good planets are hard to find...

[HangOnKids]

18. Ah Steve Forbert

Great songwriter, love the guy. Not feeling quite that way about other DUers.

[dhill926]

15. yep.....

and yep….

[TM99]

20. From the 1970's through the 1990's

men's groups became popular. They offered much need co-counseling, emotional support, and creative discussion for men of all ages, races, and orientations.

When I went through my first divorce in the early 1990's, it was a great support to have other men there to talk about the difficulties and issues that arose for me. And yes, some were legal. My first wife was a very mentally unstable person and off of medication, she was a nightmare.

Fast forward to the present, and men's groups are 'woo' and social networking is a substitute for real & meaningful connections with other men.

When I see "Men's Rights Groups", "Pickup Arts Groups", etc., I see young men (predominantly) in desperate emotional need for male connectedness, guidance, and support. Instead, there are just anonymous forums with no sane voices providing that. The hurt that fuels the rage is dumped out in the field, but rarely is it ever truly dealt with.

There is nothing wrong with men supporting other men. Sometimes that need is emotional. Sometimes it is legal support. Sometimes that need is even spiritual. The MRA movement (which frankly I only ever hear about and see exclusively online) is not the answer.

[Hekate]

28. I remember those; I thought their spiritual orientation was great

Men need each other and boys need healthy role models. If a big drum-circle is involved, so much the better.

"Men's Rights" is a whole other nasty thing.

[TM99]

42. Indeed.

Yes, even though I was not really 'spiritual', it was good at a young age to have healthy male role models to guide, support, and teach me.

This new thing, "Men's Rights" is nasty. It is just the hurt and rage with no guidance, understanding, responsibility, or awareness. I do only see it online, so I am hopeful that it stays limited in scope and definitely in influence.

Extremists positions of any sort tend to bother me.

[eridani]

107. Yes--a number were linked with the Radical Therapy movement

My husbnad attended one for a year and got a lot out of it.

[TM99]

111. Radical Therapy

was a little before my time.

I was involved with a lot of Jungians - Moore, Bly, etc. - and the main groups that I attended in Tucson were at a Methodist and an Episcopal church.

It was very helpful, and I have honestly missed that kind of community of men.

[polly7]

21. "Human Rights" doesn't crack me up whatsoever.

Human = all genders.

What's so hilariously funny about denying rights to anyone, based on gender or anything else?

[opiate69]

24. + a metric shit ton.

But, maybe he'll get back to you in 24 business hours.

[polly7]

26. I doubt it.

I'm sort of a thread killer.

[HangOnKids]

29. You need new material that quip has passed its freshness date

Dig deep baby I'm sure you will find some.

[opiate69]

38. Oh.. bad me... must remember to be appropriately deferential.

[HangOnKids]

39. No dear, maybe just a tad more current

Sorry I must decline the welcome to your fan club. There is nothing there that interests me, keep plugging it though. Somebody else might be enthralled.

[opiate69]

70. Oh, I suppose I could have made hay about his calling our Democratic President a...

what was it? "Piece of shit car salesman". But, really, the classics never do go out of style.

[HangOnKids]

75. Keep telling yourself that

I'm sure it helps!

[RiffRandell]

113. Lmao!

[WilliamPitt]

27. Such a burden to be a man in this world

that they need advocates.

[polly7]

30. Tell it to those jumping off building in Greece because they can't

live with the dishonour of not being able to feed their families, or the farmers in India killing themselves by the hundreds of thousands because of the same, or the spouse unfairly accused of sexually assaulting his own child, or thrown in jail for assault (when I saw with my own lying eyes his 'victim' slam her own shoulder in a steel door), or my own brother having crap thrown at him that cut his face, the years of bruises etc and being too proud and ashamed to do anything about it because of attitudes like yours. How unfair is it to discount the very real disparities in treatment for individuals that make up half the human population? Yes, I'll be their fucking advocate any day, just as I would and have been for many women. Men in crisis are just as deserving of compassion, empathy and RIGHTS as anyone else on the planet. But having a convenient hate group to pooh-pooh all of their concerns with and see it all as a big joke lets you off the hook, doesn't it?

Do you feel the same for women's hate groups?

[WilliamPitt]

34. "Men in crisis"

Therein lies the rub.

The "Men's Rights" advocates you hear about ARE NOT IN CRISIS. They're just on edge because their privilege is being crowded.

Huge difference.

But you already knew that.

[polly7]

35. The problem is ............. any male IN CRISIS and having the courage to

talk about it, especially HERE, is automatically told they're 'parroting MRA groups' and it's all one big pile-on fucking joke. But you already knew that. Or maybe not, as you seem to agree with it.

[HangOnKids]

40. Never seen ANYONE male or female on DU in a crisis denied support EVER

Can you bring out a broader brush Polly? The left side of my house needs a fresh coat. Thanks.

[polly7]

41. LOL!

ME using the broad brush?!! ....... go do a bit of reading.

[HangOnKids]

43. Now that you mention it the front of my house needs a coat as well

Thanks Polly you are swell!

[polly7]

45. Cool. I love painting. Don't forget the sun-screen! nt.

[HangOnKids]

47. Big bowl for you

with a side helping of crow.

[polly7]

58. I don't care for crow, which is why I leave that for you.

Bon appetite, and make sure to share with your like-minded pals.

[Skittles]

106. you lost that argument, big time

[R B Garr]

168. +1

[LanternWaste]

44. you will of course supply the link to a male DUer in crisis and being ridiculed for it, yes?

Regardless of broad brush, you will of course supply the link to a male DUer in actual crisis and being he's parroting MRA talking points, yes?

Or will this simply be another "I'm not doing your homework" avoidance routine?

[polly7]

46. You bet!! do your own homework.

There's a decade of it here, so I hope you stock up on the drinks and munchies. Nothing too hard on the stomach though ...... much of it is actually quite nauseous.

[LanternWaste]

48. I imagine avoidance is much more self-validating than simply admitting there are none...

I imagine avoidance is much more self-validating than simply admitting there are none to link to.

Bless your little heart. <giggle>

[HangOnKids]

49. Don't pester her she is coming to paint my house

[LanternWaste]

52. Damn you, Tom Sawyer and your trickeries!!!

Damn you, Tom Sawyer and your trickeries!!!

[HangOnKids]

56. Holy Fuck My Trickeries

I thought I lost them. Sheesh, found now.

[polly7]

55. LOL.

I would, but I only have one usable foot at the moment. I'd spill all your paint hopping it around.

[HangOnKids]

57. You paint with your feet?

Amazing!

[polly7]

59. Are you reading this in Swedish or some language you don't understand?

How on earth is carrying paint around ... painting???

Never mind, I can see you're a bit upset and not thinking all that clearly.

[HangOnKids]

60. Dear Polly I am thinking quite clearly

The fact that you got your ass handed to you seems to escape you. Are you alright dear?

[polly7]

64. Sorry, I post my opinion. If someone doesn't agree ....... that's

completely fine with me and in no way assumes my ass has been handed anywhere. I'm sick and tired of seeing good people maligned, accused of horrible things and their concerns relegated to those no more important than any coming from hate groups of any kind. I'll take my empathy and compassion any day over your attempts to dismiss and minimize.

[HangOnKids]

65. Ta Ta My Dear

I in no way dismissed or minimized anything. Your empathy is noble; please try to use that empathy to find DUers that have been ignored in crisis, so far you have not backed up that claim. Welcome to ignore dear one, I do not have time for you.

[polly7]

66. Yeah, yeah, yeah .... see ya.

[WilliamPitt]

61. bork bork bork

[polly7]

63. My little niece does that. She's 3.

Maybe you just need to take a break ..... I know you're more than capable of just "bork, bork, bork."

[randys1]

77. IN CRISIS, can you give me an example of a crisis they would be in that would be mocked?

I am in crisis often, but the same crisis Women and everybody else is in...

so, not sure what you mean

[polly7]

87. In crisis ...... suddenly out of a job,

but don't complain, or you're accused of being an entitled MRA asshole who believes he deserves one. Cut off from one's children, but don't complain or you're accused of being a bitter MRA'r who's 'entitled' to superiority in the courts. Battered and abused for years/decades, but don't complain, because you're a whining MRA'er who's probably deserved it. And on and on.

Greek men are in crisis due to brutal austerity and the dishonour in that society stemming from the inability to work and support a family. They're killing themselves. Indian farmers are committing suicide over the loss of the ability to grow and farm their own seeds d/t the IMF and GMO seed ownership over their gov't. Wars waged by the oligarchs and their military tools that send millions to war to fight, be maimed or die, leaving widows, children and ruined lives for them behind. Those things also affect the hundreds of thousands of women and children they leave behind. THOSE CRISES. I'm baffled at the complete inability to even try to understand how men around the world are in many, many cases suffering under that same patriarchal capitalistic system that owns all of those gov'ts that every minority down.

