Are you a misogynist? Taking the test.

[Laelth]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Raffi Ella (a host of the General Discussion forum).

A recent DU thread, HERE, contains some very helpful hints about how to avoid the appearance of misogyny on DU. It's useful to know what opinions we may hold that may be deemed misogynistic, and, toward that end, the OP linked to above provides a good list of possible opinions that demonstrate clear misogyny to our DU feminist allies. Because I admire and appreciate these allies, I felt the need to take this test and determine my own misogyny quotient.

Here's the test (if you want to take it) to see how much of a misogynist you are:

1. Insisting the SCOTUS Hobby Lobby decision isn't a big deal
2. Insisting men should have the right to compel a woman to abort a fetus
3. Insisting a man's having to pay child support equates with the state's efforts to prohibit abortion
4. Insisting men are more oppressed than women
5. Adopting the GOP idea of forcible rape vs. other rape and insisting the later (usually child rape) is less serious.
6. Insisting that large numbers of women invent false rape charges
7. Insisting rapists should not be punished with jail time
8. Frequently taking the side of accused rapists over their victims
9. Insisting women's issues and feminism aren't important and don't constitute real politics
10. Insisting women who object to rape porn or prostitution are uptight right-wingers
11. Calling feminists prudes and Puritans
12. the sex-negative label
13. Calling women c...t and b....s
14. A whole slew of derogatory or sexualized comments about women's bodies
15. Portraying a view of women that makes it clear someone sees their only purpose as to provide them sex
16. anti-choice positions
17. opposing ACA's covering of women's reproductive care
18. blaming women for their own sexual assaults
19. arguing that violence against women isn't important
20. arguing that rape isn't a societal problem
21. Insisting a misogynistic mass murderer had real concerns about how bad off men have it today
22. denying sexism and misogyny
23. arguing that women in the US should be content with what they have
24. Citing a study held out by an MRA big-wig that claims women say no when they really mean yes
25. Insisting consent is "elastic"
26. Insisting that consent is assumed.
27. Insisting there is no such thing as male privilege
28. Men telling women they aren't real feminists because they disagree with them on an issue like porn or prostitution.

Here are my results:

1. Insisting the SCOTUS Hobby Lobby decision isn't a big deal
Hobby Lobby is a big deal, and I dislike the ruling for myriad reasons--mainly for the increased power it gives corporations to avoid the law. Corporations are legal fictions, and, by definition, they can not have "religious beliefs" that supersede the law. This was a bad ruling, but, because it was 5-4, I suspect it can be overturned relatively quickly.
GOOD--you are a tolerable human being and do not require "educating" on this topic.

2. Insisting men should have the right to compel a woman to abort a fetus
I accept that, as a man, I may be required to pay child support for a child I did not want, but I recognize that I have no rights whatsoever to any fetus and that a woman should have the absolute and unconditional right to abort any fetus she does not wish to carry to term. This may seem unfair to some people, but I can live with it. I'm not the one risking my life and my future by having an unwanted baby. This is what I would call an "advantage" that women have over men, and I'm fine with that. Men have some advantages. Women have some advantages.
GOOD--you are a tolerable human being and do not require "educating" on this topic.

3. Insisting a man's having to pay child support equates with the state's efforts to prohibit abortion
No. Those are not the same things at all, and I accept that. I will always and unconditionally protect the right of a person to have complete medical confidence with their doctors and to have complete control over medical decisions--including the decision to have an abortion.
GOOD--you are a tolerable human being and do not require "educating" on this topic.

4. Insisting men are more oppressed than women
I'm not sure about the word "oppressed," as I don't think that's what's at issue here. I think we can all agree that it's just hard to be a human being, especially in the United States in 2014, but my experience of the state of our society leads me to the conclusion that it's harder to be a man. If you look at incarceration rates, life expectancy, homelessness rates, on-the-job injury rates (and just about every other social statistic you can imagine), you'll see that this society is rougher on men than it is on women. If our feminist allies would just acknowledge that it's really hard to be a man in this world, lines of communication might be more open, but few (on DU, at least) are willing to do so.
BAD--you are a misogynist.

5. Adopting the GOP idea of forcible rape vs. other rape and insisting the later (usually child rape) is less serious.
Rape is rape, and rape is wrong. I make no distinction between "types" of rapes, and I take rape, like all other bodily injuries, very seriously.
GOOD--you are a tolerable human being and do not require "educating" on this topic.

6. Insisting that large numbers of women invent false rape charges
Did you ever read To Kill a Mockingbird? False rape charges do happen, and they can have disastrous effects on innocent men. That said, I have no idea how often this occurs. I am willing to give women the benefit of the doubt on this question, however, as I know it's very difficult to report a rape. I know that women are mercilessly attacked (from various quarters) when they do report a rape. My gut tells me to believe the woman in such situations, but it's also true that false rape charges occur. How often I do not know.
ADEQUATE AT BEST--you may or may not be a misogynist based upon your response.

7. Insisting rapists should not be punished with jail time
Huh? Nobody I know insists that rapists should not go to prison (much less jail). Rapists should be imprisoned--all of them. Of course, imprisonment leads to a lot of people getting raped (in prison, of course), but I still think rapists should go to prison.
GOOD--you are a tolerable human being and do not require "educating" on this topic.

8. Frequently taking the side of accused rapists over their victims
My experience leads me to believe that the accuser is probably the more trustworthy witness (because the social pressure to not report a rape is immense). Thus, I tend to believe the accuser (while noting that false reports of rape do happen).
ADEQUATE AT BEST--you may or may not be a misogynist based upon your response.

9. Insisting women's issues and feminism aren't important and don't constitute real politics
Gender issues, imo, are the most important things that human beings discuss. Gender issues affect all of us. They are essential to our civilization. I would never dismiss gender issues. That, in fact, is why I posted this thread--because I consider this conversation essential.
GOOD--you are a tolerable human being and do not require "educating" on this topic.

10. Insisting women who object to rape porn or prostitution are uptight right-wingers
Porn is ubiquitous. Prostitution is ubiquitous. It seems to me that these things have always been ubiquitous and always will be. That said, I don't think that the people who object to rape porn and prostitution are uptight right-wingers. Quite the contrary--I assume they are decent, reasonable people who want to make the world a better place. I may also think that they are misguided and are beating their heads against a brick wall that will never fall, but I don't think the people making such arguments are uptight right-wingers.
ADEQUATE AT BEST--you may or may not be a misogynist based upon your response.

11. Calling feminists prudes and Puritans
In all fairness, the entire United States is prudish and Puritanical from my perspective, and we should not be surprised to find that many American feminists are prudish and Puritanical as well, but I don't think that either prudishness or Puritanism is what motivates our feminist allies. They seek a better world--for all people and not just women. I have never, as far as I can recall, responded to an argument by calling my verbal opponent either prudish or Puritanical.
GOOD--you are a tolerable human being and do not require "educating" on this topic.

12. the sex-negative label
I have to admit that I am susceptible to the feeling that some feminists are sex-negative. That said, my belief is that the vast majority of us are sex-positive. Sex is good. It's healthy. It's loving. It's intense touch that we all need. I find it difficult to believe that many feminists are sex negative, but I also know a few women who are, in fact, sex-negative. It happens. None of the people I know to be feminists are sex-negative, however, so while I might assume that some feminists are sex-negative, that judgment does not apply to the feminists that I know. As such, I have never leveled that rhetorical attack against anyone.
GOOD--you are a tolerable human being and do not require "educating" on this topic.

13. Calling women c...t and b....s
I don't use the C word. Never. I admit that I have, quite recently, in fact, used the B word (in private conversation, but never in public). I concede that neither word is acceptable in our discourse, and I certainly understand the objections that my feminist allies have to the use of these words.
ADEQUATE AT BEST--you may or may not be a misogynist based upon your response.

