insulting or calling people names you don't agree with (DU, Coulter, etc)

[The Straight Story]

We have seen it many times in many places, Coulter is just one recent addition to that.

Instead of debating someone on the issues, someone resorts to calling people names.

Folks will often times disagree with other folks - and one sure way to tell that people are not winning the debate is if they resort to name calling, making insinuations, or they just blurt out something totally irrelevant in hopes that it will distract or discredit the source (and that is a fun one, discrediting the source - when you cannot argue the position you attempt to make it seem like the other person's position is bad because they don't fit your world view).

It happens sadly on both the right and the left. It is intellectually lazy and a cop out.

I fear though that we will see much more of it in the days ahead - not just in the MSM and with candidates, but here on DU.

Personal attacks which attempt to discredit people (like we have seen with Obama for instance) versus taking on their ideals and views.

That is one thing I think which fueled the blocking of people in threads (which came and went quickly....).

Are we not mostly progressive people here (with the exception of trolls)? Sure, we can disagree on some issues, or how those issues are viewed, but I think mainly we all are on the same page.

We don't all agree on all the issues - from Religion to race, from some gay activism (act up) to Peta. We don't always agree on the methods used by those who fall under the big tent, but does that make us haters or just normal people trying to see the big picture and give advice we think is constructive?

Can we not question our own internal groups without the hate label? I smack down crazy ass christians (and I am a christian myself) as readily as I do anyone else I think that deserves it - and while I may be wrong in the eyes of some on those things (and right in the eyes of others) do we really need to result to name calling and labeling each other as haters/phobes/etc ?

I have been called everything from a sex offender to a homophobe to a nutcase who believes in fairy tales and invisible daddy's in the sky. And I am sure I am JUST as GUILTY myself of such crap. Lord knows I can do better :)

Have we, or are we, becoming like that freak coulter at times here? Where we resort to name calling because we have run out of ways to discuss things in an intelligent and civil manner? Is it easier to just blurt out something negative than to delve deeper into the issues?

I DON'T agree with everything everyone else does/says, and I am willing to discuss why. Can we do that without the labels and such? Or has it become so easy simply to call people names?

[Erika]

1. You mean like those who say I need logic 101

after they make mutiple posts perpetuating GOP myths?

Those people?

[The Straight Story]

4. I am sure we can all add examples that hit home to us :)

but, yeah. Those who just shut down discussion based on X because they don't want to address the issue(s).

And as I said, been there and done that myself. It is an easy thing to fall into.

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. Ok lets take this from step one

you accuse me of perpetuating a myth

Said myth is here http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3144250&mesg_id=3144250

Let people go there and realize that you are having a problem with me explaining that in a thread explaining how the GOP operates at times we need to explain how the GOP frames debates

Now unlike you, I did not bring this out of THAT thread until you did

Now Erika, it is logic 101, the first step in understand how somebody operates is to explain it

The GOP are Bullies and create myths, and one myth is that the Dems are weak on defense, apparently explaining how that is done, is for you perpetuating the myth

Has it occurred to you that perhaps there are people lurking who are just waking up and just now realizing HOW they operate?

Dammitall... infringing amazing

[Erika]

10. Logic 101 demands critical thinking

Do you know the term? Critical thinking should help you differentiate your position compared to those who agree or oppose your views. When you agree with those whom you are supposedly in opposition with, but disagree with those who share your supposed ideology, there are problems.

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. Yes I actually do

and I still to see the LOGIC in banning discussion of how the Right Wing frames the debate in a THREAD ABOUT HOW THEY FRAME THE DEBATE

once you can find the logic in that one, come back ok

By the way, if you confuse an explanation on how the other side frames the debate with ideology, we are having other problems, hence the communication problems

[Erika]

14. Once I can find the logic to agree with you, I can come back?

After you perpetuate right wing myths all night long? That's rich.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. Once again

Explaining how the right frames the debate in a thread discussing how the right frames the debate and why we need to answer is not perpetuating right wing talking points I know this may be hard to understand, but if we are going to ban discussions on how the enemy works, how do expect people, especially new people, to understand how they work?


Tzun tze said it best, "know thy enemy, know thyself."

By the logic you are using tonight, you would never know the enemy, or how they operate

So once again, if you confuse explanations for a belief system that is your problem, but you are also asking for people to conform to your believes that seem to come down to, it is verboten to even discuss how the other side operates, which is... bullying, creating myths and distributing myths, using media, low level operators or in the case of Coulter, high level operators... and all those elements first need to be understood, and then confronted.

