This message was self-deleted by its author

[oldhippie]

This message was self-deleted by its author (oldhippie) on Thu Jan 2, 2014, 08:29 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[Tanuki]

1. I wonder how many posters who say they are "not whining"

are really whining?

[struggle4progress]

118. +

[NYC_SKP]

2. Unlike NSA spying or ACA, the gender issue is very personal and sometimes painful, and....

And this alone leads to a higher incidence of personal insults.

Also, on the gender matter there are two warring DU factions, only a handful in each faction but it's in a war within our community, not against outside agents.

Finally, there are habitual alerting members, alert stalkers, etc., so quite possibly the gender threads bring on more than the average number of alerts, justified or not.

JMHO, but it's why we have non-GD groups for gender discussions and for guns.

Happy New Year!

[NoOneMan]

3. Alert stalkers?

Hm. Is that the reason someone saying "gang educated" (which I read as "educated by a gang&quot gets twisted into "gang raped" to silence someone?

Hmmmm.

[Comrade Grumpy]

6. That was absolutely ridiculous.

[Cleita]

8. Well that's another thing too. A DUer posts something and others come along and

add a word or phrase that completely changes the meaning and the whole community seems to run with it. I believe there are fanatics here who scan all the posts for key words like in your example the word "gang" and to them it has only one meaning. They attach their meaning to it without reading the post for context, start a flame war and then alert. It's happened to me already too many times to consider it a coincidence.

Anyone who disagrees with this hypothesis can flame away and it won't change my mind and welcome to my ignore list.

[NoOneMan]

12. It certainly makes DU a hostile place

I don't mean in the context of "civility". Civility is awesome. But when we have to be uber careful and avoid sarcasm like the plague, in fear of having posting privileges revoked, its a bit of a bummer. So posting with that fear in the back of your mind is what I mean by "hostile" (non-safe).

I don't know the perfect middle-ground. I'm the first to call people out for sloppy generalizations or insulting strawmans (but calling people out isn't the same as 1 of the 5 strikes required to silence them).

[Nuclear Unicorn]

16. Even if you avoid sarcasm and state what you mean in explicit terms

you will still have words twisted out of context and truncated quotes held as evidence against you. Even if you make statements that directly contradict the accusation the accusers still pile-on in their effort to silence what they will/can not refute. And don't dare call them liars for using such disingenuous tactics, THAT will get your post hidden in a heartbeat.

It's not just gender issues, either.

[polly7]

22. That is one of my biggest peeves.

Purposeful and vindictive misinterpretation of innocent remarks that are then used as ammunition to demonize, alert on repeatedly, and in the long run, imo .... try to get a poster banned. People need to realize this is a progressive board where 99% of the posters agree on these things, and this kind of tactic is not only getting rid of those that can be painted as evil, nasty bigots (of course some are .... and are rightly gotten rid of) but turns people off who see this for what it is and realize that for some, it's all one big power game.

[zappaman]

204. +1

And no I will not sit down and shut up!
Who are you to tell me that!?!?!

[NuclearDem]

13. If it weren't for that particular poster's history of tasteless, offensive "jokes"

I could have believed that he meant otherwise.

[Cleita]

14. Still doesn't change the fact that context has meaning and words

should not be added that weren't there to begin with.

[Gormy Cuss]

76. How is a pattern of behavior not context?

When I served on juries for an alert citing a pattern of behavior I'd look around a bit before judging the alerted post. Why? Because there are some people who are very skilled at writing seemingly benign posts with a hidden agenda. More often than not I couldn't justify the alerter's suspicion and voted to leave the post but not always.

[xulamaude]

52. +1

[Egalitarian Thug]

18. Just one of dozens of examples I've seen and received.

At one time I had four hidden posts, and two of them were for K&Ring a reply that didn't get hidden. I had another that was apparently hidden for the phrase "pulled that straight out of your ass".

There are at least three coordinating groups here, probably more.

[Cleita]

4. Good and thoughtful post.

I'll go along with it. I was going to say something snarky, but you made me better.

[NYC_SKP]

5. Good! I was typing as fast as I could....

....Happy New Year!

[RC]

7. Hidden posts does seem to be the object for some.

For a protected group, one of them sure drags a lot of stuff out to the Home page and in General Discussion, that causes flame fests. I wonder why that is?

[sufrommich]

9. Gosh,this thread sure went from innocent question

to bashing DUers quickly. I'm shocked,shocked I tell you.

[Cleita]

34. No one is bashing DUers. It's an honest discussion of the possibility of alert trolls.

However you taking a subject being discussed and perverting the meaning out of context saying this is a DUer bashing thread is a perfect example of what is being discussed. I hope I don't get alerted on for using pervert as a verb.

[sufrommich]

56. Post #7 takes the OP out of context and perverts it's meaning.

As do posts complaining about individual hides. None of that has anything to do with wondering aloud why certain subjects produce more hides than others. This whole thread has degenerated into another excuse to take jabs at groups and DUers and is as predictable as the sun rising in the east.

[snooper2]

10. You don't have to wonder, do the math!

Might take a couple hours, start going through those threads!


Don't be lazy!

[onehandle]

11. Doesn't matter. DU is so overrun by imbedded trolls, statistics would be meaningless.

If the owners don't see the obvious patterns associated with a large number of accounts, they just aren't trying, or are more interested in their bottom line.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

36. ^^^THIS^^^

and for onehandle and I to agree about something ... especially since I am pretty sure he has me on Ignore.

[onehandle]

41. You are not a troll, sockpuppet, stalker, nor a combination of the three.

So, no ignore.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

43. yes. -

I have found myself agreeing with you several times lately on this issue in particular. and Thanks.

[quinnox]

15. There is a ton of bad faith alerting going on in those threads

They are making up crap and putting it in alerts to try and persuade jurors to hide anything that doesn't fit their extreme and bizarre opinions. If you get a ridiculous hide, please tell the admins about it in ask the admin forum, or you can complain about it there. This underhanded and wrongful abuse of the alert system needs to be stopped.

[Comrade Grumpy]

17. Alerts need to have user names attached to them.

[quinnox]

19. The admins know, so those who are playing games with the alerting can be found out

They (these malicious alerters) are very excited now to try and game the alert system, now that it has teeth and can result in temporary bans, there are malicious alerters trying to manipulate the system to get those duers who they don't like silenced.

I think the alert system needs to be seriously re-thought, and maybe even eliminated completely, to be honest.

[Cleita]

21. What would you replace it with?

As imperfect and corruptible as it is, it's still the best way to keep the real trolls under control. I too would rather a system with less room to manipulate it, but what?

[quinnox]

23. Not sure - maybe bring back mods or, maybe a free for all

And people who were habitually abusive to others could be banned by admins still, even in a free for all no alert system. So I think most people would still be civil.

[Cleita]

29. I've participated in free for all boards and it ends up with all the

sincere posters leaving and the trolls in charge abusing each other. It's an internet version of a Libertarian paradise like Somalia. No there has to be some policing action, but what?

[quinnox]

47. I'm not sure. All I know is you are going to see a DU bloodbath with lots of duers frozen out

due to malicious alerters gaming the system if this isn't changed, that is my opinion.

[Cleita]

57. I agree with that. Some of them are already arriving on this thread. n/t

[FSogol]

229. Skinner seems to disagree.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12594479#post1

[quinnox]

454. That is fine, I respect his opinion. I think it will be interesting to watch and see what happens

I maintain this will lead to good Duers that are undeserving, who have shown a pattern of knowing how to conduct themselves in a civil manner, eventually being locked out of DU, due to malicious alerting in the months ahead under this new and much more punitive alert system. Time will tell.

[Boudica the Lyoness]

157. I've seen this as well

on some health related boards. The serious posters with helpful information, or the very ill people, just give up and quit posting. The trolls are left with the board to themselves after awhile. On one site, it was the ultra religious posters always posting prayers and making everything about god, that made it go from a helpful site to a mad house.

[Orrex]

25. To date, has this phenomemon of "alert-stalking" been confirmed?

That is, have the admins ever confirmed that, in fact, some DU members are maliciously alerting on posts by specific members? Despite many discussions of this issue, I have found no evidence more compelling than assumption and conjecture.

The sheer volume of alerted-on posts does not, in itself, prove alert-stalking; it merely means that people have alerted on a large number of posts by a given user.


Unless we can confirm that certain users are abusing the function, we can't make any certain claims about alert-stalking.

[quinnox]

27. yep, I had it confirmed, personally

[Orrex]

28. How?

[Capt. Obvious]

33. Post 19 confirms it

Whether the alert stalking claim is true or not the only people going on time out seemed to have earned all of their hides.

[Orrex]

44. Confirms it how?

The admins know, so those who are playing games with the alerting can be found out

They (these malicious alerters) are very excited now to try and game the alert system, now that it has teeth and can result in temporary bans, there are malicious alerters trying to manipulate the system to get those duers who they don't like silenced.

I think the alert system needs to be seriously re-thought, and maybe even eliminated completely, to be honest.

That doesn't really confirm anything; it simply reasserts the original claim that people are alert-stalking. I was hoping for something more concrete since, as you note, the people facing time-out have indeed earned their Hides.

Even if a small number of people are routinely Alerting on a given member's posts, that still doesn't prove alert-stalking, any more than "stalking" is proved by a user routinely replying to a given member. If I can point to a large number of responses to me by a small group of members, does that prove that these members are stalking me?

[seaglass]

65. I think if a member constantly responds to your posts by attacking you and not or barely

addressing the issue of the thread - yeah, you could say they were stalking you.

[Orrex]

183. Fair enough, but simply replying does not constitute stalking, correct?

Similarly, alerting on alert-worthy posts does not constitute alert-stalking.

[PeaceNikki]

151. I sure as shit hope you don't mean this one, pal.

At Mon Dec 30, 2013, 08:09 PM you sent an alert on the following post:

A few good reasons why being a man is awesome
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024252782

REASON FOR ALERT:

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

YOUR COMMENTS:

Both sides in this 'war' need to stop this shit.

This thread, if posted without the intent to disrupt, belongs in the lounge. But its intent is to disrput as is evidence by the "Note to the perpetually outraged brigade".

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Mon Dec 30, 2013, 08:18 PM, and voted 4-2 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: This is probably the first time the alerter's comments totally changed my mind. "Both sides in this 'war' need to stop this shit. This thread, if posted without the intent to disrupt, belongs in the lounge. But its intent is to disrput as is evidence by the "Note to the perpetually outraged brigade". The alerter is correct
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: Yeah, I agree with the alerter. If it was just a joke, then the final sentence wouldn't have been included.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Someone is being a tad oversensitive.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: This plays on gender stereotypes and is inappropriate on DU. Misogyny is often masked as "humor". DELETE!!
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: Quinnox belongs to the Perpetually Outraged at Women Who Speak their Mind Brigade.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given

ETA: to whomever alerted on this.. I AM THE ALERTER.

duh

[Major Nikon]

233. 4-2. Some think 5-1 constitutes alert trolling

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10133332#post7

[PeaceNikki]

234. "Some"? Really? Stay on topic. That post I was referring to was textbook disruption.

[Major Nikon]

243. So are a lot of the posts around here which don't get hidden

If the post you mentioned was as cut and dried as you say, why not a 6-0 decision? It was only one vote away from a no hide.

I suspect the vast majority of alerts never get hidden in the first place which is kinda more "on topic" than mentioning one that did.

Just sayin'

[PeaceNikki]

248. In context as a reply to someone claiming to be a "victim"? No.

If quinnox is claiming to be a victim of this 'alert stalking', he should include the post on which he was unjustly adjudicated. I have reason to suspect it was the one I posted because he posted in ATA moments afterward.

[Major Nikon]

261. Perhaps

But ridiculous alerts aren't that hard to find, even within the example I gave given the info in the transparency page, and those are just the ones we are seeing. Going on the juries I've been called on, there's more 0-6 and 1-5 results than anything else with several that are real head scratchers. It's hard to imagine there isn't a lot of vindictiveness going on. If you throw enough shit against the wall, eventually something is going to stick.