But, scream 'MRA' loud enough, and it'll all go away. According to this place and those who scream it the loudest, anyway.

[bloom]

134. You are out in some field of dreams or something

I can't imagine anyone around here not being sympathetic to instances of men killing themselves in places like Greece and India because of the IMF, GMOs, etc.

You are bringing up totally non-related instances to support your MRA sympathies. It's absurd. Give it up.

[polly7]

145. LMAO!

Do a little reading whenever someone from the men's group dares to bring up an issue. The whole place nearly erupts.

You seem to be in some 'field of dreams or something' and you can shove that bull* you know where. When bringing up the idea that ALL human beings (apart from those in any hate group - as I've posted many, many times) deserve equal treatment and that yes, even men face horrible challenges all around the world makes me a hate group sympathizer, I know you have no interest in anyone or any issue.

[thucythucy]

158. So give us a link.

You've been asked at least a half a dozen times to give us one specific example of a man in crisis here at DU being mocked as an MRA, and you still haven't done it.

Which would indicate you don't have any examples.

So post one, please.

[Tsiyu]

190. You've got no links

Just an imaginary grudge to bear

And you've proved it over and over and over on this thread.

but Greek people....

[bettyellen]

94. Never happened to a man in genuine crises here.

What a steaming pantload.

[BainsBane]

83. None of that has anything to do with the Men's Right Movement.

People suffer and experience all kinds of loss, and some of them are men. It is possible to support those men without defending a far right-wing ideology of hatred against women, just as it's possible to support white people we know without defending White Supremacists. Why you are so outraged that anyone would laugh at hate mongers defies comprehension.

MRA's believe that you as a woman, as well as the rest of women, are responsible for the decline of society. They have nothing to do with human rights, which even the most casual reading of MRA sites like the Men's Right's Reddit, The Red Pill Reddit, or a Voice for Men would demonstrate. They are extremist right-wing groups, so far to the right that even the GOP will have nothing to do with them.
They are the equivalent of the Klan and are starting to rack up dead bodies to prove it. Elliot Rodgers is only one of a list of MRA influenced murderers. There are several others, including the Norwegian mass murderer.

[polly7]

84. I know EXACTLY what Men's Rights Groups believe in and yap about.

I'm 'outraged' at the simple fucking lack of empathy and compassion for men who have NO association with any hate group of any kind for merely expressing some of the difficulties and trials they face. Why are you so intent on making what I said something it isn't? Never mind, that's just your MO, I've seen it over and over and over.

If you can't logically explain away the cruelty of dismissing certain human beings based on their sex alone, try with every fucking argument and excuse you can to make them and those who support them 'obvious hate group members'. Soooo transparent, and pathetic. Men who talk about their own problems really aren't taking away from yours, no matter how much you might want to believe it ..... we really all do have issues that affect and harm us both as human beings collectively, and as groups. Empathy and compassion for one doesn't take away the absolute right to support and empathize with all others.

[BainsBane]

85. There is no such logic--or humanity-- in dismissing suffering by men

and I would not do so. That, however, has no relation whatsoever to this OP. Men's Rights does not mean men. It is a distinct ideology that most men have absolutely nothing to do with.

Perhaps you can explain to me the logic of complaining for almost a year about a comment made regarding pats on the head while voicing not even the slightest bit of concern for threats of rape and death against another member (or ongoing charges of child abuse, mental illness, man-hating, and a litany of other insults)? What is the logic of deciding that attacks against some people are more important than those against others?

[polly7]

88. WTF are you yammering about, pats on the head? That was your friends, not me.

Go wag your finger at them.

[BainsBane]

92. My question to you was

Why do you continue to raise that one comment for months on end yet have nothing to say about death or rape threats against another member?

[polly7]

102. WHAT are you talking about?

When did I raise that comment for months on end???? It was said just the other day over on discussionist where your bestie just put down another woman with that exact quote and added for good measure 'you only are able to get any worth by associating with the men's group' - paraphrasing. I will stick up for those I care about against this kind of sexist crap whenever I see it, no mention of the demand for an apology for 'causing her' to steal private medical info to pass around and mock her with?

What death or rape threats??? Who has said that here? Link?????? How the hell can I say something about what I haven't seen? Good grief, and yet not a single word from you on the horrible treatment of other women when you HAVE seen that putrid garbage used against them. Not that anyone expected it of you, of course.

[BainsBane]

103. I hadn't seen the other comments either

In fact I had the person who made them on my ignore list at the time. That didn't stop you and your friends for blaming me personally for the insult. You commented on that remark over all the other crap said on that other site about people, including me. You decided to mention that over accusations of child abuse, mental illness, and man-hating. That site is teaming with overt racism and misogyny, but you don't comment on that. No, you care about a comment about a pat on the head. How about this one? http://www.democraticunderground.com/111410188#post343
What say you to that?

As for the Rape threats: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024893303#post203 That was Vashta Neranda's sock. His post telling her to commit suicide was earlier in the subthread. I thought everyone knew about that comment, given the fact MIRT declared it the single worst personal attack in the history of DU. Yet for some reason certain people continue to insist the entire site heed the insult you like to talk about in lieu of others made against DUers each and everyday.

Oh, I've confronted people about horrible treatment of women, particularly against those who make a habit of it. In fact, you and that woman you defend attack me pretty regularly. Ain't I a woman? I think what you mean to say is the women you think matter, but not the rest of us. In fact, I recall your accusing me of doing a whole string of nefarious things, like passing around nude photos of a DUer and someone's medical information. How you think I would have access to that stuff, I have no idea. The accusations were truly bizarre.

Yes, insert sock reference. I'll save you the trouble. That's always the go to when you don't want to address the issue at hand.

[polly7]

104. When did I 'insert sock reference?'

I feel sorry for you, having to invent all of these injustices against you when you can't be bothered to even stand up for other women when you see the bullying, insulting and downright meanness time after time after time.

You really seem to stand for nothing but yourself.

Which is why I take nothing you say seriously.

Carry on with your 'poor me' screeds, even though it hasn't happened.

[BainsBane]

127. When did you insert a sock reference?

Just about every time, if not every time, you have had a discussion with me. Here are just a few examples: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4814931
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4609392
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4608768
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4605969
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4605895
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4591904
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4564741
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4322794
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4133211
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1139&pid=10332
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1139&pid=10322
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1139&pid=10318
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=132200
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3676202

(By the way, "starting in on" you amounted to pointing out the main point of the article. In what universe is that considered an attack? And you accuse me of playing victim? )

Why would you pretend you haven't done something that you clearly do frequently, something easily verified by a search? How very strange.


I stand up for women. I stand up against women attacked by those who do it most frequently, and they are not in HOF. For example: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=31166
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=31164
(I personally saw the comment you insist you never made. Given your denial of those many sock comments, I'm thinking that denying what you say is an ongoing habit of yours. I don't know whether it's intentional or you truly have no sense of what you post. Either way, it's not good).
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=31161
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=31158

I stood up for her against those ugly attacks in a couple of ways. I asked the HOF hosts to ban you. I imagine I probably told you what I thought as well, as is my tendency. I also raised the issue in ATA. I got a number of responses from non-HOF members expressing amazement that your attacks weren't hidden by a jury. Meanwhile, you don't stand up for Sea even when I linked to rape threats to her. You can't even bring yourself to mention them. I don't see that you are in any position to criticize me on that particular issue. Speaking of which, have you stood up for your friend against the male member who gave her a pat on the head?

How exactly do you decide who qualifies as a woman or not? Why is it okay for you and people you agree with to attack and insult women, but if someone else makes a single comment six months ago, that is an outrage? Ain't I a woman? Isn't Seabeyond a woman? What does it take to qualify as a woman in your eyes? Does the fact we have the audacity to disagree with a handful of men mean we don't qualify as women? Does the fact we discuss issues rather than tearing down other women, as is the practice in some circles, mean we don't qualify as women? Could it be that women who don't stay in their place, the place determined by men who resent the fact that women speak on issues of which they don't approve, mean we don't qualify as women in your eyes?

As for inventing slights to complain about, I would suggest your OP mocking Will Pitt's post on MRAs is a prime example. You erected an enormous strawman without providing a single example to back up your claims, even when asked by multiple posters to do so.

[Waiting For Everyman]

136. Btw, did you ever apologize for that sock?

Because if you did apologize, I missed it. Since you keep so many links, I'm sure you must have that one.

Fyi, as to your last paragraph concerning the link you and "multiple posters" demanded from Polly7 in her thread? (And now here again of course.) Perhaps she didn't answer you for the same reason I didn't there -- at least one example if not more was in her thread itself... if you and they had read it, obviously.

Not that anybody owes you a link just because you want one.


