SOME Canary In SOME Coalmine

[omega minimo]

The first week of March, DU was agitated by the South Dickota legislature's vote to send a woman-hating test case to the newly minted Bushco Supreme Court. Threads on abortion rights-- which (MANY) DU men love to discuss endlessly expressing how they feel about it without finally accepting that the basic issue is the rights of women-- fueled gender wars that were blazing on International Women’s Day. Suddenly the board was filled with how (SOME) men felt about the way that (SOME) women talk about issues on this board, with references to (SOME) men and malecentric control/power that (SOME) men insist on taking personally-- again placing their “feelings” ahead of the actual issue of women’s rights.

The conflict got so ugly and redundantly ridiculous, we all seem to have learned something from it. The conflagration last week brought out the best and worst in all of us. It tested our limits of how far we will go-- not further apart depending on which “side” we are on-- but how far we will go to reach across the debate divide. Many of us-- including habitual adversaries-- recognized that we have to honestly address the wedge issues and cooperate.

The big lesson relearned this week is that anger/defensiveness (based in fear) is the only emotion some (SOME) men feel comfortable openly expressing. They HATE it when we say "it's all about YOU isn't it?" and then they prove it over and over and over-- it has to be on their terms, under their sanction-- and they REALLY hate when we laugh at them for proving it! :rofl:

One tried to "apologize" for his "part" in the ugliness that consumed DU on International Women's Day (after the fact). He tried to equate "bristling" at "broad brush strokes" "against" men with "reacting to "slurs" "directed at women"........................ which of course is not the same at all. I suggested people need to Listen before they Bristle.

One tried to rationalize the objections (once again focusing on how (SOME) males feel about how a discussion is conducted) by saying that women must continuously use qualifiers (preferably “SOME”) or else (SOME) men will be offended. The truth is that the reader has to take SOME responsibility for reading in context and giving the benefit of the doubt to the writer-- before a kneejerk and/or hostile response. If I open a thread on males working against male dominance, I am not going to expect every poster to put a “some” before every reference to males or malecentric power structures. (The fact that the articles referenced in the OP were BY men made the obstructionist tactics particularly unreasonable).

IT also seemed that (SOME) women could express more carefully, esp. given the evident level of (SOME) male paranoia........ yet in specific threads where comments are entirely appropriate and unsurprising, provided one has the confidence to read in context, there is immediate obfuscation and pedantry, pompous projections-- or just plain tantrums-- and insistence on ALL attention NOW being shifted to assuaging the wounded egos (see how that works? again and again and again..... :boring: )

As long as we behave and don't color outside the lines, we will be tolerated-- as soon as we stretch out, we are smacked back and all the tactics used against us are fair (mind) game in a reversal that would do an abuser proud. Then there are the psycho-intellectual mindfuckers who --when the invitation to play TopDog ShellGame is rejected --drop back and resort to "but please tell me what I've DOOOOoooone" Too many are gonna fall for those games. :evilfrown:

And yet it seems there are some glimmers of understanding peeking thru last week's muck.

There are new, excellent voices here; there are males speaking up, sharing their experiences and having intentionally respectful, calm discussions with women. There are new female voices presenting fresh ideas and perspectives. And there are many women who have already given up and gone away. At some point, the :banghead: is simply not worth the trouble; if women are disrespected, there is little point in discussing other issues.

The issue of women’s rights is fundamental to every other single issue. If DU ever got past the pattycake level of arguing about the same things over and over and over, we could discuss what those issues really are and how they are all interconnected.

The reason I cared enough to think it was important to try, is this: Women are the canaries in the coal mine. If we aren't treated right, the whole crew chokes on ignorance. This means DU and it means the efforts toward broader goals we are supposedly here to address-- the future of the Democratic Party, the nation and beyond.

:hi: :patriot: Good night and good luck!

[niyad]

1. I clearly missed a good 95 % of those threads, but this is a most

excellent post, and thank you for sharing it. (I was busy trying to educated the trolls on my own boards, a difficult job in the best of times)

[omega minimo]

3. Hi niyad, I was intrigued by your

Saturn Return answer on a (abortion) troll thread here................... were you serious, SOMEway SOMEhow? :evilgrin: I know I was a different person after mine.......................

My answer was: "When they stop voting Republican!!!!!1"

[rodeodance]

2. thanks

[omega minimo]

4. Here's to DU

:toast:

[bloom]

5. hi

I've been too sick to post - so I don't know what happened after all that last Wed. I think I posted a couple things on Thurs. At times as my headaches and pains wafted in and out - I considered various responses I could have been making. And wondering at the same time if it was worth my sanity bothering to post here at all.

So I show up today and there is this thread:

Worst sticker on a vehicle ever *sexist*

and this seems to be a typical (manly) response:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x641961#642660

"Either you believe in free speech or you don't...... and EVERYONE is pretty tired of the "it's bad for little Johnny" argument....

Really, there is a war going on, people are being tortued, people are homeless because of hurricanes, people are without health insurance, etc. etc...."


