Posting porn in comments on feminist articles is a misogynistic attack.

[redqueen]

It is not just garden variety trolling. It is misogyny.

Minimizing misogynist attacks is just as wrong as minimizing racist or homophobic attacks.

In order to combat this insidious form of hatred, we have to call it what it is.

[HERVEPA]

1. Are people doing this?

Are they being alerted on? Are they being removed from the site. (The articles and the posters>
Has anyone argued that this is not misogyny?

[redqueen]

4. There is a thread discussing these attacks at Jezebel.

In the thread it is being minimized as 'just trolling' and IMO it is important that misogyny not be minimized that way.

[Nobel_Twaddle_III]

177. so why bring it here?

[sufrommich]

179. What do you think discussion forums are for?nt

[Nobel_Twaddle_III]

180. Just questioning the motivation.

[Iris]

196. Why?

[LostInAnomie]

2. A bold and obvious stance

eom

[MannyGoldstein]

3. It could be a misogynistic attack

Or it could be trolling.

I'm certainly not condoning either.

[LanternWaste]

7. Much as posting racist remarks on the NAACP website could simply be garden variety trolling...?

Much as posting racist remarks on the NAACP website could simply be garden variety trolling...?

[MannyGoldstein]

10. No, because racist remarks are ipso facto, racist.

Porn isn't necessarily misogynistic.

[LanternWaste]

12. Racism may be rationalized by the user as easily as porn...

Racism may be rationalized by the user as easily as porn...

[MannyGoldstein]

19. I suppose that there are gray areas for both

But *you* specified *racist* remarks. The OP just specified porn, not misogynistic porn. And I didn't say it was never misogynistic, I just said it was possible for it to be a bad thing but not misogynistic.

[LanternWaste]

45. A swastika painted on a synagogue may be simple graffiti, or it may be racist by your measure...

A swastika painted on a synagogue may be simple graffiti, or it may be racist by the measures you present us with...

[MannyGoldstein]

63. Not really.

A swastika is understood by all to be inherently antisemitic.

[CTyankee]

90. I feel the same way as you do, Manny.

I would hope you would be as "understanding" of what porn means to women.

[TDale313]

132. And you really think...

There's a lot of grey area with spamming a feminist website's comment section with violent pornographic pictures? In what world is that not anti-feminist or anti-women?

C'mon Manny. Don't do this. This is not something you want to defend or minimize.

[MannyGoldstein]

156. For the 18th time, *violent* porn is not mentioned in the OP

I responded to what's in the OP. I'm not a mindreader.

[TDale313]

175. Yes, this was clearly a response...

To discussions about the Jezebel situation. And it sounds like that did include violent or rape porn gifs. However, someone (cough cough) who happens to be on time out just pm'd me about this discussion, and I feel she has a good point:

"ANY porn being posted to create an hostile evironment for women is WRONG. lol

doesnt matter if it is rape or merely violent or porn that is merely used to objectify and degrade women. to use it in a feminist forum is hostile toward women"

Now, yes, to me, the fact that it's violent or rape related makes the threat aspect even more blatant. But I tend to agree that even if the pornographic pics weren't specifically violent, it would still be intended to create a hostile environment and is still anti-woman and anti-feminist given where it was being posted.

[MannyGoldstein]

184. *Anything* creating a hostile environment is wrong

But not necessarily misogynistic.

I also said that the act is wrong whether it's trolling or misogyny. Because I agree - creating a hostile atmosphere is wrong.

But the OP said *misogynistic*, not *wrong*.

I'm not a mindreader. I still have no reason to believe that the OP's author meant anything other than what they wrote.

[TDale313]

188. Even in the OP...

It's posting porn in the comments of a feminist website. I find it hard to envision the circumstances where that isn't anti-woman or misogynistic. When the specifics of the case that is being discussed are added (which have been pointed out to you) it's even harder to claim that. I'm not sure exactly why you're doubling down on this one.

[MannyGoldstein]

189. Words have meanings.

Posting porn could be pure trolling. Or it could be appropriate in a feminist website where porn is being discussed - and a quick search of the Internet seems to indicate that there are plenty of sites claiming to be feminist that contain porn.

Unless one makes the argument that porn is inherently misogynistic, there are situations where it can be posted where it's not misogynistic. Or do you believe that all porn is misogynistic?

If the OP is updated, I'd be happy to take another look at what I've written and see if it should be adjusted - let me know if that happens. But since the author seems to have clarified that my understanding of her post is correct:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5369926

I don't think that will happen.

[TDale313]

193. I won't speak for the OP...

But I'll clarify for my self. Yeah, sure, there's a difference between posting a pornographic picture if it's part of the discussion at hand and randomly posting such pictures in the comment section of a feminist site just to get a rise out of people. And mostly what's been discussed is whether such "trolling" is also misogynistic. With that, I'm done. I think you know where I stand and what I meant, and I'm really not in the mood to debate this any more.

[pnwmom]

208. Posting porn on a feminist website is an act of hostility that is inherently misogynistic.

The OP is correct.

[pnwmom]

207. Agreed. Anytime porn is published on a non-porn site, it is a form of sexual harassment. n/t

[CreekDog]

178. you give us a hard time if we don't get your OP's

[MannyGoldstein]

185. I shouldn't.

Can you point to an example so I can learn to do a better job?

Thanks.