14. A whole slew of derogatory or sexualized comments about women's bodies
Personally, I adore women's bodies. I am biologically programmed to see them, appreciate them, and desire them. I keep this truth about myself hidden, most of the time, because I fear the repercussions of making an admission of this kind. I refrain from commenting on specific women's bodies (here and elsewhere) because I have been regularly reminded that it's not OK to express my very real and very human instincts.
ADEQUATE AT BEST--you may or may not be a misogynist based upon your response.

[font size=1]Internal note: Isn't it strange that I can profess to adore women's bodies, yet, at the same time, I suspect I will be judged as being a misogynist for doing so?[/font]

15. Portraying a view of women that makes it clear someone sees their only purpose as to provide them sex
I am unsure about what this test question is really asking. I have little doubt, however, that most men want sex. I'd go so far as to say that most people want sex, and most of us seek it from the opposite sex. None of us is dumb enough to believe that the only value of the opposite sex is that sex's ability to provide us with sex, yet I fear that I fail on this question because I admit that I do want to have sex--with a woman. There are many other things that I value about Mrs. Laelth, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't particularly value her ability and willingness to satisfy my very human need for sex. I am not really sure how to grade myself on this question, but I will assume that I failed.
BAD--you are a misogynist.

16. anti-choice positions
You'll see none of that from me. As I noted above, medical decisions should be the complete prerogative of a doctor and his or her patient. I have never advocated denying a woman's right (or a man's right) to control what medical procedures are performed on their respective bodies.
GOOD--you are a tolerable human being and do not require "educating" on this topic.

17. opposing ACA's covering of women's reproductive care
No. I am quite glad that the ACA covers reproductive care for women.
GOOD--you are a tolerable human being and do not require "educating" on this topic.

18. blaming women for their own sexual assaults
As far as I can recall, I have never done this, nor do I think there are many occasions upon which it might be just to do so.
ADEQUATE AT BEST--you may or may not be a misogynist based upon your response.

19. arguing that violence against women isn't important
I firmly believe that violence against other humans is bad and that it's an important issue for us to discuss. The absolute fact that men are vastly more likely to be the victims of violence seems to escape some of my feminist allies, but I will firmly state that this is a very important issue--for all of us.
ADEQUATE AT BEST--you may or may not be a misogynist based upon your response.

20. arguing that rape isn't a societal problem
Rape is a societal problem. It may also be a genetic problem. It may be inherent to the human race. I simply do not know, but I firmly believe that rape is a problem. I note that rape is an enormous problem in our prison-industrial complex, and that in that environment, most of the victims are men, but I would never deny that rape is a serious societal problem.
ADEQUATE AT BEST--you may or may not be a misogynist based upon your response.

21. Insisting a misogynistic mass murderer had real concerns about how bad off men have it today
Men are struggling in this day and age. I might even go so far as to suggest that men are "bad off," from what I can tell, but that certainly doesn't excuse the behavior of any misogynistic mass murderer. The problem I have with this test question is that it assumes that anyone who notes the plight of men is automatically deemed a misogynist.
BAD--you are a misogynist.

22. denying sexism and misogyny
No. Sexism is real, and misogyny is real. On the other hand, I have this sense that men who "hate" women really "hate" themselves--they hate the fact that they desire and need women. They don't "hate" women, per se. Quite the contrary. They love and desire women. What they "hate" is their own biological code that compels them to want and desire women. I think it's self-loathing, mostly. That said, I suspect that my expressed opinion here indicates a lack of "understanding" of this problem, so I fail on this test question.
BAD--you are a misogynist.

23. arguing that women in the US should be content with what they have
No. I expect everyone to advocate for their own interests. I have no problem with women who advocate for their interests and the interests of their peers.
GOOD--you are a tolerable human being and do not require "educating" on this topic.

24. Citing a study held out by an MRA big-wig that claims women say no when they really mean yes
I am not familiar with the study (or studies) in question, but, on the issue of sex, only the densest among us would argue that a "no" sometimes means "yes." Even if that were true, and, in some circumstances I suspect it is true, it's stupid to risk one's freedom and livelihood with uncertainty, and I have to take a "no" to mean "no" regardless of the speaker's actual intentions. This seems prudent to me.
ADEQUATE AT BEST--you may or may not be a misogynist based upon your response.

25. Insisting consent is "elastic"
Here, I fail entirely. In my experience, consent is elastic. It can be given and then withdrawn at any time. This has been the source of much conflict, but I don't see a clear path to avoid this conflict in the future.
BAD--you are a misogynist.

26. Insisting that consent is assumed.
In some circumstances, I think it's fair to assume consent. I don't want to live in a world in which a written contract is required (to insure consent) before every sex act. In cases where a person argues that consent was never given, however, as I said above, my instinct is to believe the accuser because the social costs of reporting rape are so very high that I assume the frequency of false reports of rape is very low. Nevertheless, in most cases, I think it's fair to assume consent. Thus, I fail this test question.
BAD--you are a misogynist.

27. Insisting there is no such thing as male privilege
I firmly believe that male privilege exists. I also believe that female privilege exists. Men have some advantages. Women have other advantages. I suspect that the fact that I note that women have certain advantages that men do not have causes me to instantly fail on this question.
BAD--you are a misogynist.

28. Men telling women they aren't real feminists because they disagree with them on an issue like porn or prostitution
I have no idea what a "real" feminist is. Oddly enough, I consider myself a feminist--and so would 90% of the people who have ever met me, but it's clear that I am not "pure" enough for some feminists (as this quiz demonstrates). Personally, I welcome disagreement on a host of issues--especially sticky ones like porn and prostitution. That said, I have never accused anyone of not being a "real" feminist.
ADEQUATE AT BEST--you may or may not be a misogynist based upon your response.

So, here's my score on this 28 question test:

GOOD: 11
BAD: 7
ADEQUATE: 10

What does that make me? Am I a misogynist?

I invite you to take the test for yourself. I found it quite interesting. Admittedly, I scored this test myself based upon my own understanding of the concerns and arguments of my DU feminist allies, but I feel my self-scoring was honest in this context. If you think I should have scored myself differently on a given question, I'd be happy to hear what you have to say.

Good luck!

-Laelth

[seabeyond]

1. i perused, and i perused only half. more an exercise for you, i think. BUT...

your posting history. i think you were incredibly honest in most if not all respects and i have areas to challenge, and just flat out call bullshit, lol. BUT.... again. incredibly honest, an interesting exercise in thought and well done laelth.

very well done.

[Laelth]

5. I am flattered that you read it.

It's awfully long.



-Laelth

[Atman]

2. Wow.

Doesn't matter. I'm forever banned from HoF because I once used the word "skanky."

[seabeyond]

9. so, you failed 13?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

15. You know the word is insulting, right? You realize that some groups are considered Safe Havens.

You understand that using insulting terminology in any Safe Haven would be grounds for banning.

[Atman]

26. I understand the context of my statement.

None of you in HoF EVER, not once, addressed my comparison to comments about men's sweaty balls, etc. Apparently, you can make any derogatory comment on DU about male genitalia, but it is strictly verbotten to discuss female genitalia. The oft-linked post in question, in which I used a certain term which nearly got me pizza'd, was completely appropriate, IN THE CONTEXT IT WAS POSTED.

Apparently, all females are pure as the driven snow. Therefore, all men must also be pure as the driven snow, correct? Oops...not correct. Some men are nasty, some women are nasty. But if you point out nasty women, you're a misogynist pig and get banished. You must always refer to women as pure angels. Thus spoketh the DU HoF.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

35. wow. First off, I need a link to the post in question.

[Scootaloo]

80. So no, you DON'T get the idea of a "protected group" on DU.

simple enough.

[Atman]

87. Not simple enough.

I am your ally. I am your friend. So ONE TIME i used the word "skanky," it what I still believe to be a perfectly legitimate context, and yet I am now forbidden from discussing feminist issues on DU, despite my work for NOW and NARAL. Yeah, I get it. Oops, no, I don't get it at all. You're as bad as all the people you try to call out.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

90. more than one time you have used that word. You keep using it every time you type it

all the while saying you only used it once.

