We have our first 2016 Election Hillary is a whore post on DU!

[boston bean]

Anyone surprised?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=455232

survives a jury and a post objecting vehemently gets hidden.

Harumph!!! Let's face it, women should remain courteous at all times! Even in the face of bigoted hatred!

[charlyvi]

1. I've been here since 2004.

Was here for Bush/Kerry, Obama/Clinton in the 2008 primary battle and the 2008, 2012 elections. Never have I seen anything like this stand -- it's wrong. So, I think I'll be taking a break from DU if it has turned into a place where this is condoned. Maybe a break forever.

[boston bean]

4. Hi charly!

I hear you. I often question my participation as well. like I'm supporting this crap with $$ and clicks.

[charlyvi]

13. It's called Democratic Underground

And it's supposed to exist as a refuge for Democrats. How we ended up bashing Democrats we don't like so mercilessly is contradictory to the aims of this site. Hillary Clinton is a democrat. The constant barrage of posts on DU trying to tear her apart is inexplicable. If you don't like her, fine. If you aren't going to vote for her in the primaries, fine. But as a fellow democrat, why try to destroy her? Bernie Sanders does not need this. He does not try to make himself look better by tearing Hillary down. I wish his supporters would follow his example because they are not doing him any favors with their hatred of her.

P.S. Hi, Boston Bean

[iandhr]

16. It's really punch a Democrat Underground.

[charlyvi]

17. And stomp on them 'till they're pulp Democratic Underground! n/t

[freshwest]

42. So much to recommend in your post. I spend less time here, but only been here since 2010.

It was a haven when I first came here, meeting like minded people. While the mission statement says it is not the official voice of the Party, it drew in a lot of Democrats.

Although most of them have been driven away as the kind of negativity DU now thrives on does not work in real life. It either turns people of politics in general, but most especially Democrats. This has become our face to the world.

At first, when I began here, a victory for the people by the Democratic Party was sure to be celebrated and facts put out there. But people who took the time to research, analyze and post are few and far between in this environment.

It's in constant, unrelenting attack mode now. Republican opposition research is being done here, a number of posts here are cited in conservative and GOP sites to show that Democrats can do nothing right about anything. That they are in disarray, despite winning two terms for the first POTUS that broke the old mold and has benefitted so many. He is beloved in many parts of the world and they respect the USA more because of him.

The atmosphere prevents Democrats from feeling free to talk on anything meaningful, so discussion is reduced. DU was attacked by GOP trolls on its first day for daring to call out GWB. And we cannot tell how many people here are GOP or Libertarian, except by their posts, yet they are long term and waiting us out. Some low down tactics are being used to drive us away. That is why Democrats are leaving, as they see their fate.



What's sad is the Admins have worked to create the most user friendly site on the net. But it's being squatted upon by other parties who will attack all Democrats with no holds barred since they have nothing to lose by demoralizing Dems, and everything to win.

[MuseRider]

70. This is HOF

and a lot of us or some of us here are Bernie Sanders supporters. I would feel a lot more comfortable in this group if people did not accuse us of being the perpetrators of everything bad that is said or done to Hillary. I find the comment that was made atrocious and posted in the HRC group with my support regarding this issue. It serves no purpose to accuse us when there is no indication that this person is anything more than a troll. Sanders true supporters are trying to be like he is. There are a few people who just love the fight but that is hardly one sided. We cannot control what others do. Please, I love this group and do not want to feel like I can't come here because of who I support. I posted way down thread before I came back up here to respond to you. I am going to join in reporting this to admin again. As a woman, as a feminist I feel obligated to uphold a better circumstance for any woman but I can certainly leave this group too or just avoid it if this is going to become uncomfortable.

[boston bean]

71. Hi Muse, I'm confused about where you think people are blaming

Bernie supporters here in this thread?

As you know this thread isn't something new to DU, and Hillary is a woman running for president and you know as well as I that the sexist attacks will come from both the left and the right.

Being on the left doesn't mean someone can't be misogynist or sexist.

So, I would hope that when you see posts like this in here, that you try to keep in mind, that Hillary, most likely will receive supportive comments when these issues arise, as she should.

ETA, I see now.. the last sentence to the post you were responding too. I guess I look at it like this. Hillary supporters aren't going to be using sexist/misogynist slurs against her, so I guess it is natural to identify member (s) of the group that have.

Don't feel like you are being lumped in with them. Maybe fight them out there in general population! And try to get them to see the err of their ways instead of trying to get people who are rightfully upset and identifying a group responsible (that obviously doesn't apply to you).