[Gormy Cuss]

148. Violent porn gifs on a feminist site are inherently misogynistic.

The intent is the same as painting a swastika on a shul, namely to upset and hurt people.

[MannyGoldstein]

154. Violent porn gifs are not mentioned in the OP

And my understanding is that the author is purposely not limiting it to violent porn.

[Gormy Cuss]

171. Okay then, let's limit it to the generic "porn gifs" mentioned in the OP

When they're added as comments on a feminist site and the commenter uses no words or dismisses the assertions made by the OP writer of a feminist piece, chances are damn good it's not benign.

[bettyellen]

192. Stop trying to put this in the context of what so commonly happens when women blog on the internet!

We can't have context here, because some people might actually have to acknowledge it's a real issue.
Can't have that, can we?

[intaglio]

201. Not by the Hindus

And as the problem was pornographic gifs pasted to the comments of a feminist site, I suggest you take your ignorant preconceptions elsewhere.

[pnwmom]

105. Why was it important for you to minimize the seriousness of this?

[MannyGoldstein]

120. It wasn't and isn't.

What makes you think it was?

That's a very hurtful thing to hear; I hope there's good reason for you to write that.

[pnwmom]

133. You felt the need to defend the creeps by saying you think it is "possible"

they aren't misogynists.

Who else but a misogynist would anonymously post porn in the comments section of a feminist website?

And in this case we're talking about swarms of posts of rape porn.

[MannyGoldstein]

140. I wasn't defending anybody.

The OP made a statement, I disagreed with it. The OP did not mention a genre of porn, nor did it mention a specific situation. I'm not a mindreader.

You are claiming some terrible things about me based on information that you simply don't have. Please remove those claims right away. I can't imagine defending the posting of rape porn in any situation, and trolling isn't good either.

[pnwmom]

142. You just don't get it. n/t

[MannyGoldstein]

152. You say terrible things, can't back them with facts, then

claim that I don't get it.

That's pretty uncool.

If you can't succinctly state your case, then perhaps you don't have one.

[KittyWampus]

143. So you minimize the misogyny but blame others for pointing it out and play the victim. Well played

Manny.

[redqueen]

16. That is a matter of opinion. Regardless, when it is posted in the comments about feminist issues

that leaves no doubt as to the intent.

[MannyGoldstein]

22. I disagree.

It's entirely possible for it to be trolling, particularly if the porn is not misogynistic.

[redqueen]

25. We will just have to disagree then. nt

[littlemissmartypants]

30. Manny. Your mom called. She wants you to clean up under your bed.

J/K

Love, Peace and the Righteous Fight.
Lmsp

[pnwmom]

161. Any act of posting porn in the comments section of Jezebel is misogynistic.n/t

[MannyGoldstein]

164. First off, suppose I posted a screen frame from a porno film in response

to this article:

http://jezebel.com/screech-confesses-to-using-a-stunt-wang-in-porn-is-may-1619659829

That had relevant information. Would that be misogynistic?

NB: this response only applies to your statement, which is a different statement than the OP.

[pnwmom]

168. Yes. Posting an image of porn is different from having a discussion of issues involved in porn.

Last edited Tue Aug 12, 2014, 04:59 AM - Edit history (1)

That would be comparable to posting a pornographic image in this thread.

A discussion is fine here. Images are not fine here.

Same at Jezebel.

[nomorenomore08]

95. It is when it's used with the intent of mocking or humiliating a woman.

Though I agree it isn't inherently so, by itself.

*Edit: I mean porn in general, not violent/rapey imagery specifically.

[pnwmom]

104. Rape porn is always misogynistic.

That's what's being trolled by misogynists on Jezebel.

[MannyGoldstein]

135. "Rape porn" was not mentioned in the OP

And I don't think the OP wants to narrow it down to just that genre, based on the rest of this thread.

If the OP is just about rape porn, that's a different thing (as I've said elsewhere in this thread). If that's the case, than the OP should be updated to address those who, like me, are unable to,read minds.

[pnwmom]

137. The poster specifically mentioned Jezebel in her next post, #4.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5369570

[MannyGoldstein]

144. First off, if that's what she meant in the OP, then she should update her OP

Second, you'll note that my response was made the same minute as hers; I hadn't read it when I posted my response, and actually didn't see it before you pointed it out.

Finally, the Jezebel situation is presented as an example, not as the specific subject of the OP.

[HuckleB]

206. +1,000,000 ... 000

[CreekDog]

176. if you change the details of the incident

you can make it seem innocuous when it was the opposite.

[redqueen]

8. It is a type of trolling. MISOGYNIST trolling using MISOGYNISTIC attacks. nt

[ZombieHorde]

26. It's both.

I don't see how someone can sincerely claim to respect women and then post rape pics just for shits and giggles on a women's website. The two behaviors don't go together in my mind. If those two behaviors go together in your mind, I would like to read your reasoning.

[MannyGoldstein]

27. The OP just said "porn", not "rape pix"

Rape pix is quite a different thing.

[ZombieHorde]

37. I have not personally seen the pornographic posts,

but people were saying they were rape porn.

[MannyGoldstein]

66. I don't know *what* they are.

I was simply addressing the OP, which just specified porn without saying what kind of porn, or any specific incident.

I'm not a mindreader!

