A new DU Group has been formed. It's called The Feminist Group.

[Bunny]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=341

[efhmc]

1. Count me in. I love the statement of purpose already.

[paineinthearse]

2. Excellent!

Good luck with the new group, and thanks to the admins and new moderators.

Guys, "feminism" is not limited to women, we need to support the group as well.

[MountainLaurel]

3. Thanks Bunny!

Will have to pop over and check it out.

:party:

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bunny]

5. I don't know. If you want one, start one.

[shockra]

6. Erm...

All the other groups are Masculinist groups. ;)

[efhmc]

7. Great response.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pithlet]

It only took 12 responses

before one of the anti-feminists came in here to accuse us of victimhood. That's got to be some kind of record.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

43. What was worn was your question.

IF you want a masculinist group..start one

[Kathy in Cambridge]

10. Why don't you start one?

we all know how oppressed white men are!

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bunny]

16. ***snarf***

:spray:

[Kathy in Cambridge]

23. ...

:spray:

[Kathy in Cambridge]

32. Not obsessed with color

but my assumption above has been 99.9%.

[Hello_Kitty]

17. Why are you asking us?

Are you incapable of forming your own group?

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bunny]

20. Frankly, we don't care what your gender is.

If you want to come to the Feminist Group and participate according to the rules, then you are welcome. If you do not, then don't. We'll survive, either way.

Not sure what your beef is, but you aren't going to crush my groove. I'm happy to have a place to go where we no longer have to tolerate posts like yours.

Have a great day! :hi:

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bunny]

22. Sorry, not going to engage!

Have a lovely day! :hi:

[beam me up scottie]

25. I expected more creativity.

But then I sometimes over-underestimate people :rofl:

[Bunny]

27. Yeah, it's pretty obvious.

No subtlety there, huh? :rofl:

[woo me with science]

78. LOL

Don't you think the title of this post is a little ironic?

[Kathy in Cambridge]

26. She's not defensive

you came to this thread with a purpose. Have a nice day! :hi:

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

55. The question was disingenuous. YOu know it. Give up

[Misunderestimator]

60. Hostile? No criticism? LOL

Have a nice day! :hi:

[mongo]

64. You might even characterize the responses you got as "sexist"

and then asked a question.

Which drew a set of responses that varied from defensive to hostile even though there was no criticism of the new group, it's purpose, or how it would be managed.

Instead, the question as to the existance that there might be a point in having a group focused on Masculine issues was met with some reactions of derision and denigration, as though the idea had no merit or basis out of hand.

Rather an unbecoming response.
But the posters making the responses know that there is NO SUCH THING as sexism against males.

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

77. No, you didn't.

You came to this thread to stir shit up and start a flamewar. And you know it.

[beam me up scottie]

35. OPRESSER ! ! !

:rofl:

[paineinthearse]

30. Spinzonner , chill.

Show some class. Starting a new group is a difficult and arduous task. If you have anything to say beyond a word of congratulations, I suggest you consider your words and frame in such a way that they are not flaming.

[Bunny]

33. You are becoming one of my favorite DUers!

Thanks! :thumbsup:

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

39. Well, the tone of your first response may have been misinterpreted

but I somehow doubt it.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

44. Come on..rhetorical my ass!

I can understand if you were just being a smart ass and having a little fun...but if that were the case, you could have easily cleaned it up before any flames arose.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

54. Your deliberate antagonism

Tell the truth. You deliberately antagonized when you heard there was a feminist group knowing full well if you wanted a "Masculinist" group, you could start one. Further up in the thread you accuse others of acting like the victim when in fact, you are acting like a victim for being taken to task for your deliberate antagonism. But I really didn't need to tell you all this, did I?

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

61. Then why did you post the question..if you knew the answer?

The rest of your post is pure projection

and I am sure you meant no antagonism here either..right?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=3410936&mesg_id=3410957

[beam me up scottie]

62. Popular, isn't he?

:rofl:

[Bunny]

65. Wow. Wonder who pissed in his Wheaties?

:rofl:

[Name removed]

80. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[beam me up scottie]

84. .

:evilgrin:

[Bunny]

90. ...

:spray:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

92. StopTheMorans, you said a truth, even though it was deleted.

Jus' sayin'.

[aeolian]

89. Apparantly not...

...the thread was just locked as "flamebait," despite a lack of flames.

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Beware the Beast Man]

91. A real man would feel confident enough to see his sisters

discussing feminist issues. Really, what are you afraid of?

[omega minimo]

131. "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself"

Hey there, Beware the Beast Man-- Good Question!

In tangling with two heavy-doody DUdes (different threads, different times), in thinking about what they wrote, in carefully considering their point of view and how to kindly skewer their ignorance, I realized that yes-- they are AFRAID. Hence the attacks, the defensive offensiveness, the irrational arguments and wild accusations-- behavior that is borderline hysterical.

What are they afraid of?

A GD thread title tonight read "Dean is attacked because he threatens the establishment."

"________ is attacked because _____ threatens the establishment."

Maybe that's it. Fear of the unknown, fear of the dark, fear of unsettled power?

Fear of change?

Or is it the fear of being WRONG! OMG!

This Group was formed by people who want to have a discussion, not a competition.

[BlueIris]

8. Awesome. Thank you, Bunny.

If there's anything this week has shown me this board needs, it's more information about and discussion of feminism. And how.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

9. thanks, Bunny

does that mean the usual suspects who piss all over the Women's Issues forum aren't invited?

[Misunderestimator]

11. I believe it means that if they start pissing, they'll be banned from the

forum... at least I HOPE that's what it means. :hi:

[Bunny]

15. I think that's how it works.

[lukasahero]

51. That is exactly what it means. Thanks Skinner!

Skinner noted that our original statement said inappropriate posts would be deleted but he wanted the perogative to ban the posters. :)

[mongo]

67. Well, I for one feel really good about that.

Skinner noted that our original statement said inappropriate posts would be deleted but he wanted the perogative to ban the posters. :)

[lukasahero]

72. From the group.

The rules are clear. Groups have rules. "God rules" posts are not allowed in the atheist group and Christians who go there and don't abide by the rules are banned from the group.

