I am starting to wonder if it isn't deliberate

[BainsBane]

The thread about "honoring" fried chicken, the rude and dismissive comments throughout that thread and MrScorpio's. Insisting people never mention white privilege, insisting opposition to obviously racist and sexist insults are "PC" or "too sensitive." A victim of child abuse who speaks out, we are told, is the true abuser for trying to ruin her father's legacy of film work. Post about racism or sexism, and you are told to shut up, you are "dividing DUers," Meanwhile, someone makes a comment that DUers are "malcontents" and all hell breaks lose. The stake is erected, the fire lit, and the witch hunted. Another starts a witch hunt because someone attacks Greenwald or Snowden. Yet that isn't dividing DUers?

At a certain point, I have to wonder if this is not part of a deliberate effort to make the site more homogenous. I know that has been the case with some of the most outspoken feminists for a while, but the disrespectful posts about racist stereotypes like chicken and watermelon makes me wonder if it doesn't extend further. That chicken and watermelon nonsense is the stuff of comedy skits making fun of racism. I have trouble believing people are really so clueless. It is a stunning demonstration of privilege: You, African American DUer, don't get to decide what is racist. I a white person insist that what you think are racist stereotypes is really "honoring your culture." You, little woman, don't know what sexism is. You aren't a real feminist. Only I, a man, gets to decide what real feminism is. At a certain point, this starts to seem like a willful effort to claim the site as the exclusive space for those of a certain narrow worldview that does not include the concerns of people of color and feminists. It's not based on simply on the color of one's skin or gender because no one can see that. It's based on the ideas and experiences that go into being a person of color, abuse or rape survivor, or outspoken feminist. When such diversity of worldviews is openly ridiculed, does it not start to look like a deliberate effort to exclude?

I would very much like to be wrong about this, but whether willful or simply obtuse, the results are the same.

[bravenak]

1. I am also feeling like its deliberate.

The way they swarm around those that don't fit their preferred profile and declare open season on them. The condescending post about how we should view things is not what I expect from anyone. I've noticed people seem to think it's okay to talk down to women and black people like they are seriously stupid and hysterical. And for some reason BOG seems to be seen as synonymous with AA and boggers are the lowest of the low on this site. It's not a coincidence. There's also a contingent that really loves the BAR. Nobody wants us here. So we leave and nobody notices that all the black people are gone but for a few, the feminists feel pushed out, and no one admits to running us off. But they still want our votes. But we should just shut up though,and talk about the NSA or Pot cause those are the MOST important issues ever, and if we don't agree then we are not welcome.

[freshwest]

4. NSA, pot, Greenwald, etc. are Libertarian Party issues and not mainsteam Democratic Party ones.

I've noted that the posters who focus on that alone, and never discuss women's rights, civil rights, the poor, ACA, etc., do not post on threads about those Democratic Party issues. They never give any credit to what Obama has done, they never celebrate victories.

They only talk on the issues approved by the Libertarians, their heroes are all Libertarians, Paulites or Democrats that will never get elected.

And the Democratic candidates they push, don't even agree with them on those issues, but they wave them around to try to prove they are Democrats. Their passions are not for the same issues AA and BOG and a number of us care about.

So many people have left. It's no good coming to a site that puts you and your ideas down in the most constant, vitriolic manner they possibly can.

[bravenak]

12. You are so right.

They run in packs around here, I know who to leave alone.

[Number23]

40. KILLED it in the FIRST DAMN POST

But we should just shut up though,and talk about the NSA or Pot cause those are the MOST important issues ever, and if we don't agree then we are not welcome.

[Jamaal510]

50. Maybe I'm crazy,

but after the 2 years I have spent on here, I still find it odd that there is a need at all for a "Barack Obama Group" on a site that is supposed to be for Democrats. I get having a few disagreements, but what I don't get is how anyone could be on DemocraticUnderground and not support the Democratic President or want him to do well.

[bravenak]

51. Not crazy. I find it strange.

It's sad that people that support a Democratic president on a democratic site are given derisive names and run up off the block. And called names. And given a safe room to support the president in.