I see what you are doing.

Others see it, too.

You are not fooling anyone.

Fail.

[Atman]

93. Nope. You are lying.

ONE TIME. ONE TIME. Prove me wrong.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

95. Every time you type it you are using it. Quit typing it and, you will quit using it. n/t

[Atman]

98. Stop lying and I will stop calling you a liar.

[Iggo]

228. Here, for one.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025460497#post2

And here, for two.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5461087

[Scootaloo]

120. First, a few things.

One, the term "ally" doesn't really apply - I'm a dude, dude.

Second, nothing is stopping you from discussing feminist issues on DU - you just can't post in HOF. That still leaves a lot of DU on which you can post about feminist issues. Instead of doing so, you have complained about your ban from HOF, insisted that the notion of rape culture is a "hof invention", complain that men "aren't allowed to discuss feminism" in response to an attempted hide on a HOF thread... And of course, saying you'd send $20 to Ethiopia if Alyssa Milano "flashed her fake boobs."

Third, I make an effort to not be friends with people who say shit like that. I consider such people to be assholes, and it's good practice to avoid friendships with assholes.

Fourth, I have no pretense of being a saint of some sort. But I'm pretty sure I'm nowhere near "as bad" as someone who thinks Redqueen believed all who disagreed with her are rapists.

Atman, you are not a victim. You are not oppressed, you are not denied freedoms or rights. You're a guy who thinks that claiming to have done work for NARAL and NOW on the internet covers for your pretty obvious disgust towards women and feminism, who has been banned from one group on DU for being a jerk in that group, and now froths in rage constantly about that ban.

My suggestion? Take some logs, take some rope, and build a fucking bridge to get over it.

[JTFrog]

126. Bravo!

That was one of the best posts I've read here in a long time.

Thank you!

[seabeyond]

128. he often does stand up... bravo posts. one i wanted to be an Op really really bad. nt

[Atman]

140. You obviously don't get out much.

[Atman]

137. I don't recall any post wherein I stated I was a victim or repressed.

Perhaps you can point this out to me.

[cyberswede]

151. Here - in this very thread

http://election.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5460749
http://election.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5461087
http://election.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5460961
http://election.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5461059
http://election.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5461099
http://election.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5461106
http://election.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5461317

this one is particularly victim-y
http://election.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5461178

[Atman]

161. I'm sorry...I fell asleep.

You had a point? None of your quotes points to me whining about being a victim of anything. Nice try, though. But a bit freaky that you have all those link on hand.

[cyberswede]

170. Yeah, I know your playing the victim can be sleep-inducing...

but of course you do it in all those posts anyway (redundant as it is)

Waaaaah...you're

"forbidden from discussing feminism on DU"
"now forbidden from discussing feminist issues on DU"
"forever forbidden to discus women's issues on DU"
not "allowed to voice {your} opinion in HoF"
"suffering the slings and arrows of having once used the term 'skanky.'"

[Atman]

174. I'm not sure what your point is.

Am I forbidden from discussion in HoF or not? Victim, or just fact? You decide.

[boston bean]

178. You are right about one thin.

You are blocked from HoF, for good reason (as noted below). And because you are blocked, you can't make posts in there.

[cyberswede]

179. You asked to have instances where you played the victim pointed out.

So I pointed them out. Not too hard to understand.

Yes, evidently you're blocked for HoF - but the way you're bellyaching about is how you're playing the victim.

And your other comments about not being allowed to discuss feminist issues on DU are not only "playing victim," but also untrue.

[Atman]

181. So who is whining?

Really?

[cyberswede]

191. You are, of course.

You can claim you're not, but people can read what you typed, you know.

[boston bean]

162. HELLO, it was this post that got you blocked from HoF:

Star Member Atman (27,845 posts)

68. Have it removed from LATEST.

I only responded to this because of the provocative sub line which appeared on the Latest page. Ask Skinner or Elad to have it removed...then the half dozen of you can have your own she-woman man-haters club, and you won't have to worry about anyone questioning your assertions about how awful men are.

You had a chip on your shoulder way before you were blocked from HoF, and it aint improved. I don't suspect you will be unblocked soon.

Such hostility to people questioning your authoritay.

Edit to add link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=13003

[Atman]

165. Nope, sorry BB. You know nothing about me.

You just wanted me to accept everything you post. My comments meant nothing, unless you wanted to banish me. I've seen this over and over again in your group, and it totally hurts your cause. Remember, I'm a male. You want for use to understand women's issues, right? I do. I work for and support women's issues. How many times do I have to post this? But you are just mean and hateful. It's a constant barrage of negativism. I support women's rights and causes and actively work for women's organizations and all I get is SHIT from you. Period. It doesn't matter what i say, post, do, whatever...you're just not nice. You are mean, you seem to hate everyone, even those trying to help you. Wake up. You have ally's that your are pushing away via your incredibly rude behavior. I'm on your side. You don't seem to care, you'd rather make people angry. So be it.

[boston bean]

168. I even stated in the thread at the time the reason.

and I posted the reason in response to YOU!

Star Member boston bean (21,175 posts)

76. This poster has been blocked from the group for attacking the group in the post I am responding to.

Atman

68. Have it removed from LATEST.

I only responded to this because of the provocative sub line which appeared on the Latest page. Ask Skinner or Elad to have it removed...then the half dozen of you can have your own she-woman man-haters club, and you won't have to worry about anyone questioning your assertions about how awful men are.

It is disruptive to the group.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=13012

So, stop making shit up.

[Atman]

169. Nice. No context, not even the sub line to which I referred.

It must have been something really, really terrible.

Did you really go back and re-read the thread? Do you still stand by my being forbidden from HoF because of THIS? If so, thank you for blocking me for your narrow-minded.

[boston bean]

172. There is a link and excerpts provided. Plenty of context for anyone who would like

to delve in further.

The fact stands. You were not blocked from HoF for calling RQ a skank. You were blocked for accusing members of the group of being he-man haters and some other insults. In other words, acting like a disruptive __________ fill in the blank.

[Atman]

177. I sure hope I wasn't blocked for calling RQ a skank!

Because I never came even close to any such accusation. I made a comment about a teenager seeing a "skanky" stripper. If you deny this is what got me banned, prove it, because that is when I got banned, and that is the reason I was given, and that is the post that is continually thrown in my face as to why I can no longer be a part of HoF. I used the word "skanky." No one has ever come even close to saying I was banned for saying "he-man haters." This is the first I heard of it...ever post you've produced has been about the word "skanky." Am I wrong?

[boston bean]

180. LOL... you were the one saying you were.

It was you MAKING the accusation against yourself! LOL

Again, follow this link. You will see my response to you in the thread as to the reason why. It is all there for you to read. So, yes it was told to you before. On the day you were blocked.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=13012

[Atman]

182. WTF are you talking about?

Seriously...explaing, please.

[boston bean]

186. Can you click the link I provided to you?

Can you then read the post that shows and explains exactly why you were blocked from HoF, at the time of your blocking.

I made the response to you.

[cyberswede]

185. "If you deny this is what got me banned, prove it"...ok

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125512916#post76

Star Member boston bean (21,181 posts)
76. This poster has been blocked from the group for attacking the group in the post I am responding to.

Atman

68. Have it removed from LATEST.

I only responded to this because of the provocative sub line which appeared on the Latest page. Ask Skinner or Elad to have it removed...then the half dozen of you can have your own she-woman man-haters club, and you won't have to worry about anyone questioning your assertions about how awful men are.

It is disruptive to the group.

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

[boston bean]

193. He was blocked in November of 2012. When was this skank post??

I can't recall what it is about or if I ever even knew of it.

Has he provided a link to that? Has anyone?? Was it after 11/12?