[beam me up scottie]

73. Can't stand it , can you?

So much for your claim about just wanting discussion and caring about women.
Right on schedule.

[FizzFuzz]

124. lol!! *wink* n/t

[Desertrose]

19. This is great!

Sometimes in order to have a reasonable discussion you have to limit it to those who WANT a discussion in the first place instead of naysaying and/or flaming.

I am really glad to see this....its just cool.

Thanks to all who got it up & running!!

:woohoo:

[zanne]

24. Exactly, Desertrose.

It's sad that posting about feminist issues in GD usually results in a flamefest. I thought we were better than that, but we do have a fair amount of anti-feminism here.

[paineinthearse]

28. Nominated - do I hear a second and third?

When the John Conyers group was opened a couple weeks back, I made a similar post. Getting this onto the greatest page will increase exposure.

[katinmn]

29. seconded!

[Bunny]

34. We're on the Greatest Page!

:woohoo:

[paineinthearse]

53. Congrats!

You know, many people STILL don't know how to nominate deserving posts.

:shrug:

[beam me up scottie]

37. Fifthed !

or something like that...

[beam me up scottie]

38. Thanks for posting this Bunny.

Hopefully we'll get some more um...passive/aggressive posts to help illustrate the need for the group.

[merh]

40. Great idea! Thanks

:applause:

[Marnieworld]

41. Can someone define feminism for me?

Seriously, I always felt I was one but according to the group statement I'm not welcome.

I always thought it just meant that you believed in equal choice and opportunity for women in all parts of society. I thought it meant that you thought that women are equal in capability, potential and intelligence. Unfortunately this group seems aligned with other beliefs that don't ring true for this 33 year old WOMAN.

Good luck "feminists". It seems like a whole lot of preaching to the choir to me but I guess this whole board is in a sense. We all need support groups for our point of view. I sincerely do hope that you find what you are looking for.

Peace.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

42. There is a lot of misogyny on this board

just wander into the Women's forum and look at the number of deleted posts. I'm not that much older than you, and there is still a ton of discrimination in business. Sorry you don't feel welcome.

[Marnieworld]

46. I'm welcome in the rest of DU

and that's enough for me. I'm used to being excluded. I'm a married, child-free, atheist, overweight democrat who has divorced her whole family. If I got caught up in belonging everywhere I wouldn't be as happy as I am. Perhaps I'll peek in occassionally and comment on the things we agree on and keep my mouth shut on the other stuff out of respect. Or maybe I'll just keep raging about the Bush administration since you never run out of stuff there.

:hi:

[LoZoccolo]

66. Forget it, not worth it, self-delete. n/t

[Marnieworld]

70. Already read it.

and you are right. It's not worth it. Some views are unshakable and that's why I won't even say which parts of the group's statement I disagreed with (it was 2 things in fact). I did enjoy the salt graphic metaphor though. :hi:

[funflower]

132. Amen! I'm shocked at what I read on DU at times.

[silverlib]

45. You got my curiosity going and I read the intro to the group...

This group is certainly for this fifty-four year old female. I fit the group very well and am so grateful that the "fit" is so well described as to eliminate people who think that we, as women, have "made it" in society.

The description also gives a gracious out to those who do not believe in the principles of the forum - a very gracious out.

The inclusion of gender is really important here, as most of the men I know are ardent supporters of women's rights.

Thanks for getting my curiosity aroused- I might have otherwise put off my visit to the new forum.

[Marnieworld]

47. Glad you found a home.

For me I'll be happy in the other forums just fine.
:hi:

[beam me up scottie]

48. Why do you not feel welcome?

I thought we tried to include everybody.
Your definition I'm sure is different than others, but then, so is mine.

[Marnieworld]

52. I'd rather not say

and get into an endless unresolvable debate. Let's just agree to disagree. :hi:

[mongo]

68. Reading the thread about starting the group in the womens rights

forum, I think many would get the impression that this group was started to EXCLUDE certain viewpoints.

[beam me up scottie]

71. Groups do not EXCLUDE anyone.

If you've got a problem with the Group rules, I suggest you take it up with Skinner.
Or would you prefer to act like a victim because you've been criticized in the women's forum?
Again, if you've got a problem with someone, take it up with the person or hit alert and tell the mods.
How long are you going to keep this up?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

74. No worries...you still have plenty of threads where you can promote porn

[Bunny]

75. Actually, it WAS started to exclude certain specific viewpoints.

As was the Christian Group, the GLBT Group, the African-American Group, the Fat Acceptance Group, and, well, you get the picture.

Just kills you that you aren't going to be able to join in, doesn't it?

[mongo]

94. No what bothers me is that blanket statements that are untrue

will be accepted as fact in that forum, without the option of presenting dissenting viewpoints and facts.

[Bunny]

95. So, will you lose sleep over this? If so, that's kinda pathetic.

And anyway, isn't "truth" a matter of perception? Your truth may not be mine, and neither of us is necessarily right or wrong, but in this forum I won't have to deal with people who don't agree with me.

It's sad that you cannot let go of this. Must you have a say in EVERY aspect of DU? Are you really that controlling?

[mongo]

104. No sometimes truth is objective - but propaganda more fits your

viewpoint. Here's some examples from just ONE thread in the women's rights forum:

That makes sense to me. I remember the line about if men got pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament. Well, if pornography that depicted men as sex objects and willing victims of violence became pervasive, it would be banned in a New York minute.

The assumption here is that violent pornography is PERVASIVE, when it is actually a very small percentage of the over 1000 titles that are produced each month.

As for females who are pro-porn, you don't have to visit a shelter for battered lesbians to know that there are women who enjoy hurting other women.

Here, the assumption is if you're a female and you like porn, well then you must want to hurt women.

I do have one caveat about porn. Adolescent males expect women to act like that. Adolescent females expect the hearts and flowers. Both are set up for a life of disappointment in the real thing if they regard porn as having anything to do with reality.

We don't expect an 18yo male to go on a killing spree after watching The Terminator. But if he sees porn he will rush right out to try to emulate it. Because we poor males have no idea of the difference between FANTASY and REALITY.