You are a good member here and I truly appreciate your participation here. Please don't let defenses of Hillary in regard to sexism/misogyny make you feel uncomfortable.

I am a very strong Hillary supporter. The only OP's about the primary election will be to discuss sexism and misogyny. Which is nothing different than this group has done all along.

I know a lot of members here support Bernie and I am very sensitive to that fact.

[charlyvi]

75. Did not mean to make you feel unwelcome

I should have said "some" Bernie supporters. I apologize to you. I still maintain though that there are posters on this board out to destroy Hillary. Read the Latest Thread page at any moment of the day. And the many, many replies piling on the hatred. And please don't tell me it goes both ways. Of course there are anti Bernie posts, but the number of them compared to the anti Hillay invective is way out of line. and much more vile. Whether these are posted by RW sock puppets, some Bernie supporters, or folks that are just anti Hillary, they are not helping Bernie one bit.
I would say to them all, it takes a very small person to try and make their candidate look better by tearing down another.

[barbtries]

12. i've been here about the same amount of time

and i find there's not much for me to read anymore. it's all so full of shit. seems like the people here could grow up and be civil, but it's not what happens. i don't know what the hell i will do without DU.

[charlyvi]

14. I was thinking the same thing.

Guess I'll try to find another progressive site or maybe start cleaning my house more. It sure needs it!

[barbtries]

31. hehe

good idea. clean the house, heaven knows i don't spend much time doing that!

[freshwest]

43. Agreed.

[A Simple Game]

44. I find it hard to believe you were here in 2008 and never saw anything like that stand.

Did you ever read any of the Obama supporters posts about Hillary? And some of those same posters are still here but now on Hillary's side ignoring the facts they used against Hillary in '08.

[boston bean]

59. A in 2008 there was a different moderating system. So, yeah the poster knows.

[charlyvi]

61. I read it, but can't recall it being this vicious.

I don't remember seeing post after post after post tearing her down in this way. Whore?

[gollygee]

68. I think this is worse than 2008

Things did get ugly but it seems uglier. It was really ugly then too though.

[Evergreen Emerald]

2. Ya know, in the real world, the judge can over rule a jury when they get it wrong.

In this case, the admins should have deleted the post. Having said that, DU has become unrecognizable. And in answer to your question, I am not surprised at the depths people go to insult Clinton.

DU has become ugly.

[boston bean]

5. They'll probably can him and say the system worked.

Like hell it did!

[DURHAM D]

10. All Hell the Great Jury System !

Guess the powers that be will never figure out that when the majority rules minorities and women lose. Hard concept?

[boston bean]

11. the hat keeps getting hung in the same place...

pretty soon it's break with all the wear and tear.

This is not a difficult concept, but one that works for them at others expense.

[A Simple Game]

49. No the powers that be have it figured out, it's the minorities and women that don't.

If minorities and women quit fighting for their own factions and combined all the minorities and women together they would be the majority. Groups of people that segregate themselves or allow themselves to be separated from the total will always lose out.

Ever heard the expression "divide and conquer?" the powers that be know what they are doing. By playing the we want this, they want that, and those people want something else game everyone ends up a loser. If all the Blacks, Latinos, women, etc. got together there would be no stopping them. The sad thing is none realize they all want the same thing, to be equal with everyone else.

It's not easier to move a small group ahead, it's easier to move the whole group ahead if everyone works together.

[DURHAM D]

50. Huh? The "powers that be" is exactly one person. nt

[A Simple Game]

51. Good for you. n/t

[DURHAM D]

53. Ok. No clue what you are on about.

Looks like you dropped into HOF to cause trouble.

[A Simple Game]

57. Then do us both a favor and quit responding to me.

You obviously don't understand what I was talking about so let's just quit the conversation.

If you would read my post I was offering advice, you don't have to listen to it and if that is trouble in your mind so be it.

[DURHAM D]

58. I understood what you said but given that it was completely off point

I decided to let you know. Apparently you can't take a hint. Your scolding/lecturing is not appreciated and yes, now done with this conversation.




Calling this Hosts for cleanup.

[Fred Sanders]

22. Also in the real word the jury is given instructions that they listen to and consult with each other

before pulling the lever...so it is not really a "jury" system as much as it is a popularity contest.

And, yes, the judges at DU need to add a clause to the TOS like this:

This is Democratic Underground", not "Democraric Unhinged".