[cyberswede]

196. Feb 2013

45. Who invented "18"

Why is it special? At that magical age, you can die in war, but not drink. You are an "adult" but you can't rent a car. What makes 18 special? A piece of paper some guy wrote and got passed into law. Ask the 16 year old whether or not he was "endangered" by having a skanky snatch ground in his face. He'd probably disagree with you. But give him two years, then it's all okay.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022407000#post45

[boston bean]

197. So, according to him, I blocked him for a post he had not made yet???

LOL

[Atman]

204. So wait a minute...I was still posting AFTER you blocked me?

Something doesn't add up.

[boston bean]

216. No, you have not posted in HoF since Nov 2012, the day I blocked you.

So, again you could not have been blocked for using the skank, skanky, or calling RQ a skank or skanky.

Hot damned, have you read and bother to click on anything I've written or linked to, that PROVES beyond a shadow of a doubt why you were blocked from HoF?

[Atman]

203. It was about a teenager who was taken to a strip club.

I don't have the link. It was a news story about a 16 year old being taken to a strip club for his birthday. Since it was posted in HoF, I should have known that women posters would be outraged. But I commented something to the effect that the 16 year old was probably thrilled. I used the term Sk....never mind.

Outrage ensued. Two or three DU threads. I was hated and blocked from posting. FOR ONE POST. ONE THREAD. ONE WORD. Then I was blocked from posting in HoF because of the one word I posted.

That's it. How tolerant of you.

[boston bean]

206. ah, no... I'm pretty tolerant. I blocked you for the reason stated at the time of your blocking.

There is no post of yours in HoF that used the word skank or skanky according to DU advanced search.

Provide the link, please.

I've been pretty tolerant of you basically stating I am a liar after I have provided you proof as to the reason for your blocking.

[cyberswede]

219. The "skank" post wasn't even posted in HoF - it was posted in GD months after you were blocked

It was in GD in February 2013.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022407000#post45

Star Member Atman (27,855 posts)
45. Who invented "18"

Why is it special? At that magical age, you can die in war, but not drink. You are an "adult" but you can't rent a car. What makes 18 special? A piece of paper some guy wrote and got passed into law. Ask the 16 year old whether or not he was "endangered" by having a skanky snatch ground in his face. He'd probably disagree with you. But give him two years, then it's all okay.

...and by the way "skanky snatch" is 2 words.

[Atman]

194. You've shown NOTHING, cbyber. What it that post got me banished?

This isn't even the post that got me banished, and not the one BB or others continually refer to. The post that supposedly got me banished is one in which I referenced a stripper as "skanky." Apparently, since I made that one reference in one post in one particular context, HoF seemed to think that is how I think of ALL women. That's about as closed-minded as anything I can possibly imagine. One reference. One word. Banished.

[boston bean]

199. Again, you were given the reason at the time of your blocking.

It's as clear as day.

Give me a link, now you can provide the proof, of the post you are saying got you blocked?

[cyberswede]

200. LOL - ok...

I guess I'll believe you instead of my lyin' eyes.

[AverageJoe90]

209. I've noticed this behavior as well.

And it's kinda saddening to me, especially as someone who doesn't just understand women's issues, but who actually tries to work for a better world however he can.

I mean, it's okay to disagree, but there are some people who have taken it way too far, not just here on DU, but this seems to be a problem in general.

[boston bean]

211. LOL, that's my response.

It's everyone else, NEVER EVER, you.

I feel a sad coming on....

[AverageJoe90]

214. "It's everyone else, NEVER EVER, you." Pot, meet kettle. nt

[boston bean]

217. I've met you. And yes, we are very different people

with very different outlooks on issues.

My beliefs tend to be of the progressive/liberal kind.

[AverageJoe90]

229. "My beliefs tend to be of the progressive/liberal kind." Me too.

But, at least these days, I'm a pragmatic person who doesn't buy into extremes just because they may sound personally gratifying at the moment, or whatever(which is why, for example, why I don't get upset at the President every time he makes a mistake, as some may). It seems that way too many, however, have become rather too dogmatic in defending their personal pet beliefs.

[boston bean]

233. Understanding white privilege, male privilege is not

an extreme understanding or belief.

Because you claim it to be does not make it so, in all truthfulness.

People disagree with you, they aren't attacking you. They are attacking what you say, and TBH it is many times in kind terms, tone deaf to those who experience the ill effects of white/male privilege, and your comments to them are many time insensitive and are right wing memes.

Your responses act as derailment to important issues. Not many responses to your posting on these issues are in agreement with you. In fact, most wish you would just stop.

You are hurting people. I beg of you to open your mind and come up with a clue as to why so many other persons cringe at your posts and find offense in them.

[AverageJoe90]

242. I'll have to be blunt: please, I really wish you'd get a clue for once.

right wing memes.

What right wing memes? In fact, some of the stuff I've read here actually feeds into real right-wing memes; hell, the fact Bill O'Reilly utterly confused a belief in "white privilege" with an understanding of real institutional injustice is proof of that, by itself!

You are hurting people.

Who? For goodness sakes' who? And, in fact, on that subject, I myself have been hurt, betrayed by people that I once respected on here. Does that not matter to you?

[cyberswede]

173. LOL - so he's lying about being blocked for using "skanky" ?!

[boston bean]

175. mm mm.. yep...

[Atman]

188. mm mm.. nope.

Total BULLSHIT. I made a comment about a mythical teenager seeing a "skanky" stripper at strip joint. That was my comment. BB and others have it bookmarked, and call it up every time I mention women's issues. Every time, despite the context of the thread, which was about a teen who got a stripper for his birthday. But for my comment, I'm clearly a misogynist pig who has no right to comment on women's issues. You people are fucked up.

[boston bean]

189. LOL, when you were blocked in November of 2012

I responded to a post of yours in HoF, that was the offending reason and explained why you were being blocked from the group.

I have already proved it.

You were not blocked from HoF for calling RQ a skank or for the word skanky.

You were blocked for disrupting the group by insulting it. That isn't welcome in HoF. This isn't rocket science. I have on multiple occasion now in this subthread, gave you all the proof you are looking for as to the real reason you were blocked from HoF.

[Atman]

207. At least you finally admit it was YOU who blocked me.

Even if you can't get your timeline correct.

[boston bean]

210. God damned, It was in the link I provided to you.

I responded to you that I blocked you at the time, in Nov. 2012!

It was never a secret.

[cyberswede]

225. Nov 2012: Atman blocked from HoF (by boston bean); Feb 2013: Atman posts "skanky snatch" post in GD

Do you get it yet?

[boston bean]

227. I sure hope he does. How could I block him for something he didn't even post yet?

Makes no sense.

Plus the fact that I told him at the time, in the open, in a response to his post, why I was blocking him.

[Rex]

25. Ask for the ban to be lifted and try not to use that word again?

Bans don't have to be forever.

[Atman]

29. Fat chance.

There are a few on HoF who have that one post bookmarked, and link to it any time I mention anything about feminism. Happened just this week. Despite my working with NOW and NARAL, I once used the word "skanky," so I'm forever forbidden from discussing feminism on DU.

[seabeyond]

31. "Fat chance." ya. i am saying, after all they are.... ? nt

[Rex]

46. Well you sound like you have already accept your fate being written in stone.

I'm trying something different for a change...a daily shot at diplomacy between two groups. My first attempt looks

[Atman]

61. I honestly don't believe they want "diplomacy."

There is an agenda, and we either accept it or STFU. It's pretty clear.

[seabeyond]

63. the agenda, is do not use sexist slurs. ya. that is what feminist do. say, ... no.

i know it is out there. those radicals... and all.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

92. Honestly, You are the one with the agenda. You want to play the victim in all this.

You want others to feel sorry for you, to pity you.

[Atman]

94. Yet, you lie about my use of the word "skanky."

Who has the agenda here?

I don't want any pity. I'd appreciate some honesty, though.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

99. See, you just used it again. You appear to be addicted to it. -

Typical addict behavior. Classic. Textbook example. Exhibit A.

Are there any other substances/behaviors that give you this problem?

[Atman]

103. Google the word "WORD."

It is a word. I referenced the word I used which almost got me banned. It's still just a word. Go recline on your fainting couch and try to recover.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

107. LOL

You're cute when you get angry.