While you don't have to look at porn, and your friends may use it responsibly, some people may go from enjoying hard core porn to deciding to act it out, and they can choose their victims randomly.

The Ted Bundy defense - porn makes me do it. Alcohol is the #1 factor in violence against women, but no one wants to demonize that anymore. But a serial killer comes out to James Dobson and says "porn made me do it" (even though on two previous confessions, he never mentioned porn), then there must be a casual link, right.

Stalin and Hitler had that kind of freedom of the press. What the dictator wants is widely disseminated, and the rest is underground or forbidden. Pornography is propaganda. It disrespects women exactly the way Goebbels disrespected Jews, by portraying them as suitable victims.

Here we are comparing adult entertainment, and by extension people who enjoy it to NAZIS.

If you are really female (one never knows for sure online),
I hope you can continue to live in your little fantasy world. And if that isn't possible, I hope that at least you survive the attack, hopefully without permanent mental or physical damage.

In response to a poster who was female - If you say you're a woman and you actually LIKE porn, you're suspect. And the message here is that porn causes mental and even physical damage.

All this came from only ONE POST http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=229&topic_id=1407

The other thing is you'll notice that most of the deleted messages in THIS post we're in here came from the so-called "feminists" who respond to ANY question of the need or purpose of the group with snarky responses and personal attacks.

Your truth may not be mine, and neither of us is necessarily right or wrong, but in this forum I won't have to deal with people who don't agree with me.

Which is EXACTLY what you want. A secret clubhouse where the only views that are tolerated are the prevailing groupthink. A place where propaganda is tolerated and encouraged, as long as it fits your purpose.

[Name removed]

107. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cally]

112. I just don't understand your obsession

I get that you are for pornography but why hit most threads on women's issues with your interests. I've seen you enter threads which have nothing to do with porn but with women's issues. Could you just start some threads on pornography and have a discussion. Maybe you should start one every day so you can discuss your interests. Maybe you should start a porn group. May I respectfully ask that you stop taking other threads off topic.

[Bunny]

116. Well, what's your point?

Re: your last line? Of course this is exactly what we want. We wanted a place to be free to talk about issues that affect us, free from having to deal with people that the issues do not affect. Why do you think we did it? :shrug: If you think that you've somehow put me in my place, you're wrong.

BTW, I noticed that you didn't answer my question about your need for control. And that's really very telling, but, since perception is practically everything, why don't you console yourself with the thought that us poor women are going to just continue living our pathetic deluded lives, without the benefit of your vast knowledge and wisdom? Seriously, go ahead and tell yourself that - it may make this whole Feminists Group thing more palatable for you.

[beam me up scottie]

121. You know, Mongo, right now

the part of me that is small and mean, the part that you might recognize, wants to go back to our "Secret Clubhouse" and start a blistering, self-righteous, rabid, spittle-spewing, snarkmeister of a thread solely for the purpose of dissing your beloved porn.

Oh, the satisfaction I would feel, encouraging all of the women who you drove out of the other threads to get it all out of their systems.
Kind of a cathartic smut-cleansing of their souls.

It would blossom and spread like kudzu in a cornfield, until you could go nowhere on DU without hearing the giggling and taunts of all those women who weren't allowed to have an opinion.

It would be a monumental, much deserved in-your-face for all of the grief you caused my sisters.

But I won't do that.

Because that would cheapen and sully all of the hard work and good wishes that went into the Feminists Group.

You see, that would be admitting that you are right, and that women on DU are inseparable from porn just as they seem to be in your mind.

And you are not right.

You're not even close.

This Group is a huge success because of all of the women and men on DU who believe in equality and freedom.

Not just freedom to dislike porn, but freedom to dislike anything we want to without fear of reprisal from porn proselytizers or misogynists or juvenile snivelers or passive-aggressive control freaks, basically free from any sort of intimidation whatsoever.

And the doors will always be open to anyone who just wants to be themselves without having to explain why they don't fit into some anal-retentive Frisian's cookie cutter image of one gender or another.

So I suggest you get used to the idea.

It's not about you and it never was.

Although your unceasing patrol of the Women's forum definitely influenced to me stand up and fight.

So, see? You did manage to influence me about porn.

Why, without you, I may never have been motivated to cast my vote for a safe place for all of the women who couldn't speak.

I'll bet you helped a lot of people make up their minds about endorsing this group.

So, thanks Mondo, for all of your help.
We couldn't have done it without you! :toast:

Oh, and Mondo, just in case you never paid attention, I have never, ever anywhere on this board in any way, shape, or form discussed my feelings about pornography.

So did you succeed in alienating a possible ally or create a new enemy?

[Misunderestimator]

122. Well said, bmus!

:thumbsup:

(I too have never discussed pornography on this forum. And I get tired of seeing it brought up by the same person time after time after time in thread after thread after thread where it has no place.)

[Hello_Kitty]

123. I second the thumbs up

And I rarely even think of porn in my daily life. I'm certainly not for banning it, so long as it involves consenting adults who willingly participate in its production. I agree with what someone said in another thread about porn being the price we pay for free speech.

But I guess someone who is obsessed with it would bring it up in any situation and try to impose it on everyone with a determination bordering on pathological. It's creepy and it's harassment. I'm reminded of many, many, guys I was stationed with in the Navy and currently work with in my male-dominated profession. You know the ones. Pseudo-intellectual Clarence Thomas types who try to steer every conversation into a sexual arena. Oh yes, and some of them have quite an extensive collection of "erotica" that they are only too eager to describe to you. No doubt hoping that you'll agree to a private viewing, since you seem like such a sophisticated, open-minded kind of girl, as their eyes roam lasciviously over you. Yah right. Buffoons.

[mongo]

142. Show me where I brought it up.

I get tired of seeing it brought up by the same person time after time after time in thread after thread after thread where it has no place.

The fact is I have been replying to posts where porn is mentioned, and the couple of times I have posted in that forum about other issues, someone else always turns it into a war on porn, because I posted something on topic.