[ZombieHorde]

68. Not assuming motivation is wise, in my opinion,

but also I believe using the context of today's posts on the subject is logical.

[pnwmom]

102. It's not either/or: it's misogynistic trolling. n/t

[FSogol]

5. Is it happening at DU or does this refer to the Jezebel article? n/t

[redqueen]

9. The Jezebel article

It is being minimized as just garden variety trolling in that thread, as I explained above.

[FSogol]

84. I'm not sure it was minimized. People suggested tech solutions, which while however unsatisfying,

are the best course of action in the short-term. What to do about the asshats behind that is more problematic, since they are anonymous. Not sure there is a simple long term solution.

[redqueen]

86. Not talking about those who refused to address rhe cause rather than the symptoms...

I'm referring to the ones who said it wasn't necessarily about feminism and was just trolling for lulz.

Using porn to attack feminisrs is a misogynistic attack. The people doing it are engaging in misogyny

[MannyGoldstein]

147. People *refused* to address the cause?

Were they explicitly asked to address the cause, then they refused?

Or they simply chose not to write about the cause at one moment in time when they had an opportunity to?

[snooper2]

6. what is it called when you post two hours of cats meowing?

[sufrommich]

11. The fact that there is such a thing as a

"rape porn gif" ,or rape porn period, is a misogynistic attack. It's no different than if there were such a thing as "negros hanging from trees" or "homosexuals being drug behind trucks" porn.

[redqueen]

13. I agree. The fact that people defend that shit is just another indication

of how very far we have to go, still.

[Electric Monk]

23. Please, take it up with 4chan and /b/

[redqueen]

44. I will discuss it here. nt

[nomorenomore08]

98. I don't think it's confined to those creeps. Even if they're among the worst.

[leftstreet]

14. +1

[leftstreet]

20. So the gifs were posted to please and thrill users?

[Blue_Adept]

24. I was not talking about the images posted in a thread

Don't equate the actual porn with what's going on there. what happens in those topics with people posting it is childish and offensive and out of bounds - and out of the rules/TOS of pretty much every site out there.

I in NO WAY said that the gifs were posted for that. Iwas responding the post about equating rape porn with hanging negroes and such.

[leftstreet]

34. But it doesn't even make any sense

As I understand it, the site in question is feminist and there was discussion of an article (more or less)

The rape porn gifs were posted to....what? Show derision, or an opposing view, of feminism? Make a point? If so, what point?

Wouldn't a better photo for the anti-feminist trollers be something like:





Short of something like the above, the rape gifs are an attack on the women themselves, not feminism

[Blue_Adept]

36. I have no idea why they were posted.

Assholes abound on the internet unfortunately. I've been online since 1985. They were there then, there are far more of them now.

Posting stuff like that to any sort of discussion site, especially a topline mainstream site, is so far out of bounds that they need to be smacked down in some way. And I completely agree with that. My comments were directed at a different part of the discussion from this topic.

[leftstreet]

41. You wanted to talk about women enjoying rape

Oops, I mean women 'fantasizing' about rape

My comments were directed at a different part of the discussion from this topic.

I see nothing in the OP that invites that discussion

[redqueen]

21. No. If those people want to film themselves pretending to engage in a hate crime for kicks

they can do it themselves and keep it to themselves.

Violence against women should not be produced and marketed explicitly for the purposes of sexual arousal.

[Blue_Adept]

28. Why not?

It's fantasy. It's what people want to engage in. And bringing some sunshine to it and explaining it, understanding it, helps to get to the root of it.

I'm in no way pro-violence against women. But I've had multiple girlfriends over the years that have talked about the fantasy itself, the appeal of it and the enjoyment they got from the various films that were seen.

They know the reality is what you see in films like The Accused and other films. But there is the fantasy side as well.

Hell, if not for porn, I would never have learned about a lot of things that are interesting, engaging and a whole lot of fun that I've engaged in with a several partners.

On a tangent, I remember several years ago my mother complaining about why some famous actresses and actors come on TV and talk about their illnesses, bulemia, anorexia, being abused physically and sexually as kids by adults and saying that it shouldn't be on TV. I countered back that by talking about it in a public way, it got other people who had experienced the same things and were going through similar issues a realization that they weren't alone and that they could come forward, talk about it and find hope and a way to move forward. There's some parallels to be sure with sexuality and porn has a lot of positives to work with for many couples and singles.

[redqueen]

39. Presenting violence against women as sexy and arousing is FUCKED UP. INDEFENSIBLE.

You can go on until the cows come home about what individual women think, or you sex life (if you must), or whatever else you like but you will never convince me that it is ok to portray violence against women as sexy. EVER.

[Blue_Adept]

42. That's fine.

I don't need to convince you in the slightest. You don't need to convince me of anything either. I was simply presenting a view that you disagree with and explaining it from my own life experiences.

[redqueen]

48. Perhaps you aren't aware, but rape porn has been defended here many times

using the same rationalizations that you just did.

We are all very much aware of how many men (and a few women) will line up to defend rape porn.

Given the context of this thread perhaps the defenses could have been left out this one time.

[sufrommich]

29. Rape is a crime,not a sexual aid.

I guarantee you,no rape survivor thinks rape depictions are titillating.

[Blue_Adept]

33. I don't doubt it

But there are many, many women who enjoy the fantasy. How much of it fills up the "romance" books out there? It's a long time staple of much of erotica and porn.