[Atman]

111. You're not.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

117. LOL -

funny man. peace.

[Atman]

64. One time. ONE TIME I used the word "skanky" in a specific context...

...and I am forever forbidden to discus women's issues on DU. Despite my years of work with NOW and NARAL. But I posted the word "skanky" and my opinion is no longer valid. And the HoF'ers wonder why the aren't taken more seriously except by there small group.

[seabeyond]

67. first. if you had just said, my bad. we would be done. second you have then gone on to trash

hof repeatedly. which takes that one time, to every time. when you insult us, repeatedly, we are allowed to say.... now, now atman.

[Rex]

72. Now that is a little bit fatalist don't you think? You can still discuss women's issues in GD.

But it sounds like you already made up your mind that you will never get to post in HoF again.

[Atman]

82. No, not made up my mind at all.

They blocked me. I am forever forbidden from discussing feminist issues on DU, unless it is in GD or maybe the Lounge. You see, I presented a position which they disagreed with. Not even a position, I just used a term. I said "skanky." You're apparently not allowed to use that word in HoF, regardless of context.

[Rex]

85. But can you just ask to be unbanned and not use that word again?

Forever forbidden seems wrong, maybe just say 'sorry won't say that again' and get unbanned? How do you know if you don't ever ask?

[Atman]

89. I asked. They told me to fuck off.

I said "skanky." No one who says "skanky" shall be allowed to voice their opinion in HoF.

[JTFrog]

129. Good for them. n/t

[Gormy Cuss]

79. Did you ever offer them an olive branch?

As a host I would have blocked you for using skank in a feminist space. However, I would also remove the block if you made an effort to apologize for the poor choice of words.

[Atman]

91. Yes. Many times.

They just got nastier. I'm waiting for the re-post of the "skanky" comment. That's what they always resort to if I try to comment on women's issues. Actually, Redqueen is gone. Maybe I can comment again...although there is still BainsBane.

[seabeyond]

96. because you validated and excused the use of the word. right? like you do in this thread.

then insult us.

[AverageJoe90]

212. I haven't been banned from HoF myself yet.

But that's probably because I'm usually pretty innocuous for the most part. No doubt, though, that there's probably a few who are just itching for the chance to utterly ban me as well.

[boston bean]

238. I could do that now if you like. You have some issue with the posters in HoF?

If you do, members there probably would find your presence disruptive. Have you ever posted in there?

[boston bean]

239. He wasn't blocked from HoF for using skank.

see upthread for the reason.

This is a side show.

[Kali]

135. jesus fucking christ

I am reading through this thread and finally lost my patience. you are repeating the word in just about every fucking post while whining like a god damn republican. shut the fuck up.

I don't know you because I mostly stick to the Lounge and the occasional flamey thing that pops up, but I do know you have been whining about this for a LOOOONNNGGG fucking time.

Look, you can use any damn word you want. You take your chance with a jury, but by all means have at it. You can discuss feminist issues all you want too. GO FOR IT! you might be blocked from a safe haven group or two, but THERE ISN'T ONE FUCKING THING STOPPING YOU from talking about it in GD or any number of other groups. so brag about your group affiliations all you like, post about feminist topics to your heart's content.

but, PLEASE! can you stop whining about getting in trouble for using the word skank in a feminist safe haven group????

[Atman]

144. Hey, Kali...where I have been "whining" for way too long?

This is a DU thread. I've every right to comment on it. If you don't like my posts, ignore them. Block me. Whatever. But my opinion is just as valid as yours. Even if that means it's not valid at all.

[Kali]

155. you have been whining all through this thread

and you have done it before because even I have noticed, and I am usually pretty clueless about what goes on in GD or anywhere outside of the Lounge...

carry on, though. if you want to continue looking like a foolish whiner, be my guest. I am out of this thread.

[Atman]

158. And you're not "whining," right? You're just a chearleader for justice.

Okay. I get it. My opinion sucks, yours is awesome. You win. Got it.

[Call Me Wesley]

190. Don't you get the 'funny' side?

The 'S-word' is all over this thread, in almost every reply from them. 'Reply' is the magic word here. Reply with the 'S-word.'

[AtheistCrusader]

213. SURVEY SAYS: Leave it.

On Fri Aug 29, 2014, 02:49 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

jesus fucking christ
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5461324

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Shut the fuck up? Nasty...should be hidden. Please don't be biased jury...if someone said that to you you would alert on it, anyone should!

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Aug 29, 2014, 02:55 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I was afraid I'd get called to this jury. Sorry Kali. I suspect you saw this coming... Hide it.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I wouldn't alert on it if I deserved it.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: "shut the fuck up" seems just a tad uncivil, if it's not then I am sure we will see a lot more of it.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[seabeyond]

30. try... not using the fuggin word? lol. it is THAT hard. lol. ah rex.

such an ally. actually you are and i am teasing.

[Rex]

40. It was my daily diplomacy try...looks like a failure.

But hey, if someone knows what they did wrong and says they won't do it again...I think everyone is redeemable or at least I fool myself into believing that.

[seabeyond]

42. youngest?

the youngest seems to excel at diplomacy.

[Rex]

50. Only child.

[seabeyond]

51. well. arent you the special one. cuase i always wanted to be the... only child, too. lol. nt

[Rex]

55. Large family sea?

Yeah it was okay, but I was always jealous of my cousins having brothers and sisters. It could get very lonely at times, but also I never get bored since I have nobody but myself to entertain me.

[seabeyond]

56. two older brothers, all in a three year span. privileged and challenging. nt

[JTFrog]

123. Obviously well fucking deserved. n/t

[Gore1FL]

224. I was banned after a fight with Iverglas

Totally worth it.

[chrisa]

3. What's the point of this?

[el_bryanto]

8. There are two possibilities that I see

The exercise might have been done genuinely in which case it's well worth everybody doing (although possibly not so publicly as this)

Alternatively it was done to suggest that Bainsbane's list was flawed in that a person can be a good person and a feminist and yet not live up to the standards imposed by that list. Which would have the effect of minimizing certain of Bainsbane's complaints.

Bryant

[seabeyond]

11. and it is probably both. interesting and glad you said it as you did. nt

[leftstreet]

4. Jesus! Most bar exams are shorter than this n/t

[intaglio]

43. So when did you get your license to serve drinks?

Because on the basis of your dismissive post, that is the only bar exam I can see you talking

[leftstreet]

97. You don't find the OP itself 'dismissive?'

I sure do

The overemphasis of the "educating" suggests serious snark to me

But whatever

[Tuesday Afternoon]

145. and here is where the rubber meets the road, so to speak because, the very fact that he took

the time and trouble to do this belies the fact that it is dismissive.

It is where his actions do not coincide with his words.

In essence he lied to himself and thus also to us.

It was actually a pretty clever ruse.

I give him credit and 9 out of 10 for creativity.

[seabeyond]

149. In essence he lied to himself and thus also to us.

i think this is the big lesson and clarity.

gotta go

[Tuesday Afternoon]

154. Have a good lunch, sea. ttyl

[leftstreet]

218. 8 out of 10 for Passive Aggressiveness

A little too obvious and intellectually lazy in some areas, but points should probably be given for the sheer amount of time and effort invested

[Tuesday Afternoon]

221. exactly!

I hate that it hurts Baine's feelings is all.

[LanternWaste]

6. I think posting history is much more indicative than a challenge...

I think posting history, usage of language, using sexist terms, and habits of trivializing or minimizing legitimate concerns are much more indicative than a challenge to determine whether one is a misogynist or not.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

18. I agree with watching posting history especially when I see an arc in character development.

I love seeing light bulb moments

However, some people take umbrage and accuse people of keeping lists. They seem to not realize that they are also keeping a list of those keeping lists otherwise how would they know who to accuse of keeping lists.