[PeaceNikki]

263. Skinner confirmed that there aren't as many alerts as you'd like to think.

And that he and the admins are sure there is no 'alert stalking'.

And, lastly, quinnox should stop playing the victim and share the details of "making up crap and putting it in alerts to try and persuade jurors to hide anything that doesn't fit their extreme and bizarre opinions".

I call bullshit. And I suspect he was/is super salty about the hide he got on my alert. I stand by it.

[Major Nikon]

271. 6:1 ratio on alerts vs hides

And I don't know that they've said there's no alert stalking, but just that it's not a widespread problem which the numbers certainly suggest. At least one person got a sock banned for bypassing the alert restrictions, so I'm not so sure it's accurate to say it doesn't happen. There's also the fact that the restrictions were implemented in the first place, which is telling. I do know that the admins now see ever single alert that gets sent, so I'm convinced that if someone wants to make a career out of alert stalking, it will probably be short lived.

[PeaceNikki]

273. ugh, really... look again "The alert stalking claim is bogus."

Star Member Skinner (58,762 posts)
1. The alert stalking claim is bogus.

The number of alerts is very small, and even if they don't result in a hidden post the vast majority of them are legitimate. Certainly some people alert more than others, but we don't see anyone doing it in a manner that is abusive. Yes, some alerts are occasionally bogus, and yes sometimes people alert on other people multiple times -- I have even done so myself from time-to-time. But the system has shown itself repeatedly to be self-regulating -- juries rarely if ever hide posts that do not deserve to be hidden, and if a person sends an alert that is found to be bogus they temporarily lose their ability to alert.

The alert stalking claim persists because some people here want it to persist. They don't want to consider the possibility that their own posts were hidden because they deserved to be hidden on the merits.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1259&pid=4510

[Major Nikon]

278. That's the post I was referring to

Skinner is saying the system is self-regulating, which means to me that whatever alert trolls are out there see little success in their efforts. It doesn't mean they don't try.

[William769]

196. You did?

I'll let the link speak for itself. http://www.democraticunderground.com/12594479#post1

[hrmjustin]

96. It exists.

I can see it on the jury's I sit on and from the pms I get from people.

[Orrex]

134. That's anecdote.

In contrast, I haven't seen it on the juries on which I've sat, so does that prove it doesn't exist?

What is the nature of the PMs that you've received from people? What do they prove, exactly? And how do they prove it? If they all assert the perception that alert-stalking is real, that demonstrates only that they all perceive it, rather than proving that it exists.

I'm not being contrarian here: to date, I've seen nothing more concrete than the assertion that it exists, claimed by (and on behalf of) the person(s) alleged to have been targeted. Without confirmation from someone in a position to make a formal assessment (i.e., the admins), the speculative testimony of even a few dozen DUers amounts to anecdote.


Is alert-stalking a widespread phenomenon, or is it isolated to the half-dozen or so members who are facing time-out due to their 5+ justifiably hidden posts?

[hrmjustin]

139. Yes it is anecdotal but I have gotten complaints.

We don't get much of this in mirt.

I talk to friends and some people I really do not know but they contact me. They forward jury results that they lost and won. People foward them results they won.

I think it exists.

[Orrex]

152. Here's a question:

If a post is hidden by jury decision, does it matter whether the alerting poster is "stalking" the post's author?

[hrmjustin]

189. No. If a post is hidden it is because 4 to 6 people said hide it.

[Orrex]

209. We have received the official confirmation

Skinner has confirmed that alert-stalking does not exist. Therefore, either alert-stalking does not exist, or Skinner is lying/incorrect.

How does that compare your MIRT observations and the assertions of thread-stalking that you've received via PM?

[hrmjustin]

218. He knows more than I. I can only say what I get told and shown.

Mirt does not see this much at all.

[tammywammy]

158. Skinner's response on alert stalking:

The alert stalking claim is bogus.

The number of alerts is very small, and even if they don't result in a hidden post the vast majority of them are legitimate. Certainly some people alert more than others, but we don't see anyone doing it in a manner that is abusive. Yes, some alerts are occasionally bogus, and yes sometimes people alert on other people multiple times -- I have even done so myself from time-to-time. But the system has shown itself repeatedly to be self-regulating -- juries rarely if ever hide posts that do not deserve to be hidden, and if a person sends an alert that is found to be bogus they temporarily lose their ability to alert.

The alert stalking claim persists because some people here want it to persist. They don't want to consider the possibility that their own posts were hidden because they deserved to be hidden on the merits.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12594479

[Orrex]

173. Skinner is totally stalking me.

And who can blame him?

[Cerridwen]

171. ATA: Skinner: "The alert stalking claim is bogus."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12594479#post1

Thu Jan 2, 2014, 11:35 AM

-----------

The number of alerts is very small, and even if they don't result in a hidden post the vast majority of them are legitimate. Certainly some people alert more than others, but we don't see anyone doing it in a manner that is abusive. Yes, some alerts are occasionally bogus, and yes sometimes people alert on other people multiple times -- I have even done so myself from time-to-time. But the system has shown itself repeatedly to be self-regulating -- juries rarely if ever hide posts that do not deserve to be hidden, and if a person sends an alert that is found to be bogus they temporarily lose their ability to alert.

The alert stalking claim persists because some people here want it to persist. They don't want to consider the possibility that their own posts were hidden because they deserved to be hidden on the merits.

-----------------

[PeaceNikki]

162. Don't put words in the Admins mouths. Skinner said it's bogus.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12594479

Skinner (58,748 posts)
1. The alert stalking claim is bogus.

The number of alerts is very small, and even if they don't result in a hidden post the vast majority of them are legitimate. Certainly some people alert more than others, but we don't see anyone doing it in a manner that is abusive. Yes, some alerts are occasionally bogus, and yes sometimes people alert on other people multiple times -- I have even done so myself from time-to-time. But the system has shown itself repeatedly to be self-regulating -- juries rarely if ever hide posts that do not deserve to be hidden, and if a person sends an alert that is found to be bogus they temporarily lose their ability to alert.

The alert stalking claim persists because some people here want it to persist. They don't want to consider the possibility that their own posts were hidden because they deserved to be hidden on the merits.

[Egalitarian Thug]

20. More than that, there should be consequences for frivolous alerting. n/t

[Cleita]

24. That could be something to think about.

I personally hardly ever alert even some offensive stuff because I feel they will be chastised by other posters quickly enough. It has to be really offensive and undeniably a troll for me to alert, but from doing jury duty it seems there are habitual alerters popping up over and over again. Even though we don't know who the alerters are, their writing patterns a word usage point to the same alerter.

[Egalitarian Thug]

31. Same here, it has to be completely obvious for me to bother. OTOH, I've been on dozens of juries

that were completely, obviously bogus. 6 - 0, 5 - 1 to leave it alone.

Maybe a limit on alerts would be viable?

[Orrex]

51. How might we police "frivolous alerting?"

Should we institute a feature enabling us to Alert on Alerts? Wouldn't that just lead to frivolous alert-alert-stalking? And do we then alert on those alerted-on alerts?

Or should someone be charged with supervising the Alert process, perhaps with veto power? How would that differ, in effect, from DU2's mod policy?

If the jury system is broken, as is so often claimed, then results of 6 - 0 or 5 - 1 don't really tell us anything about the frivolousness of a given alert.

[Egalitarian Thug]

69. Developing a system to find and track this behavior would be very simple. n/t

[Orrex]

122. "this behavior"

Which behavior is that?

Hitting Alert?
Hitting Alert on certain members?
Hitting Alert on certain members in certain discussions?
Hitting Alert on certain members in certain discussions in certain groups?
Hitting Alert on certain members in certain discussions in certain groups a certain number of times?

Your solution doesn't really add anything that isn't already in place, unless you're advocating for public disclosure of who's hitting Alert, and even that wouldn't be proof of alert-stalking.

[tammywammy]

137. The admins can track alert stats. They've said multiple times there's no serial alerters. n/t

[jberryhill]

125. There already is

First, the jury results have an "alert" feature that goes to the admins.

Second, there is a threshold of failed alerts (I can't remember what it is at the moment) or 0-6 leaves, which renders the alerter unable to alert.

These things already exist.

[Orrex]

143. Well, that would seem to solve the problem entirely.

If a post is hidden by jury decision, then that means that at least 5 people found it hide-worthy, so it shouldn't matter whether the hidden poster is being "alert-stalked."

[jberryhill]

146. One would think so

But "I was alert stalked" is a whole lot better than "maybe I should think about how I address others".

[quinnox]

26. yep, or limit alerts to one a week or something, not unlimited

[NoOneMan]

35. +1

[xulamaude]

60. Jury members have the ability

to read through the thread/subthread for context (if they care to be bothered) and make up their own minds.

Or they can excuse themselves just as I did the other day because I am not well enough versed in the subject matter that was in contention.

[VanillaRhapsody]

30. Yes because some men presume to tell women how to feel about these issues...

un-remorsefully....no matter how much you tell them that they can never understand. They think they can...and then they proceed to minimize the issue...by telling you why you are wrong to be outraged.

[polly7]

32. I see a lot of that as some men presuming to give opinions

and that being twisted completely around as to them telling women how to feel.

Everyone should have the right to an opinion here, even if it's not popular. Why not discuss the opinion itself instead of claiming it's some plot to shut up women (only some, mind you, because not all of us believe it to be true, by a long shot).

[VanillaRhapsody]

37. they ARE telling them how to feel...do not fool yourself into thinking otherwise...

they wouldn't presume to say these things about African Americans regarding voting rights issues...but because its women...they think they understand.

[polly7]

50. No worries, I'm no fool and have been discussing important issues such as

bigotry, violence against women, rape, etc., for a long, long time.

[VanillaRhapsody]

72. then you should know better....

[polly7]

231. Don't talk to me like I'm some kind of naive, innocent little child you're trying to

teach about life. Just because many of us here don't fall in line with everything you think we should doesn't make our opinions any less valuable than your own.

[VanillaRhapsody]

232. then do not talk to me like I am one....

I am talking about MEN's opinions of my place in the world...

what part of that did you not get?

If a White person shouldn't tell those things to African Americans

And a straight person shouldn't tell LGBT what to think and feel...

neither should men when it comes to Women's issues.

[polly7]

236. I think if you'd take the time to read the responses of men

here with an open mind and forget the war between the genders that some have tried so hard to create, you'd find much more often than not that there is a great deal of agreement and common ground, and that there are merits to actually listening to one another.

But when the inevitable result of these threads has been decided before they're even posted, it's almost a given that people will be dismissed simply for replying .......... no matter whose issues are being discussed. And yes, I think men also have issues that are brought up, joked about and dismissed as being MRA whining, when if it were turned around, it would have people demanding that heads roll.

What's wrong with discussing and trying to make things better as one, instead of the divisiveness that makes it nearly impossible?

[VanillaRhapsody]

239. I don't NEED to know what they think about my place in the world

I LIVE IT!

Now why would you say to a White that they have the right to tell African Americans how they should feel?

Why would you say that a Straight should tell an LGBT how they should feel?



answer those please!

[polly7]

245. We all live with some unfairness, in one form or another.

I've live through some pretty shitty, life-threatening situations and you know what? I blame the person/persons who did it, not progressive men on a message board that I would trust would be the first ones to demand justice for the assholes of the world who hurt and demean anyone - woman, man or child. And that includes African Americans and LGBT people.

Why the absolute need to divide, when so much more can be learned and gained from collective thought and consensus?

[VanillaRhapsody]

247. THAT doesn't answer the question

does it?

obfuscating still.

[polly7]

249. Ok, well then, screw your question. You have no intention of actually hearing

anyone or anything but those who fall in line with your own bias against anyone not ass-kissing the dividers on board.

Edited for offensive content.

[VanillaRhapsody]

252. No I have no intention of listening to men tell me what it is like to be a woman..

no I do not...

by the way...I am not "kissing anyone's ass" least of all yours.