[cally]

125. Thanks for stating what I'm thinking about all this

From another poster who has never stated my belief about porn. I do know that Mongo's posts have influenced me in ways he wouldn't want.

(At least I don't think I've but I've been here a long time and I don't remember all my posts.)

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

134. Very well said

[Gelliebeans]

137. My sentiments exactly BMUS!

:thumbsup:

[Pithlet]

138. Best post of the day!

:applaud:

[Name removed]

141. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[beam me up scottie]

143. WAY to go, mongo!!!

Nice job of exposing the real mongo !!!
Also, excellent example of a personal attack. Bravo !!!:applause:

I realize it's just terrible that you will no longer be able follow rape victims from thread to thread to tell them you won't allow them to vilify pornography.

:nopity:

And if anyone really wants to know what happened, all they need to do is look at the threads in the women's forum.

Taking quotes out of context only to try to paint DU women as anti-porn and anti-free speech won't work for you any more.

Performing your daily searches for porn will no longer provide you with easy targets.

Get used to having all that extra free time and start enjoying it.

Might I suggest a new hobby?

I hear there are a lot of prisons that don't have enough pornography in their libraries.

[mongo]

145. Actually, the MAJORITY of DU women aren't anti-porn or anti-free speech

But they probably won't be participating in your group either.

[Ripley]

146. How do you know what the majority of DU women think?

And guess what pal, the group is Feminist Group, not Anti-Porn Group.

But since you equate feminist with anti-porn and anti-free speech, you obviously show your hatred of feminists. Nice. I guess you really understand the MAJORITY of DU women. :eyes:

[mongo]

147. Nice job putting words in my mouth

I know many feminists who are very pro-porn.

[Misunderestimator]

148. Someone put words in your mouth? Those were YOUR words.

Actually, the MAJORITY of DU women aren't anti-porn or anti-free speech

You made a broad assumption that the MAJORITY of us aren't anti-porn. You also slyly join it with anti-free-speech (as if there are ANY women who would be that). Then you say that they probably wouldn't join this group (why? because we don't want to talk pornography 24/7?).

Then you say you know "many" feminists who are very pro-porn.

Very? I know of no feminists who are very pro-porn. Some who just live with it because they believe in free speech and realize that's the price they pay. But I know of NO feminist who is actually pro-porn.

There must be some ... after all, there are Log Cabin Republicans too. Some people just happen to work against their own interests.

[mongo]

159. Here's the words put in my mouth

equate feminist with anti-porn and anti-free speech, you obviously show your hatred of feminists

You made a broad assumption that the MAJORITY of us aren't anti-porn.

And the assumption I made comes from reading GD and the lounge.

But I know of NO feminist who is actually pro-porn.

As far as feminists who are pro-porn, I'll start with myself and my wife. As far as people you may have heard of Nina Hartley, Susie Bright, Betty Dodson, Carol Queen, Annie Sprinkle. This is just the first ones that come to mind.

[Misunderestimator]

160. Why yes of course... that's what I imagined your list of illustrious

feminists would look like... :rofl:

(Though some of those on your list are not exactly pro-porn, but pro-sexuality... a very different thing.)

[mongo]

161. One more thing

There must be some ... after all, there are Log Cabin Republicans too. Some people just happen to work against their own interests.

Spoken like a true one-right-and-only-true-way-of-feminism(TM) feminist.

[Misunderestimator]

162. Right... one-right-and-only-true-way-of-feminism(TM)

:rofl:

Sounds to me like you've trademarked your very own one-right-and-only-true-way-of-feminism(TM). :eyes:

[Name removed]

151. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[beam me up scottie]

154. Porn must be considered a religion now, I guess.

That's why we're not allowed to criticize it.

Or else the Porno Preacher will have his god smite you for your
blasphemy !!!

Foolish Mortal !

:eyes:

[Ripley]

156. Funny how certain subjects are so black and white.

All liberals seem to see the absurdity of that tactic that the repukes use....You're with us or with he terrorists. You're for the Iraq war or you're for Saddam. Nuts right?

Yet some of those same liberals will use the same tactics for pornography, rape, a variety of issues. Usually to do with controlling women and somehow they feel they are morally and intellectually superior if they can prove the majority of women agree with them.

Were you aware a DUer was using mind reading techniques here?

[beam me up scottie]

158. Well, he is

a religious man, after all.
I hear they have special powers.

:rofl:

[mongo]

164. I think you answered your question below about attacking me

and yes, the response to which I was originally refering was made by someone else - so I apologize for that.

But then again, I can't show you a list of your deleted posts in other threads now, can I?

[beam me up scottie]

166. What deleted posts?

I'm curious, just how many times do you think we've communicated?
You get us women confused with each other all of the time, don't you?
Easy mistake for someone who thinks I'm anti-porn even after I've stated that I'm not.
Just like all of the other women on this thread who've stated they're not anti-porn.
Keep making it up, this is your last chance to make us look bad in front of an audience, you want it to last as long as possible.
After that, your posts will go unanswered, just like they did before you started monitoring the Women's forum.







edit: grammar

[Marnieworld]

153. If you read the mission statement

it is most definitely anti-porn. Just saying.

[Ripley]

155. That is a false statement, and i should know since I helped craft the ms.

You mean this part?

If, for example, you believe that women who have concerns about the prevalance of pornography in our society are uptight, sexually-repressed prudes who need to be enlightened to the "facts" and "realities" of the sex industry, this is not the group for you.

Where does that say anti-porn? It says very specifically that people who do not want to allow women who have concerns about the prevalence of pornography to express their viewpoint, you are not welcome.

How does a feminist who has concerns about pornography make her a flaming evangelist who wants to ban porn?

Some people either have a reading comprehension problem or they are purposefully trying to lock out different viewpoints.

[mongo]

165. How can anyone stop anyone from expressing their viewpoint on DU

as long as they stay civil?

Answer: by forming a DU group.

[beam me up scottie]

167. Oh, so ALL of the DU Groups are preventing you

from expressing your viewpoint?
Talk to Skinner, I'm sure he'll be all over that.