[seabeyond]

21. hey. we have been talking to each other, and listening, for over a decade. this not taking it

to personal makes no sense. to me.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

45. I admit to also being confused. How else can one know a person if not by their actions?

and is not typing words on a message board an action?

Therefore, aren't the words typed how I would know a person?

By the words they type.

Why then is someone amazed when I know them and that I cared enough and took the time to remember them.

If they do not care for the way I remember them is it my fault or theirs?

[seabeyond]

49. ya. lol. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

10. Color me impressed for taking the time and having the courage to post this.

Forgive me, now I want Baines to grade it and, put her remarks in the margins with a Red Pen!

[seabeyond]

12. OM... fuggin, G. or g. i LOVE.

now I want to Baines grade it and put her remarks in the margins with a Red Pen!

[Tuesday Afternoon]

13. ... lol ...

Maybe she will grade it on a curve

but, really I am impressed that someone took the time and, cares enough about the issue to open up the dialogue in this manner.

[seabeyond]

14. "to open up the dialogue in this manner." that was my first post. i can respect that. nt

[Laelth]

28. I would be flattered if she would do so.

As I said in the post, I think this is very important and something that we should discuss.

-Laelth

[whatthehey]

16. I suspect my only landmines are 8 and 22

But only when (often deliberately) misconstrued.

8) I simply suggest waiting for the facts and preferably a thorough investigation before deciding to automatically Believe EITHER side, but I've seen this approach roundly castigated as automatic misogyny, even when, as OCCASIONALLY happens, the rape claim is unfounded. It seems anything other than unqualified and absolute belief based on gender is unacceptable. Healthy skepticism seems to be welcomed in claims of crimes both less (the backward B) and more (self defense homicides) serious, but not in rape/sexual harrassment claims. Do I think all rape claims are false? Certainly not. Same for most or even many. But some? Yes. Just like other claims of victimization sometimes are. My skepticism does tend to go up when the alleged rapist is rich and famous too. Not that I think they are less likely to rape, just more likely to be falsely accused.

22) Only a blithering idiot says sexism and misogyny don't exist per se. Might as well deny that racism and classism exist, but here it seems to be a minefield and inviting vitriolic condemnation to deny that any claimed example of misogyny is a genuine problem. Kenneth McDuff? Yeah misogyny there aplenty. The guy drawing Spiderwoman with a more protuding butt in the same pose as Spiderman? Well there's a question. He works in the comicbook industry which is not exactly legendary for its sexual maturity and even handed gender treatment, but women, especially lean athletic ones, do have buttocks that protude more than mens' when crawling downhill on all fours. Is he a misogynist? Wouldn't surprise me a whole lot, but to say that the minor differences in the drawing are exhibit A and Z and condemn him with death penalty certainty as being one is a bridge too far.

And that probably makes me a misogynist to some people, other 26 and common sense be damned.

[seabeyond]

20. good post without the wine...

And that probably makes me a misogynist to some people, other 26 and common sense be damned.

this would raise flags way more than the two you defined and expressed.

[whatthehey]

27. I agree, but it's a common issue, and the thread in question and its spinoffs demonstrate this.

Disagreeing that a specific something, be it a statement, a picture or an action is misogynist does not mean a person is disagreeing that misogyny is a problem, or demonstrating it themselves, but can you honestly read the Spiderwoman thread and say that's how disagreement, even stated with the utmost delicacy and reasoning, was taken?

[seabeyond]

34. when a long time, male poster told some woman in hof he assumed alerted, she needed to get laid,

and jury allowed it to stand, i trashed the thread, and was ready to walk. i never trash threads. but, on a progressive board, a man is allowed to tell a woman to shut up and just get laid....

i was hardly concerned if that particular woman got pissed....

how about you?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

83. why should anyone, male or female, tell someone they need to get laid?

It is just stupid.

I know how you feel though because when *Two Women in The Lounge* told me I needed to get laid, I was ready to walk, too.

I really do not get that comment.

It is just out of left field, a disconnect, for me.

I do know that I lost respect for the two women that said it, not sure if there was ever much respect there to begin with but, what little there might have been was gone with that comment.

[seabeyond]

100. uptight. anti sex. prude. the other end of the spectrum. that is all. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

104. and that is why I don't get it because I am not any of that ... but, maybe they are/were

the other end of the spectrum and so, they just called themselves that by using that phrase.

I did not call them that. Did not have to. Their own actions toward me are the tell as to what they are.

Kinda sad, actually. I sort of pity them.

[seabeyond]

109. it is about dishonesty tuesday. that is why i do not say, i like sex, i like men....

before saying something. many of us feel the need to clarify, to not have our sexuality insulted. who wants that? i realized a handful of years what i was doing. and stopped.

it is done simply to insult. i know i am getting like tons more sex than most. i have read about many virgins into adult then come back and say i am a prude. say what?

it is not about our actual sex life. it is about a male pumping chest to merely insult us our sex. just like calling a woman a slut. what was sluttish about fluke? not a damn thing. but... they used it on her to insult her.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

115. Yes, it is dishonest. The two women are liars. One is here on a daily basis still telling lies. -

Hey, its all good, yanno. Peace.

[TexasTowelie]

17. I'm less of a misogynist than you are based upon this quiz,

but I'll also concede that I have room for improvement. I occasionally use the b***h word, but when I do it is because of the actions of that person and it is not intended to describe all women. If I used synonymous words for a man it would be a jerk or an a**hole.

I ask that nobody take offense since it is not my intent to be a misogynist, but maybe someone can suggest a synonymous word to use instead to describe a woman that is "difficult" to satisfy?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

19. Jerk and Asshole work for both genders that are difficult to satisfy. You realize

that some men can be difficult to satisfy, too. Right?

*Hard to Please* is Not a gender specific trait.

[TexasTowelie]

75. I certainly know that some men (I'm one of them) are difficult to satisfy,

living with my brother is a real-life adventure as far as that is concerned. He and many other men that I know I can be hard to please so jerk or a**hole is an appropriate descriptor.

I guess that I associate the terms jerk and a**hole more with the male gender so I reserve those words for men. That leaves the "b" word as the fallback descriptor for a woman and I use that word very sparingly--so yes, I guess it means that I'm a misogynist. It's primarily because there is no other word in my vocabulary that is succinct and concise than the "b" word. When I checked an online dictionary for synonyms here is what came up:

witch
virago
frump
dame
battleax
harridan
chick
bird
princess
arm candy

I've never heard of virago or harridan prior to searching on the word b***h and the word that comes closest to conveying what I mean is witch, but that word isn't descriptive enough. However, I guess the next time I'm in a situation that calls for it I will use harridan and observe how the woman reacts.

I do take affront to comments when one of my male friends says something like "let's pick up the b***hes and go to the bar" using that word in a collective sense. So please do not be too harsh in your judgment of me since I limit my usage of the "b" word more than other terms like jerk or a**hole. I know that it is wrong, but the word is so ingrained in our culture that it is difficult to avoid using it in lieu of "difficult to satisfy woman."

[Tuesday Afternoon]

77. I judge not but, I do have a question =

Why *must* your insult be gender specific?

[TexasTowelie]

167. Good question,

I don't know if I really have an answer though.

I'm not that well versed in psychology, but attacking someone's gender is usually considered to be one of the harshest responses when delivering insults. I know that is completely wrong and it is either a defensive mechanism or a way to rationalize my behavior.

As far as I am concerned, the insult words that define manliness are the most offensive to me. Therefore, jerk doesn't affect me at all, a**hole or f**ker has a little effect, wimp moves to the next level, and words like fa**ot and pu**y are the most offensive.

I never used the "c" word to describe a woman because it wasn't in my vernacular when I grew up, but the "b" word was and I considered it to be the most insulting word for a woman.

Unfortunately some behaviors become ingrained due to circumstances and my situation is influenced by the fact that nearly all of my friends are men. I often see behavior that I don't want to emulate, but undesirable behavior occurs because of my mental health issues or due to stress. Fortunately, the circumstances where I've made gender specific insults rarely occur and I've exercised better judgment and control.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

183. I understsand ... this is a growing and learning experince for all humans, I think.

Some of us are more knowledgeable about this subject matter and, others are just beginning their journey to self awareness. Sitll others are completely happy where they are and, see no need to change.