I certainly wouldn't share it with someone who had been through it.

[pnwmom]

162. And yet you're defending the posting of rape porn on a site like Jezebel,

which has many readers who have been through it.

[historylovr]

190. Why does someone have to bring up

that a few women have "rape fantasies" every time there's a thread on this subject? Are you guys seeking to minimize the crime or what? It's no big deal because x amount of women want to be forced? I'm pretty sure those women who "enjoy the fantasy" have never been raped (and if they have I can't even begin to figure out why). I guess they think it's all Luke and Laura General Hospital type stuff with Herb Alpert playing in the background or something. But seriously, why throw that out there? Please explain why it's so important to bring up "rape fantasy" on these threads.

How much of it fills up the romance books out there? None in the last 20 or so years, not counting that plagiarized garbage that shall not be named or maybe some self-published stuff because publishers have very strict guidelines. And if so it's off camera and it's the villain as the perp or it's something that happened in the heroine's past (or hero's in a m/m). While yes, it was almost de rigueur in the older novels from 30 and 40 years ago, publishers started realizing readers didn't want their romance heroes to be rapists because rape is not, I repeat-not-sexy, and neither is it a heroic trait. Also, not directed at you specifically, I know romance is an often disparaged genre, but I really wish people would stop spouting off on a topic they know little or nothing about.

And finally, yes, putting rape porn gifs up on a feminist site is misogynistic, as is bringing up the idea of rape fantasies in an op talking about it.

[JI7]

35. is this why you had a problem with cali posting a thread about the rape threat pm she got ?

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10025243375

[Blue_Adept]

40. I don't know what connection you're trying to make

And I'd rather not revisit and conflate that topic with here as they're fairly separate. As I said in that thread, I completely agreed with her reporting it and demanding that action be taken - users that sent her what they did should not be allowed anywhere near a civilized site. My only thing then, coming as an administrator of various sites over the years, is that before things get hugely heated, those with the ability to deal with the situation be given at least a few minutes to figure out what's going on before everything turns into a massive situation. Somehow that got viewed as me saying she should not have said anything, which is completely not what I was saying at all. It's easy to be misunderstood online, which is why I've stopped posting much.

[JI7]

43. it's actually not separate at all

[JTFrog]

199. Poor misunderstood misogynists.

I'm crying a river over here.

[nomorenomore08]

101. If you're talking about stuff that's obviously simulated - with disclaimers etc. - then you might

have a point. But a single "rape" image, out of context, might well be indistinguishable from the real thing.

[freshwest]

56. You nailed it right there. Thanks.

[closeupready]

15. Very much so.

K&R

[rocktivity]

18. Modern day night riding from the comfort of your home

Last edited Mon Aug 11, 2014, 07:47 PM - Edit history (2)

And your sheets don't get mussed, either.




rocktivity

[littlemissmartypants]

31. I concur. nt

[ChisolmTrailDem]

32. Is someone calling it something other than that? n/t

[Atman]

38. Generally, I've found that anything redqueen doesn't like is a "misogynist attack."

Part of "the group." There can only be black and white...if you don't agree with their views, you're obviously a hideous rapist misogynist. It gets quite tiresome.

[sufrommich]

46. Scawy,scawy feminist overlords.

[leftstreet]

47. Wow n/t

[darkangel218]

51. lol!!

[darkangel218]

50. Ouch, now you did it!

[redqueen]

52. You really do live in your own private Idaho there, dontcha?

[Atman]

57. Not at all.

I just see over and over and over again. You can't have any other opinion without being labeled a misogynist. Even in the jury comments, I was called a pig. Now, what do you suppose would happen if I called one of the HoF posters a pig? Oh, wait...absolutely nothing, because I'm forbidden from posting there anyway.

Reap what you sow. REAP. REAP, I said, REAP. Not that other word.

[redqueen]

59. Some people remember what you say.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2407288

[Atman]

61. Yes, and others are mature enough to understand it.

I won't re-litigate that one. You get to say anything you want about how all men are evil. I get that. Men are not allowed to ever question your opinion. I am ABSOLUTELY not one of those "men's rights" people. I think that is absolutely stupid. But I also disagree with absolutes in general. And you seem to be able to post only in absolutes. Generally.

[redqueen]

65. All the men here I get along with will find your comment... amusing... I'm sure.

And yeah. I bet you ain't got shit to say about that.

Enjoying discussionist? I bet you can refer to women's geniralia as "skanky snatch" all you want at that little paradise, eh?

[Atman]

69. I don't post at Discussionist. Sorry to burst your absolutist bubble.

Nope. Not me.

[redqueen]

73. Well wherever you're posting these days, I hope they're more your kind of people. nt

[Atman]

78. Oh, you made an assumption that was WRONG?

Imagine that. What is "my kind," btw?

[redqueen]

80. People who think it's fine to use terms like "skanky snatch". nt

[Atman]

87. I use lots of terms.

They don't necessarily apply to every situation in my life. Look up the word "context." You use lots of terms I find offensive, too. Again, black & white. Either agree, or we ban you and you are a misogynist pig. No opinions other than yours are allowed.

[redqueen]

89. I can't ban anyone so your sad little persecution complex is misguided. nt

[Atman]

97. I didn't say YOU did. I said I am banned from HoF.

So if you didn't do it, maybe you'll go back and allow me to participate in your discussions? Some have been about ME, even, but I'm blocked. Nice system you have there. Agree with us 100% or be banned!