I was happy to see as many people speak out against the whole thing as did...
---------

I do see it as a Libertarian/selfish/"men need not bother to care" and "free speech is the most important thing in life" mindset that is the problem. I see it as anti-progressive and the even the opposite of progressive.

I see it as that there are the "Strict Father" Republicans who are against women's equality because it interferes with men's rule (some of whom are also libertarians).

And I see the Libertarians - esp. of the left persuasion - who seem to have this attitude that hating women is part of the game, is part of their rights. It's in the music. It's in the culture (esp. porn culture). They are part of the culture. So it's part of them and if we say that it's bad then WE are bad.

----

I missed the men who were speaking up for the most part. I know there are men out there that do - and that is nice to know that not all men suck. Just some of them.

Sometimes I honestly wonder if the men-who-hate-women phenomena is part of natural depopulation event. It sure seems like it's meant to drive women away. Who needs it?

[omega minimo]

6. I'm not so sure it's "manly"

Seems rather juvenile.

Also, equating "free speech" with "porn" is certainly short-sighted.

One thing the Mohammed cartoon controversy showed was that SOME think "free speech" = the "freedom to offend" rather than the "freedom to respect."

You're right-- there's a lot more going on...... maybe that's why folks would rather defend tacky bumperstickers than think about getting on a watch list or fired for an AAR bumpersticker or a Kerry sticker.

"And I see the Libertarians - esp. of the left persuasion - who seem to have this attitude that hating women is part of the game, is part of their rights. It's in the music. It's in the culture (esp. porn culture). They are part of the culture. So it's part of them and if we say that it's bad then WE are bad.

"Sometimes I honestly wonder if the men-who-hate-women phenomena is part of natural depopulation event. It sure seems like it's meant to drive women away. Who needs it?"

So rather than think about bigger issues it's safer to "fight" for the right to be misogynist-- still "okay" with discriminating against females.

[bloom]

7. Thoughts on juveniles

It was interesting with the bumpersticker discussion how this act by an adult man - which seemed more typical of a middle schooler - and which esp. affected middle schoolers was being championed by these guys online (who could be middle-schoolers for all I know.

But lets assume that some of the posters are adult men. Some of whom made arguments such as - "so these kids go home and turn on MTV - so what's the difference". And there you go. People defend misogyny because some millionaire hip-hop artist gets paid to act like a woman-hating 13 year old. And why should people who aren't celebrities presume to know better?

Money has always equaled status and authority. So now we have kids and adults assuming that misogynist celebrities should be emulated. How dare we - esp. those of us who are the focus of their celebrities scorn - say otherwise.

It does seem like the world is being run by 13 year old boys. Or people who wish to emulate them. And respect is not a priority.

----------

Where I live - women are more respected - at least what one hears out in the open. You never know what sort of juveniles men turn into when they are in their own little groups... This "in your face" thing seems analogous to BushCo and torture being out in the open. It's a whole different thing when disrespect and oppressive tactics are out in the open - as if the offenders have no reason to care or to pretend they care.

If anything - women are too nice. Put up with too much crap.

[omega minimo]

8. Sometimes those "what's the difference" responses are playing

Devil's Advocate to deflect the discussion-- and sometimes maybe people don't see the bigger picture.

On a porn thread (enormous, of course) I asked the question if it was possible to view porn and also be aware of objectification and the effects it has on people and society. You have already pointed out the type of response.

"Also, isn't all entertainment in some way an objectification?

"How about Fear Factor. The contenstants are made to do all sorts of humiliating "feats" for money. And that is on in a time slot where kids are watching. If you think that watching porn makes you want to try what you see on the screen in real life, then what about 13yo boys watching people eat bugs, being handcuffed under water, etc?

"Or The Real World. We get to spy on every aspect of the roomates lives. Are they not being objectified and their joy and pain put on the screen for our voyeristic pleasure?

"I could go on and on here, but really when you step back, almost all of our entertainment consists of someone being objectified for our pleasure. TV is inherently voyeristic."

This is interesting, because for one thing, the shows where "contenstants are made to do all sorts of humiliating "feats" for money" and "we get to spy on every aspect of the roomates lives" are pretty recent. The fact that "reality" show voyeurism, humiliation, degradation is now considered entertainment, then becomes a rationale in support of pornography?

It's an example of how much education is needed and how stunted these sorts of discussions (arguments) are here. The "yeah, BUT" approach is --well, it's limited. More degradation, desensitization, dehumanization leads to more of the same. Used to rationalize more of the same. :crazy:

[femrap]

9. 'women are too nice.' You can say that again....

I attended a 'Goddess' class last year and the first thing the teacher said was...'nice is bad.'

I see the world around me becoming a lot meaner against women....the 'c' word being said in public just like 'bitch' and 'ho.' The porn industry is making it all OK to treat women like dirt. I don't think most women realize what it is doing to young males. And of course, if I raise the subject, everyone gets all defensive and says: 'Well, my son would never......' Lots of denial out there.