(Note to jury: I am not accusing BainsBane, her sock is a fact established by Skinner on the sock's ban statement, which is a page posted by admin and available for every DUer to view in the name of transparency.)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=302058&sub=trans

[pintobean]

140. That was a TOS violation.

Don't post malicious code or mess with the software.

Do not attempt to intentionally interfere with or exploit the operation of the Democratic Underground website or discussion forums (eg. by "post bombing" or using any other flooding techniques, by attempting to circumvent any restrictions placed on your account by the forum software, etc.) Do not post messages that contain software viruses, Trojan horses, worms, or any malware or computer code designed to disrupt, damage, or limit the functioning of any software or hardware.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

She's lucky she wasn't PPRed for that. Others have been.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

159. Not only that....

....but since given MIRT privileges.

Though I suppose a relevant analogy....you want to protect a safe, who better to hire than a thief.


Copy and pasted from WFE's post for my protection....

(Note to jury: I am not accusing BainsBane, her sock is a fact established by Skinner on the sock's ban statement, which is a page posted by admin and available for every DUer to view in the name of transparency.)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=302058&sub=trans

[BainsBane]

141. What makes you think I owe you anything?

You don't own this site, and you don't own me. Nothing about my life is any of your business. If you are so interested, do a search. There was an OP in HOF on the subject.

I see no reason to explain myself to someone who called a survivor of child rape an abuser.

The only thing new is Woody Allen's film award recently. This controversy is nothing more than an attempt to detract from that. Thus, regardless of the past, Dylan is the abuser now.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4468935

Did you apologize to that thread full of rape survivors who were insulted by that remark that conjured up feelings of self blame that invariably afflict survivors of child rape? No, you doubled down on the insult.

You have no moral authority to question me. That comment above told me everything I need to know about you. I suggest you turn that critical eye on yourself for a change. I will never see you as anything other than a person who called a survivor of child rape an abuser for daring to speak about her father's violation of her, something you claim to be less significant than a movie award.

As for the link, no she doesn't owe me it. Her inability to provide links, however, serves as a pretty good indication that her allegations in that OP were unfounded. She of course is free to post as she chooses, just as thinking people are free to disregard her allegations against DUers since she could provide no evidence.

[Waiting For Everyman]

142. Lol! So you didn't apologize for the sock.

I'm not surprised.

Not surprised at the long-winded way of not admitting it either.

[BainsBane]

202. Not admitting it?

I posted dozens of links to references about it. I brought it up to save her the trouble of invoking it when her argument falls apart. Jesus Christ.

I told you where to look if you wanted to see what I said about it at the time. It's not my problem you can't or won't do a basic search.

What I do apologize for now is sinking to this level of petty bickering. Clearly you find my presence on this site objectionable. Therefore I suggest you put me on ignore. I can no longer tolerate this level of toxicity that some seem to derive such pleasure from.

I extend that same invitation to anyone else in this subthread who feels similarly. Surely folks have better things to do that cultivate animosity with people online.

[one_voice]

152. This is rich coming from you..

What makes you think I owe you anything?

You have no moral authority to question me.

fucking hilarious. All one has to do is read this thread. Pot meet kettle.

[polly7]

143. Ahhh ........ I was talking about today.

Speaking of history though ...... you probably have no room to complain about anyone here. I remember you and your sock 'educating me' on the FEMEN threads and those 'terrible, shameful women'.

As to the rest of your screed, I haven't got a clue what you're yammering about and can't be bothered to read it. Sorry.

[one_voice]

150. What?

Serious?

It was said just the other day over on discussionist where your bestie just put down another woman with that exact quote and added for good measure 'you only are able to get any worth by associating with the men's group' - paraphrasing.

Well isn't that ducky. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for anyone to condemn it.

[one_voice]

91. I didn't see the rape threats until after the fact....

that person should have been banned and if there was any way that charges (some type of threatening charges) brought that should have been done. As for the child abuse, mental illness I have no idea who or what you're talking about.

As for the dog pat on the head comment that was made. It was a pretty foul thing to say. I don't care how it's tried to be justified. If any man said anything close to that about a woman fire and brimstone would have rained down.

What was worse was when more than one person, make that more than one woman spoke up said how offensive they thought is was, they were mocked, talked down to etc. Then you went back to your safe haven and had a blast making fun of all of them. Doubling down on it. Trying to make it ok. When all it would have taken was to say 'sorry'. That's how your group of feminist treated other women on a progressive site. Other women that were offended that a woman was compared to a good hunting dog. One that was loyal to men. Men that your group deemed sexist. It was meant to be an insult.


I will tell you if I see anyone say anything remotely close to what you've described, I promise I will speak up.

[BainsBane]

93. Precisely

Last edited Fri May 30, 2014, 12:59 AM - Edit history (1)

That one offensive comment has been discussed repeatedly for months on end, but even now you can't bring yourself to denounce rape threats. Instead you say "I didn't see it until it was over." Then you go on to hedge and say if something like that actually was said. If you saw the comment, you know very well it was said. Tell me why that is less of a concern to you than the dog remark? Is it that you consider threatening to rape a woman less serious that the comments referenced above? Or is that you think threats against some people are more serious than others? I didn't see the pat on the head comment until well after the fact, but that didn't stop people like you from deciding I was personally responsible for a remark made by someone on my ignore list.

Then you went back to your safe haven and had a blast making fun of all of them. Doubling down on it. Trying to make it ok. When all it would have taken was to say 'sorry'.

Show we where I went back to my safe haven group and made fun of them. Go on. I'm waiting for a link. You have made a serious charge against me with no proof. I don't recall ever discussing that person in that group. Why should I apologize for something I never said? Is it possible that you aren't able to distinguish individuals and that you believe feminists collectively bare the blame for what one person does? If so, what does that say about you?

Given how outraged you are by the pat on the head comment, I would think you'd have something to say about this. http://www.democraticunderground.com/111410188#post343
Or is it not as offensive if it doesn't aid in grinding a personal axe?

I personally do not believe in the inherent superiority of one person above the rest of humanity and therefore do not think an insult against one person worse than those waged against the rest of the DU membership, subject to insults every day.

[one_voice]

97. I'm sorry did you miss this part of my comment:

I didn't see the rape threats until after the fact....
that person should have been banned and if there was any way that charges (some type of threatening charges) brought that should have been done. As for the child abuse, mental illness I have no idea who or what you're talking about.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1002&pid=5023265

I'm pretty sure saying that if there was any way charges should have been brought that should have been done is denouncing the comments. But if you need me to use the word denouncing I will--I denounce the rape comments made against Seabeyond.

Let's be clear here, I didn't see the rape comment (which I've told you) until after the fact but didn't stop YOU from deciding that my original comment; that the person should have been banned and if at all possible charges brought was enough of a denouncement.

I wasn't clear when I said 'you' I meant it in the collective--for that I apologize. Here's one thread (all through this thread) http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=36897 I know there are more I've seen them. I will look for more.

I'm perfectly able to distinguish between individuals and groups. It would be nice if you guys would act as individuals. You guys are always rushing to each other's defense & speaking on things as groups as if you're speaking as one but demanding to be treated as individuals in situations like this. You can't have it both ways.

Just for the record, I have no problem acknowledging when I mis-speak as I did above. I should have been more clear when I used 'you' and noted it was the collective. As you'll see from the link it was more than one person involved.

To answer your last question 'what does that say about you (me)'--thus far. 1) twice I've denounced the awful things that were said to Sea. 2) I clarified a mis-spoken statement.

So far you're still making excuses as to why you cannot at least acknowledge the dog comment was hurtful to other WOMEN. It shouldn't matter whether you saw it or not. You've heard enough about it by now, you could have taken the time to read it. I didn't see the comment directed at Sea but I still know it was a disgusting filthy thing to have be said and have said as much.

[BainsBane]

101. So you admit you faslely accused me

I am not a collective. I am an individual human being. Your defense is you don't believe I act as an individual? Are you actually going to claim you can't tell my writing and posting style from other members of that group? Does the name on the linked post look like mine? Or is my crime that I more often than not agree with feminists who care about women's rights? (You've obviously missed the disagreements among members of that group about a host of issues). Or is the crime that women in HOF support each other as friends rather than spending our days attacking each other, as some seem to think is how women should behave? Whatever your problem is in recognizing the humanity of individuals who have the audacity to disagree with you is your problem entirely.

That's the first I've seen that comment you linked to. I'm going to assume by your use of it that you consider the one insult about the pat on the head far worse than calling a woman a c.... You chose that remark, and didn't see fit to comment on the sexist vulgarity. Nor did you remark on the other "pat on the head" comment. Have you demanded an explanation from him? No, yet you insist I bear some collective guilt for a comment made by someone who was on my ignore list at the time. How many times am I supposed to comment on one insult to this person you elevate above the rest of DU? Why exactly do I have to talk about that insult ad nauseum while the regular insults against me don't even register on your radar? Why is it acceptable for that member to insult me regularly, yet I am supposed to apologize for remarks someone I had on my ignore list made to her? Shall I hold you responsible for the vile comments to Sea because you share that member's antipathy toward certain feminists on this board?