"Administrators reserve the right to delete any registered members postings that fail to comply with TOS for Democratic Party candidates for President as the TOS would be applied to registered members, regardless of results of a jury decision of registered members."

[freshwest]

46. DU has become so ugly it makes people physically ill. So many have left and told me why.

[billhicks76]

62. DINOs And NSA Supporters Chased My Friends Away

[niyad]

3. sadly, this is not in the least surprising.

[boston bean]

6. I know, it's not the first, nor will it be the last, sorry to say.

[charlyvi]

7. The fact that someone said it, unfortunately, is not surprising

in the current climate on DU. The fact that four jurors voted to let it stand is surprising. Also disgusting.

[boston bean]

9. That is why the system is not fair and is not working.

The person who responded angrily to the affront, gets hidden.

But a misogynistic slur directed at Hillary Clinton stands.

That is not a system that is working, imho.

[charlyvi]

15. I think instead of right and wrong

politics entered their decision.

[boston bean]

18. possibly, but I've seen a lot of this on DU.

With the same result... maybe for good reason I do attribute to more than just not liking a particular candidate, and I might be wrong at times.

[freshwest]

48. I've actually seen HRC called a whore on and off for some time now. This isn't new, sadly.

At one time, such language against rightwingers was not allowed. What a cesspool.

[mercuryblues]

8. I never

expected it to get hidden.

[boston bean]

20. I didn't see that, are you sure? nt

[charlyvi]

21. No wait! I blocked him so I can't see it!

Duh!

[boston bean]

27. LOL! Now you don't have to see it! Good on you!

[UtahLib]

23. Hey, boston, here's a heaping helping of irony.

I just served on a jury from an alerter attempting to hide your post defending the hidden "fuck you" post on that thread.

[boston bean]

24. that's not unusual either. The righteous response to a misogynistic post is often times

deemed more offensive than the misogynist post.

As you have seen now three times in that same thread.

[ismnotwasm]

25. Fuck no I'm not surprised

[freshwest]

63. Correction to your image: Everyday since 2000 is November 8th, 2016.

They've been flaunting their sexism under ideological cover for years here. Usually with the help of a Judas Goat.

Many have grown up with RW media telling them the most fantastical myths about HRC. And they are always deeply personal character smears that bear no context with reality.

I hate it that such are posting here and have turned many to their side. The IQ reduction in thinking and reasoniung is inverse to the number of posts made. Everyone wants to get along with the majority out of stupidity or fear.

I doubt all those who sang out 'Seig Heil' meant it, knowing the cost of not going along. This is the effect of the Koch and GOP mantra, that money equals free speech.

The more posts inundating a website, paid or not, the more the less aggressive posters will resist. They see a trend taking place and don't want to be left out. This is human nature.

So posts and recs equal people - often the same people who make racist or sexist OPs and protect their leader on juries.

Monkey see, monkey do. The greatest learning method has been overcome with dollars. The rightwingers don't even cloak the argument anymore.

If you are not wealthy, they say, you should not get to vote, even if the outcome keeps you in bad straits. How many of the same people say they won't vote and claim to be allies?

It is the opposite of democracy. More like aristocracy or the coming feudalism. They haven't missed a step on the road to eliminating opposition. What Charles P. Pierce said is good, but not as strong as it should have been. But then, he has to work for a living, too:

Modern conservatism is not about making the
government smaller. It's about making the government exclusive.

Their model is to keep out all the poor, women, minorities, the disadvantaged and the victims of the system out of power to change things. The ones who call for not voting if HRC is the candidate, are not being hurt by the status quo and will never be our allies.

[ismnotwasm]

65. Agree

I found an article to that effect--I'm at work, I'll try to post it later

[freshwest]

66. TIA.

[riversedge]

26. Why would DU allow this-Democrats demeaning Dem candidates in such a vile form?

The post should be taken down period!

[charlyvi]

28. See Post 13. n/t

[riversedge]

29. I agree. Good post well said.

In solidarity

[JustAnotherGen]

30. This person needs to go

ibewlu606


Who is with me in sending the pm or ata? We construct the same one then just keep sending it until the intruder is gone.

And correct me if I'm wrong - but wasn't that union (ibew) known for its rampant racism and sexism? Not sure I want to be associated with that.

A tip of the hat to the sweetheart who pointed tat out to me!

[heaven05]

32. I'm with you

just got back from the vet. While I may not agree with HRC as my primary candidate, so far, doesn't mean this type of post should be accepted. Disagree on policy, on history but her sex has nothing to do with this election and anyone intimating that with derogatory words should be banned. That jury pissed me off.