When Bush was president, republicans loved him. Barack Obama is president, democrats and republicans hate him.

[1StrongBlackMan]

54. Because there are so many on this site ...

that include "Democrat" as their 3rd or 4th political descriptor ... but only after going on and on about how they donated to, canvased, campaign and voted for President Obama, twice!

[BainsBane]

55. Allegedly

[heaven05]

59. yep

[Whisp]

2. like this thread?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024472335

am I looking for something that is not there because I found this OP deplorable considering what the food topic is about lately.

[bravenak]

14. I never understand him.

I never ever know wtf is going on in his threads so I stay the hell out.
I have never eaten that fish he's taking about. Sometimes I think people are deliberately obtuse and laugh hysterically at their own posts. Never do they explain what's so funny.

[JI7]

27. nope, i totally get what you are saying

it's pretty clear.

[Number23]

41. That poster sets off more red flags than almost anyone else here

Between his pining for the Good Old Days, his utter SHOCK and HORROR that the world is mean to people, his NEVERENDING attempts to divide (Warren hates Obama! Sanders hates Obama! All good, decent people hate Obama!1) and his overall dismissive cluelessness, the fact that he has so many fans here speaks to how narrow minded and UNprogressive this place is better than anything I could ever point to.

[sheshe2]

3. Deliberate and Divisive.

Yes, I am starting to wonder about that too. The victim becomes the aggressor the alleged perp the victim. We saw that during Trayvon's trial too.

There have been questions in ATA about the BOG, gawd forbid we support our first AA President. One wanted us hidden from GD. They felt our posts should not be rec'd and sent to the greatest page. Guess they wanted to shut us down and not let our voices be heard. They want to censure and silence us. Why is that?!

I think you hit the nail on the head, BainsBane. Thank you.

[monmouth3]

30. I think there are many paid posters on the site these days, you can only ignore so much and

then it's time to move on. Some post only to stir the shite, be divisive. I wonder how much Koch money has tainted DU..

[Tarheel_Dem]

56. Hammer meet head of nail! It's a "taint", with a disturbing acceptance these days.

[merrily]

5. The biggest defender of that lunch menu as an honor to Black History Month, ultimately apologized.

I believe his apology was sincere and I was the one going back and forth with him more than anyone else.

[BainsBane]

6. Did you see the follow up thread?

Insisting fried chicken "honored" African Americans?

[merrily]

8. Oh, you mean the new thread?

No. I thought you were talking about the original school lunch thread that I posted on and the poster who went back and forth with me. I do think that poster's apology was sincere. However, until he apologized, I was starting to wonder about some of his arguments, like he did want to have to give up his favorite foods. However, on this thread, I see the link to a new thread. Sigh.

[BainsBane]

10. This is the one I mean

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024471031

[merrily]

11. No, that one I had not seen at all.

If the OP read the lunch menu thread that I had posted on and still thinks that way, I have no idea what to say to him or her or anyone on that thread.

I really wore myself out on the first thread, trying to convince the person who thought the menu was a fine idea. I posted that I was giving up, whereupon the very next reply was an apology. But, I was giving up because I had already done my best and his responses were only getting worse.

[reusrename]

7. You and I had a disagreement the other day, and if you'd like I'll comment on it.

I have my own idea of what happened, and it seems like it would be an appropriate response to the question you raised in the OP. I'm not at all interested in continuing with that particular argument, I'd just like to explain what I think happened. Somehow the discussion went sort of sideways.

[BainsBane]

9. Yes, but that disagreement doesn't relate to this OP

in anyway. It was not one of the many posts that led to me these conclusions. I'm thinking of posts in GD where someone will come into a thread and tell me I shouldn't post what I have, that sexism isn't important. There are scores of such instances and many different threads on race, diversity, etc... that led to these ideas I've been mulling over. I see similar behavior toward African American posters, and it was in fact the recent thread on "honoring fried chicken" that crystallized things in my mind.

[freshwest]

13. Just went to Mr. Scorpio's thread and raved. A poster there posted Wanda Sykes video and she was

called being divisive.