I consider your refusal to acknowledge me as an individual human being a grave insult. I see no reason to talk to anyone who refuses to recognize my humanity, who charges me with things I never did and has the nerve to link to a post to someone else as evidence of my culpability. Since I don't exist as a person. you have no reason to ever again respond to any of my posts. Just ask the person you linked to what I think, since you apparently don't believe I have a mind of my own or even exist as an individual.

[one_voice]

123. You're a piece of work. You know that.

Poor poor you. Always the perpetual victim; all while lecturing every person that doesn't follow you.

I guess it wasn't good enough that I admitted my mistake I APOLOGIZED for it, something I don't think I've ever seen you do.

I wasn't clear when I said 'you' I meant it in the collective--for that I apologize.

I also denounced the comments against Sea not once but twice--you've yet to say shit about the dog comments--except that it really wasn't an insult . Yet you continue to yammer on about any and all real and PERCEIVED slights against you and any other HoF'ers. Poor poor victims. Poor put upon women.

I'm not going to get into what insult is worse than another. An insult is an insult. My mom use to say 'stealing is stealing, doesn't matter if it's a dollar or a thousand dollars it's all stealing'. Same with insults. Yes some are worse ALL deserve an apology. It wasn't the 'pat on the head part' but the fucking DOG part and you know it.

Now I see how it is with you; some insults matter, it depends on the woman, because some women matter some women don't.

I've tried being nice, I've tried being decent and apologizing when I've made a mistake none of that is good enough for you. So here's the deal. You don't want to educate other women. You don't want to have good honest conversations with other women, YOU want to lecture other women (men too) YOU want women to follow you. YOU want to be the THAT man you claim to be fighting against.

You want to keep other women down. YOU want to silence other women who dare disagree with you. You're great for the 'they just want us to shut up' when in fact you want others to shut up. Well I've never been very good at shutting up, especially when someone is telling me (directly or otherwise) to shut up.

You and many others in HoF are some of the worst people I've ever come across. The way you mock, try and humiliate, swarm aka bully, etc. You're not looking to educate/help you're looking for follwers/cult. You're the clique that points and giggles, you're the clique that petitions to exclude the mom that cuts her grass in her bikini from the block party because she's a bad influence on the young girls, etc. You're a mean girls clique.

I like many of the people in HoF. I think many of them are extremely intelligent, funny, and offer women's causes a lot I enjoy reading all of their posts. It's disappointing that a handful put such nasty tone to the group.

Shall I hold you responsible for the vile comments to Sea because you share that member's antipathy toward certain feminists on this board?

What do you mean shall you? This is the third time in as many posts that you've brought up the comments. As if I've not repeatedly denounced. You act as if you say it enough you'll convince people I actually said the shit. Exhibit one of my antipathy toward certain feminist on this board. 1). dishonesty. 2) Perpetual victims.

[pintobean]

125. Wow.

[seabeyond]

163. You and many others in HoF are some of the worst people I've ever come across.

see. i am pretty damn sure i have not said anything so ugly to anyone on du period. but hey... the worst? k.

[Violet_Crumble]

165. A question for you..

Do you think that equating a woman with a dog and saying that she's looking for pats on the head from men is a sexist slur? If not, why not?

[seabeyond]

166. totally ignore.... the worst people ever. i would say amazing violet, but it is

predictable.

have the last word. i am done.

[Violet_Crumble]

167. I'll take yr refusal to answer that simple question as you not thinking it's sexist...

I'll tell you why it definitely was a sexist slur. Anyone who portrays women as not being able to think for themselves, only existing to gain approval from men, and equating them with dogs is taking a page from the MRA handbook, if those creeps have a handbook. That some who claim to be feminists and care about all women can condone sexist slurs if it's one of their friends flinging them is something I find pretty horrible, and it does make me think 'oh bullshit!" every time they go on with "I love all our girls!" and that sort of fluffy but meaningless nonsense.

This learning moment brought to you by someone who found the defence of that sexist slur a turning point...

[seabeyond]

171. don't make up something out of the blue. that is dishonest. the issue. 170 post. me? 1 post. you...?

havent been in this thread at all and the moment i post... you zero in on me. not to address what i actually post. but to start other shit i have no interest in at all.

you have been doing this for months. i have no interest in interacting with you.

you have now gone along with polly. i read the first sentence in the title.

I'll take yr refusal to answer that simple question as you not thinking it's sexist...

such a crap statement you lost the privilege of me reading any more of your post.

now. i am done.

taunt with another made up accusation, whatever. i wont be back in this thread

but hey... someone saying we are the worst people ever does not phase you at all. again. no surprise.

[Violet_Crumble]

172. But I didn't make anything up...

You did refuse to answer the very simple question you were asked, and now you've come along and clarified that yr refusing to answer it. btw, this 'other shit' is what the sub-thread was about before you appeared and tried to derail it, and just in case you missed it, it was about a sexist slur being thrown at a woman.

And this is the post yr trying to describe as starting up shit? If so, it seems that discussing sexist comments posted at DU does actually disturb some people posting here after all...

A question for you..

Do you think that equating a woman with a dog and saying that she's looking for pats on the head from men is a sexist slur? If not, why not?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025018878#post165

Having told me in the previous reply that you were done with me, I'm not going to hold my breath that you stick to what you say. Not that it bothers me one way or the other whether you reply to me or not. I just find it totally bizarre that you'd lash out rather than do what people who are opposed to sexism would do, and discuss whether that comment was a sexist slur or not.

I dunno, maybe I should go to google images and get some warm and fuzzy, mellow-out image of a glowing sunset, or maybe a dewy eyed puppy to stick at the end of my post to show just how incredibly mellow I'm being. Then again, maybe not, coz it's kinda lame...

On edit: to hell with it. I think I can afford to lose a little street cred by posting a warm, fuzzy, motivational sunset image to close this post. Enjoy!

[pacalo]

184. VC, congratulations!!!

#171: such a crap statement you lost the privilege of me reading any more of your post.

[Violet_Crumble]

188. Hiya pac!

LOL. To lose that particular privilege is quite an achievement, especially as I kind of suspected my posts weren't being read properly in the first place.


That's one very exuberant poker machine there. American ones are so much louder and colourful than ours...

[pacalo]

189. I wanted you to win a new car

but that was the shortest clip I could find.

Was in the mood for goofiness tonight, so after grasswire deleted his OP, I hooked onto to this one. Comedy gold!

[polly7]

174. You know, I'm tired of your call-outs.

If you have a problem with me, address me. Don't hide it in a reply to someone else. You do this all the time, even on days when I haven't posted, or addressed you. I suggest you read the rules of the site here, you're no more above them than anyone else.

How has she 'gone along with polly' ???? and, what exactly have I done for her to go along with?

[Violet_Crumble]

175. I was wondering where I've gone to...

I just figured if yr already there, it can't be too bad a place. But I am heading out in about half an hour for a big night out which is going to involve a fair bit of alcohol and good food. I'd invite you along, seeing I'm supposed to have been going where yr gone, but logistics at this short notice might be a bit of an issue

[seabeyond]

196. ah. well, you see. like i explain to you often. when reading your posts to me, as soon

as i get to insults, name calling or a nontruth, i stop reading. not really a call out. more me explaining to violet, that i do have my standards. and i will stop reading a post with non truths. immediately. or name calling.

i think we are better than this. i think civility is a good thing to reach for.

[R B Garr]

169. I see you are morphing that comment again. I see you dropped the B-word slur

as your interpretation. So when the B-word slur didn't stick about the dog comment, your interpretation of that comment now is that it's "pats on the head" and loyal like a dog (as another perpetually confused poster referenced in this thread). Yet, you rejected those interpretations when they were presented to you the last round of this phony outrage.

[Violet_Crumble]

170. There's as much morphing as there was an attempt from you to answer the question I asked seabeyond..

I'm the polar opposite of perpetually confused, which you would have picked up on if you read many of my posts, but thanks for the lame attempt at an insult. That disgusting comment that a few of you are so intent on defending hasn't changed at all from when I first read it. Scroll down a bit and read my response to the other person who refused to answer the question. That what was said is a sexist slur is clear. What I'd like to hear is any sort of attempt by anyone who doesn't think that was a sexist slur as to why it wasn't. Feel free to give it a try....

Oh yeah. Kind of interesting that opposition to sexist slurs is seen as 'phony outrage'...

btw, I went back to where I recalled the one exchange I'd had with you at DU, and it was about that comment, but nothing I've said has changed or 'morphed' in any way. In fact, I'm asking the same question now I was asking then...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4554931

[R B Garr]

182. Your own post said you weren't going to bother reading my answer to you.

Now your story has changed, just like this inane attempt to smear someone over a very common and simple figure of speech.