[redqueen]

115. !!!!!!

[Tuesday Afternoon]

124. Only the Hosts of Any Group have the power to ban a person. There is no other way. Now,

to say that redqueen suggested that it might behoove a certain poster to be banned from a certain group is something else.

Only the hosts have the ban button. No one else can even see it much less use it.

[JI7]

67. so why are there many guys who are not offended by what she says and doesn't think

she is talking about them ?

the ones who are usually do so for a reason. in this case i see it in her links.

and we had the other ones who threatened rape of some du members.

[Atman]

77. I honestly don't even understand what you're trying to say.

I don't think she's talking about me, because I know she doesn't have any clue about me and therefore has no basis to form an opinion about me. I am a feminist and one feminism's biggest allies, for real, on paper, in politics.

The link to the post of mine, which she obviously keeps on file for quick link purposes, was a one-off statement which is totally true. Redqueen seems to believe that if boys/men didn't have hormones, we'd all be cool. Black & white. I'm not about that at all. Men can be men -- strong, weak, gay, bi, ambiguous, whatever. We can have different feelings and different thoughts. EVERY post I've read from redqueen indicates that she does not believe that. There can only be black or white...you're either with us or against us. It shows up in every one of her posts. You can blame the jury result on the terrible DU system, or you can wake up and face the facts. You can't go on hating half the population every day and not eventually just become one of the haters. Redqueen seems to have become one of them...everyone except those with whom she agrees are misogynist pigs, regardless of what our actual beliefs and actions are.

(She didn't bother to post my responses wherein I pointed out that I've worked for NARAL and NOW...just like all us misogynist pigs do).

[JI7]

79. haha, you respond as if you think she is talking about you

maybe there is a reason for it.

as there are many guys who don't get offended or defensive at what she says. but the ones who do often reveal themselves and i can see why.

[Atman]

85. No, actually. I responded that I don't know WTF you're talking about.

You might want to re-read that part of the thread.

[JI7]

91. that's not all you responded with

[Atman]

93. Yes, actually. That is all I responded with.

Sorry I'm not fitting your pre-conceived notion.

[mercuryblues]

153. Please, please

go to NARAL and NOW and tell them not to get their "hackles raised"

[Rex]

139. I've noticed that too...

I've NEVER seen RQ say, "all men are evil" and I find it really funny who jumps in to defend themselves...as if they were personally offended.

I say if the shoe fits...

[thucythucy]

155. Please post a link to redqueen saying "all men are evil." Thanks. Nt.

[thucythucy]

203. No link. No reply. No surprise. Nt.

[CreekDog]

181. there are a few who have posted on DU, their hopes that the age of consent would be lowered

unsurprisingly, most of the other stuff they post is crap too. go figure.

[alp227]

159. "You can't have any other opinion without being labeled a misogynist."

What opinions would you like to have, if you're so concerned about tone & being called misogynist?

[Skip Intro]

53. Alert on your post failed, jury says 5-2 to leave.

On Mon Aug 11, 2014, 04:50 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Generally, I've found that anything redqueen doesn't like is a "misogynist attack."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5369700

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Cal out on a specific poster and a personal insult.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Aug 11, 2014, 05:02 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Cool, another "roll the dice" alert. Let's see how this particular crapshoot plays out. LEAVE IT
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: How is the truth an insult?
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: its kind of a stretch to call this a personal attack. LLP
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Although I agree with the sentiment, it is a call out. Probably justified, but a call out nonetheless.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Poster is just another of the many sexist pigs who think what they say about women is more important than any other view. This is a personal attack by him but it is typical. Why does he even get to post here on DU?
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No one has been hurt by the opinion. If Redqueen is always right, then nobody has been wronged or hurt except maybe the replier, but that is not what I read.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[redqueen]

54. This system is such a joke.

Exhibit A, Atman's post & the jury results above


Exhibit B:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2407288

[sufrommich]

58. Never underestimate the immaturity level of supposedly

mature adults.

"yes,it's a personal attack,but I agree with it!"

[redqueen]

60. Nobody who pays any attention is fooled.

Like I said, the flailing desperation just gets more and more obvious.

[Atman]

62. You must not be paying attention.

Just sayin'.

[JI7]

64. all the while insisting they are the good ones

no wonder they get so defensive .

[redqueen]

74. It's pathetic, really. nt

[laundry_queen]

94. You noticed that too? nt

[SunSeeker]

75. Wow. And on a progressive site.

Women still have a long way to go, sadly.

[Atman]

81. Riddle me this, Batman...

Have you ever commented on a MAN based upon his appearance or situation? Are all men perfectly clean Adonises? So you've NEVER observed that some men are nasty? Skanky, even? No? Never? Don't lie to us.

So why is it that when I make one reference to a strip club, BAM -- it is BLACK & WHITE. I am obviously talking about ALL WOMEN! See where I'm going with this? I was speaking of a specific situation, not of ALL WOMEN. If you can admit that there are skanky, smelly men you wouldn't want to be near, why is it verbotten for me to use the same terms for a woman? Do you want some sort of equality, or just reverence?

[SunSeeker]

112. Lay off the all caps and take it down a notch.

Referring to a woman's vagina--any woman's vagina--as a "snatch" is offensive and misogynistic.