I don't need anyone to tell me what it is like to be a woman...I AM one..

I doubt African Americans NEED White people to tell them what it is like...

nor do the LGBT need straights to tell them either....

I have not faltered in this stance...and I won't no matter how many insults or curse words your flailingly hurl my way.

[polly7]

254. You hear exactly what you want to hear. nt.

[VanillaRhapsody]

258. Do you expect African Americans to listen to White people tell them

what it is like to be African American?

Do you expect Gays to listen to Straights tell them what is is like to be Gay?

Why is it okay for men to tell women that then?

[polly7]

260. Men don't tell women that here.

But you wouldn't know that from all the outrage a simple comment twisted to appear so invariable creates.

[VanillaRhapsody]

262. OH YES they have....

In fact several times yesterday I was told to "calm down" that I am "overreacting" about what Justice Sotomayer did....by MEN!

So don't tell me that doesn't happen....I HAVE seen it personally!

[Waiting For Everyman]

266. If opinions aren't allowed then keep it in HoF.

Bring it into GD, and others will say what they think, like it or not... as it should be.

[VanillaRhapsody]

269. are White people's opinions for African Americans allowed?

are straight people's for LGBT allowed?

Is this how it works?

[Waiting For Everyman]

292. Yes, anybody in GD is allowed to have an opinion.

If you bring a topic in here, it's presumed to be for the general audience to comment on. You don't have to like their opinions, and you don't have to think their opinions are relevant.

Yes, that's the same for any topic. If others' opinions on the topic are considered inappropriate or unwanted, then that's what the protected groups are for. You wouldn't want the general populace in your protected group, so don't try to bring the protected group's thinking out here and enforce it on all.

If you think someone's opinion violates ToS, there's a procedure for that.

Btw, if such disqualifiers as you're suggesting were allowed, how would we know who really is African American, or female, or LGBT, or any other designation? It's easy to self-present as anything on the internet... and based on that, you'd determine who can have an opinion, and who must blindly follow that opinion?

I have yet to see anyone outside of a particular minority group telling a person within it what that's like, or how they should feel. If it happens, it can't be very often.

[VanillaRhapsody]

295. they can have those opinions on how it is to be an African American

and they will be excoriated for it...

straight people can have opinions about what it is like to be LGBT and THEY will be excoriated...

yet women are supposed to STFU if a man has an opinion about what it is like to be a woman!

[Waiting For Everyman]

324. They can have an opinion on those topics, yes.

Not "what it's like", as I said, I have yet to see an example of that. Nobody says that, that I have seen. But if they did, it would be ok unless over the ToS line, it would just be SILLY. It probably wouldn't be taken very seriously, I don't think outrage about it would be necessary. But then, this is hypothetical.

Is "excoriating" what you're intending to do to disagreement on feminist issues? Is that some kind of standard to be upheld or matched with the others you mentioned?

If excoriating is the intended response to disagreement, then it's no mystery why there is so much nasty contention on these subjects. Clearly, it's the goal. I think that is pretty much the definition of a "disruptor" though, and not allowed under the rules.

[VanillaRhapsody]

327. Yesterday right here on DU

I was told not to be so "outraged" about what Justice Sotomayer did...I was told to "calm down" about it among other things....

Do NOT tell me that would be tolerated if she did that towards Voting Rights and someone told an African American to "calm down" and don't be "outraged" about it!

[Waiting For Everyman]

345. Ok, I see what you mean.

Yes, I've seen that sort of statement about lots of subjects. not just including all the minority issues, but even things like the JFK assassination. It's not telling you how to feel as a woman it's saying that your reaction seems out of proportion, in that person's opinion. Well, you can disagree with that of course.

If you told that person it offended you and they keep on doing it, then yes, they are needling you and that isn't civil and shouldn't keep happening. If you put together links of you objecting to it, and that person continuing to say it, I'm sure juries would start hiding that once the list got to more than a few entries.

That is not, however, a reason to say that men have no right to an opinion on women's issues... or that anyone for that matter doesn't have the same.

[VanillaRhapsody]

357. when you tell me that my reaction is "out of proportion" YES

you are telling me how to feel!

that is soft misogyny...because you cannot know what it is like to be a woman if you are not one! It's very simple.

You wouldn't tell Black people their reaction is "out of proportion" would you? But because its a woman's issue...you think you can!

[Waiting For Everyman]

369. Both men and women can overreact, it is a human quality not just female.

And yes, it is possible for black people to overreact too, ANY human person can overreact.

In short, it has nothing to do with being a woman. Unless you want to assert that only women overreact?

[VanillaRhapsody]

373. But YOU as a White male do not get to decide for a Black person what is or isn't an

over reaction to something the Supreme Court is doing to them....get it?

therefore...neither can a man judge for me what is or isnt an overreaction to the offense...

[Waiting For Everyman]

422. It's an over reaction in the opinion holder's opinion.

There is no such thing as a way to objectively determine whether someone has, as measurable fact, over reacted. It is SUBJECTIVE, in the eye of the beholder, an opinion.

Your opinion may differ from other opinions, it happens sometimes. Nobody "gets to decide" anything. Nothing gets decided.

Btw, I am not male.

[Waiting For Everyman]

326. You keep citing something that nobody has seen

so maybe you should show us what you mean.

[VanillaRhapsody]

329. It happened to ME...

several times yesterday....

[polly7]

270. I haven't seen it.

Mind you I don't search for replies that could be twisted to mean so, either.

[VanillaRhapsody]

272. that could be your malfunction right there...

I haven't twisted anyone's...

though I have had insults and curse words hurled at me haven't I?

[polly7]

274. I have a malfunction!?!

What are you saying?!!! Because I could twist that to mean many things you would probably take offense to.

I've had insults and curse words hurled at me by ................ women here! Some seriously ugly shit, too.

[VanillaRhapsody]

275. apparently you do have one....

were they hurled at you BECAUSE you were a certain gender? Or because you feel that a certain gender should not have to put up with the other gender telling them how to think and feel?

[polly7]

277. No, I don't.

I'm perfectly fine. But thanks for your nastiness.

Maybe you should think before you post. You come across as dismissive, arrogant and insulting.

[VanillaRhapsody]

279. Yeah actually you do...

you hurled insults and curse words at ME for defending women against men's "opinions" of how they should think and feel...

Maybe you should look in a mirror once in a while...

I was just told yesterday by men on DU....to just "calm down" and not "overreact" to what Justice Sotomayer did...

So you can peddle your petulance elsewhere.

[polly7]

281. Well you know what you can do with your own 'malfunction'.

And read your posts before you accuse me of something that didn't happen. I'm always amazed at how some can spin every word written, no matter the context, to play victim ... all the while being more abusive than anything you can conjure up to ramp up the gender wars.

[VanillaRhapsody]

282. My "malfunctions" weren't being questioned..

I didn't bring up "malfunctions" you did...

[polly7]

285. You spin more than my washing machine on laundry day. Try harder please.

This is getting ridiculous. If you want a meaningless fight so bad, step outside and punch someone, see how that works.

[VanillaRhapsody]

291. and you cannot answer a simple question

would you expect African Americans to put up with what women put up with?

would you expect the LGBT to put up with straight people telling them how to think or feel?

you can accuse me of whatever you want...doesn't change the answers to those questions that you CANNOT answer!

I am not the one hurling insults and curse words....perhaps it is YOU that seriously wants to punch someone!

[polly7]

297. I'm a woman.

I've lived through terrors and assault, broken bones ... and yet I can't bring myself to blame all men for what some criminals decided to do to me. In fact, the men in my life have been more supportive and helpful in rebuilding my life than the women ........ isn't that weird. If you believe that 'life on a message board involving gender discussion' is comparable in any way to the horrors African Americans and LGBT and women in REAL LIFE have fought for and are fighting for, I suggest you get out and do something real to help victims of bigotry and oppression. Claiming a DU rape culture and trying your hardest to paint progressive people here (many women don't agree with your precious HOF) as woman-hating bigots doesn't do anything but give people something to b* about day after day. Some of us have spent a great deal of time with victims of DV, assault, rape .... and there really are actual cases of mysogyny and every other form of bigotry that harms and kills out there. Here - where a difference of opinion is branded as cause to divide a community claiming gender hatred and oppression??? - not so much.

But knock yourself out.

[VanillaRhapsody]

316. So? What's your point?

what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

[polly7]

320. I guess it flew over your head.

Sorry about that.

[VanillaRhapsody]

361. If there were one....

[VanillaRhapsody]

286. Right...just in this thread...

I have been called from a "Conservative" an "internet dictator" a "Senora Commandant" a "Rightwing Nut"

and you yourself started flinging curse words my way...

but YOU are the victim here....yeah right.

[polly7]

288. Awwwies.

[VanillaRhapsody]

293. are you denying it?

are you being victimized?

[polly7]

298. No, I'm not being victimized.

Plenty of women, men and children are ........... just not here.

[VanillaRhapsody]

300. YES Here!

Yesterday I was told by several "supportive" DU men not to be "outraged" to "calm down" about what Justice Sotomayer did...

So put THAT in your pipe and smoke it!

Yes Virginia....there is soft misogyny on DU!

If she had ruled for a stay about "voting rights" do you think White people would tell the African Americans to "calm down" and not be so "outraged"?

[polly7]

302. Ok, you win. This is a horrible, misogynistic site where women are not safe

to post an opinion.

Is that it?

[VanillaRhapsody]

304. hyperbole much?

how does one learn when they cannot see the grey area?

[polly7]

308. That's exactly what you're implying. I agreed. We're good now. nt.

[VanillaRhapsody]

310. No I didn't "imply" anything...

I am very well known for being straight-forward. I shoot from the hip and I do not pull punches...

Nor do I hold quarter....I take no prisoners...

Anyone around knows that....

[polly7]

315. Really?

Because that's not how I see you at all!!!!

I guess we can be anyone we want to be on the internet.

[VanillaRhapsody]

416. I don't tell people how to "see" things...

though you would argue that they have that right!

[VanillaRhapsody]

309. and as a matter of fact....

Are you an American living in Canada...or a Canadian?

Because if it is the latter...you also do not get to tell American women what it is like to live in the Sexist States of America.

[polly7]

312. I'm a Canadian.

Are you arrogant enough to believe women are suffering just in the U.S.?

I post at least weekly about the horrors faced by women in Afghanistan, India, Pakistan, Latin America, etc. etc. etc.

Come to think of it, I never see you on those threads, or any other woman from HOF. It's like those women don't exist.

If you have a problem with me posting re human rights that are shared around the world, take it to admin. I'll await their reply.

[VanillaRhapsody]

314. did I say that? No I didn't

I told you....twisting my words does you no favors...

[polly7]

318. You were bitching about me a Canadian here.

Do something about it then!!!!!

[VanillaRhapsody]

321. No I wasn't

and "bitching" is a sexist word. An alertable offense in fact....

I only said that you as a Canadian woman...do not know what it is like to be an American one...

[polly7]

322. Ya you were bitching about it. Go alert. nt.

[VanillaRhapsody]

323. Nope...no curse words...no insults...that would be YOUR department.

and now sexist ones...

[polly7]

328. ALERT! Do something instead of constant complaining, ffs. nt.

[VanillaRhapsody]

330. I don't have to...I rarely do...why?

because I can take anything YOU have to dish out.

but it doesn't make your sexist language any more valid does it?

[polly7]

333. Beyond boring. Sorry, I've had enough of you. Good luck with someone else. nt.

[VanillaRhapsody]

335. Yeah....that's what they always say.... when they are proven wrong....

[polly7]

340. No, it's what 'I' say when I'm beyond bored. I don't see a reason to lie about being bored.

bore 2 (bôr, br)

tr.v. bored, bor·ing, bores

To make weary by being dull, repetitive, or tedious: The movie bored us.

Sorry, I can't help you out here if you don't understand the meaning.

[VanillaRhapsody]

343. Yes you can be bored...AND wrong at the same time....

there is nothing that excludes that....