You've been answered many times that I've seen about that word reference, but you change your question slightly enough to keep asking it over and over and over -- as if no one notices. That's why your outrage is phony. When did you decide that the dog reference wasn't about the B-word slur after all? Everyone was all up in arms about that, but it didn't stick and didn't make any sense, so now you've shifted your outrage to a very simple, simple and common figure of speech. It's really absurd.

[Violet_Crumble]

186. Where are you reading that in the posts I linked to?

I never said that at all. And I just rechecked and I haven't changed my question at all, nor have I been asking it over and over, though it would help if someone answered it.

You say what was said is merely a common figure of speech? I don't care if it is or not. The word 'bitch' is merely a common figure of speech, and it's one that used in some ways is a sexist slur. The same goes for dog. If I say I'm like a dog with bone when I'm trying to solve a problem at work, that's not a sexist slur. If I refer to another woman who I dislike as being the same as a trusty hunting dog and trying to please men, then that's a different use of the common figure of speech, and is very much a sexist slur.

What bothers me far more than the original comment is the way one or two folk have responded, not by saying that they can appreciate that me and it looks like quite a few other women saw it as a sexist slur but they don't agree with us, but being met with insults and dismissals like phony outrage (btw, I'm not an outrage type of person), sanctimonious crap, amongst others. Those sort of dismissals are the sort of thing I see coming more often from people who have a problem with feminism, so I'm very disappointed to see feminists using the same sort of dismissive language...

[R B Garr]

193. So when did you decide to drop the B-word slur from your "outrage"?

Or is your interpretation overnight now shifted back to the B-word slur, because it looked like you dropped it and focused your outrage on a very general, benign, and innocuous figure of speech that denotes loyalty. You keep shifting your outrage to suit your purposes.

[Violet_Crumble]

195. I'll ask again. Where are you reading that in the posts I linked to?

I reread them and can't see that anywhere. Also, I discussed yr claim of it merely a being a figure of speech in the post you just replied to.

I'm not sure you telling me multiple times I'm outraged immediately after me telling you I'm not a person who does outrage is really achieving much as far as discussion goes

[seabeyond]

203. i compared feminists, me, hof to pavlov dogs the other day. it was appropriate.

obviously i was not calling any of us a dog. and certainly not the b. word.

we can see the rewards of speaking out. like pavlov dogs, that will encourage us to continue to speak out.

[BainsBane]

205. Oh, I thought it was that infernal comment about pats on the head.

My bad. I'll delete.

Edit: Turns out she was talking about that comment. Clearly they see that as far more grievous than mere threats of death and rape. Meanwhile, people are insulted every day--I'm called unhinged, mentally ill, psychotic--but naturally none of that compares to a comment about pats on the head made six months ago.

It is all so incredibly petty and toxic. I had hoped we were better than this. It all feeds into the worst stereotypes about women.

People are going to disagree. Everyone doesn't seem feminism or any other issue in the same way. There is no reason they should. People just have to deal with the fact that others are going to have different opinions, and they are even going to express them. We should stick to issues that matter--politics, society, culture. But when we focus on this petty bickering, we only bring down ourselves. Enough already.

[seabeyond]

206. we are told we are the worst people ever. worst people ever.

now. they have to make us out to be the worst people ever. but, we are not. this is all they have. that is it.

i think, with all the accusations, for that to be the only thing they have to discuss, it says a hell of a lot. and that is not... worst people ever.

i dunno. i think it is worse to call a group of women, the worse people ever than to compare a person to an obedient and loyal dog.

as i say, i compared us to conditioned dogs.

meh...

and one particular feminist we all dearly love, i can say is a pitbull of feminists.

now. totally done with this thread. never wanted to be in it in the first place.

[one_voice]

218. Oh dear. I feel like I need to explain my comment.

First I didn't say all HoF were the worst people ever.

This is what I said:

You and many others in HoF are some of the worst people I've ever come across.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5024799


But I will admit to a mistake and apologize. I didn't mean to say 'many' (bolded) that should have said few.

this was the second part of what I said (which you conveniently leave out):

I like many of the people in HoF. I think many of them are extremely intelligent, funny, and offer women's causes a lot I enjoy reading all of their posts. It's disappointing that a handful put such nasty tone to the group.

Now you seem to have taken quite an issue with my statement. So much in fact you've misrepresented (I'm being polite here) what I said.

You've climbed up and nailed yourself to your cross of martyrdom. Let me be of some assistance to get down off that cross.

I don't like hypocrites or posers. I think they're dishonest people and only interested in 'puffing' up themselves. When you pick and choose what women are 'good' feminist that's what you are/what you're doing. When you make nasty comments because another women may see a situation a little differently, possibly based on her life experiences, it reminds of a man telling a woman what she needs/what she should think. You don't have the lock down on what makes someone a good woman or feminist.

You guys go to your safe haven and think it's ok to mock and talk about people. That's high school. Are you still in high school? Is that what the safe haven is for? My understanding was that it was to discuss women's/feminists issues; not other DU'ers, that don't live up to your expectations.

I have a hard time believing you really want discuss/further women's issues when you (and a few others) are so combative/nasty/mocking toward anyone that doesn't fall in line.

That's my observation and my opinion. Which I'm entitled to. Maybe I'm wrong. In the minority. I'm ok with that. I've never been a follower.



This here is crap

i dunno. i think it is worse to call a group of women, the worse people ever than to compare a person to an obedient and loyal dog.

When Riff was called a dog it was meant as an insult. She was being ridiculed for getting along with the men's group--you know the group that y'all like to refer to as the mra group.

Also:

i can say is a pitbull of feminists.

Calling yourself a pitbull or a friend in this context isn't the same as above.


I will give y'all (a very few) this you really are good at back peddling, two stepping, trying to change the context and act as though it's the same, changing the subject, diversion, twisting people words/adding to them. It's definitely a talent. fYI, that the same kind of non insult as the loyal dog comment.


I hope this clarifies what I said. Please don't change what I say. I don't like that. I will own what I say. I didn't say this:

hof women being the very worst people ever.

I didn't say what you said in the comment I'm replying to either. Yes, in this situation, clarifying whether I said 'all' is important--because I didn't say that.

Have a pleasant evening.

[Violet_Crumble]

219. Yes, I was talking about that comment...

And the only reason I was doing that was because you brought it up initially here.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that because someone think that comment was a sexist slur that they think it's more grievous than anything else. It doesn't work that way. Next time you point out to someone that a word or comment is sexist, how would you like it if someone appeared and said 'Hold on! Yr complaining about that, but you don't say anything about death and rape threats?'. I don't think you'd like it at all, and might even view it as a diversionary tactic. If you asked me how I felt about that incident yr talking about, I'd tell you I totally understand the shock and disgust the recipient of that must have felt, because I received similar back when I was arguing with anti-choicers and one of those Army of God creeps decided to tell me in graphic detail what he'd like to do to me with a mop handle (serves me right for the mop handle theme by naming myself after the suckiest Pearl Jam song ever made. I guess). I felt shock and revulsion when I read it, so that's how I know how it feels. I'm not sure what else you want me to say. As for accusing you of being unhinged, that's totally out of line, and if I was on a jury I'd vote to hide in an instant.

Yr correct that people are going to disagree. That's why I was so disappointed to see women who saw a comment made about another woman as being a sexist insult being dismissed and sometimes insulted by a few people. I know because both times I've asked for an interpretation that wasn't a sexist insult, I've been greeted with incivility and claims of hating some people and being buddies with others and blah blah blah when the reality is that it was the comment itself that I took issue with. And discussing sexism, and part of that is sexist comments aimed at women, is one of the issues that matter as part of being a feminist. Like you, I'd prefer it if people stuck to the issues rather than all that 'You hate me!!!' and 'No, you hate me!!!' making it personal stuff.

After reading a few of the newer posts in this thread today, I just want to be clear that I don't hate anyone, and as a co-founder of HoF, and a member of the group, I'm the last person who'd hate the group. Like One Voice, I think there's some great DUers posting in there, who do post about feminist issues and post stuff that's worth reading, which is why I pop in and post every now and again. But like many groups of people, and I could use being pro-Palestinian as an example of that, there's also one or two who I've decided not to engage with in any way because there's no agree to disagree setting available for them and things always seem to end up nasty when there's disagreement between them and other feminists on specific aspects of feminism.

Thanks for hearing me out

[pacalo]

183. Question...

Does combing through the mental health forum for a particular person's information, then e-mailing it to your buddies count?