Lunasun won the thread with this:

161. hey Diane Fedele, didn’t understand the charges of racism either............

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2008/10/16/30814/obama-bucks/

A local California GOP women’s organization’s most recent newsletter claims that if Obama is elected, his face will appear on food stamps, rather than dollar bills like other presidents. The group then included a picture of “Obama Bucks” — a phony $10 bill with Obama surrounded by racist imagery:

The president of the organization, Diane Fedele, didn’t understand the charges of racism: “I didn’t see it the way that it’s being taken. I never connected. It was just food to me.”

Sure OK



http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024468868#post161

EOM!

[BainsBane]

17. Divisive =

view points other than the white male hegemonic worldview.

It's exactly the sort of thing Fox News said about Obama and the Democratic Party.

[freshwest]

18. I edited while you posted... Look what I added... n/t

[BainsBane]

19. I did see that. Pefect illustration

Did it make an impression on those who insisted that there was nothing racist about such stereotypes? I didn't see any responses to it but yours. But then, people seem to get fixed on a position and will not change regardless of what evidence is put before them.

I didn't watch that Wanda Sykes video today, but I've seen that bit a few times. She's one of my favorites, always on point.

[freshwest]

25. All she did was give her impressions, thoughts, feelings and her hope for change. Nothing to divide

anyone from anything but their so-called right to micromanage how blacks behave, like the guy who murdered Jordan Davis.

[KAMouflage]

15. Been here since the beginning...

...of the End when DU popped into existence as a forum to discuss the stolen election. The only site I could get onto when I arrived at my desk on the 30th floor at 54th and Sixth Avenue slightly after 9:00am, wondering where all those fire engines that just passed me were headed.

I can only guess at my post count because I rarely throw my hat into the ring unless I have something I know for certain no one else will eventually dig up. Once posted a clip of schoolchildren in the 1950s reciting the "old" pledge to the colorful flag WITHOUT the added honorable words to the approved deity. There it was. In black and white. Clear as day. Brought to you by the good people at Time-Life Books or some other such redistributor of such nostalgic dollar bin VHS tapes. Great ammo in the culture war against the oath-taking sheep. Dude called me out, saying I had doctored the vid. So I keep my thoughts to myself when I can. (Like the physics of a free-fall object and how long it takes to reach the ground from say, oh . . . 1300-1400 feet or so . . . (SHHHHH!))

Thinking back over the during of DU's lifetime, I don't believe I have missed more than one day in a row of at least taking a glance at most of the favored posts and one or two runs through the first page of Late Breaking News. That could usually give me the sense of whatever new atrocity was being foisted on us by both sides. Never look at the names of posters and rarely at anything else other than the topic and what a thread might reveal in the thought process of folks over on this side of the spectrum. Having strong beliefs but too fiery a temper to really be an asset in this struggle, I hope that all of you can at least run a conversation that I might learn something about myself or what is (potentially) "really going on." And maybe even pick up a piece of the puzzle in case I ever have the opportunity to assist a misguided friend or acquaintance. So the names of the participants have no meaning for me and I don't dig the battles that go on. Yes, you are right: they do seem to be more frequent as the years roll by. I cannot say I sense the same kind of "ganging up" per se, but certainly don't like the influence of parties who obviously don't belong here.

I have little doubt you are all speaking truthfully. That is why I felt the need, at this ridiculous hour, to search my smokey brain for my "Name" and "Password" just to lend a voice of support. Don't let any of it burden you too much. Study it all and stay focused on the message, not the messengers nor detractors. We have a real battle coming. YOu all know it. Nourish your brains and steel your Will. No time for whining. That is what they want us to do in order to weaken us and plant Doubt. But, as an old buddy of mine told me nearly 20 years ago when I was bitching about something in this "unjust world!" (no doubt done quite dramatically and with great emotion and volume to the joy of no one):

"Navigate it" said he. The rules are always changing. So Navigate it.

You all give me hope (see? I don't even know how many posted. if only two, then be a really strong two and find a third.)

peace.
k

[freshwest]

16. Thanks, K, for the encouragement. n/t

[BainsBane]

20. Thanks KaMouflage

I appreciate your words of encouragement.