[Bunny]

168. Mongo, you're going to make me cry.

I'm feeling such deep empathy and compassion for you right now. Where oh where on DU can you go to discuss porn? Such a shame that the only outlet you appear to see here has been shut down.

Christ, now I'm all verklempt! Excuse me - I need a moment...:cry:

[beam me up scottie]

169. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!

I'm crying too !
No, really, I am !!!
:rofl:

[Zenlitened]

179. Or they might go stalking from thread to thread to thread...

... playing the same note over and over again, making wild accusations and characterizations about people's motives and mind-sets, stirring up arguments day in and day out.

Worked for the Princess, for a while. Worked for Cuban_Liberal for quite a long time. Eventually, though, role-players like them get lost in the part and go way too over-the-top. Then the people around them wake up to what the role-players have been all about all along, and say "enough." They start calling them on their bullshit.

Kind of like what we see happening here.

Have a super day. :hi:

[Marnieworld]

178. I guess I took issue with...

not the first part of the statement, "If, for example, you believe that women who have concerns about the prevalance of pornography in our society are uptight, sexually-repressed prudes" but the resistance to any "facts" or "realities" that might change anyone's point of view. It was the closing of debate that I had a problem with and the implication that if you hold a difference of opinion you aren't a feminist by your standards and are not welcome. My reading comprehension is just fine thanks. It was the locking out of other viewpoints that I specifically objected to.

Not only that but why even mention porn when there are so many other issues relevant to women here and in the world? I see that it is in response to some other incidents and verbal attacks and that some want a safe place from it and that's just fine.It just seemed an odd priority.

[Ripley]

180. No resistance to facts and realities.

In fact I'm sure the Feminist's Group would encourage women working in the sex industry to post their experiences. The group is open to men and women, but it has been extremely sexist to hear only men explain how women really think, feel, and enjoy this type of work.

You're right there has been a years long problem with certain men speaking solely for women on this particular issue. There is a post in this very thread where a male claims he knows for a fact that the majority of DU women are pro-porn and would never post in the Feminist's forum. That statement is so condescending and wrong on so many levels. If you can't see the paternalistic "Father knows best" attitude when you see it, I can't help you.

I don't think a man who sells pornography or who buys it or who even participates in the making of it can honestly speak for all of the women who work in pornography. Or female prostitutes. Or strippers.

Do you think it would be okay if a white guy went into the African American Group and wrote post after post about how he knew what AA's really thought. He was speaking for them?

This has been a problem on DU for a long time. Don't believe me?..ask any other females that have been here since DU version 1.

[beam me up scottie]

157. It is?

"- If, for example, you believe that women who have concerns about the prevalance of pornography in our society are uptight, sexually-repressed prudes who need to be enlightened to the "facts" and "realities" of the sex industry, this is not the group for you."

How is that anti-porn?
Sounds more like respecting someone's right to dislike porn.

Read it again.

I'll clarify:

"If you believe that women who dislike porn have something wrong with them, then this is not the group for you."

Anti-porn?

Not by a long shot.

[mongo]

170. Yes it is

From post #155 It says very specifically that people who do not want to allow women who have concerns about the prevalence of pornography to express their viewpoint, you are not welcome.

How is posting a reply to a message that says something you feel is untrue not alllowing them the express their viewpoint.

Personally, I consider it challenging, a viewpoint, countering a viewpoint, but not disallowing ANYONES viewpoint.

But both of us know that this group was started specifically with me in mind, because I don't let statements like the ones I posted above go unchallenged.

"If you believe that women who dislike porn have something wrong with them, then this is not the group for you."

Anti-porn?

Not by a long shot.

Yeah, sure right. Because if I respond to a post that says amost all porn is the filming of actual rapes or is produced with sex slaves or any of the things I have actually seen posted in the women's rights forum, it will be deleted in a heartbeat in your new group.

[beam me up scottie]

171. Will you try to get a hold of yourself?

You are making no sense.
This is the EXACT statement from the Group:

"- If, for example, you believe that women who have concerns about the prevalance of pornography in our society are uptight, sexually-repressed prudes who need to be enlightened to the "facts" and "realities" of the sex industry, this is not the group for you."

It is NOT anti-porn, no matter how you twist the words.

This is from Skinner's rules for DU Groups:

"3. In order to post in a DU Group, a member must agree with that group's mission statement. Off-topic postings that violate the mission statement of a DU Group are not permitted. Members who disagree with the mission statement of a particular group may be blocked from posting in that group."

It sounds to me like you have a problem with DU Groups.

Like I said before, take it up with Skinner.

Please stop accusing us of preventing you from expressing your opinions.

[beam me up scottie]

172. And you accuse us YET AGAIN

of forming a group solely for the purpose of excluding you.

"But both of us know that this group was started specifically with me in mind, because I don't let statements like the ones I posted above go unchallenged."

Listen to yourself, man.

I really am starting to wonder if it's even safe to discuss this with you anymore.

[lukasahero]

177. Please get over yourself

I posted the thread asking if there was any interest in forming a group based on a male's post in response to the question "What can we do about sexism on DU?"

You and porn are not the only problems faced by women in the world on this board and there are several other posters who hijack threads in the WR&I forum to support their own agendas, dismiss our concerns or blame women for their own "predicament". (Among the favored topics: pay equity; the idea that class is the only real issue, and gender has nothing to do with it; the idea that any male criticism = male bashing; the dismissal that women have unique concerns; etc).

I have almost never had a discussion with you but you're now going to suggest that I started the discussion about the group solely for the purpose of excluding you? You really have to get a hobby.

"amost all porn is the filming of actual rapes" This is so much bullshit and you know it. Please point us directly to the post that said this.

[lukasahero]

176. False

It is anti-"broad based personal attacks on the character of women who may have some concerns about pornography". Just because I have concerns about some of the more extreme types of pornography that are sent to my email box does not mean I am sexually repressed, thank you very much.

We should be able to have a discussion about it without having to suffer the personal attacks about our own sexuality and that is what the mission statement is trying to provide.

The statement in question: "If, for example, you believe that women who have concerns about the prevalance of pornography in our society are uptight, sexually-repressed prudes who need to be enlightened to the "facts" and "realities" of the sex industry, this is not the group for you."