I understand insults and, when I fly off there is no telling what may pop out of my mouth.

However, I have found that on DU3, out of respect for others and, to avoid getting a hide, it is best if I stick to non-gender insults.

Interesting thing is happening, in that I am finding less and less need to call on those words and am becoming more inventive and creative on how I insult.

Also, of note, I find that as I become more comfortable in my own skin I feel less and less the need to insult at all.

Peace.

[seabeyond]

81. it is the fact you need to insult women in a gendered way. insult men in a non gendered manner.

which automatically feeds patriarchy, oppression. and, while, patriarchy teaches all of us to insult women by gender, making it a very real reality for us.

that is the issue.

also. it does not automatically make you misogynist. it is sexist. and you are using sexist terminology. but, that is learned and not necessarily indicative of your position on the issue.

[TexasTowelie]

132. I'll agree with your comments.

It is a reaction that is subtle (and at times indistinguishable) from a male's point of view, but blatantly obvious from a female's point of view. Since most of my friendships have been with other men it is something that I don't necessarily catch when I behave in such a manner--that is why I said that there is room for improvement.

Discussing issues on DU with other women has made me take note of sexism and within the past few years I've moved a long way in modifying my views and behavior. The one woman that I associate with the "b" word was a former supervisor and she was sexist. She made comments directly to me describing men as "unable to communicate effectively", other derogatory remarks about men, and she frequently showed other signs of gender bias when assigning tasks in the office. Therefore, from a position of hindsight I can see where I developed some sexist bias in retaliation.

I'm trying to be more supportive of feminism including making some posts in the Feminists group when I find interesting articles, but I'm usually not an active participant in discussions about feminism and sexism since I feel like I have more to learn by reading than what I have to offer via commentary. Despite my occasional bouts of boorish behavior, I do support the feminist cause because I realize that equality benefits everyone.

[Gormy Cuss]

153. There is nothing gendered about asshole or jerk and they're both as succinct as bitch.

However, I've seen it often claimed that these are terms for men, and bitch is the equivalent for women. That's fundamentally sexist. Try substituting jerk or asshole the next ten times you want to describe a woman as a bitch. I predict that you'll find that these terms really are suitable.

I'm only suggesting this because you do see the power of carelessly tossing around the b-word as evidenced by your example.

[TexasTowelie]

171. Okay, but you don't have to be a jerk about it.

From now on, all of the women that I can't satisfy will be called jerks or a-holes. I will wager that if it occurs on DU that I'll get my response hidden by the jury though.


Thanks for the advice.

[Gormy Cuss]

232. A-hole.

[seabeyond]

22. jerk or asshole. on the other hand, i have clearly been on the record as saying....

the b word has been used by me. and now, every time i do, i get what i am doing. to the extent i really do not use the b word anymore. because, the issue is much bigger than the light weight of the b word.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

52. Exactly. I was also guilty but, Yes, I find I have no need for the word anymore. There are many

non-gender words that fulfill the need.

[TexasTowelie]

84. Please see my response in post #75.

As I originally said, I know that I have room for improvement. I'm trying to modify my behavior and show more consideration since the word is offensive.

[seabeyond]

105. hey.. much is just conversation. and i appreciate yours. i replied further, above. thanks. nt

[phil89]

23. Certainly relieves the need for critical thought

Just tell me how to think and I'm on board!

[BKH70041]

24. "In my hand I hold a list..."

I understand the purpose, but at some point you just do the right thing and don't worry about how others might want to frame your deeds. IOW, if they don't like it, tell 'em to fuck off.

[leftstreet]

39. omg

I KNEW this whole thing was snark

Putting "educating" in quotes was the first clue...

[seabeyond]

41. you will probably get a hide. and yes... thank you for the link. nt

[snooper2]

47. That wasn't very nice, you could have said "sexy piece of shit"

I tried to find a video on sexy piece of shit but just keep finding this Adam Sandler song LOL


Hilarious

[Rex]

57. Wow...that post, hard to ignore.

Women feel compelled to breed with the top barbarian? I won't even type what I think about that...but lemme just say

[Marr]

66. Wow.

That's uh... illuminating.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

68. wow.

[LeftyMom]

69. "It's not like the shooter didn't have a point"

Amazingly enough any appropriate response to that is going to get me in trouble, because DU is deeply fucked up. So I'm just going to quote that for emphasis and let everybody think about the fact that somebody said that and is still here, lecturing the rest of us about what evil harpies feminists are.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

73. yeah, let that sink in.

wow. just wow.

[bettyellen]

101. Wow, I guess meta call out snark is okay as long as it attacks feminsts?

[seabeyond]

113. bummer hide. but X took one for the team in honesty. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

122. That is a hide to be proud of ... that one would go in my journal if it had been mine.

what am I saying. All my hides go in My Journal for posterity's sake

[seabeyond]

124. oh man. i should have put my hides in journal, a hundred hides ago. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

127. for real -

[seabeyond]

130. ah ha... got a lunch i have to get to. later. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

131. Always a pleasure chatting with you, sea. Ciao!

[lumberjack_jeff]

138. "take one for the team"? So... is "the team" pooling your hides? n/t

[seabeyond]

141. literally lumerjack... whatever

[LeftyMom]

187. You caught us. Women are all engaged in a conspiracy to oppress you. You're very clever. nt

[LanternWaste]

143. I agree with the sentiment in the hide...

I agree with the hidden sentiment. After reading the half-witted, idiotic drivel, "They're (women) driven by their genetic code to seek out the most vicious barbarian they can find to mate with..." I have to admit, the hide was low-key and rather diplomatic to what I would have said.

I'm only sorry I missed it prior to being hidden, so that I may have +1'd it.

[seabeyond]

150. exactly. that is the complexity of the Op writer. he believes. i see so many men believe that

garbage cause it behooves them, rewards them, to believe. and it causes our girls death. reconcile that. yes. it was an important link.

[Laelth]

241. Wow.

I am very sorry that you feel that way.



-Laelth

[demmiblue]

74. That sounds like something a right-wing knuckle dragger would say. Wow.

This is the best post in that thread:

http://metamorphosis.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5003102

Holy shite, that was funny!

[leftstreet]

102. LOLOL

Nice catch!

[taught_me_patience]

33. Your answer on #4 probably won't sit well with BainsBane and others

Thanks for the honest assessment, though. I agree with much of everything in the OP.

[snooper2]

36. Whenever I see BainBain for some reason I always get a mental image of Bam Bam

LOL

to be a kid again

[intaglio]

37. Your "Bads" indicate that, yes, you have a misogynistic attitude

Men are more oppressed than women? This despite them receiving more pay, better promotion prospects, more work options, a large amount of leaway in sexual assault and harassment cases? Your attitude towards women stinks.

You insist that consent is elastic and say that in your experience it is. On that basis I suggest that there is a good chance that you have sexually assaulted a someone but have not realised it. What is more you are likely to blame the victim of sexual assault rather than the criminal

You say that consent can be assumed, in what circumstances? Even in marriage you cannot assume consent, if you have ever assumed consent then there is an excellent chance you have sexually assaulted a your sexual partner. What is more you are likely to blame the victim of sexual assault rather than the criminal.

On the question of male privilege, please identify what privileges women have that do not depend on a deeply patronising and misogynistic male view of women. If you can find such examples then explain how they make up for the assumption that women cannot do equivalent work to men, that women deserve less pay for equivalent work, that women can have men pass open judgement on their mood, driving skills, clothing and physique.

These four answers grounds alone show you display a deep and completely unexamined misogynistic streak.

You also seem to have an inability to read anything more than what you want to see. The word "only" appears in Bainsbain question as in "Portraying a view of women that makes it clear someone sees their only purpose as to provide them sex" (emphasis mine) and what is confusing about that?