[AverageJoe90]

22. Interesting perspective. Namaste, my friend. nt

[countmyvote4real]

23. +1

Thank you.

[reusrename]

39. Thanks for that.

No matter how much I disagree with some of the folks here, I know that I want them on my side when that struggle begins in earnest.

[Number23]

42. What a great post. Thanks for that.

[MadrasT]

46. "Navigate it."

Spot on. That's great advice for us all.

[Tarheel_Dem]

57. You should post more often KA!

[AverageJoe90]

21. To be honest, I very seriously doubt it.

There *may* have been an occasional trolling issue, I don't doubt that. But with that said, it's never been anything more than occasional. I think the biggest problem has probably been miscommunication, on both sides.

And, I hate to say this, but there are some issues with the OP, particularly this:

You, African American DUer, don't get to decide what is racist. I a white person insist that what you think are racist stereotypes is really "honoring your culture." You, little woman, don't know what sexism is. You aren't a real feminist. Only I, a man, gets to decide what real feminism is.

I honestly don't know where you're getting this from, but I can't recall a single recent *actual* instance of this.....or at least, not on DU(though I'm sure there's been misunderstandings aplenty).

To be truthful, the only thing I've been able to find that's more than the occasional gripe, is some criticism of the usage of the term "white privilege". And to be fair, it is *quite* understandable that some would have a hard time understanding why. And yes, I know about the original intended context from when it was first crafted some years ago.

But it has not, unfortunately, proved to be very helpful of informing the general public of the very real disadvantages faced by People of Color. In fact, it has actually backfired on us in some ways; not just because there's been a significant problem with abuse of the term in recent years, but also because of how the Teabaggers and their ilk have taken advantage of stuff like this and used it to paint all of us liberals as if we were all a bunch of looney whiners(no, most of us, regardless of our respective backgrounds, really aren't! But that's how they spin it). And unfortunately, much the public either buys it all up or becomes totally aloof.

We do need to change some of our strategies, if we want to *finally* eliminate the vestiges of structural racism & other prejudice; and I'm afraid this does include replacing "white privilege" with a more straightforward term.

Honestly, I'm just another person on the Internet. I don't claim to be perfect, nor am I omniscient. But I can observe. And I'm a bit disappointed by what I see. I hope people can realize that this isn't intended as an attack on anyone, but rather, it is offering

(BTW, I happen to be a major supporter of the BOG Group.)

[BainsBane]

26. Nearly everyone in this thread has seen it

The threads on watermelon and friend chicken today were recent examples. I cannot count how many times men have told me I'm not a real feminist, while it is a frequent occurrence to refer to HOF posters as "feminists" in quotes or "so-called feminists," apparently because some disagree that porn and prostitution are a positive good, or that we care about rape and a whole host of things they don't want to think about.

Telling people they have not experienced what they have because you haven't seen it is not a helpful approach. It suggests that I and others who have commented on experiencing the same thing, are either liars or deluded.

As for whether they are trolls, they are DUers in good standing who post regularly.

This in a way gets to the point of the OP. That you personally have not experienced something doesn't mean it didn't happen or that it isn't important to other members.

[JustAnotherGen]

28. I've personally experienced it

And the thread by KittyWampus TOTALLY outright dismissing the concept - is perfect example. I bet she reads the Black Agenda Report and worships at their altar.

Ironically when we point out its a racist publication - well meaning white folks jump to the BAR's defense.

[M0rpheus]

34. There is a consistent and regular trolling issue.

This has been the case since I arrived here (10+ years ago) and it has gotten progressively worse since the election of PBO.

This:

You, African American DUer, don't get to decide what is racist. I a white person insist that what you think are racist stereotypes is really "honoring your culture." You, little woman, don't know what sexism is. You aren't a real feminist. Only I, a man, gets to decide what real feminism is.

is not a matter of talking past each other. It's a matter of willfully denying the thoughts and feelings of specific subsets of posters who are speaking the truth about the basics. Being an AA, I see this in any thread that has to do with race but, I also notice it when the topics turn to women/feminists.