That does not say "If you hate porn, this group's for you." and there is a big, big difference.

[Name removed]

149. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

135. Imagine that. A forum free of leacherous people promoting the

objectification of women. How fascist indeed.

[beam me up scottie]

102. How badly does it bother you that

"blanket statements that are untrue will be accepted as fact"
"without the option of presenting dissenting viewpoints and facts" in the Atheists & Agnostics Group?

How about the Skepticism, Science and Pseudoscience Group?

Interracial/Multi-ethnic Relationship Support Group's Group?

Are you saying that you only want to influence OUR group, Mongo?

Because there is something seriously wrong with a person that cannot let others discuss their personal issues without his approval.

[mongo]

105. I only want to influence speech about porn

since it is so hated by both elements of both the right and left.

I'm not looking for your approval, or anyones. I'm looking to provide a counter view to the many OUTRIGHT LIES and mis-characterizations of porn and the adult industry in general. Mostly for the benefit of all who read, but did not post in the womens rights and issues forum.

Because there is something seriously wrong with a person that cannot let others discuss their personal issues without his approval.

There is also something seriously wrong with a person who cannot debate a topic without degenerating into snarky responses and personal attacks.

It would be really interesting if there was a count of how many posts a person had made that were subsequently deleted.

[gkhouston]

109. if that's the case, then why not set up a group

called "influencing speech about porn"? :eyes:

[bloom]

115. LOL

:D

[beam me up scottie]

110. WHEN did I attack you? SHOW me where?

Start talking about me, not somebody else when I'm addressing you.

If you want to influence speech about porn, ask Skinner for a group.

Start a class.

Open a school.

Do whatever the fuck you want, but do not tell us that we are not allowed to discuss porn without you butting in with your endless proselytizing.

[Name removed]

117. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[beam me up scottie]

173. Mongo, since I know you never even bothered to look,

I just thought I'd let you know that right now, there are no less than 33 active threads in the Feminists Forum.

Not a single one about porn.

Hundreds, yes HUNDREDS of posts have been made by DU men and women.

They don't seem to feel unable to express their viewpoints.

It looks like it is a smashing success.

And it had nothing to do with you or porn after all.

[mongo]

174. Since you seem intent on keeping this thread going

Actually porn is at least mentioned in 11 threads right now. Most of what I saw (I didn't go through all the threads) is ancedotal or pro or neutral to porn But we already have the porn is demeaning to women and any woman that is participating in the adult industry has something wrong with her meme going on.

Postmodern Feminism -- Isn't
Topic started by Eloriel on Jun-08-05 10:05 PM (28 replies)


We're not talking about prudery. There's a huge difference, and why must that be pointed out to real, self-respecting feminist, anyway? That's the kind of thing MEN like to say to try to deflect the anti-porn and anti-cheesecake discussions so they can hang onto their sexist pleasures. Prudery is: "It's is immoral." Feminism says: "This is demeaning to women. It hurts women because it degrades us as a class."

"Celebrating their sexuality"
"Celebrating" my a$$. These women are exploiting their own sexuality (and ours) to make a buck. It's not healthy sexuality, it's juvenile, capitlist greed.

But actually, other women seem to be taking the pro-porn points that I never saw in the old forum. Good for them.

Of course, no one dared challenge the notion that porn is degrading to women, or mentioned that it's only a movie, or that it isn't necessarily feminist to label other women's sexuality as bad, and that men viewing porn is a "sexist pleasure".

Have fun in your secret clubhouse, I'm done.

[beam me up scottie]

175. We'll miss you!

:hi:

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

57. Post 4 and the conversations that follow are a verite performance act

demonstrating why a feminist group is of value. I am curious though. What part of this statement specifically excludes you?:

he purpose of the DU Feminists Group is to provide a safe and non-threatening community where all those interested in discussing and trying to resolve the problems that are inherent to women in society can come and work together free from defending the basic premise that issues do exist which specifically affect and limit women, their rights and their potential.

We believe that women do not start on the same rung as men on the ladder of success; that misogyny and sexism do indeed exist in America circa 2005; and that the progress made for women's rights is being seriously and immediately threatened by this administration.

The goal of this group is to understand the problems (and how they affect women), identify the myriad causes (and how they can limit a woman's vision and opportunity) and propose solutions (and how we can bring those solutions in a meaningful way out into the greater community).

About this Group

- This is not a group to discuss gender, class or sexual orientation rights and issues. It is specifically to discuss women's rights and issues as they affect women from a woman's perspective and experience.

- If, for example, you believe that women have already achieved "full participation in the mainstream of American society..., exercising all privileges and responsibilities thereof in truly equal partnership with men... in all aspects of citizenship, public service, employment, education, and family life,"* then this is not the group for you.

- If, for example, you believe that women who have concerns about the prevalance of pornography in our society are uptight, sexually-repressed prudes who need to be enlightened to the "facts" and "realities" of the sex industry, this is not the group for you.

- The terms "feminist/feminism" and "misogyny" have established meanings in the context of women's history. While terminology may be debated, the denigration of these relevant terms will not be allowed.

- Attempts to minimize or dismiss women and/or the issues being discussed are not welcome.

- Like-minded DUers of all genders are encouraged to participate.

[Finder]

79. Your definition seems to fit the bill.

The statement of purpose seems to say the same thing you are stating except for one paragraph which I feel has nothing to do with feminism but is more a morality issue.

Hope to see you there.

[Hello_Kitty]

97. Marnieworld

Respectfully, I've seen that you post in the Fat Acceptance group. I haven't read the rules on that particular group but I'm pretty sure that posts from size-ist diet pushers would not be welcome. How'd you like it if you were in the midst of a productive discussion about size acceptance and being healthy at any weight when suddenly some lout barges in admonishing all of you stop promoting being fat, complete with links and statistics detailing the dangers of obesity? Like you'd never heard that before.

Do you see the comparison? Because those of us who want this group sure do.