Many when they discover they are wrong...and are not going to have their wrongness validated....will suddenly proclaim they are bored with the subject matter

[polly7]

349. Not today though!!!!

I hope you find someone with a bit more patience, you clearly love this divisive, hatey, make up the worst things you possibly can, stuff.

But ..... have a WONDERFUL evening!

[VanillaRhapsody]

352. apparently so...you proclaimed it yourself. I didn't deem it appropriate

to tell you whether you should feel bored or not...I accepted your description of your feelings.

But in YOUR world...You would have had to accept (my opinion) me telling you WHY you really aren't bored!

How does that GRAB you?

[Violet_Crumble]

348. Polly's nationality has nothing to do with this...

I've never seen her tell American women what it's like to live in the US. You may not have intended it to come across the way it did, but that post does appear dismissive of women who don't live in the US...

[polly7]

350. I love you Violet.

[Violet_Crumble]

351. Right back at ya, polly!

[VanillaRhapsody]

355. Can you tell a woman in Darfur what it is like to be one there?

can you?

Can you tell a Russian woman what it is like to be one there? Can you tell me what it was like for a member of Pussy Riot to spend time in a Russian Gulag? Can you?

You can wax poetic all you want...but you will NEVER understand what that is like will you?

So why do you propose to tell polly that SHE should be able to tell me what I think and feel as an American woman?

[Violet_Crumble]

362. Again, I haven't seen polly tell you what you feel as an American woman n/t

[VanillaRhapsody]

363. it has nothing to do with that...it was a analogy...

and what exactly is your point except to support polly's contention that men SHOULD be allowed to tell me what to think and feel as a woman.

[polly7]

370. What a freaking LIE that is!!!!

Link, or admit you're making up the most egregious, ugly shit possible!

Waiting!

[VanillaRhapsody]

371. NO I haven't ....

you have been saying that Men should be allowed to voice their opinion about what I think and feel as a woman...for example Yesterday when I was told my outrage at Justice Sotomayer wasn't correct by MEN!

[polly7]

378. You said 'I' told you men should be allowed to tell you what to think and feel as a woman.

"polly's contention that men SHOULD be allowed to tell me what to think and feel as a woman." - FALSE.

That's EXACTLY why I stopped taking a lot of this serious. If you have to invent this kind of bullcrap, your agenda is pretty clear.

[VanillaRhapsody]

380. this is what you have been saying all along...

that they have a "right" to this opinion....

[polly7]

383. No, that's a lie. An ugly one, too.

I've said everyone on a message board is entitled to an opinion without being called a hater pig for it.

Now I see how you operate though, so thanks for that.

[VanillaRhapsody]

385. the truth can be ugly polly

especially when one denies it.

I gave you evidence and you denied that too..

WTF are you saying? That white people get to tell black people how to think and feel...when to be outraged or not?

that straight people SHOULD get to tell the LGBT community what they think about what it is like to be one...when to be outraged?



You wouldn't say those things...but MEN should get to voice their opinions about when how and why women are outraged.

[polly7]

389. Your lies are the ugliest of the ugly. Believe me. nt.

[VanillaRhapsody]

394. that's like....your opinion man...

You lying that I am lying...is quite diseased...believe me.

[polly7]

395. Nah, your posts don't disappear because you want them to. nt.

[VanillaRhapsody]

398. NOR do yours....

Answer the questions....

So I guess you agree with me now that Men shouldn't get to tell women how to think feel or act or what to be outraged about as a woman?

Is that right? Cause that is what I have been saying all along...what have you?

[polly7]

400. Thank god they don't.

I answered your questions. You ran from mine. You're a very, very dishonest person. Now, alert.

[VanillaRhapsody]

402. No you have not answered the questions I have asked all along

Are White people allowed to tell African Americans how to think, feel or what to be outraged about?

are Straight people allowed to tell LGBT people what to think, feel or what to be outraged about?

and if not why do men get to tell women these things?

[polly7]

406. Sorry, asked and answered - twice.

Do you understand why yet I said this was beyond boring, you revert back to the same old questions time after time to run away from those you don't like.?

Go back and read.

And thanks for your opinion that women should never be called horrible, ugly things - or just women you don't like, that is.

It's the hypocrisy.

Some of us are fed up to our fucking eyeballs with it.


Suppertime for me!!! Enjoy yourself.

[VanillaRhapsody]

407. NO you didn't answer....you can lie about it all you want

doesn't make it so...they are simple questions...don't know what the problem is...

Should men get to tell women how to think feel or act or what to be outraged about as a woman if white people cannot tell African Americans that or straight people cannot tell LGBT that?

[polly7]

409. Go back and READ. LOL! Good grief, like a freaking post! nt.

[VanillaRhapsody]

410. been reading all along...

perhaps you haven't

Should men get to tell women how to think feel or act or what to be outraged about as a woman, if a White person shouldn't tell an African American or a straight person tell an LGBT person that?

[VanillaRhapsody]

358. birds of a feather and all that....

you still do not know what it is like to be an American woman...no matter how hard you try..

[Violet_Crumble]

364. Us DUers who aren't American women do tend to stick together! n/t

[VanillaRhapsody]

366. so? How does that change anything?

if you arent an American woman...you don't get to just tell an American woman how to think and feel AS one do you?

THAT'S the point being made...

[Violet_Crumble]

372. I was responding to yr 'birds of a feather' line

if you arent an American woman...you don't get to just tell an American woman how to think and feel AS one do you?

Well, I think I had every right to tell Pat Goltz and her anti-choice gang of twits from 'Feminists' for life that they were a bunch of fascist, women-hating, right-wing freaks whose mere existence offended me as a woman. Which I did a hell of a lot on another forum before I came to DU.

But I see the error of my ways now and I should track them down and apologise to them for presuming to tell an American woman how to think and feel

[VanillaRhapsody]

375. but how does that have anything to do with the issue we are discussing

you are just here to throw in other issues as grenades....to divert the discussion.

No you don't get to tell American women what it is like to be an American or an American woman. Nor can I tell polly what it is like to be Canadian. I cannot tell her what is or isn't an overreaction to politics happening in Canada...

get it?

[polly7]

376. Women are women.

Women all over the world:

- get raped, beaten, assaulted
- are denied rights because of a capitalistic patriarchal system that affects every human being on the planet
- are married as child brides
- suffer the results of war and conflict
- fight for the right to control their own bodies
- etc. etc. etc.

Tell me, what makes women from the U.S. unique in all of this? I believe humans should care about every woman, man and child on the planet. Lines on a map don't impress me much when it comes to bigotry and hatred.

Neither do people complaining on 1st world message boards about (falsely) being told to STFU all the while creating divisiveness and hatred to further whatever their cause is ...... because watching the list of grievances here re 'not being allowed to discuss, when the discussers have no intention of letting it happen as much as beating people on the head with their own, indisputable point of view' it's become as confusing as * to me.

[VanillaRhapsody]

382. baloney...being a woman doesn't mean you have cornered the market

on what it means to be various ones? Does a straight woman get to tell a LGBT woman what she should be outraged about?

[polly7]

387. Of course not.

I've never in my life presumed to tell ANYONE what she or he should be outraged about.

Either you're deliberately missing the point, or you're trying to further your hate war (which from your post below, I now fully believe to be the case).

My only concern in all of this is allowing opinions from every side (as long as they're not full of bigotry and hate themselves - those should, and are ppr'd thank goodness) to be able to express themselves without being made to feel guilty for it, or called names - as I have been, over and over.

What do you think of me, a rape and DV survivor being called a rape-apologist?

What do you think of other women here voicing an opinion being called good old dogs that just live for the occasional pat on the head???

[VanillaRhapsody]

390. then why are men on DU allowed to?

as was my experience yesterday?

by the way...I am a rape survivor too...you haven't cornered that market either. I don't bring it up to give my self props...

[polly7]

393. I don't bring it up to give myself props either ....... what a fucking piece of work you are.

Did you report this supposed event yesterday?

Where's the link?

You never answered my questions. Why not. Scared?

[VanillaRhapsody]

396. Yes you did as it wasn't relevant to this discussion at all?

Why....you haven't answered mine yet?

Should White people be allowed to tell Black people how to think and act...when to be outraged?

Should straight people be allowed to tell LGBT people how to think and act and when to be outraged?


you first!

[polly7]

399. I've answered those questions twice already, as well as many others.

Your turn.

Scared?

[VanillaRhapsody]

404. No you haven't answered...

and No I am not scared...least of all of you! There is still a "little trailer park" left in this chick...don't worry.

Now what is it you are afraid of...offending some men?

Do you agree with me or not?

"So I guess you agree with me now that Men shouldn't get to tell women how to think feel or act or what to be outraged about as a woman?"

[polly7]

408. Answered. Bored. Hungry. Not impressed by your fear of questions you find uncomfortable.

Later.

Maybe.

[VanillaRhapsody]

417. afraid of you?????

BWAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAA!


So I guess you agree with me now that Men shouldn't get to tell women how to think feel or act or what to be outraged about as a woman?

[polly7]

425. Deliberate denseness is also a bore.

Fear of being seen as a hypocrite for agreeing that certain women here should be able to be called ugly, horrible things.

[VanillaRhapsody]

430. do what?

WTF are you going on about now?

[polly7]

431. Your FEAR. nt.

[VanillaRhapsody]

433. I have no fear...where on earth do you get the impression that I would

fear YOU?

[polly7]

436. That's like three times you've tried to say that I said you had fear for me.

Never happened.

Your fear of exposing your hypocrisy for believing that only certain women here are worthy of having boundaries respected and not to be called hideous names. Once again. Sigh .......... you'll twist anything, won't you?

[VanillaRhapsody]

442. You have accused me of being afraid of you several times

I have not called you a single name...you on the other hand...

[polly7]

445. A LIE. nt.

[VanillaRhapsody]

447. No its not....

you have asked me if I was afraid...or outright accused me of it at least 3 times so far..YOU are the liar.

[polly7]

449. NSS!!!!!!

AFRAID to answer my questions on the treatment of certain women here! FFS.

[VanillaRhapsody]

450. I am not afraid at all...YOU don't answer mine...

just because you don't like my answers doesn't mean they weren't answered...

FFS yourself.

[polly7]

452. You are ridiculous. Go stalk someone else,

I'm sick of your bullshit.

[VanillaRhapsody]

456. You keep replying to my posts...if you are sick then stop...

[VanillaRhapsody]

443. I never said ANYTHING about women

I spoke about men....prime example of YOU twisting my words...you know exactly what you keep accusing me of without proof.


AND proof you are twisting my words...

[polly7]

446. 'I' asked you about treatment of women. Three times.

You were too AFRAID to answer.

I've suggested you actually read. It might have helped.

[VanillaRhapsody]

448. I am NOT afraid...I was NOT talking ABOUT women in this discussion

I am talking about MEN!

How does that make me afraid...that you keep lying and saying you aren't accusing me of?

Now you are just being silly....going through the thread trying to add irrelevant remarks...

[polly7]

451. Well it's not just YOU in this conversation, IS IT?

You dogged me for what ........ an hour to answer questions I'd already answered time after time. I asked you something you were obviously AFRAID to answer because it would expose your hypocrisy regarding the treatment of women you obviously have no use for here ...... but that's not allowed? Who the fuck made you owner of the thread or decider of who posts what?

Nobody.

Now leave me the fuck alone!

[VanillaRhapsody]

453. why don't you do the same...you keep finding other things to reply too...

you are the one going through the thread looking for places to say stuff to me...

Why did you start this in the first place if you cannot finish it.

No one is stalking you....you are the one doing that...


If you reply to my posts...I reply in kind.

[VanillaRhapsody]

353. I was making a POINT

perhaps you have heard of them? Its called an analogy....

I said...she as a Canadian woman...cannot relate to what life is like as an American woman...to convey the message.

Or are you saying that an American woman can relate to what it is like being a woman in Darfur?