[JustAnotherGen]

67. I'm so not surprised at this post!

You are a gentleman!

[brer cat]

33. I have sent an ata.

I think they should be flooded with them. Frankly if this is allowed, then I am out of here. "Community Standards" can either be defined by the administrators or the lowest common denominator from among the posters. I guess they will let us know which they choose.

[boston bean]

36. I sent an ATA as well.

[heaven05]

34. HOW COULD THIS!!!!!!

Last edited Sat Jul 18, 2015, 06:28 PM - Edit history (1)

survive a liberal, progressive jury. Makes me wonder.

[Laser102]

47. Makes me incredibly sad.

[George II]

35. Well, we all have to give Mr. IBEW (we know it wasn't a woman!) our thanks....

.....what he did was to unite and bring ALL camps of DU members together. Thanks "brother"!

Now, get the fuck out of here.

For what it's worth (I've posted this a couple of times already), here is the result of my alert on the "whore" post:

_____________________

On Sat Jul 18, 2015, 10:17 AM you sent an alert on the following post:

Rec'd
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=455232

REASON FOR ALERT

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

YOUR COMMENTS

Referring to Hillary Clinton as a "whore" (twice) is offensive and inapproprriate!

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Sat Jul 18, 2015, 10:26 AM, and voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Are you kidding me!? Poster should be BANNED.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Too iffy, even if it sounds okay to use the word in the male "economic sellout" sense. It's just that there's no trusting that same contextual use of it when sexist labels are too oppressive in other contexts for over half the population. Arguably using divisively sexist, pejorative language within the party just excuses opponents to use it, too, and they are the guyz who really do mean it.

Use of historically sexist words in other contexts just starts another version of all the "arguable," "excusable" contexts for using the word "nigger." Those who argue for using racist/sexist labels can then deny their own motives in word choice before the public.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Could have gotten the idea across without such charged language.

Thank you.

[Flying Squirrel]

37. The post objecting vehemently just said, "Fuck you!"

That is the kind of thing the jury system is SUPPOSED to hide. It was intellectually dishonest to include that non-hide in your OP as somehow proof that a vehement objection to an inappropriate post can never be hide-worthy or should not have been hidden. There are many less offensive and more productive ways to voice a vehement objection - do you really want DU to devolve to where that kind of language is acceptable for anyone who feels strongly about anything?

[boston bean]

38. poster above has been blocked, just so you know he will be unable to reply to any posts made to him.

[boston bean]

40. uh, DU had already devolved when it was determined to be OK by community standards to

call Hillary Clinton a whore (you know as misogynistic slur?).

[paleotn]

39. The original post was over the top.....

...but the response far more so. It deserved to be hidden.

[boston bean]

41. No, a response of fuck you to a misogynistic slur was well within the bounds.

There is something really askew that the two would actually be equated with one another, and in your case determined to be worse.

Bye....

For all, poster has been blocked, he will be unable to respond in the group.

[LanternWaste]

90. What specifically leads you to believe that?

"but the response far more so."

What specifically leads you to believe that?

[wyldwolf]

45. pathetic.

[seaglass]

52. I love the statement below from Laura Hudson, I think it holds true not just for harassment but

sexist, racist and homophobic attacks:

Laura Hudson ‏@laura_hudson Jul 14

The rules a community makes about harassment are a declaration of their values. They tell us what matters to them, and WHO matters to them.

[DURHAM D]

54. This

[DURHAM D]

55. And now we have an OP in GD defending it. nt

[asjr]

56. I am not surprised at all. I came here in 2002 and was delighted

with DU. There have been many days that some smart aleck entries got posted. But nothing like that now. It seems almost every day we get posts that become a race to see who can be more ugly. The fun for me is no longer funny. I have become more reluctant to post because someone always answers with a smart remark that is unnecessary.

[gollygee]

60. You could call Clinton just about anything and get away with it

I'm not even a Clinton fan and it pisses me off. It is total bullshit that it wasn't hidden.

[LuvLoogie]

64. The original poster of the original thread has not condemned it.

But is miffed that most people are not addressing the original post.

[MuseRider]

69. I am outraged that that post stood.

I hope (lol, like that does a lot of good) that the admins will get around to PPRing it AND the people who voted to let it stand.

This i going to get much worse if it is not stopped now.

I too will send something about this. I am sorry for all of you who support her and sorry for all of us who are women.