[Marnieworld]

103. Huh?

If you read my posts in this thread I never said that the feminist group is wrong and should be disallowed. I wished people well in finding comfort with like minded people as I do overall at DU itself. I even said that I would keep my disagreement to myself there out of respect. I guess I wasn't even supposed to mention that I was excluded by design because I disagree? A vague disagreement with a few premises outside of the group is so wrong?


Here's the fat acceptance group statement BTW-
"The DU Fat Acceptance Group is a place for all fat people to discuss the issues that impact their daily lives as fat people; cultural stereotypes related to appearance and attraction, the pervasiveness of messages in the media and in society that seek to diminish us as men and women and undermine our well-being; to explore and pursue bringing awareness of these issues to the DU community. We are not a diet group, but accept and support everyone's goals for their own health, both physical and emotional. Health, happiness, and love come in all sizes. We welcome those who are not fat but who share our goals to participate in this group."

There isn't use of the phrase "This group is not for you."
Or "only like minded members are welcome."

I never thought of the group's purpose as accepting the fat per se as accepting the person who struggles with the fat. Your assumption is incorrect. If someone posted health info it is not contrary to the group's statement at all so I don't get your analogy. What would be objectionable would be blatant hatred or insults as in any group and I've hardly been insulting.

To further compare the groups, the feminist group has stated beliefs that if you disagree with you aren't welcome. It's implied that if you disagree then you aren't a feminist. It doesn't allow debate about these beliefs when there is debate to them including feminist literature. It is as if the FA groups' statement said "We believe that all forms of weight loss are wrong and if you are overweight and trying to lose weight and want support this is not the group for you." That's not the vibe at all over there. There is debate allowed about the risks and wisdom of weight loss surgery for example.

I just wanted a voice here in this thread that not all women feel what was stated and you can disagree and still be a feminist. A feminist not welcome in that particular group. That's all.

Like I said to someone else, I am glad that you found a home that helps you. We all need that.

Peace.

[Hello_Kitty]

114. Okay you definitely DON'T get it.

I think my post made a pretty clear analogy. What I described hypothetically is the type of condescending, disrespectful crap that gets posted regularly on the WR&I Forum by disruptors.

I'd like to see how well received by the FA Group something like this would be: "People who are overweight should just quit whining about how oppressed they are. Because really, all you need to do is push away from the table once in a while and go for a jog."

Nice huh? That mimics the disparaging tone toward feminism of some of the posts on WR&I that have caused this group to be formed. Let's not even get into what goes on in the rest of DU.


If you don't believe me read for yourself.

[Marnieworld]

119. And you didn't get my point

One group allows debate the other doesn't.
If FA stated that only low carb diets work, an opinion that can be supported with facts, and that all discussion of low fat or low glycemic diets, also valid theories that can be supported with facts, were not allowed it would be similiar to the Feminists mission statement. The group statement states two debatable opinions as fact and I happen to disagree with those opinions and therefore I'd be considered a disruptor instead of someone with another opinion. There is a difference between disagreeing with someone and abusive language. Your example would be abusive and I do not contend that the WI&S group hasn't had some insulting attacks. I'll take your word for it.

It has been my experience when I try to reasonably debate on these disagreements that I am faced with a sort of fundamentalist mindset that cannot see the shades of grey in all human issues. I am an atheist and if I were to attempt to engage a fundamentalist in a conversation over just accepting that the bible is an opinion, that there are other just as valid opinions and that even if they believ strongly in something there are no known absolutes, I would get the same type of response that I did today here.

I don't know how to be clearer so I will bid you all farewell and wish you love and peace.

[Greybnk48]

50. I'm in...Thanks!! n/t

[Vladimir]

56. I think it has a fantastic statement of purpose

best of luck, and here's to many constructive discussions!

:toast:

[beam me up scottie]

63. Thank you.

Truly liberal men aren't threatened by us.
So sad about the others...

[Misunderestimator]

59. This thread is proof positive that we need the forum. Thanks, Skinner...

for providing it.

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lukasahero]

82. Sorry I didn't see it

I've been concentrating on getting this group up and running for the last two weeks. I'll be sure to pop in and see what's going on in your group. Conyers is an amazing man - one of the few I respect in the whole political business today. (Not one of the few men, one of the few politicians. Don't know why, but I felt the need to clarify that. ;-))

[Spinzonner]

85. I'm a Cheerios person

[Vladimir]

87. Oh get a grip mate, it wasn't funny the first time n/t

[beam me up scottie]

86. I didn't see it either,

I'm posting all over the place today.
I'm putting it on my forums and I'll see you there.
Thanks for the support.

[CarefullyLiberal]

81. Good luck with your new group, Bunny!

Double thumbs up!!! I think it's a great idea. :toast:

Best wishes,

-Fergus

[Bunny]

88. Well, thanks, but I'm a bit player. I just made the announcement.

There are a few other people here who really deserve the credit for doing the mission statement and otherwise getting it organized.

[cally]

111. Thanks for a classy statement

We all appreciate your support and you are welcome to join in.

[CarefullyLiberal]

120. cally, if I could just learn what American feminism really is...

then I could check off one of my line items on my "Things to do before I die" list.

I will gladly join in at the new forum.

My guess is that it's going to be far more interesting, far more open minded, and far more ever thing else than the General Discussion forum.

Oh, forgot to mention....I'm an XY.

Take care!

-Fergus

[cally]

126. The group's mission statement is a good definition

Otherwise, I think many of us define feminism differently. Come join our group. For the first day, I'm amazed at the number of posts and the discussion.

[progmom]

83. yay!

:bounce:

[valis]

96. Can men join?

[Misunderestimator]

98. Of course they can, valis. Anyone who agrees with the mission statement.

[Susang]

99. Wow

What the hell did I miss? :shrug:

I'm always late to the public floggings! :cry:

[Misunderestimator]

101. Sometimes it seems just the word "feminism" or "feminist" is cause...

for flamebait... Go figure... :shrug: Pretty much proves the need for it though. :hi:

[Susang]

113. Amazing

Not exactly a flameworthy OP, was it? :eyes:

:hi:

[Seneca]

100. My best wishes for the success of this group

:toast:

I must add, one of the reasons I have not posted after many months away was because of the kinds of flames that have been brought to bear in this thread. I am stunned that on a progressive forum, the idea of a Feminist Group could be ridiculed, mocked, or brought into question. Astounding.