[Violet_Crumble]

360. It's a flawed point...

For a start, I've never seen polly tell another woman at DU what it's like to be a woman in America.

Secondly, why do you think women in other First World countries can't relate to what life for a woman is like in the US? Do you think we're all lacking some sort of empathy or something? We're incapable of reading about things in the US? Maybe we should not say anything when we see things posted at DU about what anti-choicers are trying to do in the US?

I would hope most women can on some level relate to the situation of women in places like Darfur...

[VanillaRhapsody]

368. No in fact it is not...

it was an analogy...it doesn't have to meant that it actually happened...its called an hypothesis...

she is arguing that MEN should be allowed to tell me how to think and feel as a woman.

But YOU just want to defend her....no matter what she said...

[Violet_Crumble]

374. Yeah, it looks like it is a flawed point...

Show me the posts where she's arguing that men should be allowed to tell you how to think and feel as a woman. I haven't spotted those...

[VanillaRhapsody]

377. YES she has....

men told me here on DU that I was "overreacting" to Justice Sotomayer...

She is arguing that they DO have a right to tell me so...and I am saying they don't have a right...because they have NO Idea what it is like. Because they wouldn't get away with telling a Black person that their reaction to the attacks on Voter laws is "overreacting". Straights don't get to tell LGBT people how to react to marriage equality laws. Why do men get to tell me how to think and feel?

In fact her contention was that misogyny doesn't happen on DU....

[polly7]

379. They didn't happen. nt.

[VanillaRhapsody]

420. actually that HAS been my point all along

perhaps in your flailing around you have forgotten the original point..

So I guess you agree with me now that Men shouldn't get to tell women how to think feel or act or what to be outraged about as a woman?

[polly7]

426. Just on principle, after seeing how you lie and twist things, I probably shouldn't agree with

you on anything.

But, my assertion all along is that no one should get to tell anyone how to think or feel, and that I don't see that happening here.

Did you miss that??

Sorry, I just can't jump in that outrage barrel with you when the only people on here who HAVE told me how I should feel and act - are women.

[VanillaRhapsody]

435. please prove where I lied

or was afraid of you

or am outraged by you...

All of the above is an outright lie by YOU

and just because it hasn't happened to YOU doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Yesterday MEN told me that I was overreacting to a Supreme Court Justices stance.

Denial is still not a river in Egypt

[polly7]

437. READ your posts!

LOL!

[VanillaRhapsody]

439. I have read them ....I wrote them....

but put your money where you mouth is...

put up!

You still don't get to call me a liar without proof.

[Sheldon Cooper]

301. Don't waste any more time with that one, VR.

There's no use.

[VanillaRhapsody]

303. You are right Sheldon....they just REFUSE to see the forest for the trees...

I stand by my contention.....

[polly7]

306. No use for what, to convince me that all

women are not allowed opinions here and are constantly being shut up?

Or what is your main problem with me. Spell it out, because I have no clue who you are or what I'm supposed to have done to you.

[VanillaRhapsody]

325. I was told to "STFU" yesterday by men on DU...

so YOU in fact are wrong....

[polly7]

331. I hope you alerted.

Because being told to shut the fuck up is usually cause for a hide or banning.

I was called nasty things by women too that were never hidden, so I hope you have better luck - though I never alerted. Maybe I should have.

[VanillaRhapsody]

334. why should I?

I have thick skin....

I am only pointing out the "soft misogyny" that occurs everyday in women's lives....you joined those ranks when you used sexist terminology.

[1000words]

346. I would never tell you to STFU ...

Because the ignore feature achieves the desired result.

It gives me great pleasure to remove you from my "DU experience."

[VanillaRhapsody]

388. You are welcome...but my feelings are certainly not hurt!

Nor do you get to tell me what to think or feel as a woman.

[opiate69]

411. And now you've told polly and Violet to STFU.

[VanillaRhapsody]

412. Where did I say that?

I have been asking questions that polly doesn't want to answer.

[opiate69]

415. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4267138

[Egnever]

305. Holy cow you are toxic

[VanillaRhapsody]

313. that's like...

your opinion man....

[Comrade Grumpy]

359. I second that opinion.

[VanillaRhapsody]

381. Of course you do...

[sufrommich]

365. Nobody should be called "toxic",nobody.

That's not a discussion point,that's just out and out name calling. Shame on you.

[seaglass]

392. And alerts and hides are down on DU because everyone's behavior has gotten so positive!

This place is a fucking joke.

[sufrommich]

397. The cognitive dissonance displayed by

people who love to describe DU feminists as rude and petty is absolutely laughable.

[seaglass]

432. Well multiple juries have told me that calling someone toxic is not rude. So clearly you and I

have standards of civility that are a bit too high for DU.

[polly7]

391. I third that opinion. BIG TIME. nt.

[VanillaRhapsody]

414. Of course you do...am I supposed to be surprised that you

would support a personal insult?

[polly7]

429. Check out a mirror. Your outrage is transparent and phony. nt.

[VanillaRhapsody]

434. this is not my outraged look....

your projection is not working

[polly7]

438. Zzzzzzzzzzz ......

Bye.

[VanillaRhapsody]

441. SOP when you have been beaten...

[polly7]

444. Beaten at what, responding to your spin, twisting, deliberately lying about what I and others wrote,

implying things that were never thought, let alone stated???

There's no winning against that.

Trust me, I lived with someone who did it every day. That kind of gas-lighting, abusive, crazy-making stuff is pointless to argue. When someone has no scruples about doing it, and shows you who they are, for doing it ......... believe them, and don't worry a second more about it. You've shown me very clearly what your game is, and it's pathetic and what a huge waste of time all of that was.

Sorry I ever thought you might be sincere.

[VanillaRhapsody]

457. prove it...prove it...prove it...

I will leave you alone when you stop replying to my posts...

Please prove where I spun, twisted or lied...you keep saying it but never proving it...

You saying it doesn't just make it so does it?

[Cleita]

38. + 1

[VanillaRhapsody]

240. So would you also +1 to allow White people to tell African Americans

how to think and feel?

would you +1 to also allow Straight people to tell LGBT how to think and feel?

Because that is EXACTLY what you are +1'ing in this case!

[VanillaRhapsody]

39. So we are going to allow ALL opinions on DU now?

what about the opinions of White Supremacists? Do we allow their opinions too? See....its not about "any opinion goes" opinions can be wrong...

[polly7]

53. What a horrible way to categorize progressives who choose to discuss something and may

have a slight opinion about something. Over-react much?

Obvious bigots get what they deserve and are ppr'd ...... very quickly, thank goodness. Those who you're trying to paint with such an ugly broad brush are also allowed a voice, and usually it's one that's supportive but deliberately twisted into something really ugly, as you've just done above.

[VanillaRhapsody]

62. Its women's issues in the United States...

so do you allow "soft bigotry" is that what you are saying...you know the kind that can be "twisted into something really ugly"?

apparently you think soft misogyny is okay...

Otherwise...why is an affront to African Americans treated with disrespect...but you seem to think Women's issues do not deserve the same respect.

to you ....the issues that face African Americans is sacrosanct, but women should just "stfu" about theirs and allow some "difference of opinion" about those rights.. Do you suggest to African Americans that they should just "allow some difference of opinion" by White people?

[Cleita]

67. "soft misogyny"?

I did not see that in your post, but apparently someone did. I believe this is what we are talking about and it has nothing to do with your post.

[VanillaRhapsody]

73. what?

that is just word salad...

[Cleita]

54. We did at one time and DU was a better place for it.

Shutting down opinion is censorship and that's not Democratic. The only thing demanded back then was that you had your facts right and good sources to back your statements. Those posters usually left with their tails between their legs once their errors and astroturf opinions were exposed and rest of DU left the discussion better informed. Oh we did and still do have a couple of White Supremacists on board. I believe they mostly lurk now but they are still registered DUers.

[VanillaRhapsody]

66. should African Americans allow some "difference of opinion" about their rights and

grievances and place in the world made by White people?

[Cleita]

68. Of course. Why don't you star a thread on it because it has nothing to

do with this thread.

[VanillaRhapsody]

71. Sure it does...

why are women's issues less important in your eyes? Thats the point trying to be made by this analogy...

but sure...African Americans would allow White people to tell them what they should be outraged about I am so sure....

[Cleita]

79. Women's issues are more important in my eyes than yours which is why

I focus on the REAL issues, not the petty bullying that is poisoning the well for genuine achievement in gender equality.

[VanillaRhapsody]

81. Obviously they are not....

[countryjake]

86. What do you mean by that?

You cannot control who contributes to a discussion on this message board.

Why would you even want to?

[VanillaRhapsody]

90. I don't presume to tell African Americans what is or isn't outrageous to them...

nor to the LGBT community....

why should men be allowed to tell me that?

[countryjake]

97. Yet you do presume to tell Cleita that women's issues...

are obviously not that important to her?

Why in the world would you say such a thing?

[VanillaRhapsody]

103. I am only going by what I am seeing here....

she is telling me I MUST accept the opinions of men....even though she wouldn't tell Black people to accept the opinions of White people...or of straight people of the LGBT community.

But women...that's just different. We are expected to allow men to "have a different opinion" about our experiences...

[Cleita]

107. See this is so wrong.

How dare you put words in my mouth. I never said those things.

[VanillaRhapsody]

111. No its not....

you are telling me I SHOULD accept mens "difference of opinion" on my rights as a woman...

[HappyMe]

100. I don't let anyone presume to tell me

what I should or shouldn't be outraged about - not men or women.

[VanillaRhapsody]

112. Me either!

[Cleita]

95. You "obviously" know so much about me.

I was in the vanguard of the feminist movement. If it weren't for the activism of me and my sisters in the sixties and seventies you and I would probably not even be able to participate on this board or any political board. It would be for men only and you and I would be participating on the Betty Crocker homemakers' forums.

[VanillaRhapsody]

98. wow...so?

this makes you the authority....and I should allow men to tell me what to be outraged about? This is your defense?

[Cleita]

104. You should be on your knees thanking every woman who got

you better wages, broke the glass ceiling, even got you the right to wear pants at work and here you are spitting in our faces, who got you the right to control your own fertility (a right they are trying to reverse) and instead you get on a message board to argue about petty shit.

[VanillaRhapsody]

105. What makes YOU think I don't? Are you saying I am supposed to bow to you AUTHORITAY?

because I don't allow men to tell me what my experiences as a woman are? Somehow that is disrespectful of YOU?

[countryjake]

102. Brava!

You and me, both!

[VanillaRhapsody]

108. Of course "jake"

cause YOU want to be allowed to tell me what I should or shouldn't feel! Anything that supports that is fine by you...

You still haven't answered would you tell African Americans how to feel? Or the LGBT community?

Should they just allow "difference of opinions" by Whites and Straight people to go unchallenged?

[Cleita]

115. No one is talking about African Americans but you.

Or the rest for that matter. Take that outrage and protest what governments are doing to planned parenthood and other institutions that provide care for women's bodies.

[VanillaRhapsody]

119. I am making an analogy...

the fact that you cannot see the comparison I am making...supports my contention of "soft misogyny".

Why is being a woman in America treated differently than being an African American or being LGBT?

Why don't you explain to me how women's rights are less important than those?

[Cleita]

138. It's a poor one and intellectually dishonest.

[VanillaRhapsody]

264. How...explain HOW

it is different for men to tell women what it is like to be one...

versus a White telling a Black...or a Straight telling an LGBT?

THIS is why it is "soft misogyny".

[VanillaRhapsody]

123. why do you suggest because I have an opinion on this matter...that somehow I don't

protest what governments are doing to Planned Parenthood too? I spent 18 yrs getting treatment at Planned Parenthood for your information. One doesn't exclude the other...

the fact that you threw THIS in my face is quite telling....

[countryjake]

136. I haven't told you a thing about how YOU should feel...

And reaching a point where men do, finally, understand and support the struggle for women's rights in this world should be one goal in this fight, not total alienation of half the population.