[polly7]

164. Thank you!

[maddezmom]

181. Well stated

👍

[pacalo]

185. Nailed it.

[one_voice]

138. LOL...

Nice try. But it was the DOG comment, THE FUCKING DOG comment. CALLING A WOMAN A DOG that was the issue. You know that, stop pretending. If you don't think it was a big deal to call a woman a dog, how bouts I just start referring to you as a dog from now on. That cool with you?

So no I don't have anything to say about that comment for two reasons. 1. it wasn't about the pat on the head & 2. it was tongue in cheek. He was one of the people that defended riff against the dog comment. So you have a big fat fail with that.

As for this:

I personally do not believe in the inherent superiority of one person above the rest of humanity and therefore do not think an insult against one person worse than those waged against the rest of the DU membership, subject to insults every day.

That's a load of crap. You're constant demands that insults against HoF'ers be denounced are legendary. And no I will not go and get links for you. Or maybe your sock can dig them up.

edited to add:

Whoa! where the fuck did I say this nonsense:

That one offensive comment has been discussed repeatedly for months on end, but even now you can't bring yourself to denounce rape threats. Instead you say "I didn't see it until it was over." Then you go on to hedge and say if something like that actually was said. If you saw the comment, you know very well it was said.

Let me refresh your lying ass memory.

first comment:

I didn't see the rape threats until after the fact....

that person should have been banned and if there was any way that charges (some type of threatening charges) brought that should have been done.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5023125

2nd go round:

I'm pretty sure saying that if there was any way charges should have been brought that should have been done is denouncing the comments. But if you need me to use the word denouncing I will--I denounce the rape comments made against Seabeyond.

Let's be clear here, I didn't see the rape comment (which I've told you) until after the fact but didn't stop YOU from deciding that my original comment; that the person should have been banned and if at all possible charges brought was enough of a denouncement.

I didn't see the comment directed at Sea but I still know it was a disgusting filthy thing to have be said and have said as much.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5023410

Where in there did I say: 'if something like that was actually said' Where? You made that up. It's a lie.

Which makes the rest of this bullshit. It makes you look like a liar. The only way you can get our of completely ignoring a woman being called a dog is to lie about me. OH NO Bane I did the right thing. I denounced the fucked up shit that was said to Sea---MORE THAN ONCE. You know what you did? You lied about me. And there it is for everyone to see.

nice edit after the fact. I guess you didn't think I'd see that shit.

Don't fucking spread lies about me. I don't like that. If I said it, I'll own it. But I didn't say that.

[polly7]

146. +100000000000000000 nt.

[RiffRandell]

112. There you go again, making shit up.

The post against me was from December 2013.

It hasn't even been a year. Just because I didn't "voice concern" over that post doesn't mean I agreed with it. It was disgusting, and the member that posted it should have been banned immediately, which he was. I don't play junior high games over posts or juries just because I disagree with certain people here. It's unfortunate but not surprising others do.

Search when the last time was that I brought up the post against me...it's been months as I've moved on, but thanks for the reminder.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4120434

[BainsBane]

115. Once again you falsely accuse me

I did not "make shit up." Nothing I said was false. I referred to that comment because Polly brings it up all the time, despite the fact far worse insults and threats are made on this site regularly. Yet somehow one comment to you many months ago is more serious than rape threats against another member, comments even now you can't bring yourself to comment about and instead continue to focus on yourself, pointing to the insult against you. So it turns out that comment was six months ago rather than twelve. Since I have had that comment relentlessly thrown in my face, you'll have to forgive me for thinking it was close to a year ago. On reflection, it's impressive that you and your cohort could make it the subject of so many posts in a mere six months.

You yourself have raised the issue of that insult repeatedly, proving a complete fabrication your claim that I am "making shit up."
You and polly decided to make it and yourself a major point of discussion in a thread about objectification following the posting of SI in GD, seemingly because you couldn't bear seeing people discuss issues concerning images of women rather than you personally.

As recently as May 7, You kicked that thread in the men's group. http://www.democraticunderground.com/111411793#post43 That was after sea had been threaten with rape and death, something that even now you can't bother to comment on. On May 7 as today, you were focused entirely on yourself and the only insult that you seem to think matters in the past six months. And you do it yet again, in direct response to a thread mentioning those rape threats.

And now in your post above you again link to the comment, which clearly you see as more serious than rape threats against another person. Meanwhile, every single day DUers are insulted, many in far more abusive ways. That you continue to focus obsessively on a single slight to you is astounding.

Since you're so concerned about references to pats on the head, shouldn't you be outraged about this? http://www.democraticunderground.com/111410188#post343
You've participated in that thread numerous times, but never said a word to that member about his pat on the head to you. Why is that? Should he too be banned, as you insist TA should be?

Once again, your allegations have been proven entirely false.

I've had enough discussions with you to know that your next response will be a personal insult, as is always the case when you can't defend a position. The pattern is all too predictable.

[redqueen]

116. ...

[opiate69]

120. ... smackdown? more like

Last edited Fri May 30, 2014, 12:35 PM - Edit history (1)

http://m.

[Waiting For Everyman]

118. So now *not commenting* on something is an insult.

Maybe you'd like to just write out everyone else's responses to your liking and we could just post them under our usernames?

[BainsBane]

119. Maybe you could read a post

and follow the point? Or perhaps just write your own posts and respond to them. You clearly have no interest in what I've actually said.

[Waiting For Everyman]

121. Maybe I could comment how I choose

and not how you want me to. See that? Oops you did it again.

[pintobean]

122. She's been trying to

tie that around the necks of anyone who disagrees with her ever since it happened. The person who made those vile comments was PPRed almost immediately. Thousands of DUers haven't commented on them. Very few people even saw them, but she brings them up, and links to them, almost every day. I wonder how the victim feels about that incident being used like this.

[Waiting For Everyman]

126. It's pretty ludicrous

to take offense at someone not commenting on something. Since apparently it's such a justified outrage (I've seen it thrown at more than one poster, myself), I'd invite those who agree with that to take it to a jury, and see what the community thinks about "offenses by omission".

I'll bring the popcorn for that one.

[opiate69]

132. Some people, you just can't apologize enough to.

http://m.

[RiffRandell]

148. She'll continue to do so.

I didn't see them until I saw her link.

[pintobean]

149. It's such a lame tactic.

As if DUers are too stupid to see through it.

[polly7]

153. Well, for some of us ...... and I'm finding out there are many,

who ARE survivors of rape and abuse,... using the threat of rape, when the person who said it was ppr'd instantly, over and over to insult and demean people who never even saw it for not replying, makes the issue of real rape a bit of a joke, doesn't it? Just something to use to spread some personal hate, imo ... and it's sick.

[RiffRandell]

147. When will you ever learn?

STOP MAKING SHIT UP, TWISTING WORDS AND LYING.

I never said "one comment to you many months ago is more serious than rape threats against another member" you did.

I JUST said in my post it was disgusting. Now I'm getting an etiquette lesson on how to respond to insults on DU from you? I can think of some other posters that need it far more than I do.

Polly's my cohort? No, I don't "conspire" with anyone one DU...just agree with some people more than others.

I kicked that thread in the MG as a response to this thread, where you continue to insult me from your safe haven: http://www.democraticunderground.com/125543051

This really takes the cake: And now in your post above you again link to the comment, which clearly you see as more serious than rape threats against another person. Meanwhile, every single day DUers are insulted, many in far more abusive ways. That you continue to focus obsessively on a single slight to you is astounding.

It's not more serious (disgusting that you would even imply that); I never said that, and I don't focus obsessively on it. Last time I brought it up before May was February. As a matter of fact, you and your "cohorts" have probably brought up the vile comment made to her more than I brought up my "slight" since it happened and will continue to do so for your benefit. Despicably, that's your MO.

Show me where I insisted TA should be banned? You can't, because I never did. I alerted on it because it deserved to be hidden; that's all.

As for the outrage post it was a joke, just like you and your friends make about baguettes, doors and ducks.

Predictable? That would be you. It's not just me that's noticed, either.

[polly7]

154. Well said, 'cohort'.

[polly7]

155. I 'bring it up all the time'?!

Bull*.

But, I will defend any woman being called a dog - and actually, whenever I please. YES, it offended me that a good person was insulted that way. Deal with it.

[redqueen]

130. But yesterday when opiate called me a "fucking idiot" and someone applauded,

your only response was "I know".

So yeah, your outrage does seem to be consistently selective.

[opiate69]

133. I wasn't clear. I was calling the author of that op-ed a fucking idiot. Not you. Sorry.

[redqueen]

135. Oh so then you only called me a "sub intellectual grandstander", then?

And the video you posted as a reply to me in this thread, titled "The Nonsensical Ravings of a Lunatic Mind" is similarly innocent I'm sure.