You claim that because a "good percentage" of women supposedly have rape fantasies, rape gifs posted on feminist threads are not misogynistic. Why do you think those people are posting those rape gifs? As a favor to the feminists on that site? To titillate them?

They are posting them to exert power over these women the same way the threat of actual rape exerts power over women outside the cyberworld. The gifs are posted to terrorize the women and degrade them; to humiliate them and shut them up; to "put them in their place."

I can't believe you are defending this conduct. I especially can't fathom the reason you are defending it: that a significant portion of women "want it."

[Atman]

116. Sorry, I won't. You're not even responding to me.

I never once claimed "a "good percentage" of women supposedly have rape fantasies" or that "rape gifs posted on feminist threads are not misogynistic."

I never defended the conduct. You are responding to someone else. Except for the "snatch" comment. That was mine, and has a contextual background that I stand by, even if you and redqueen choose to pretend it doesn't exist.

[SunSeeker]

126. So you agree rape gifs posted on feminist threads are mysogynistic?

[thucythucy]

183. No answer to your very simple question.

Rather telling, don't you think?

[Atman]

186. Yes, rather telling...

I occasionally step away from the keyboard, and don't have your posts automatically texted to me.

[thucythucy]

187. So you're here now, yes?

Don't keep us in suspense.

It's a very simple question. Care to answer?

[thucythucy]

204. Still no answer to your question,

still very telling.

Best wishes, SunSeeker.

[SunSeeker]

205. Yes, I noticed that too, thucythucy.

[redqueen]

82. I'm surprised anyone even bothers alerting on stuff like that anymore. nt

[former9thward]

134. I suppose you continue to think the "system is such a joke."

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
Mail Message
On Mon Aug 11, 2014, 05:26 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Posting porn in comments on feminist articles is a misogynistic attack.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025369544

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Poster is deliberatly attempting to provoke other members.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Aug 11, 2014, 05:34 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Alerter is deliberately attempting to harass the OP.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Yes the OP is trying to provoke other members. So don't fall for it.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No she is not! Good gawd people... stop gunning for her. She has broken NO RULES. I loathe this alert.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: What a stupid, stupid alert...LEAVE FFS!!!!

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[redqueen]

157. The fact that or works some percentage of the time does not mean it's functional.

Allowing trolls to be on juries is fucked. That's my opinion.

I prefer to think that a jury voted to leave his labeling of a woman's genitals as a "skanky snatch" alone rather than hide it was due to trolls on the jury. It is less depressing that way.

Then there's votes such some in the alert on his first reply to this OP...

[pnwmom]

111. You don't think it's a matter of black and white that posting rape porn on Jezebel

is a misogynist attack?

Because that's the issue here. Rape porn.

[A Simple Game]

197. Please comment on the subject I responded to otherwise our conversation is over. n/t

[pnwmom]

198. I am addressing your comment. Please clean the wax out of your ears. n/t

[mercuryblues]

103. found the same with you

Generally, I've found that anything Atman doesn't like is an "attack on him."


Part of "the group." There can only be black and white...if you don't agree with his views, you're obviously a "skanky snatch". It gets quite tiresome.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2407288

[demmiblue]

109. Wow, some nasty stuff right there. No wonder. n/t

[Atman]

110. Totally lame attempt.

Link back the ONE POST of my nearly 28,000. The one post that raises red's hackles. Yup...that sums me up. Nice try. Not. Of course, a person who was not intellectually lazy would actually read through my posts. Even just the ones on this thread, not all 28,000 of them. Or you could just run to redqueen's defense. You know, because we're either with you or against you.

[mercuryblues]

146. You are

funny. Not defending anyone here. Showing you that shit you wrote didn't seem so funny when it is directed at you.
Then I could say the same about you in this thread. Run to defend a poster that is basically defending rape porn. No comment on the post, just a personal attack against the poster.

Quite the projection you got going on there. I am betting that you have a whole lot of hackles yourself. Women speaking out against using porn as a way to silence them is just one of your hackles.

I guess you are going to say you support feminism. Your choice of verbiage just drips with respect towards women.

[nomorenomore08]

106. -100

I've never seen her accuse any DUer of being a rapist. Meanwhile, the "man hater" canard gets thrown around at the slightest pretext.

[pnwmom]

108. Posting rape porn on a feminist site like Jezebel is always a misogynist attack,

and defending this is defending misogyny.

[kelly1mm]

170. Can a woman be a misogynist? I ask because there is a theory that non-whites

(at least in the USA) cannot be racist as they are not part of the oppressor class, even if they say/do things that if said done by a white person would generally be considered racist.

So, basically, what I am trying to determine is if some female posted rape porn on Jezebel would she be a misogynist?

[pnwmom]

172. I suppose so, under certain circumstances. Although the chance that women are responsible for

the rape posts on Jezebel is vanishingly small.

[chrisa]

136. I would love to hear you defend the concept that porno-bombing a Feminist website isn't trolling.

Or any website for that matter. It's a quintessential example of a mass-trolling attack.

[thucythucy]

167. Wow. This is how you reply to an OP about a feminist website

being flooded with rape porn. You just couldn't resist any opportunity to accuse redqueen of man-bashing and overuse of the term "misogyny," even in the context of such a blatant attack on feminists.