The best place to explore these aspects are in threads dedicated to how they operate, which the above thread is about, or do you have a better sugsetion of where we can discuss these issues and get better at not only detecting the slurs but also answering them?

[NoodleBoy]

2. word

[Bonobo]

3. Sadly, it is still too hard to call people names, I think.

What we need is something like the "smiley" feature here on DU.

With one click of the mouse, we could say things like:

"You sound like a Freeper"

"Don't let the door hit you on the ass"

"Nader's ego put George Bush in the White House"

or the ever popular "Thanks for playing!"

[The Straight Story]

6. The freeper thing always gets me

or the 'rw talking points' and such.

if the person wants to debate, they should - if they don't, then why do they post quick flyby's like you mentioned?

I don't care if something sounds 'rw/freeperish' - if you can smack it down, do so. If not, then why pop in with a coy remark (as you pointed out so well)?

Data/facts are just that - they don't have an agenda or a party (or a religion....).

[silverojo]

7. Please, lighten up!

Has it ever occurred to you that, throughout American history, political figures are the targets of satire, ridicule, and name-calling? Going by your logic, political cartoons would no longer exist!

And when things are as bad as they are right now, it's a nice stress relief to be able to let some insults fly toward the oppressors, whether it's people like Bush or their enablers like Coulter. It's the one freedom Bush hasn't taken away from us (yet).

If I want to call Coulter a psycho she-male from hell, or call Dick Cheney a snarling, cloven-hoofed demon, that's my right. And if people want to call Bush the Chimperor, Smirking Chimp, Dim Son, or whatever, who are you (or any of the other humorless types around here) to try to stop it? Humor keeps people sane during hard times!!

Speaking of -phobes, I find a lot of people here at DU to be humorphobes: Afraid of displaying anything remotely resembling a sense of humor. And yes, name-calling IS humorous, if it's clever enough.

[The Straight Story]

8. I have a sense of humor :)

Was not talking about that ;)

[Dr.Phool]

13. Goddammit, you hit the nail on the head!

Humorphobes. I got nailed the other day for posting about Vincent Pastore, ake "Big Pussy" on "The Sopranos" dropping out of "Dancing with the stars". He couldn't handle the physical exertion required for the dance training.

I said it looks like "Big Pussy" really is a big pussy. I was nailed as the supreme misogynist over that crack.

[MADem]

23. I thought that was a bit unfair, especially since I heard the same comment on MSNBC

No thought police barged in and beat the commentator to a pulp, either.

And furthermore, why do people always ASSUME that the PUSSY word means something other than one of these?



It says more about their gutter-obsessed minds than anything else.

IMO.

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. Cute cat

very cute cat

[Maven]

41. I look forward to the oppotunity to turn your existence into a joke.

There's nothing humorous about bigoted slurs unless you're a) an overgrown South Park devotee who thinks you're such a fuckin' cultural rebel because you can act like a rude prick, or b) a bigot yourself.

[LostinVA]

42. Beat me to it by one minute

[bicentennial_baby]

45. It's your right to be spew transphobic crap?

"If I want to call Coulter a psycho she-male from hell...that's my right"

And here I though bigoted speech was disallowed on DU...Oh that's right, you got deleted for doing the exact same thing the other day...

[sniffa]

46. if it's one thing i Lack, it's humor

[Dr.Phool]

9. The Thought Police have been running rampant lately.

In the last week, I've been branded as a homophobe and a misogynist. Anyone who knows me will testify in my defense, but I will cop to being a smart ass, and having a warped sense of humor.

In 4 years of posting on DU, and probably a year of just reading, without posting, I've never put someone on ignore, but I'm getting very tempted.

When knowledge becomes dogma, we all suffer from a lack of communication.

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. I have one person on ignore

and he\she worked for it

The other two were toobstoned

;-)

I think yuo and I have been posting just as long and you are right, the though police is getting bad

[Dr.Phool]

15. Thanks,

Because I was really getting pissed this week. I'm gonna start calling them on their dogma. They reinforce conservative caricatures of liberals.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. Yes they do....

And this week it has been funny... it it wasn't tragic

[Erika]

18. When GOP myths are perpetuated by DU'ers, it is indeed sad

Someone has to stand up to the pathetic GOP.