I know it will be a great group!

[anitar1]

106. Glad to see this. Count me in ! n/t

[mistertrickster]

108. Good for you. First order of business is how to keep the disruptors

from getting the threads locked.

A rational discussion of women's issues is entirely necessary and appropriate for a discussion board like this, and I hope the flame-baiters can just keep cool.

[Bunny]

118. Now see, that's what nice about a DU Group.

Disruptors are not only not permitted, they can actually be BANNED if they can't behave. No flame bait allowed!

[FizzFuzz]

127. Wonderful!!!!! Congratulations!!!!!!!!! Great Mission Statement!!!!!!

Sexism is so pernicious and subtle, this will be great to be able to bring it to light in its many manifestations, and not have to worry about getting slagged and cut off or have to get bogged down with fending off the blows.

But remember where blows come from: Blowhards.

[snot]

128. Congratulations to us--meaning ALL DU'ers

What is the thinking on how this group should be distinguished from the "Women's Rights and Issues" forum? Is "Issues" broader?

[beam me up scottie]

130. The Women's forum will stay the same

everything is up for discussion and debate.
The Feminist Group is like any other group.

This is from Skinners "What are DU Groups":

DU Groups are a special type of discussion forum. DU Groups are forum topics suggested by the DU Members themselves. DU Groups are different from regular forums in the following ways:

1. DU Groups are forum topics suggested by groups of DU Members. (To learn how to start your own DU Group, please read the topic called "How to suggest a DU Group.")

2. Each DU Group has a specific mission statement, which has been submitted to and approved by the administrators of Democratic Underground. Administrators reserve the right to withhold approval from any group idea suggested.

3. In order to post in a DU Group, a member must agree with that group's mission statement. Off-topic postings that violate the mission statement of a DU Group are not permitted. Members who disagree with the mission statement of a particular group may be blocked from posting in that group.

4. Only members with a DU Donor star next to their username may post messages in the DU Groups. Non-donors and non-registered lurkers are permitted to read DU Groups, but they are blocked from posting in them.

5. Currently, thread topics started in any of the DU Groups will not appear on the Latest Page. In the future, we may give members the option to show them on the Latest Page, provided that it does not put undue stress on our web server.

6. Please be aware that no members "own" or "run" any particular group, nor do members have the ability to decide who participates in any given group. The regular DU rules apply to postings in the DU Groups. If a DU Group becomes disruptive to the rest of the message board, the Administrators reserve the right to shut it down.

7. The Administrators will occasionally delete DU Groups that do not attract significant traffic or postings. If a particular DU Group is in danger of being deleted, the Administrators will post a warning in that Group at least 24 hours before it is removed.

We hope that these DU Groups will return some of that "small community feeling" that has been lost on DU during the last few years of rapid growth.

Enjoy!

Skinner
EarlG
Elad

The Administrators of Democratic Underground

[snot]

136. Thanks! n/t

[omega minimo]

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

Good job and good luck, everyone. You came up with an excellent founding statement that is appropriately specific AND flexible.

I look forward to the time that DU is a place where the Rules for respect are applied consistently and the need for a women's rights cloister is unecessary. Although the initial thread for the Group proposal compared this Group to other DU religious discussions, the analogous situation would be to a racial group. If there were ANY racial identity that was vilified, attacked and undermined the way women are on DU, it would stop immediately.

The assumption that emerged on the thread is that this gender-based bigotry is so entrenched in society and on this board, that calling for improvement in the non-Lounge forums at this time was not an option.

Gender-based bigotry will not serve the goals of DU or of the Democratic party. IMHO we are in such a dangerous situation as a nation that we don't have time for ignorant bullshit bigotry. If we are looking for info and ideas on the excellent DU, women don't need to be smacked in the eyeballs with disrespectful and disruptive shite, any more than an African-American or Asian-American or Native American or ______ would.

However, DU is a big digital party. Some may feel we are in such a dangerous situation as a nation that it is time to diddle while Rome burns.

Dear strong, smart Female-Americans (and beyond) don't disappear in the cloister. Let some of that enlightened air out into the swirling gasses of the forums when you can.

:hi:


"We should remember that the process that determines our decisions and actions is just as important as achieving the outcome we want."

--Social Justice and Equal Opportunity
We must consciously confront in ourselves, our organizations, and society at large, barriers such as racism and class oppression, sexism and heterosexism, ageism and disability, which act to deny fair treatment and equal justice under the law.

--Feminism
We have inherited a social system based on male domination of politics and economics. We call for the replacement of the cultural ethics of domination and control, with more cooperative ways of interacting which respect differences of opinion and gender. Human values such as equity between the -sexes, interpersonal responsibility, and honesty must be developed with moral conscience. We should remember that the process that determines our decisions and actions is just as important as achieving the outcome we want.

--Respect for Diversity
We believe the many diverse elements of society should be reflected in our organizations and decision-making bodies, and we support the leadership of people who have been traditionally closed out of leadership roles.

:kick:

[funflower]

133. Awesome, Bunny.

This may actually get me motivated to donate!

[Bunny]

163. Well, thanks, but again, I'm just the messenger.

I would love to be able to take credit for that awesome mission statement, but that was done by some other women here. I was just cheering from the sidelines.

[Behind the Aegis]

139. Congrats!!

Feminism = the radical notion that women are equal and deserve the same rights as men....I am all for it!

[ngGale]

140. I'm all for it - but...(Sorry - didn't mean to start a topic) LOL

we women on another forum have never been able to start a Fem thread without a flame. The guys have sports threads, etc. - and they are always welcome to join in Fem. just not to destroy the thread.
I'm willing to give it a try, there are so many issues especially now with the lovely new judges coming into lifetime appointments.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

144. Jeez look at all the deleted messages

:eyes:

[beam me up scottie]

152. HEY!

Quit insulting porn, will ya?

[UCLA Dem]

150. Woohoo I'm there!!!