I'm afraid this says a lot more about you than it does about redqueen.

Just wow.

[tammywammy]

174. Posting porn in the comments section at Jezebel is a "misogynist attack"

As a regular reader of that site I'm just glad I've never come across it. It's indefensible.

[DonCoquixote]

55. I agree

I am someone who enjoys some porn, but I woudl not shove it down people's throats, anymore than I want Bible crap shoved down mine. Whoever is doing this, do us all a favor and SHUT THE HELL UP!, and if not, do not whine when people like me MAKE YOU SHUT UP!

Asfar as those here that may approve of this, I only offer one thing. Discussionist has given you a warm, comforting area from whcih to snipe from, as you tell yoursleves what a bunch of real men you are. However, sooner or later, that bit of tolerance will end, especially as the powers that be wonder why people like me refuse to sign up for memberships (reason why, I will not until the jury system is reformed.) Sooner or later, the owners will realize that the long term profit is to stop coddlign you, which means your little built in system cheats will go bye bye.

As I have said, I have disagreed with some of the feminists on here, Redqueen among them, and cheered many others on, Disagreement should never equal disrespect. However, I will be damned if I let a bunch of undeveloped fratboy apebearpigs speak for myself or my gender! By doing antics like this, you are attempting to say "pay atttention to me pay attention to me!"If you cannot handle the fact that you are no longer the default setting for power, than you can join the dinosaurs.

[nomorenomore08]

114. ...

[w4rma]

70. Are you against all porn or just rape porn? Do you consider all porn to be misogynistic?

Please clarify. Thanks.

[redqueen]

71. I consider any porn posted in the comments about articles concerning feminist issues

to be a misogynistic attack.

[nomorenomore08]

119. "posted in the comments about articles concerning feminist issues"

You seem to have ignored that part.

[Atman]

125. I didn't ignore that part.

It was posted in the comments concerning feminist issues, not the comments demanding agreement with such issues.

[nomorenomore08]

128. Even still, how is posting porn with the apparent aim of mocking or embarrassing someone

acceptable behavior?

[pnwmom]

165. It was posted by someone who was deliberately attacking the women who read Jezebel,

knowing that those feminist readers would be offended, making it an act of aggressive misogyny.

[pnwmom]

163. And you are correct. No reasonable person could argue otherwise.

[w4rma]

202. Thank you for clarifying. I agree. That sounds like trolling to me, too. (nt)

[Spitfire of ATJ]

72. What I hate is when someone feels they have to rush in and whine about male rights.

[redqueen]

76. Yep that derailing tactic is WAY more common

than misogynistic attacks.

With the WATM whine they can get naive and sympathetic people to steer the conversation away from the topic at hand.

[Treant]

88. Interesting Conundrum

That would make the gay porn posted on ReaganBook to be an anti-conservative attack.

I'll think on it, but offhand I'm coming down on it as "Not necessarily, it would depend." I'm not big on absolutism.

[redqueen]

92. Conservatives aren't an oppressed group.

Your comparison makes no sense.

[Atman]

96. It makes perfect sense...

He posted "Not necessarily, it would depend." I'm not big on absolutism."

Pretty much just what I've been saying. Does it have to be black & white, only redqueen's way, or are there other more nuanced issues worth discussing? Or am I just a misogynist pig because i don't agree with you 100%?

[redqueen]

113. Stop throwing a pity party for yourself. I never called you a misogynist pig.

If anyone did it was probably for meltdowns like the one you had over the woman who got in trouble for hiring a stripper to grind her "skanky snatch" into a 16 year olds face.

[Treant]

123. Misogynist pig.

I'll be glad to join you there...which would be quite a stretch in my particular case, actually.

>>He

Most trees are both, actually, although some may flower with only male or only female organs. Some just open air pollinate and the pollen falls where it will.

Something like that, I see most people as having aspects of both genders (which does not change their self-definition in any way, nor imply that everyone is transgendered by any means). For yin and yang, look no further than your mirror.

[Rex]

131. Funny, you say there are more nuanced issues worth discussing, so why are you in this thread?

Wasting your time? Why would you do that?

[Treant]

117. That makes no sense...

Any group can be...

Oh, forget it. Like I said, I'm not an absolutist. But I do have to say that I don't think your bad attitude and complete inflexibility is winning any arguments for "feminists."

Treant out, this is not a discussion and I don't do arguments very often.

[Capt. Obvious]

200. AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Last edited Tue Aug 12, 2014, 10:47 AM - Edit history (1)

On Tue Aug 12, 2014, 08:35 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

That makes no sense...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5370173

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

"But I do have to say that I don't think your bad attitude and complete inflexibility is winning any arguments for "feminists."

Obvious personal attack.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Aug 12, 2014, 08:42 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Will this jury be stacked with MRA types?
Will the patriarchy win again?
Will there be a HOF thread complaining about it?

Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: For the alerter, no this is not a personal attack.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I agree with the post, actually. I think strident people more often hurt the causes they are trying to address than help them. That's true for many groups, including feminists.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Not even close. Please stop alerting.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[JI7]

99. no more than black history month is discrimination against whites

[pnwmom]

209. It is an anti-conservative attack. But "conservative" and "liberal" aren't protected categories. n/t

[dilby]

107. Were they posted by men or women or you don't know? n/t

[nomorenomore08]

122. Either way, the intent is to mock or humiliate female (usually feminist) posters. n/t

[dilby]

129. Unless I know the sex of the poster I can't make a decision on if it's misogyny or not. n/t

[nomorenomore08]

160. And you've never noticed how many women harbor internalized misogyny?

Some female misogynists are worse than almost any male misogynist.