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. You are ON A ROLL today

tonight, what have you

[Erika]

20. Because I can't buy some of your perpetuation of GOP myths?

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. What part of

discussing these myths in threads where they are discussed is part of knowing the you are purposely missing I don't get

What I do get is that trying to ban discussion just because it makes you uncomfortable is quite authoritarian, regardless of flavor. This is the kind of NON Debate those who are nervous about their ideology engage in, and it is also the kind of lock step discipline needed in any authoritarian movement.

Draw any conclusions you wish from the above.

Who knows you may want to ban me answering you... I know I would not do that, but hey, that is what many authoritarians would do, and they exist in both the right and the left.

Oh I forgot, you will probably say that is also a GOP talking point, so I will save it for you... they would call it STALINISM.

(Know thy enemy... know thyself)

[Erika]

22. banning discussion is not anything I ever considered

or even discussed. Are you projecting?

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. Nah that is what your whole tone reflects Eirka

you may want to reread your posts... ALL OF THEM

[Erika]

25. No. I suggest you read them

Don't do your projecting on me.

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. you are the one accusing people of

engaging in discussion of how the right wing operates of embracing\repeating their talking points

So sorry, you are the one projecting, and you have yet to answer how do you expect to have these discussions on a political board no less?

You also brought this discussion outside that particular thread.

So no Erika, you are the one trying to impose your view, and your view is any discussion on how the right operates is verboten, or at least that is how your posts read.

Now we can continue all night... I have time...

;-)

And I have yet to accuse you of doing things that I know you are not doing, yet you accuse me of dong things I am NOT doing... but apparently I am by engaging in a discussion you seem to find repulsive in a thread dedicated to a discussion of that subject, i a political board no less.

So where exactly do you want people to discuss how the right frames the debate? I want an answer? A LOGICAL one.

[cgrindley]

29. Is Erika suggesting

that a leftwing "thought police" is a GOP myth?

[Bluebear]

52. How did you move from Canada go?

Are you settling into Connecticut nicely?

[trumad]

32. A smart ass, with a warped sense of humor

is a dying breed here on DU. Anyone who has bothered to read my rants on DU since 2001 know that I'm one of the most obnoxious smart asses on DU and I have a hyper warped sense of humor.

That trait of mine is slowly dying because it offends more than naught. My dear Friends who have been with me since 2001, know me well enough to get where I'm coming from. It's those who don't who raise the red flags. This in my mind is a small touch of censorship but not serious enough (yet) to keep me from posting here.

MHO

[nadinbrzezinski]

34. Well I for one apreciate your posts

but hey, I also have a very warped sense of humor

;-)

[trumad]

36. Thanks...

BTW: You spelled apreciate wrong...;-)

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. Yeah I know

you'd be amazed at how many words I cannot spell...

;-)

On a serious note the spell flames used to bother me.. these days they are part of the course

;-)

Damn English as a third language, actually American as a fourth language.

[GreenZoneLT]

28. Oh, shaddup, you long-winded wuss!

;)

[B Calm]

30. It is hard not to when the cons are having sex with animals, little children.

and gay prostitutes. After a couple weeks of rehab & presto they're cured. But... maybe you are right..

[bigtree]

31. "I can do better"

there's the key. We can all do better.

[SemperEadem]

33. sometimes I find it amazing how people get upset at this

when culture has been tacking in this direction since Reagan took office. It started with the Angry White Male and that has oozed into what's seen on TV, what's read on the internet--everywhere you go, being (and feeling justified in being) vulgar, combattive, angry, venomous is de rigueur.

What are the top rated shows? American Idol, where one man says nasty things to contestants and people viewing love that shit. Flava of Love/I Love New York--where young people basically debase and degrade themselves while whoring for TV time and a potential 'prize' of being with some knucklehead. :wtf: MTV--Real World/Road Rules--hires despicable twenty-somethings to create more drama than is ever necessary just to get viewership. Daytime talk shows put vulgar behavior on stage and gave it decent lighting to make it look attractive. It also got the ratings. Why? Because people watched.

So now, society has basically grown callous as a result, so in order to get attention, one has to go further in their vulgarity and nastiness to get attention... and it's like driving by a car wreck and being facinated at that carnage which was created, but not being able to help yourself for looking. When people stop validating vulgarity, these types of entertainment will vanish like the big studio movie musical or the variety show.