Attributing all of the above to misunderstandings is awfully charitable, if not downright naive. I don't know if this is a coordinated effort to squelch our voices, but it sure in the hell feels that way.

[BainsBane]

37. [phone]

[Number23]

43. FABULOUS post, M0rph

[M0rpheus]

45. Looks like I'm jumping on the bandwagon for a bit.

'Cause I just can't accept this BS and shake my head anymore.
I call dibs on the seat between you and JAG.

[Number23]

47. You go for it. And we'll get your back.

Anybody else besides me tripping that we are dealing with this garbage and feeling so besieged from folks that scream all day long about how they are DEMOCRATS??!

[JustAnotherGen]

48. Come on and take a seat

[merrily]

24. After checking the thread to which you linked me, I conclude

it's a combination. Heaven knows, no one is saying that fried chicken doesn't taste good or that anyone should give up eating any dish or any menu that stems from the Southern tradition. Yet, many of the posters went there, even after Cha correctly mentioned context in the beginning of the thread.

Too bad they don't make hearing aids for tone deafness as well as deafness stemming from physical causes. Then again, one of those might be willful. If so, nothing helps.

[Scuba]

29. IMHO, there's a lot of paid operatives here on DU, working for several different constituencies.

My least favorites are those who argue that traditional Democratic Party platform planks are "ponies and rainbows" and we should all support "compromises" like Chained CPI .

[gollygee]

31. It has to be deliberate

Those two threads are just embarrassing. They're full of the kind of thing I'd expect to read at Free Republic or something. Or like an embarrassing Facebook post from a white relative who says he's a tiny amount Native American (supposedly) and therefore can speak about racism and race issues from the place of a person of color.

And then claiming posts about sexual abuse aren't fit for GD because they're about a celebrity. As if that makes them stop being about sexual abuse. The posts about Jerry Sandusky weren't considered off topic because they were about sports.

This place is crazy and wrong. My star expired and I can't see myself renewing it.

[JustAnotherGen]

32. It's 100% deliberate

It also makes them the 'cool' kids with how 'smart' and 'knowledgeable' they are. There is a certain mentality that gravitates to the ignorance around here. Not for nothing - and trying not to take your message off track - but they do that at their own peril.

Piss off enough black folks and I guarantee whoever their "Chosen One" leftist progressive one piece of toilet paper and pot for everyone magical mythical candidate is . . . black voters won't show up.

I look at the polls outside of DU - and I get one thing. But this is a good cross section on the 'left' of those who care about politics (DU being a slice of that cross section) - here I get another thing.

Here's the potentially taken off track - Jon Huntsman. No one at DU is saying his name - but Republicans I know in my personal life that held their nose to vote for Christie or the two that did NOT Vote at all in November - they are starting "that" up. A few picked my brain yesterday afternoon because they knew I was a grass roots supporter of John Edwards in 2008. They need ideas.

But here's the thing - Huntsman is clean as a whistle, articulate, well spoken (nods to Reid and Biden on Obama) etc. etc. He does no harm and isn't an asshole. Oh yeah - and worked in the Obama Admin.

Who knows what this black woman might do out of spite in 2016 - if they don't knock their snotty little bigot "Oh fiddle dee" bullshit off. And I'm taking more people with me. He won't need holy rollers on the right - if he appeals to the base core values of black voters on the left.

^That's the first and last time^ I will post something like that at DU. But if they run a pot for everyone, one piece of toilet paper per crap, and install a monument in DC of Snowden and Greenwald candidate while telling everyone else on the left to STFU and 'get over it' and 'we know more than you' - I'm going to retaliate where it really matters. And that's not at DU.

[onpatrol98]

33. It's deliberate...

It's definitely deliberate by some. That's not to say there aren't some clueless ones in the bunch, too. But, the pack leaders are being deliberate.

"At a certain point, this starts to seem like a willful effort to claim the site as the exclusive space for those of a certain narrow worldview that does not include the concerns of people of color and feminists."

Sounds like bullies...