For reference:

he also used the word "imply", which adds a bit of context to the word "caused", which those of us with a modicum of understanding of English can easily understand, without having to try to derail the thread with ridiculous semantics games. Essentially what we have here is, yet another fucking idiot who has no discernible training or background in the Psychology or Psychiatric fields somehow feeling like she's qualified to pontificate on matters which are far beyond her depth of intellect. And the usual sub-intellectual grandstanders line up to applaud her "expert analysis."
Second verse, same as the first.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5021359

[RiffRandell]

139. As does yours.

Last edited Fri May 30, 2014, 02:14 PM - Edit history (1)

At least mine is consistently correct.

You applauding Bain on her "smackdown" of me (shouldn't that be an offensive term?) is hilarious, as her post is full of inconsistencies.

[NuclearDem]

96. Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it so.

I'm 'outraged' at the simple fucking lack of empathy and compassion for men who have NO association with any hate group of any kind for merely expressing some of the difficulties and trials they face.

Still absolutely shit for evidence of that claim.

[polly7]

105. I say it because I believe it.

Whether you agree or not, matters not one bit to me. The evidence has been all over this board for months now/years. See it, or ignore it ......... I really couldn't give a shit.

[smirkymonkey]

176. You are just being willfully obtuse.

It's ridiculous.

[smirkymonkey]

178. +10,000

You have explained the issue very simply and logically. Of course, some people's minds are just impervious to logic, so this will go right over their heads.

They will just keep throwing out the same old right wing talking points, ad nauseum. It's almost pointless to argue with them, they just dig in deeper.

[chervilant]

224. Golly, Polly.

I thought having you on my IL would shield me from your virulently anti-feminist posts. hmm...

All of the examples you list herein above exist because of patriarchy, not because of feminism. In fact, feminists seek to change these rigid gender role expectations so that we can all be whoever we are without being pigeonholed according to our 'plumbing.' Feminists are advocating for services for ALL survivors of relationship violence.

I know, because I have done advocacy for survivors of relationship violence for more than thirty years. In that time, I've advocated for two men who were being abused by their female partners, and one lesbian whose partner was emotionally abusive. I have never interpreted the predominance of female survivors as a negation of male or lesbian survivors, but I have come to understand that recovery resources are virtually non-existent for men who are abused. I know many fellow feminists who are working for parity in these resources. I hope that your brother has found the help he needs and deserves.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

198. because human rights violations are a real thing, and men's rights

as expressed my mra's are not a real thing.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

23. "Men's Lefts" are even funnier.

[benld74]

25. Agreed, Rec'ed, and glad someone said it!

[Laelth]

31. Agreed. The term "mens' rights" is stupid.

It's not that men lack "rights." Men have all the legal rights that women do (with the exception of a long string of legal precedents that favor women, but that's another topic). Generally speaking, I am comfortable saying that men and women enjoy the same legal "rights" in this society. "Rights" are not the problem. Power is the problem. Women have gained it, and men have lost it over the last hundred years. Men have reacted very badly to this loss of power, and that was the entire thrust of this thread.

I argue that it is in our best interests to address this problem. I said so here. I think it's completely unproductive to call the "angst" expressed by the badly-named "Mens' Rights Movement" toxic. We should honestly and thoughtfully address it rather than merely condemning it and dismissing it. It is having real effects that demand our attention.

-Laelth

[redqueen]

50. How do you think people should react to the angst these men have because they've lost power

in the last 100 years?

What kind of power did they lose that warrants anyone giving a single fuck about their "angst" over losing it?

[DesertDiamond]

32. LOL! Thanks, William! How about "Billionaires' Rights"?

[scheming daemons]

33. The only place I consider the term "Men's Rights" relevant is with respect to child custody

Many courts in this country are biased toward the female parent, and all other things being equal, will give primary custody to the female parent over the male parent.

In all other realms of modern society, men have no complaints about lacking "rights".

[joeglow3]

90. That regularly gets blasted and lumped in with men's rights groups

I have had multiple posters say that is how it should be since women have to carry the fetus for 9 months.

[m-lekktor]

36. it's like "why isn't there a white history month"?nt

[hlthe2b]

76. I'll bet you'd find some RWers who are asking that...! LOL

[AverageJoe90]

37. This.

I mean, don't get me wrong.....there are some issues which DO affect men and boys. But what have MRAs ever done to HELP their fellow males? Nothing, that's what.

[Damansarajaya]

51. Yup, me too.

I never even heard of the MRA until I started posting here. Now, I think it should be on a terrorist watch list as a hate-group.

[Rex]

62. Men's Right to rule the world since the dawn of time!

Been a Good Old Boys club since the beginning of recorded history. So yeah...cracks me up too!

[krawhitham]

67. Thats because all men are piece of shit used-car salesmen right?

[WilliamPitt]

68. bork bork bork

Thanks for kicking my thread.

[krawhitham]

72. anytime

[WilliamPitt]

74. Thanks again.

bork.

[Iggo]

71. I hear ya, brother.

[Gore1FL]

78. I'm always cracked up at the DU hyperventilation of the week.

It's a flurry of hilarity where everyone posts the same thing in a different way. As it begins to subside just a twinge, it is followed up with flame-bait threads like this one. This will finally die down enough so we can hear the beginnings of next week's tizzy.

I realize it has the plot depth and story-telling patterns of any given Gilligan's Island episode. Nonetheless it's it's generally amusing in a Gilligan's island sort of way.

If you'll excuse me, I have popcorn to make.



It's always better with popcorn.

[bravenak]

79. Kick!

Just because.

[WillyT]

80. Hey Will... I Don't Know What It Is... Chivalry... Women And Children First... Generational...

But I was blessed to be the older brother of three younger sisters.

And when my dad died in 1975... I became the "man" of the house... or so I was told.

My mom, who still has his love letters from Korea... after he had already served with the Marines in the South Pacific during WWII... would beg to differ.

She was Skittles... before there was a Skittles...



Yeah... Men's Rights... They Should Be So Lucky...

[antiGOPin294]

81. People who advocate "Men's rights" are truly hypocrites.

After all, many of them are the same people who are fine with women staying in the kitchen and being subservient to their man, rather than them being free to pursue their own interests as strong, independent women. They are also perfectly OK with endangering the very lives of many women by denying them access to safe birth control, as well as imposing restrictions on abortion. And that's why I really don't bother taking the "men's rights" advocates seriously anymore.

[smirkymonkey]

177. Welcome to DU!

Great post!

[Jester Messiah]

82. Yeah, it needs to be "Equal Rights" to have any meaning.

People get too hung up on enforcing the ways in which they're different, or engaging in pissing matches to see who has it worst in the Oppression Olympics. Equality is where it's at. Superficial differences shouldn't factor into rights in any way, shape or form.

[bettyellen]

124. Disrupting serious conversations about rights with petty grievnces about not getting dates and

getting ticketed more frequently (one of the largest impacts to men cited here). Yeah, that's laudable, LOL.

[Jester Messiah]

160. Dismissing others' concerns as "petty" simply because you don't share them...

Is a sure sign that you're not out for justice, you'd just rather that you were on the "winning" side of the injustice.

[bettyellen]

180. If a person is using the "parking ticket" thing to dismiss that inequality

Exists? (Which is the context you seem to be completely missing here.) then yeah- that issue is a BS distraction intended to derail an important conversation. In that context, I will dismiss it.

it's not like dudes are starting threads about parking tickets because it really impacts their lives much. Or they want to reform the justice system over that issue.

Give me a fucking break. It's a gambit- and a childish one.

[LeftyMom]

86. Men's Rights is about kicking women. It's not about supporting men.

Yesterday I was interested to see if Men's Rights groups had anything at all to say about getting the non-complying states to implement PREA, since putting a call in to Rick Perry, et all seems like a simple way to help vulnerable men.

So I googled "PREA and Men" and looked through ten pages of results. I saw human rights groups, prison systems, news sources and yes, feminist groups talking about an actual police effort aimed at reducing prison rape. But "Men's Rights" groups? Not a one.

I think that's the best evidence yet that they're completely full of shit.

[Shandris]

89. Personally, I find the concept of Rights to be a good thing.

I have to admit to a certain amount of skepticism about people who are against Rights, no matter who they may belong to.

I have to wonder what exactly is happening to people.

[bettyellen]

95. the OP is against MRA groups, not individual's rights. Hope that helps your confusion!

[Shandris]

98. It seemed to be less MRA groups and more of a retort-thread.

This seems to be some kind of retort-thread for some other one I saw earlier (Human Rights, I think it was?). I always find those 'double entendre' threads a bit late to catch the joke. Ah, well, if that's the worst thing that happens to me today, I'll be happy.

...well, and that silly man who forgot my darn Cinnabon icing-filled crisps at Taco Bell. Grr. Seriously, isn't that grounds for a civil offense or something? If not, it should be. *grousegrumblecomplain*

[bettyellen]

99. the "human rights" thread was the retort, hours later, to this one....