The thing that bothers me are the children who grow up on a diet of this bullshit who then go into careers in the entertainment industry and bring that vulgarity they've been inculcated in to their job and sink the quality of entertainment even further than it's gone already.

[UTUSN]

35. Yes, it happens here, but human nature is bigger than just "intelligence & civility"

As much as I am also spooked when I'm flamed, *I* don't bother with "intelligent/civil" arguments when dealing with THE ENEMY (wingnuts): I call them names.

As for HERE, I've been called: Freeper, DLCer, corporate tool, homophobe, Catholic-phobe, Irish-phobe, Hispanic-phobe, obese-ophobe, and more.

I suspect the name callers are YOUNG (oops, I just name-called).

They are definitely ideologues of their home group/constituency.

Their tactics:

* They mobilize their co-hornets for the flaming attack.

* Nitpick words, concepts with blitzkrieg.

* Demand links---even when the poster is expressing OPINIONS.

* When the links are provided (from Google), they DENIGRATE the sources as being Freepers/corporate tools/DLCer, etc.

* Scorched earth (like LIMBOsevic) - You're either FOR them or AGAINST them.

[Obamarama]

37. Self Delete

[Beausoir]

39. I like your style. Edit: Now you made me have to delete mine!

But I did like what you wrote.

:thumbsup:

[Obamarama]

40. Well, I relaized I made a glaring (if not funny) error in my response!

I breezed through the opening post of the thread, so quickly that I thought the OP was up in arms at people calling Coulter names. When I went back and re-read it - but not before I posted - I realized the OP was talking about calling EACH OTHER nasty names, here on DU. On that point, I sort of agree with the OP.

Anyway, I didn't want to sound like a complete boob, so I deleted it.

[Maven]

43. What exactly is your beef with ACT-UP?

What did YOU do during the burgeoning of the AIDS crisis in America? What awareness did YOU raise while hundreds of thousands of gay men were dying in silence in this country, and the political establishment wouldn't even ACKNOWLEDGE WE EXISTED?

[The Straight Story]

44. Um - It was not a problem or issue I have with them

But some in the gay rights' movement did back in the day, which went with my flow that not everyone, even within the same group, always agree.

[Maven]

48. No, because this isn't the first time you've brought this up.

And who are these "some," by the way? Andrew Sullivan?

[The Straight Story]

50. So you are saying there was no one in the community

that took issue with how act-up did things?

Hell, we have people here on DU and across the liberal blogosphere who disagree with methods of other liberals. What is wrong with noting the fact that we don't all always approve of how people do or say things (like you are disagreeing with me)?

I don't think christians/buddhists/islamic folks all agree with the methods or marketing their people do, that does not mean anything bad - it is simply a truthful observation. Why be afraid of criticism? We don't all agree on everything that other liberals do or how, it is that simple. If that makes you uncomfortable i don't know what to say.

I'll try never mentioning the words gay, act-up, etc ever again so as not to get people all in a huff, i will stick to criticizing all other groups when I disagree with them.

[Maven]

53. I was referring to your criticism in the past

You've called the movement "divisive" and criticized their methods without indicating what you might have done (and didn't do) to shake people out of their apathy about "social undesirables" who were dropping dead by the thousands.

If you had an alternative plan, and the will to put it into action, then I would welcome your criticism. But not many people at that time were ready and willing to address the problem. ACT-UP was a proportionate response to a moral outrage, and we'll never know how many lives it ultimately saved.

That's why ACT-UP is now viewed as a model of success not only within the sphere of GLBT activism, but within the entire field of new social movements. I invite you to read "The Art of Moral Protest" (James Jasper), which contextualizes ACT-UP within that larger framework of progress.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

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

[Bluebear]

51. Dang

My thread says
ignored
ignored
ignored
ignored

[sniffa]

56. i have some of that

but now i see deLeted message. :eyes:

[Joanne98]

54. No! I don't have an Adam's apple!

:)

[Warren Stupidity]

55. We should avoid calling each other names.

In fact the rules more or less forbid that. However if you want me to stop calling those reptilian scum sucking morans over in the Republik party names: fuck that shit.

We need to tar and feather their asses until the very idea of representing the Republik Party is a national joke.

[Duncan Grant]

57. I'm not giving anyone here a pass on gay rights issues.

Some may piss and moan that they're being called 'homophobic' when their own ignorance is being illuminated. Others may think they have license to be rude and condescending, but they don't. The rules regarding these issues are clearly defined by the administrators of DU.