[Blue_Tires]

35. Wow...Just wow...

I step away from DU for a weekend and they allowed *that* shitfest to happen?

When, when did this site become so tone-deaf to racial issues??

The ONLY thing that keeps me from leaving is the thought that our numbers are already critically small, and there would be one less everyday regular trying to at least keep the site honest, so to speak...

[Number23]

44. Blue, that's what's kept me here too

The ONLY thing that keeps me from leaving is the thought that our numbers are already critically small,

And the thought that the 2-3 black folks that get all of the props they get because they hate the president/U.S. as much as the rest of those cretins being the ONLY black voices around here gives me the willies. But if that is DU's cross to bear, then so be it. It's not our fault that the place is literally rotten to the core with trolls. I refuse to let these ignorant, over privileged, closedminded and clueless Green Tea Baggers drive me as batty as they are.

[Gormy Cuss]

36. The fried chicken threads are embarrassing.

Sadly, there are only the most recent example.

[TBF]

38. The NRA and Third Way

Shills are painfully obvious. As for the other divisiveness your guess is as good as mine. Could be Pauliites, could be PR firms hired by any number of very wealthy individuals or groups. I don't think it's just DU either - control of social media is very much a real thing.

[JI7]

49. this could be a positive but a lot could be disgruntled types who can't

find anyone who will take them seriously in person. so they all come on the internet and spew.

larouche types use to set up some table near where i work and people saw them as a joke. they were such assholes . it seems like many of them turned into Paul supporters.

if you go on youtube and other comment sections they spew the same crap. even if it's not related to the video or article.

[TBF]

53. I can't believe the LaRouche types are

still around - but they are. They have been pretty active down here in south Houston with their criticism of Obama.

[BellaKos]

52. BainsBane

Last edited Tue Feb 11, 2014, 09:59 AM - Edit history (3)

I'm so glad you brought this up. Whatever *this* is. I didn't follow the "fried chicken" dispute, but, unfortunately, I've become embroiled in one or two gender-related threads lately and have found the same kind of thing. Whatever *this* is.

Some have suggested that it's deliberate trolling. Others have talked about the mentality, tone, temperament, and/or the insensitivity of posters who infect threads to the extent that they devolve into unadulterated bickering.

I submit that it has to do with mentality. Racism and sexism are more than mere political and sociological issues that can be dissected and illuminated on an intellectual level. Both are deeply embedded within the entire being of an individual, where they are viewed from the prism of experience, education, cultural background, and even spiritual belief systems. They can be reflected in society in highly nuanced ways within a myriad of contexts, the subtleties of which are not easily discerned by the casual observer.

So if one approaches these issues with the mentality of thoughtlessness, belligerence, or sense of superiority, then he is not *hearing* what others have to say. He overlooks the validity of the *other* as he hones in on the area or even the tiny spec of a word or phrase that ignites his ire. An ire of his imagination. (Or hers, of course.) The game has begun at that point. It's all about how quickly he can bombard the other with lists of facts, or the latest buzz words, or the singular experiences cited as evidence that the other is wrong.

People who are thoughtful and especially those who have been hurt by racism or sexism and see it clearly, even if expressed in subtle, esoteric forms, are repelled by that kind of thinking. As it should be.

[1StrongBlackMan]

58. I'm exhausted ...

I just spent the day ... between doing the things I had to do ... arguing with my fellow Duers.

Issue #1: Does snowden's (unethical) act of exploiting a co-worker's trust/friendship/relationship to further his plan, cause supporters of snowden's action to face an ethical dilemma, i.e., does an unethical means justify the ends.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=726383


Issue #2: Is asking someone to post support for a conclusionary statement, i.e., "this is considererd a very minor move on the part of the EPA" and "this is considererd a very minor move on the part of the EPA", while denigrating a specific EPA Guidance statement, where I stated quite clearly that I disagree with the Administration's policy position (or rather silence) on the issue of Fracking, defending the larger policy position of President Obama?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4493440

Du can be exhausting at times.

[noiretextatique]

60. not deliberate, just garden variety ignorance

And privilege, IMHO.