Alienating many DUers on women's struggles is the opposite of organizing to fight for the rights of women. That is what this thread illustrates, quite well.

Biting your nose off to spite your face will never get one anywhere.

[VanillaRhapsody]

186. the phrase is "despite" your face by the way...

[countryjake]

195. Bwahahahahahaha! I shall dig up my old dead mother...

to inform her of that new age-old adage!

You are most assuredly wrong on that.

[VanillaRhapsody]

200. Oh no I am not...and it makes it mean something entirely different.

its not to "spite" your face...


It's "despite" the fact that face needs your nose...its part of it.

[countryjake]

223. Care to address what I said in the post where I used that adage?

Or do I get nothing but crickets in these man pants I am told I wear.

I'll not argue over a saying that appears to have been rewritten and misunderstood by the younger generations. I will continue to remember both the idiom and the meaning, as explained to me on my grandma's knee, decades ago.

[VanillaRhapsody]

225. I have not "TOLD" you to wear man pants..

I have said...if you are not male while using a male name...while arguing about women's issues...perhaps you should disclose that information.

Seems rather germane to the issue don't you think?

[countryjake]

226. Why?

Why exactly does it matter what sex we may be, when discussing any of the issues that are presented on this board?

[VanillaRhapsody]

230. Would it be okay for a White person to keep that information private

in a discussion about African American issues?

Or a straight when it comes to discussing LGBT issues?

would that be okay in your book?

but for some reason...this is considered OK when it comes to women's issues...

this is why I call it "soft misogyny".

[countryjake]

241. How do I know what you are?

There are lots of right-wingnuts on this board who claim they are men, women, gay, straight, black, white, and everything in between. Those of us who have been here for the past twelve years learned long ago who was what, by the conversations that we participated in and the friends that we made. It's called building solidarity, an extremely important aspect of any and every struggle, including the fight for the rights of women.

Reaching a point where men do, finally, understand and support the struggle for women's rights in this world should be one goal in this fight, whether they be "soft misogynists", male chauvinists, or total sexist pigs. That will never be accomplished by absolutely refusing to reasonably discuss oppression with them.

Alienating many DUers on women's struggles is the opposite of organizing to fight for the rights of women.

[VanillaRhapsody]

246. are you calling me a Rightwing Nut now too?

but "I" am the one being accused of being insulting!

I have not pretended to be anything....are you?

[countryjake]

257. So that is all that you got from my reply?

Now that you've googled that old saying (and learned from it), I would suggest that you should also google the word "solidarity".

And concentrate on building it.

[VanillaRhapsody]

259. No...I don't NEED your opinions about what it is like to be a woman..do African Americans

need to be told that by Whites?

Do LGBT need to be told that by Straights?

[countryjake]

294. So building solidarity isn't important in the fight for women's rights?

[VanillaRhapsody]

296. Being supportive doesn't mean you get to have opinions about what it is like..

how they should think and feel.

I support African Americans without telling them that...

I support LGBT without telling them that...

Why should I have to put up with "supportive" men who do?

[countryjake]

307. Which brings us full circle in this whole tete a tete.

You cannot control who contributes to a discussion on this message board.

What exactly does it accomplish by doing that?

[VanillaRhapsody]

418. Do African Americans? Do LGBT?

Do we allow KKK members to post? I think that gets regulated don't you? If racist posts are made...that gets regulated. Would we allow White people to tell African Americans what to feel or think or be outraged about? Do we allow straight people to tell LGBT people that?

But for some reason...men DO get to say those things to women even on DU!

[VanillaRhapsody]

237. So you were right about its meaning...

despite the fact that it makes no nevermind in this discussion....

carry on.

[DirkGently]

235. It's "cutting off your nose to spite your face."

But it does mean what you think it means, basically.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutting_off_the_nose_to_spite_the_face

"Cutting off the nose to spite the face" is an expression used to describe a needlessly self-destructive over-reaction to a problem: "Don't cut off your nose to spite your face" is a warning against acting out of pique, or against pursuing revenge in a way that would damage oneself more than the object of one's anger.[1]

If you think about it, it means what what you were thinking, but it's a sharper analogy than "despite your face" would be. You're mad, so to get even, you do something destructive, which hurts you more than your perceived enemy in the process. It can happen especially when someone fails to recognize an ally or an asset.

Carry on.

[OilemFirchen]

367. Wow.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutting_off_the_nose_to_spite_the_face

"Cutting off the nose to spite the face" is an expression used to describe a needlessly self-destructive over-reaction to a problem: "Don't cut off your nose to spite your face" is a warning against acting out of pique, or against pursuing revenge in a way that would damage oneself more than the object of one's anger/

BTW, you weren't being schooled on the Sotomayor thread because of your gender. You were taken to task because you don't understand the law. And it wasn't "men" doing so. The most prominent critic was a woman.

[pacalo]

386. 'Cutting one's nose off *despite* one's face.'

VanillaRhapsody

186. the phrase is "despite" your face by the way...

[Cleita]

110. Thank you!

[VanillaRhapsody]

113. "jake" doesn't get to have an opinion about what it is like to be a woman in America

he will NEVER understand. You can applaud his effort to secure his right to tell me what I should or shouldn't feel all you want. It's still wrong....

[countryjake]

124. Heh heh...

Last edited Thu Jan 2, 2014, 06:47 PM - Edit history (1)

Are you telling me that I have no right to post a comment on this thread?

It's also wrong to assume that one's moniker determines anything, at all.

[VanillaRhapsody]

126. You have no right to tell me what I should or shouldn't feel as a woman

when you do...I have the right to call you out for it...Just like an African American would if a White person does it...or an LGBT person if a Straight person does it.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

129. ^^^THIS^^^

[Cleita]

156. You are assuming "jake" is a man.

But you have a habit of making up insults out of whole cloth that just aren't there.

[VanillaRhapsody]

168. what insults? Why is the truth an insult?

As I recall I have been the one called a "internet dictator" and "senora comrade" that you applauded...

and then perhaps if jake is not a male...then jake should say so and then continue to argue with me why WE as women should allow men to tell us how what their opinion is about being women in America? Or does "jake" have something to hide?

Why should an LGBT take that from a Straight?

Why should an African American take that from a White person?

Why should women take that from men?

[Comrade Grumpy]

131. Some of these folks remind me ultraradical campus Maoists. It's like a bad parody of feminism.

[countryjake]

145. Women hold up half the sky!

What the hell do Maoists have to do with posts on gender issues being hidden on this DU forum?

I don't believe that the disruption of this board has anything at all to do with "ultra-radicals" or "feminism".

[LanternWaste]

154. While yet others accurately exemplify the League for Men's Rights

While yet many others accurately exemplify the League for Men's Rights and the Justitia League for Family Law Reform-- which unfortunately, isn't a parody at all.

[VanillaRhapsody]

169. a "parody of feminism"?

Yet I am accused of using insults...

[Cleita]

174. No. No.

You are not getting away with this. Seeing insults is not the same as using insults. You are again twisting words and sentences into your own meaning and perception of them.

[VanillaRhapsody]

177. No did you or did you not applaud my being called an "internet dictator"?

and "Senora Comrade" or some such nonsense?

or do you not know the meaning of the word insult?

[Cleita]

184. But you didn't make the insult.

I do know the meaning. You apparently seem not to. If a social democrat like me called you comrade you should feel complimented, however that isn't the word I used. You seem to take the word comrade as an insult so that would make you anti-communist which conservatives are. I'm only asking now. Are you a conservative?

[VanillaRhapsody]

187. No I didn't and NOW asking me if I am a Conservative....

IS an insult and an alertable offense I might add!

This PROVES to me exactly where YOUR head is...

Have you no shame at all?

[Cleita]

206. An alertable offense.

What's taking so long? I will reciprocate with the list of alertable offenses you have done on this thread.

[VanillaRhapsody]

210. Please do!

would love to see them...especially by someone who has been proven to be talking out of both sides of her mouth when it comes to insults. You can insult me by the words "internet dictator" and "Senora Comrade" and accusing me of not supporting Planned Parenthood...and then asking if I am a Conservative....


But then....

[Cleita]

214. Are you a conservative? You seem to be in high dander about the question.

Are you even a real feminist? Your need to bash your fellow women when they don't follow in lockstep with your humors seem to make me question that.

[VanillaRhapsody]

220. This question doesn't even deserve a response...

Are you a locomotive? How about a platypus? Are you a table or a chair?

[VanillaRhapsody]

193. by the way...was the word "comrade"

meant to be complimentary or insulting?

Now who is twisting words?

[Cleita]

203. comrade is complimentary from me but I never called you that.

[VanillaRhapsody]

207. You applauded it...along with "Internet Dictator"

was that not meant to be insulting or not?

Then you turned around and falsely accused me of using insults...


You seem to be very one sided when it comes to insults....perhaps you are one sided on other things?

[VanillaRhapsody]

197. and when did Social Democracy get confused with

Communism? They are not the same are they? Social Democrats do not call each other "comrades" for fun...

[Cleita]

201. I not against communism either like in kibbutz, communes or

monasteries, but in this Republican Democracy, we have to stop at social democracy.

[VanillaRhapsody]

205. then why did you even bring them up?

but "I" am the one twisting words!

[VanillaRhapsody]

179. actually...that is EXACTLY what you are doing....

or did you not try to paint me as "not supporting feminist issues like Planned Parenthood"?

[Cleita]

198. This is what you are doing.

You are trying to make posters look like they said something they didn't. I said go out and support Planned Parenthood. You turn it into a negative to make it look like I said you don't support Planned Parenthood. That's very disingenuous of you. You know what you are doing. Rush Limbaugh twists everything President Obama says the same way.

I can hardly wait to see how you are going to twist this around.

[VanillaRhapsody]

202. All I have said is that Men don't get a pass when it comes to women's issues...

JUST exactly like White people don't when it comes to African American Issues...or Straights when it comes to LGBT issues. I have not been swayed from that position....

No amount of YOUR twisting and accusing me of being a Conservative or "Senora Comrade" can change my words...

[Cleita]

211. Not fun is it when you get back some of your own.

[VanillaRhapsody]

213. I don't know...how is that crow you are eating taste?

I am not the one using insults...

[Cleita]

217. Ah come on.

You claimed to speak the truth and yet you don't like it when it doesn't suit you.

[VanillaRhapsody]

221. I haven't changed my position....

no amount of you twisting my words will change that....

I have stood firm on this from the beginning...there has been no change....to suit YOU or otherwise.

[VanillaRhapsody]

222. where is this "truth" you claim to have that didn't suit me?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

40. not just men. -

when you have two women telling you that you need a dick ... I think that is saying something about the website as a whole.

[VanillaRhapsody]

42. If you allow 2 women to say that...then those women SHOULD be dealt with accordingly.

there is alot of institutionalized thinking among women.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

45. I dealt with it in the only way I know how to on this Site. I do not participate or engage either

one. I manually Ignore them. One no longer posts here (or so very rarely as to be a non-issue) The other, however holds positions of power within the DU3 construct.

on edit:
These two women benefit therefore perpetrate the Patriarchal Society

[Cleita]

75. You sure have some authoritarian views for a progressive.

"...SHOULD be dealt with accordingly." and in caps? How should they be dealt with accordingly señora commandant?

[VanillaRhapsody]

77. And who are you to judge who is or isn't a "progressive"?

when did you become the "progressive police"?

[Cleita]

82. About the time you became the gender police.

[VanillaRhapsody]

87. I am a female...that gives me an inside track...on what I should or shouldn't be outraged about.

I am not African American so I don't get to dictate that to them....get it?

[Cleita]

99. Then why did you bring it up if you don't feel adequate to put

words in their mouths like you feel you have a right to for all women.

[VanillaRhapsody]

101. It's not a feeling...its knowing I don't...

I will NEVER understand what it is like for them....so I don't presume to tell they "how they should feel". I don't expect them to accept my opinions about them....to let them stand no matter how wrong.

[xulamaude]

80. "señora commandant"

Really?