[pnwmom]

194. Of course you can. A woman could be a misogynist if she gained pleasure

from attacking and humiliating women in particular.

[TDale313]

118. So sad you even have to say this.

One would think it would be fairly obvious. I find it really disturbing people are willing to defend/minimize these attacks. Yeah, repeatedly posting rape porn in the comment section of a feminist site has nothing whatsoever with being anti-feminist or anti-women.

[redqueen]

130. I know. As someone PMed me today said, this place just gets worse and worse.

Many other places seem to be moving forward, at least.

[MikeW]

121. whats going on at DU lately

Ive been reading this for many years dont post much.

The clientele has changed here either that or people really spend too much time scrutinizing every issue.

The issue aside ... this thread is just as bad its deliberate trolling.

This kind of stuff, sex, porn , mysogony talk doesnt belong in the GD section.

[Texasgal]

138. Why not?

Should the wimmen be pushed into the kitchen to make coffee and discuss such issues?

[MikeW]

150. it doesnt belong in GD

[SunSeeker]

158. That's not true. From TOS for GD:

Discuss politics, issues, and current events. Posts about Israel/Palestine, religion, guns, showbiz, or sports are restricted in this forum. Conspiracy theories and disruptive meta-discussion are forbidden.

Nothing in there about discussions on the issue of misogyny being verboten.

[redqueen]

151. "mysogony talk doesnt belong in the GD section"

Just gonna highlight that.

Yep, there's a problem here but it's not what you think it is.

[pnwmom]

195. Why can't people address misogyny and sexual harassment in GD?

Why should these issues, that affect both men and women, be excluded from discussion?

[Rex]

127. 4chan is a pox on the WWW.

To have that much hatred inside, to make sure women know that they are hated at a level so deep - it should disturb even the most jaded of persons. Make no mistake this is not just misogynistic, but also a warning from mentally deranged people that want to hurt and kill women.

Gawker better get their asses in gear. This is terrorism as well.

[99Forever]

141. Lot's of trolls out there.

Seems to me that they do their best to troll any site they do, using whatever it is that will piss off the people on that site most. As to why? I'm pretty clueless about that. I can't even understand why they do it here. Seems an awful waste of time and energy to me.

[Rex]

145. Trolls are miserable creatures and in order to feel better, they have to make others come down

to their level of misery. At least that is what I have observed over the years. Trolls waste their life away, but I suspect they would be doing that anyway...WWW or no WWW.

I think you summed them up nicely - a troll is someone with a tremendous waste of time and energy.

[Iron Man]

149. I would say it depends on the intent of those trolls.

[Old and In the Way]

182. Very true.

There are the "in your face" trolls" and there are the nuanced "keep picking the scabs" trolls. Personally, I find the later to be much more corrosive.

[Uncle Joe]

166. I agree.

Thanks for the thread, redqueen.

[cer7711]

169. Yep! No Argument Here.

Last edited Wed Aug 13, 2014, 03:29 PM - Edit history (3)

In the same way that posting glossy, artfully-lit photographs of guns gleaming in their gun oil (gun-porn, if you will) is an attack on any board attempting a reasonable, considered discussion of prudent gun control measures. It's a not-so-subtle threat.

It's the context, stupid! To those that defend this behavior: Would you post a picture of KKK regalia on a civil rights forum? What could that possibly mean? The intent is pretty clear, isn't it? If it wasn't, the garden-variety, room-temperature I.Q. shock-artist types that engage in this behavior wouldn't do it. What about posting pictures of brass knuckles and/or blackjacks on a forum dedicated to discussing spousal abuse? WHEE-HEE; great fun! Right?

There are days I'm ashamed of the human race. The craven cowardice and idiocy (of a sizable portion of both sexes) is apparently endless.

PS. But back to my gender: It's irrelevant that you, a male, enjoy/defend/purchase pornography--perhaps even while considering yourself a feminist. That's an entirely different heated discussion/argument. As Aristotle said: The highest ethical behavior is the right thing, at the right time, with the right person, for the right reason.

Posting porn on feminist discussion forums? In case it wasn't entirely clear by now: The wrong thing, at the wrong time, with the wrong persons, for the wrong reasons.

Ladies: on this, I feel your pain and irritation. And sense of incredulity that anyone could ever argue otherwise.

[AgingAmerican]

173. Well, yeah

That's pretty obvious.

[LeftyMom]

191. The local fabric store has a serial flasher.

He's figured out that he can walk in, waggle his unit at a few shoppers and leave long before the cops arrive.

He doesn't do it in any of the surrounding stores, only the one nearly exclusively used by women.

The whole point to people like that isn't to show women their dicks/nasty porn it's that they get off on the non-consent of the dick-viewing woman trying to buy yarn/jezebel reader.

The whole point is to infict a sexialized behavior on non-consenting women and people are arguing that this isnt misogyny? Jesus Horace Christ.

[pnwmom]

210. Thank you. Besides promoting discussion, the OP has allowed misogynists to unmask themselves. n/t