If anyone here thinks that GLBT people can be intimidated into silence in order for "the majority" to make rude, ignorant or insensitive remarks, think again. We aren't the delicate little flowers you may think us to be. So knock it off with the faux indignation about "right-wing thought control" and all the other ridiculous rationalizations and justifications used to soothe imaginary injuries to one's "right to be offensive".

The respectful exchange of ideas should be the only issue here. Imagine how much better it will be when we can all admit when we're wrong and then move forward -- like real progressives.

[sniffa]

58. ...

:applause:

[JackBeck]

59. ...

:thumbsup:

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

60. EXCELLENT POST.

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

[Morgana LaFey]

65. And I feel the same way about women's issues and racism

as well as GLBT issues -- and I would invite you to join the efforts against theses joined-at-the-hip issues as well. They are all related, esp. gay / women's issues because without misogyny (the hatred and fear of women), there would BE no homophobia. Homophobia is intended to keep men and women in narrowly defined sex and gender roles. We jointly need to work towards the time when it's not an INSULT to refer to some male as a sissy (or worse), and it's not an INSULT to call a woman "mannish" (or worse). But that requires addressing and routing out the underlying misogyny -- which is rampant at DU (as is homophobia AND racism, I'm sorry to say).

Can we count on your participation?

[Duncan Grant]

66. Yes, they are all related.

I'd be happy to publicly oppose racist and sexist threads -- and do! I couldn't agree with you more that the roots of homophobia are found in misogyny. Add me to your buddy list and PM me whenever there's a racist or sexist thread -- I'd love to have those threads brought to my attention. :hi:

[Morgana LaFey]

70. Done.

Thanks!

:hi:

[omega minimo]

71. a little cognitive dissonance

your post is praised at one level and below that, praised in another that points out common cause--

yet on DU the two are still sometimes separate. sometimes those who champion gay rights-- and believe what you are saying in principle-- misunderstand or attack women's rights threads.

[omega minimo]

69. that attitude extended to solidarity with women's issues would be a vey good idea

:thumbsup:

[Jamastiene]

61. Easier said than done.

If you stop insulting people, I'm sure people will stop insulting you back. It goes back to the ever-so-simple golden rule.

[omega minimo]

62. "Are we not mostly progressive people here (with the exception of trolls)?"

Doesn't seem like it. Maybe the question "Are we not mostly Democrats here (with the exception of trolls)?" "Progressive" is a different subset. The few jerks on DU are definitely not "progressive."

They attack what they don't understand. They're belligerent and proud of their ignorance, defiantly breaking DU Rules in attacking and stalking people around the place. The fact they think they can get away with it says something about the larger society, the ignorance and belligerence that has become "normal."

Definitely not "progressive."

[barbtries]

63. i only call names

when i'm talking about the bushies - the motherfucking warmongering greedy soulless BASTARDS.

i outgrew calling names on the playground when i was about, jeez, 6? 7? all of your observations regarding the destructiveness and rudeness and immaturity are well taken. happy to say i have yet to get involved in such an exchange.

though i have to say the OCT'rs on the 911 board are awfully touchy, aren't they? how do i make a tongue in cheek emoticona? thanks

[NMMNG]

64. Let's see

People bandy about labels like f***ot, d**e, "Mann Coulter", etc. and continuously associate GLBT with evil by asking "Do you think (insert name of loathed person here) is GLBT?"

Then when GLBT people or their supporters rightfully get irritated there is a response of Gee, stop being oversensitive. You have no sense of humor. :wtf: is your problem?



But the moment anybody here says anything the LEAST bit critical of Christianity, or questions it in any way it's adherents and supporters will speak out. Shall we claim Christians on DU are "humorphobes", oversensitive or "Christian Police" who swarm in like rabid PC mongers?



What ever happened to Do unto others , et. al. ?

[sniffa]

67. ...

:loveya:

[pampango]

68. Reminds me of a poster a few weeks ago who was commenting

on RW intolerance and said "I am intolerant of people who are intolerant." I wasn't sure if he/she was being self-deprecating or didn't realize the irony of doing the thing that he was condemning someone else for doing.

Of course the poster's intent may well have been that he/she couldn't stand RW intolerance, but it was the phrasing that made the comment memorable.