[Cleita]

89. Really!

Anyone who openly states that no one should have an opinion other than the one she finds acceptable is nothing more than an internet petty dictator.

[xulamaude]

92. LOL! "internet petty dictator."

That actually did make me laugh.

[VanillaRhapsody]

127. do white people have a right to tell black people how they should feel?

without challenge?

Would that make them a "internet dictator"?

[Squinch]

46. Good God!

[Tuesday Afternoon]

48. more like good gawdamn!!

[Squinch]

55. Yes.

And I have to say: HoF gets blamed for this a lot, but I have been doing a little experiment lately. In each thread that went crazy, I went to see who was the first to throw a jab. In most, it wasn't HoF members. It was posters who like to throw a wrench into a thread, fan the flames and then say, "Look, see, there go those HoF people again!"

[Tuesday Afternoon]

58. this happened in The Lounge ... not that it excuses the behavior. Happened on or about June 2013.

[Squinch]

59. I hear about that, but I missed it.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

63. meh, I just considered the source and moved on but, sometimes it still rankles when discussions

about the Gender Issue arise because it is not really gender and this is an example of why it isn't.

[RC]

117. What I have seen in the situation you describe, is someone posting an opinion a little different

than the prevailing opinion of the group in question, and a pile on enthuses, each piler-on twisting the intent and meaning of anything the target poster posts, in an effort to find something that will stick in an alert to get the one or more of target's posts hidden. Thereby locking them out of the thread and racking up another hide, contributing to a forced vacation. One of their tactics is accusing their target of doing what they themselves are doing. Doesn't matter whether the target is guilty or not.
I have been on juries where this is obvious and have received jury results on some of my own posts, where the alert comments had nothing to do with the post in question or of anything I actually said or meant.
It is the same people doing this, over and over again. The rest of DU is getting fed up and thus the reason for this OP and thread in the first place.

It is bullying, plain and simple.

[Squinch]

120. That's nice, dear.

[RC]

133. Have any other words of wisdom?

You know, about something I have actually posted here?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

141. Squinch,

since you replied to me and RC replied to you and I was speaking about something that was said OUTRIGHT. I am really confused how it can be taken any OTHER way.

What was said to me was beyond sexist. It was gross, disgusting and belongs NO WHERE on a Democratic Message Board.

NO WHERE.

I don't care if it was in The Lounge.

What the hell kind of Democrats talk like that to each other?

[Squinch]

164. I hope

you don't think I was saying it was acceptable, in the lounge or elsewhere.

When I talked about the responses, I was discussing the overall OP subject: how the "gender wars" seem to be all being blamed on one group, when the group that is so incensed with their existence is the one who usually derails the threads.

What was said to you was not acceptable.

[sufrommich]

149. A. You have no idea who's alerting let

alone "over and over again". B. You don't actually speak for the "the rest of DU" no matter how many times you make that claim.

[RC]

167. I don't need to know.

I can read the threads certain people are in. After a while it become obvious who's doing it.

[tkmorris]

153. You DO realize the validity of such an exercise...

depends entirely upon who gets to decide what a "jab" is right?

[Squinch]

165. I invite you to try the exercise yourself going forward.

[Vashta Nerada]

70. If men can't have an opinion on those issues, then why even post them in GD?

Aren't there groups where just women can talk about women's issues, if men aren't supposed to give an opinion?

No. They're started in GD because those who start the threads want to watch them fall apart and thrive on it.

[VanillaRhapsody]

74. men should come to learn...

not dictate....Just like White people should listen to African Americans...and Straight people to the LGBT community.

None of those other groups have the right to tell them how they should feel or what they should be outraged over. They cannot no matter how they try to walk a mile in those shoes...

[Vashta Nerada]

78. Without participating in the discussion?

Doesn't that pretty much defeat the purpose of a discussion forum, especially in General Discussion?

DU has a Men's Group. Why not start a Women's Group where these issues can be discussed without the opinions of men?

[VanillaRhapsody]

84. they should listen and learn not presume to say they "know what its like"

nor tell what they should or shouldn't be "outraged about"

Do I presume to tell the LGBT community that whilst I am straight? No I don't....

[MicaelS]

135. Distilled down what you are saying is men should STFU.

And be lectured to (and I used that term deliberately) without ever replying. That is not going to happen.

[Squinch]

180. When people whose race you don't share talk about their racial experiences, do

you assume they are lecturing to you? When people whose sexual orientation you don't share talk about experiences related to their sexual orientation, do you assume they are lecturing to you?

And yet, when women talk about their experiences, why would you assume they are lecturing to you?

Believe it or not, they probably aren't even thinking about you.

[VanillaRhapsody]

182. when it comes to Women's rights issues....that they seem to think they

can tell us when to be outraged...yes...they can STFU!

[MicaelS]

194. When ANYONE tells me to STFU, that is when I stop listening.

To anything they have to say.

[Squinch]

199. How unfortunate for you.

[MicaelS]

212. No, not unfortunate at all.

Life is too short to deal with people who think one should be silenced.

[Squinch]

219. Life is too rich to insist that you can't learn from what other have to tell you about their

own experiences. The ones you don't share.

You must miss a lot.

[MicaelS]

224. So let's turn this around.

So can men tell women to be silent when it comes to issues that affect men? That women should sit down and listen and be silent when it comes to how men think and feel about certain issues? And don't try to parse the question with "What issues?"

[Squinch]

228. Asking which issues isn't parsing. It's clarifying. So, which issues?

Issues men face when dealing with sexual violence perpetrated on them, either as adults or children? I absolutely wouldn't DREAM of telling men how to feel about that. There is a whole host of issues around that that I couldn't begin to understand. I would be interested in hearing about those issues, if it were something a man wanted to share. But for me to put my two cents in about whether their feelings were valid would be, in my opinion, horribly ignorant and dismissive of them as people.

Men's feelings about their changing role in society, the reduction of their unearned advantages? Nope. I'm not going to tell anyone how to feel about that. The only thing I would say about that is that it's inevitable and whether one deals with it or not, it's happening and will continue to happen. If anger about those losses hits me, directly and personally, I will defend myself, but no. I'm not going to tell anyone how to feel about that.

So what else?

[VanillaRhapsody]

238. ^^^ THIS ^^^

[tkmorris]

161. You really think you should tell men what they should do?

Are you beginning to see the hypocrisy here?

[Squinch]

170. Do you really think you have more expertise in what it is to be a woman than a woman does?

That's not really hypocrisy. It's just common sense.

[VanillaRhapsody]

250. its also soft misogyny.

[tkmorris]

251. Did I say I did?

Of course I don't. However, neither do women know better than men what it is to be one of them. Both of those things are true and utterly beside the point.

Most of what gets discussed on these "gender wars" threads are issues that involve in some way or another both men and women, often in how one group treats the other. To get anywhere at all in such discussions it is paramount that we listen to each other, and attempt to communicate our own views with honesty while remembering that our view isn't the only possible perspective, nor is it of necessity the only correct one.

There are some though that seem to believe they have both a copyright and patent on the Truth ™ and no other point of view is acceptable. Simply saying "you don't know what it's like to be me so shut up" does not make anyone right. If it did we'd ALL be right, all the time.

[Squinch]

287. You were responding to a post that said:

with respect to women's rights issues, there are men on DU who like to tell women whether their feelings about these things are valid. Those men need to shut up.

And frankly they do.

Because, sometimes it isn't about you. I don't need to discuss this with you. Discussion isn't paramount. I don't need your agreement about certain things.

To use a DU example, "rape is never the victim's fault." That is something that needs to be clear to women and those men who have experienced or come close to rape. A lot of people jumped into the thread to say, "Yes, yes, we all agree, now stop insulting us by saying it, and stop flame baiting us by saying it. Just stop talking about it." Or my favorite, "Why does this have to be in GD!?"

Well, no.

Obviously the statement made some uncomfortable. Obviously some felt it was aimed at them and part of an "agenda," and they had had just about enough of that!

But, so what? It wasn't there for them. It was there for the others, male and female, who have been assaulted and are dealing with the aftermath. It was there for those of us who wonder how to talk to the young women we are raising. If 25% of women and who knows how many men are sexually assaulted in their lifetimes, then it simply stands to reason that some of the assaulters are here among us. It was there for them.

It doesn't require the approval of those who are always showing up and discussing what is wrong with these threads, and hijacking them to say "but for God's sakes, who will think of the men!" It isn't about those posters. If they didn't think it needed to be said, they could just move on, as many of them probably move on past cat threads, or astrology threads, or region threads.

I think at the bottom of it, some people are just unable to understand that it doesn't always have to be about them.

[1000words]

216. +1

The hypocrisy is stunning.

[xulamaude]

88. "Why not start a Women's Group where these issues can be discussed without the opinions of men?"

You don't want the world to explode, do you?!

Never, ever, never, ever going to happen. Trust me.

[Vashta Nerada]

91. Groups are protected.

I don't see why it won't work or why it can't happen.

[xulamaude]

106. Not THAT protected.

(please note that caps in the title line are in lieu of italics - thank you)

[Vashta Nerada]

109. Oh?

Aren't those who go against the SOP of a group blocked from that group?

Or am I imagining it?

[xulamaude]

114. Yes, as far as I know, those who do not

adhere to the SOP are blocked.

So what?

[Vashta Nerada]

116. There you go, sport.

[xulamaude]

121. Sport??

Anyway, do you truly believe for one minute that DU would tolerate a space wherein the SOP included a women-only clause?

[VanillaRhapsody]

128. Are African Americans expected to do the same for Whites?

LGBT for Straights?

[xulamaude]

130. I think that you are responding to the wrong person here...

I quoted out what Vatasha was arguing and was disagreeing...

[VanillaRhapsody]

132. no...

[hrmjustin]

142. The poster is gone.

MIR Team (EarlG) banned xulamaude
Mail Message
Reason:
Previously banned troll.

http://www.democraticunderground.com?com=profile&uid=309982&sub=trans

Real name:
DU Member for: 1 months, 8 days
Posts: 847
Recommendations: 110
Star member: No

[pintobean]

159. Good riddance

Thanks for the info Justin.

[hrmjustin]

191. I did not follow the poster but just wanted people to know.

[polly7]

253. Whoot!!!!

What took so long!

[hrmjustin]

255. I really did not follow vthe poster so I do n8t know.

[polly7]

256. He/she followed me with sneaky, snarky sh*.

People knew it was a retread.

[hrmjustin]

337. I saw some meber said something about someone named iverglas.

[polly7]

342. I read that too, but have no idea who this poster was formerly.

You never know!!

[Vashta Nerada]

140. Why not?

Or maybe the group can be for women and men who are interested in learning about women's issues without turning it into a flamefest? And those that do turn it that way can be booted.

[hrmjustin]

192. Poster has been banned.

[Vashta Nerada]

215. Thanks.

[VanillaRhapsody]

94. do you tell this to the LGBT community....that they should allow

the opinions of straight people that tell them what they should be outraged about?

Do you tell African Americans to get their own thread if they don't want to hear White people's opinions about their rights?

Why are women's issues different?

this is what I am calling "soft misogyny".

[LittleBlue]

190. Aaaaand I told you so- she's PPR'd

Said it two weeks ago, she's a sock puppet.

[BainsBane]

227. They knew she was a zombie from the day she signed up

That explains nothing.

[lumberjack_jeff]

150. I'm here to learn as well as teach. n/t

[Squinch]

267. Because 51% of the population is female. Do you feel that every topic that is posted on GD

needs to directly concern you?

There's a citizenship test right now on GD. Did you take it? Did you need to post your opinion on it?

There's a thing about a storm on the east coast on GD. If you don't live on the east coast, does it offend you that it's on GD? If you don't live on the east coast, and you got on that thread and said, "oh, yeah, well what about that LA traffic???" wouldn't that be obnoxious?

What makes you think you are required to give an opinion about women's rights threads? You go in there and become offended, and it's their fault for posting it?

Sometimes it isn't about you.