[boston bean]

72. me too, muse!

[Phentex]

73. This does not surprise me...

from a place that also allows the president to be called a POS used car salesman.

[KyleMcShades]

74. That's pretty awful.

I can't see how any self-described liberal would find that acceptable.

Maybe Admins can get involved?

[still_one]

76. and the response to the overt sexism remark made was hidden by a jury

It was a "FU" response to the poster who said Hillary was a "w------", and very appropriate especially within the context

Probably even more troubling was a separate thread justifying it by saying it is a generic term, which is so off base. Not thing surprises me though when the "c" word was used against Hillary about a month ago that person was rightfully tombstones, but there were follow up posts arguing everything from it was metaphorical to it is common usage in UK so that makes it acceptable

Very sad

[nilesobek]

77. I have not come out for a candidate yet.

I've been working crazy hours and have not had time to make an informed decision. I'm sure both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders would make great Presidents. The country will be in safe hands. I cannot say the same for any GOP candidate.

I've served on numerous juries at DU and always vote to hide when profanity and vitriol take over. Its in the "hurtful," and "over the top," classification. Both posts should be hidden Imho.

I'm considered pretty tough out here in the world, my occupation and the way I've led my life but DU somehow turns me into a bowl of jello for a spine. I'm out of my league when talking to long term posters who are better informed than I am and, quite possibly, intellectually overmatched and darned near computer illiterate. For instance, I've written articles and taken pictures for the articles but cannot figure out how to post the pic to the article.

We all have a voice. The "w-" comment could have been phrased differently. Please everyone, edit and review before clicking "send." Reminder to self also.

[DURHAM D]

79. abakan has started a Meta OP in GD.

Given the Meta OP that was allowed to stay yesterday guess he will probably get away with it.

Update: I am shocked. It was locked.

[MineralMan]

80. That thread has now been locked by Hosts.

[DURHAM D]

82. Saw it and updated my post above.

Thanks

[MineralMan]

84. My pleasure. We try hard to lock up disruptive meta threads.

A lot depends on how many hosts are currently online. I locked it as soon as I saw the alerts.

[boston bean]

85. Do let us know if someone says you didn't have consensus to lock it.

[MineralMan]

86. That seems very unlikely.

Truly.

[boston bean]

87. okie doke.. nt

[boston bean]

81. We're just not going to put up with someone equating the use of the word whore

when deriding its usage. to one using it in a sexist/misogynist way. It is disruptive to this group.

So, I blocked him.

[DURHAM D]

83. Good decision.

poor baby

[geek tragedy]

88. I prefer Bernie, but that shit is not ok.

Not ok to use it against any woman.

[JTFrog]

89. I have to post Skinner's comment about this because... well... you know....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12598326

. I agree that person is a troll.

He dropped a turd in a thread, stared a shitstorm, and then made no effort whatsoever to explain himself. Furthermore, he has a history of inflammatory comments like this.

To be clear, as much as it pains me to say it, I don't think that specific post is by itself cause for banning. As you know there is a very long history (including here on DU) of people using the word "whore" to refer to public figures (both male and female) who are doing the bidding of powerful interests. People on this website routinely post about "corporate whores" or "media whores" and barely anyone thinks it is out-of-bounds.

But the fact that this was aimed specifically at a prominent Democrat who is also a woman does bother me very deeply. I am really disappointed that large numbers of DU members (including a majority of the jurors on that post) thought that that post was within bounds. And it wasn't a jury of "trolls" either -- the jurors who voted to leave the post were all long-term members with thousands upon thousands of posts and stars next to their usernames.

So I guess the takeaway here is that we need to decide what kind of community we want this to be. We have the power, though our posts and through our jury service, to set a higher standard. We just have to decide to use it.

And another thing: For people who are seeing this through the partisan lens of the Democratic presidential primary, it seems to me that that supporters of every Democratic presidential candidate have an interest in curbing this kind of language. Obviously Hillary Clinton supporters don't like seeing their favored candidate smeared in this way. But supporters of Bernie Sanders or other Democrats should not want to see this either, because it makes them (and by association, their candidate) look very bad.

"we need to decide what kind of community we want this to be"

We? They set the site up for mob rule. How on earth can community standards ever be upheld in this manner?

[NuclearDem]

91. The use of "whore" in "corporate whore" doesn't mean that.

The word "whore" is a derogatory term for someone who sells themselves to serve someone else, while "corporate whore" is a derogatory term for someone who sells themselves to serve someone else.

See? Totally different.