Icing filled crisps at Taco Bell? I MUST look into this. Thanks for the tip!

[whistler162]

109. Simple they need to hate someone to hate to feel

good about themselves.

[whistler162]

108. Thats your opinion!

My opinion is mocking people when they express their concerns is never good and likely one of the catalysts for worse problems.

So yes your attitude like those that dismiss gay rights, the rights of minorities, and the rights of woman is a large part of the problem.

[Lyric]

110. Gay rights, women's rights and other minority rights are just that

minority rights. Men are not a political minority. Frankly, there has never been a bigger, more powerful, longer-entrenched political majority in the world than the male one. It's even older and more powerful than the cabal of the wealthy--and the two are (and historically have been) deeply intertwined.

Men's rights is the political and moral equivalent of "White" rights. Are there issues that men face regularly? Yes. Are those issues related to a longstanding oppression and/or denial of human and/or civil rights, perpetrated by a powerful political entity onto a minority that holds less power? Nope.

Even rich people have problems--but those problems are not the fault of the poor. They tend to be the fault of OTHER rich people. And the same is true of men. What always amazes me are the false equivalencies that the MRA movement draws. We all know that the rights of women have always been oppressed by the men in power. We all know that the rights of racial minorities are oppressed by the racial majority in power. So when "men" start having issues, they automatically adopt the posture of the victim and assume that someone MUST be oppressing them too! Except...the culprit there is usually men TOO. Women aren't the ones committing the vast majority of rapes against male victims in this world--that is oppression by other MEN. Female judges are still much rarer than male judges. When custody is awarded unfairly, it's often a MALE judge, using outdated social norms invented by MEN to control and corral WOMEN (a.k.a., women ought to stay home and raise babies), who made that call.

The stuff that MRA's complain about is, when you strip away the hysteria, evidence that men can be victims of the entrenched patriarchy too. Women aren't oppressing guys. GUYS are oppressing guys. If they were even slightly sincere, they'd acknowledge that fact. However, many of them don't really seem to care much about getting to the root of their issues. They like being able to blame and hate women, and nothing will ever deter them from that line of reasoning.

[redqueen]

114. It is so sad that this has to be explained here. Over and over. nt

[TDale313]

128. It is.

And it's not that hard to understand. Unfortunately some are *very* invested in not getting it.

[redqueen]

131. Very invested in derailing and disruption too. nt

[KitSileya]

173. This is such a good post.

You explain it so succinctly and well, that it is a shame that those on DU, and those on this thread especially, who twist "men's rights" into human rights in an attept to jab at feminists, won't read, and most certainly will not comment. They are not interested in hearing that men are a privileged group, and that most of the problems men encounter because of cultural bias, have been created by men. That women aren't privileged in child custody cases, they are in fact benefitring from something men thought would be detrimental to them because at that time, most men thought that caring for their own children made you less than, so it was suitable only for women. Now that it is biting them in the butt, men are more than happy to blame women for it, rather than their own gender.

The same goes for men having huge problems with job loss because of the idea that men are to be breadwinners. Not only does that invisibilize the fact that a huge number of women have been bread winners in their families, by focussing on just the mechanical aspect - these men must get new jobs - it shifts the focus away from equality. A culture where men are seen as bread winners is wrong. Feminists try to change that - but many on this thread sees this as dismissing men rather than freeing them from patriarchal expectations alongside women.

In the two threads, this and its response, is so much rank hypocrisy it's not even funny. The term "men's rights" (and notice how one side keeps it in quotation marks to show that it is the MRA concept they are talking about, which is blatantly ignored by the hypocritical) does not equate to human rights. They are no better than those who argue that anti-semitic means hatred of Arabs and Muslims.

[smirkymonkey]

179. +10,000

Brilliant post! Thank you!

Still, your words will fall on certain deaf ears here, unfortunately.

[valerief]

151. Like Whites' Rights or Ruling Class Rights. nt

[Paladin]

156. Whatever levity I got from the mens' rights movement, I lost over at Discussionist.com

Some genuinely twisted individuals over there, expressing opinions about women that no sane person should harbor, opinions which clearly indicate the need for professional help, and damned quickly. What a shame it took yet another mass shooting to drag these people into the light.....

[redqueen]

157. Some of us have been trying to raise awareness of these dangerous hate groups for years.

It really is sad that it had to come to this for their hatred to be taken seriously.

I do understand the desire to think they're just a few loons and should be ignored, but that tactic isn't helping and there's way more than a few.

[Harmony Blue]

161. Male circumcisiion is a hot topic

button on DU. So in that aspect we can't dismiss MRA's for advocating the stop of male circumcision of innocent infants. I begrudgingly concede that to MRA's because they are right to educate the public about this practice.

[JackRiddler]

162. Genital mutilation is practiced on both sexes.

What's done to young girls is generally much worse.

Infants and children are not given a choice about it.

It is not good in any form.

[Harmony Blue]

191. Male circumcision is legal in the U.S.

that is what the men's rights activists are fighting to change.

Personally, I don't believe in the concept of men or women's rights but human rights. But people like to assign their worldview in neat categorically boxes to make themselves feel better and avoid seeing the world in shades of gray.

[JackRiddler]

217. It shouldn't be.

That doesn't mean I'm in any way supportive of the "men's rights activists," most of whom are garden-variety misogynists who blame everything bad on feminists.

[pacalo]

187. Men are more the problem on DU than what we've been seeing 24-7 ad nauseum from some feminists?

But then again, I'm from planet Earth.

No, you've been sucked up by the mothership, Will.

[Iggo]

197. Oops.

[Skittles]

201. do you even know the meaning of the word feminist?

I would hope everyone on DU is a feminist

[pacalo]

207. I adore you, Skittles.

Your plain-spoken, no-holds-barred personality shines in the simplest, humorous comments you make. It's easy to see why you're so likable.

In my opinion, the feminism "movement" on DU has more to do with personality than the issues themselves. Strictly personalities. They jumped the shark on feminist "leadership" a long time ago. I don't see leadership; they provoke men into defensive modes with their abusive, accusatory tones that serve as baiting in order to alert on those who bite. They are troublemakers who love to argue. It's the same thing, day after day.

Compared to their silence on what Republicans are doing against women, their priorities of concern obsessions (on a progressive site, mind you) really lessen their credibility.

That's not my idea of feminism. No thanks.

[Skittles]

208. I don't agree

every time they speak someone comes along crying, not understanding it is NOT ALL ABOUT THEM - it's pathetic

[pacalo]

209. Those who are up to here with their monotony find them pathetic.

[Skittles]

210. here is someone who gets it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025035659

[pacalo]

212. Skittles...

I'm at the point of being so turned off on the idea of women being victims that I'm no longer interested in reading anything on feminist issues on DU. All the men on DU are adults & are progressive; the snide remarks to feminists have more to do with the feminist personalities/behavior than the issues themselves -- not everyone is getting this.

[Skittles]

213. if you can't handle it use IGNORE

plenty of us get it

[pacalo]

214. That was taken care of months ago, thank you!

[Zorra]

194. Yeh, kind of like "1% rights".

[La Lioness Priyanka]

199. straight rights and white rights are also pretty funny. while we are at it.

[bettyellen]

204. Lioness- what do you call it when people pretend they are unaware of any larger context? Like here,

where people are saying they do not realize this is about MRA groups? I can't think of the word, but I bet you can.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

211. lying? ignoring inconvenient details?

LOL. i dunno. but i find it AMAZING!

[bettyellen]

215. HA. I thought you'd have a great academic term for it, since you know... people have great respect

for those around here.

[valerief]

216. Men never want to talk about their Wrongs, though. Where are the

MWAs?

[seaglass]

221. Why? n/t

[Sissyk]

222. May I ask why you would do that, ITW?

As far as I can see, there has not been any activity on this since Sunday.

[IronLionZion]

223. Cracked has an interesting post about 5 uncomfortable truths about MRA

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-uncomfortable-truths-behind-mens-rights-movement/

My takeway from that article: "it's just them feeling bad about themselves and directing that hatred elsewhere... which is exactly how a hate group works."

Yup, that's the tip off. Anytime a group is mostly against something, rather than being for anything, it's a warning sign. There's a lot of parallels to right wing political groups who feel deeply repressed as well.



A few observations from this thread:
1. The argument subthreads have mainly been between female posters
2. MRA groups don't really do much for men's rights. They mainly just complain about women or feminism.
3. Many of the grievances of MRA groups are actually because of the gender expectations from the patriarchal system.
4. Some grievances have jack shit to do with anything. Those individuals are just angry losers.


A personal observation for anyone who cares:
I believe feminism has made dating easier for me. I'm shy and awkward as hell, but I just got asked out for coffee by a cute brunette today in fact. Tossing out gender expectations also encourages women to initiate stuff, and even pay for stuff. And I've always been attracted to confidence.