[Vashta Nerada]

280. Oh, so discussion forums aren't meant for discussion.

Okay. Makes sense. General Discussion is for all, is it not?

If you don't want men participating in those threads, but them in a group where men won't comment on it.

Easy enough, right?

Unless, of course, you like conflict.

[polly7]

283. Not anymore .......... since META was taken away. nt.

[Squinch]

311. If you are offended by these threads, why not just pass on by?

Leaving aside the question of why-oh-why "rape is never the victim's fault" and an Indian PSA about ogling would so incense people on DU, why not just pass by?

Here are a few of the threads on GD that are not aimed at me:

The dog poop thread. I don't care.
The Steelers refs thread. I don't follow football.
The Citizenship test. I have taken it in the past and did pretty well.
The Duck guy threads. All of them.
ACA threads, unless it is someone's good news about getting covered, which I like to read about. I'm covered at work, and not much affected.

None of those threads require my contributions. I am not angry that they are on GD, I don't feel that I am required to respond, I do not think they need to be consigned to a dark corner of DU because I am not the subject of them. I don't feel that any of them are part of an agenda or a conspiracy against me, even the ones that are covered ad nauseam here on DU.

I do not think that the people posting them need to come to some kind of agreement with me about their validity or importance.

I am grown up enough to understand that they just aren't about me. Because not everything is.

We all get it. There are people on DU who don't like the threads about women's issues. But there are men and women here who find them helpful and informative, and so they will continue.

[Vashta Nerada]

319. Good for you.

You don't care for them. Great. But you are still allowed to post in those threads.

But what VanillaRhapsody and you are saying is that men should not participate in discussions about women. If you want to exclude people from a particular conversation, then start it in a protected group where a disruptor will be blocked from the group.

[Squinch]

332. And you are allowed to post in anything you want to. But if you hate these threads so much,

why would you?

And, though you don't seem to have noticed, there are many men and women, who are not part of protected groups who constructively participate in these threads.

[Vashta Nerada]

336. I don't hate those threads.

What I do hate is that 15970807 threads started about the same topic. See: last week.

[Squinch]

338. Then pass them by.

[Vashta Nerada]

344. I will.

But if they're started in General Discussion, don't make it exclusive to a certain group of people from participating. GD is for everyone.

[lumberjack_jeff]

147. "they" "them"

I think this should serve as exhibit #1 as to the reasons behind a perceived gender war.

[Brigid]

49. I do know . . .

That I have been on jury duty several times in just the past week, and every one has been about a cyber fight in a thread about gender issues. Every one.

[Cleita]

61. Me too. n/t

[HappyMe]

64. Pretty much the same for me.

[lumberjack_jeff]

244. The trick is posting to avoid jury duty.

My jury summons are always about guns. I guess I should post on that topic more often.

[Major Hogwash]

83. Jan 6th is D-Day for GD for gender issues.

I'ma warning allaya varmints, if ya make like an ass, I'ma gonna blast yer fool heads off!!

[Tuesday Afternoon]

144. haha ... with what ...

a gun, maybe

[lumberjack_jeff]

242. Heh. +1 n/t

[hrmjustin]

85. There is a large amount of alerting on those threads.

Some things that get hidden should not and some things that don't get hidden should be.

Some people say things to see what they could get away with, and some have no consideration of others.

These threads get ugly.

[seaglass]

172. absolutely right Justin - hope all is well with you. n/t

[A-Schwarzenegger]

93. Not enough.

[PeaceNikki]

178. amen.

[pintobean]

148. Skinner on alert stalking

Response to hootinholler (Original post)

Thu Jan 2, 2014, 01:35 PM

Star Member Skinner (58,748 posts)
1. The alert stalking claim is bogus.

The number of alerts is very small, and even if they don't result in a hidden post the vast majority of them are legitimate. Certainly some people alert more than others, but we don't see anyone doing it in a manner that is abusive. Yes, some alerts are occasionally bogus, and yes sometimes people alert on other people multiple times -- I have even done so myself from time-to-time. But the system has shown itself repeatedly to be self-regulating -- juries rarely if ever hide posts that do not deserve to be hidden, and if a person sends an alert that is found to be bogus they temporarily lose their ability to alert.

The alert stalking claim persists because some people here want it to persist. They don't want to consider the possibility that their own posts were hidden because they deserved to be hidden on the merits.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12594479

[Capt. Obvious]

163. There's the proof

"The alert stalking claim persists" - all the proof we need to know that alert stalking is real.

[pintobean]

166. You make me laugh often

[winter is coming]

155. Don't know, don't care. If you want to know, why not go a little ways back in the GD archives

(far enough that threads won't pop back to the front page), choose a one-week time period, and make a count? That won't give you the drive-by trolls who have had their posts removed, but it would give stats about ongoing DUers.

[LanternWaste]

160. Although I listen to the LGBT community...

Although I listen to the LGBT community, I don't pretend to have the relevant knowledge or background to dictate, or even suggest what they may or may not be offensive.

I imagine that may be applied rather broadly, and from that broad application, valid deductions made.

[Squinch]

175. Of course. For any other group, I think all here would agree that to do anything

different would be absolutely obnoxious.

But somehow, there are those who feel that women need help to understand their own feelings.

Oy.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

176. Please stop

making sense.

[Squinch]

181. LanternWaste is like that.

Always making the damn sense.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

185. The making of the sense will only confuse many.

[Squinch]

188. As is being vividly illustrated right here in this thread.

[HockeyMom]

208. I am perfectly willing to blast my own gender

when it needs to be done, i.e, the Sara Palins, Michelle Backmans, Michelle Duggars, etc. I will even blast the patriarchal Catholic Church as a former Catholic for their dogma on women and reproductive issues. When you reach a certain age (I'm 65), you tend to get sick and tired of putting up with all the BS.

[MADem]

265. Well, I've been hitting HIDE THREAD a lot lately, but I'm guessing that isn't what you mean.

You're talking about jury hides, I am betting.

I'm just sick of the topic. I don't think that most DUers are "pro-rape" or "anti-woman" or think that abusers should walk free because they were "provoked" -- I don't know anyone who feels that way, either, out here in the real world.

I'd be interested, in a "meta" way, mind you, to know which topics result in the most trashed threads. I'll bet it ain't Cooking and Baking!

[dumbcat]

268. Interesting that a post can get 250+ replies ...

And not a single rec. I wonder what that says?

[LanternWaste]

276. A very little Little let us do, and all shall be done!

Shakespeare's Henry V: "A very little Little let us do, and all shall be done!"

[sufrommich]

284. It's Meta and a hit and run Meta at that.nt

[Purveyor]

289. Not enough if they are riding in the GD forum... eom

[In_The_Wind]

290. I haven't alerted on any post about gender issues.

[oldhippie]

317. Thanks to all for your thoughts

I'm pretty surprised by all the replies and discussion as to the question I mused about this morning. I didn't expect this amount of discussion.

Two things I find interesting:

1. As the poster dumbcat noted, there are a lot of replies with zero recs. I'm not sure what that means. Something to think about.

2. Unless I missed one, there have been no hides in this thread. I would like to think that is good, because the discussion remained civil. But I don't think it did remain civil (or at least as civil as I would prefer.) One poster in particular seems to want to dominate the discussion but not be told what to think. So I wonder if people are just burned out about alerting, or if maybe skinner's comments have caused some to think before hitting the alert button. I suppose it will not be possible to tell.

And I did not mean this topic to be meta. I had a question about how other people on the forum think about an issue. It wasn't supposed to be so much about how DU works, but how the people on DU think. I believe that is a legitimate question for General Discussion. And though there were actually very few replies to the original issue, the thread has been very illustrative of how other democrats think.

[sufrommich]

339. "one poster seems to want to dominate the discussion"

Really? One poster?

[oldhippie]

347. Yeah, ...

That's only my opinion, mind you.

[PeaceNikki]

341. There was at least one (ridiculous) alert on a post in this thread. One of mine, in fact.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

At Thu Jan 2, 2014, 12:52 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

I sure as shit hope you don't mean this one, pal.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4266284

REASON FOR ALERT:

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Should alerters be exposed this way? I don't alert much but find this violates the person's anonymity.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Jan 2, 2014, 12:59 PM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: Disruptive and rude certainly apply.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I vote to leave because I have no idea what is going on.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: PeaceNikki appears to be posting the results of an alert that she herself sent (the entire body of this post is a copy of the PM that alerters receive after the jury is completed). There's no reason why alerters shouldn't be able to expose their own identity if they choose...
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: What? Looks like PeaceNikki posted the results of an alert she sent herself. That's not violating anyone's anonymity.

I posted the results of my own alert, BTW.

[oldhippie]

354. I have no idea ....

.... what that was all about.

Dinner time.

[countryjake]

356. The absurdity in that alert is way beyond ridiculous...

Are they claiming that you cannot "violate anonymity" by posting your own alert?

Jeeze.

[PeaceNikki]

384. I have no idea.

[RainDog]

401. There was another alert

I was one of two that voted to hide the personal insult.

At Thu Jan 2, 2014, 05:32 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Holy cow you are toxic
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4267130

REASON FOR ALERT:

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

There is no excuse for posts like this. Nothing of value,just an insult thrown out there.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Jan 2, 2014, 05:47 PM, and the Jury voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Truth stings, eh?
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: A comment only meant to insult.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Another caustic discussion on gender issues... if one engages in these posts, they had better develop a thick skin. I have a difficult time finding who is the most toxic in these threads. I am for equality, fairness, compassion, and above all.. making no difference in anyone regardless of their gender and orientation. I don't understand the venom spewed in these discussions.

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

[PeaceNikki]

403. Yeah, juries are a real crapshoot in this place.

Like Skinner said, "even if they don't result in a hidden post the vast majority of them are legitimate".

That one, legit. And should have been hidden.

[sufrommich]

405. Juror #2.

I hope the admins see that one.

[PeaceNikki]

413. And Dear Juror #6: If you don't like venom, why didn't you vote to stop it?

That's why it continues, because one person 'gets away with it', so the other feels compelled to respond in kind. And it snowballs. And bleeds into other threads. Voting to hide at least stops it, if only for a moment.


I don't get it.

[sufrommich]

419. I dont get it either. I take jury duty pretty seriously

and people who vote to leave a personal insult because they agree with the insult are the lowest of the low, they might as well add "I have the emotional maturity of a 12 year old" to their comment.

[seaglass]

440. I alerted on all 3 posts that called the poster toxic - the original, ComradeGrumpy's and Polly7's

For some reason I never got the response on this one so I didn't know what the results were (other than not to hide) - so thanks for that.

There is no denying that to call someone toxic is rude. It's just not debatable.

If you saw some of the other juror comments you would come to the conclusion that there are some people posting on DU that are just plain stupid. I don't know why they participate on juries as it seems too hard for them.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

421. "Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said:

I vote to leave because I have no idea what is going on."

Whatever side anybody's on in this ancient brouhaha, if you can't laugh in your heart at that vote/comment, you might be doing yourself damage.

[PeaceNikki]

423. it's true. I often want to use that when called to adjudicate on a post in I/P.

I usually just bow out of those.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

424. And the more I click around to investigate & clarify

the more confoozled I git. I finally go back to the
alerted-on post & try to determine if it's nastier
than the nasty one to which it responded, and then
I flip a coin. Kidding, of course. To be sure, I take DU
jury duty very seriously, just as if as if I were sitting on a
real jury in real life, or was even a Supreme Court Justice
deciding the law of the land.

[PeaceNikki]

427. Thank you for your service, Justice Schwarzenegger

[A-Schwarzenegger]

428. All rise.

Court dismissed.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

455. If oldhippie were to self-delete this monster

I bet a couple people would go "WHEW!"

[PeaceNikki]

458. I know I would.

yikes.

[oldhippie]

459. Damn, I think your are right ......

I had no idea.

I still find it amazing that we have a thread with 450+ posts and not a single rec. I guess this means that this is a subject that no one likes and won't recommend other DUers see it. Isn't that strange?