Similarly you admit that sexism and misogyny exist but then deny that on the basis of the bovine excremental grounds that you think men who have those attitudes are self hating. I don't think you would classify yourself as self hating so why are all men displaying your attitudes to be so judged?

[Scootaloo]

38. I dunno if you're a misogynist...

But you sure are making a very concerted effort to pretend that you don't 'get it."

Reminds me of the nonsense of "I don't see color; the only race is the human race!"

[seabeyond]

44. concerted effort to pretend that you don't 'get it."

this is always where it bottom lines.

[mythology]

53. This really doesn't seem sincere

While I often disagree with BanesBain, the just doesn't seem helpful as a method to debate an issue.

[liberalhistorian]

54. Regarding number two-

there's a contingent here who believe and promote that MRA nonsensical bullshit that, since women have the legal right to have an abortion (actually that depends on what part of the country you live in and how much money you have, but they never take those factors into consideration), then men shouldn't be forced to pay child support if she chooses not to have an abortion.

And regarding number three-there's a contingent here that calls child support "male enslavement". And those who promote that shit and who are misogynist in general are still here while women who tried to fight against such bullshit are not. Go fucking figure.

Then there's the fact that you almost can never start up a thread here dealing solely with misogyny and have it stick just to that subject. People will inevitably post shit like "what about the other isms, aren't those important, too?", etc., etc. Gah.

[Marr]

58. This seems problematic to me.

Point number 11, for instance. Unless it is your contention that the words "prude" and "puritan" are completely meaningless, then it's absurd to insist that any group contains no one that could be accurately described that way.

And point 22. I would certainly agree that anyone who denies that sexism and misogyny are still pervasive problems is in the wrong. But I'm not prepared to accept every claim of misogyny and sexism out of hand. Frankly, I've seen some very unconvincing claims along these lines right here recently-- most notably the 'Spider-Woman's Butt" fiasco.

[randys1]

59. Good post, as a man it is easy to F up once in a while and do something inappropriate even

if you are trying not to.

I stopped using the B and C words long ago, I think (I may be guilty of it once or twice with Malkin or Coulter) but all in all my rule is kind of simple:

IF a Woman tells me what I am saying or doing is rude or inappropriate or misogynist, then I stop doing it...

If an African American or Native American or Latino or Muslim or Asian tells me what I am saying or doing is racist or bigoted, I stop doing it...

If a rightwinger tells me what I am doing or saying is bad or wrong, I keep doing it...

[seabeyond]

60. kinda how i look at it. listen. i do. and last one, funny.... nt

[AverageJoe90]

223. Randy, here's an honest question for you:

What happens, if someone claims that something is racist, or misogynist, or whatever, but that you know it's actually damn well not so? What would you do? Do you just defer to the individual, or do you try to explain the truth?

(This has happened to me a few times, btw)

[BainsBane]

62. It was not meant as a test

Or a means to judge fealty to women's rights. It was meant as nothing more than a list of things I (and some others) see as problematic. I don't want to give the impression that I am conducting some sort of purity test. That is not the case. People can and do disagree on any number of issues. For me, what counts a lot is that someone cares enough to listen to concerns by feminists, including me and those women who see feminism differently.

I can see the phrase BainsBane Test becoming a meme to disparage feminists. That is the last thing I want to encourage. Again, it was mean to inform what some of us find problematic, not test.

[seabeyond]

65. thank you for the reality and clarification. i have got to admit, i was having fun with it. truth,

though, is important.

[BainsBane]

108. Sea, this OP is about mocking my concerns

and those of others who share them. I never said it was a test. I never said a person was bad or good depending on their views on each and every issue, nor do I think that way. My post was in response to someone who asked for links to misogyny on DU. Since I did not wish to implicate anyone in particular, I made a list of the kinds of positions I associate with misogyny. Then someone PMed me and asked me to make an OP out of it, so I obliged. The list does not imply a person who articulates any one of those positions is a misogynist, or that people are good or bad depending on how they responding. There is no quiz and no score.

This is not a feminist-friendly OP. It is shit stirring.

[seabeyond]

114. you are right on..... nt

[theHandpuppet]

236. I agree

And it seems to have produced the desired result.

[lumberjack_jeff]

70. If I were to accept her test (and implied revision of the dictionary) as valid, then yes.

But then again, by that standard, the vast majority of men and women in america are too.

Which if one were to spend even a microsecond thinking about the implications of calling the residents of a country in which women live longer, have more money spent on their care, are relatively immune to violent crime, get the lion's share of education, are given lighter sentences for the same crimes and have the benefit of social programs designed just for their care... "woman-haters", the idea instantly loses credibility.

By the definitions proposed above, I and anyone else who disagrees with her, would be misogynists.

Which is what I've been saying all along; HoF throws out the worst kind of pejoratives and invective which when boiled down, really mean "people who disagree with me".

So yeah. I can readily believe that this is the prevailing HoF definition of misogyny; "everyone but us".

[seabeyond]

86. it is not her test, but what laelth created it to be. he and you are defining, not hof. nt

[RussBLib]

160. jury results

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

String of one MRA propaganda smear after another. Women are in fact given harsher sentences for murder of spouses than men. What they are not given is the same penalty for a petty offense as the violent crimes more often committed by men, and that infuriates Jeff who clearly believes women should be treated more harshly for lesser sentences and men more leniantly for violent ones. This member presents false, right-wing propaganda as a way to work against equality for women. He also throws in an insult to HOF members. Note it is a man and not BB or a HOF member who posted this as a test. BB says in her response to this thread her OP was not meant as a test and should not be interpreted as one. This member once again turns to propaganda from far right-wing hate groups to insist men are oppressed and women are priivileged. Might as well say the Koch brothers are oppressed by the poor, because that is the equivalent of his argument. It is far right wing and unacceptable among liberals.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Aug 29, 2014, 12:25 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: The whole thread is flame bait. Still judging this post on its own, the cherry picked examples to use it to generally smear HoF is going too far. Hide vote from a male who has little to no use for HoF- I may not be a fan but they do have a right to a group and to speak their minds.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The alerter's comments should have been a reply to the poster.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: In the time allotted, I don't think I could parse through all that. Let DUers read it, fercrissake, and make up their own minds. Now there's a concept!
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: it seems like the flagger actually just has a different point of view.

[Nye Bevan]

71. I have the biggest issue with 25 and 26.

I mean, has nobody here ever had sex, which both parties clearly were enthusiastic about, but where the words "yes, I consent to (sexual act)" were never uttered? I would rephrase those as something like;

25. Insisting that when a woman says "no" to sex, she usually means "yes".
26. Viewing a woman's reluctance to have sex as a challenge to get her to change her mind.
26a. Believing that alcohol is a useful tool to reduce a woman's inhibitions.

[Inkfreak]

76. Reading through this OP

You certainly don't seem to be anti-woman. Just pro-people. And pro-thoughtful approach. I think I'd find myself graded roughly the same. Your "internal note" made me chuckle a bit, honestly.

[hifiguy]

78. Very interesting.

Last edited Fri Aug 29, 2014, 12:54 PM - Edit history (2)

I took the "test" and typed my first, gut response to every question/statement.

1. Insisting the SCOTUS Hobby Lobby decision isn't a big deal 
it is one of the most wrong-headed and unjust decisions of the last several decades for all the reasons Justice Ginsburg set forth so eloquently.

2. Insisting men should have the right to compel a woman to abort a fetus.
No such right is tolerable in a civilized society, personal bodily integrity and a basic right for everyone.

3. Insisting a man's having to pay child support equates with the state's efforts to prohibit abortion.
Plainly, such a contention is false on its face.

4. Insisting men are more oppressed than women
See answer to #3.

5. Adopting the GOP idea of forcible rape vs. other rape and insisting the later (usually child rape) is less serious.
Rape is rape. Period.

6. Insisting that large numbers of women invent false rape charges 
A ridiculous concept. It probably happens about as frequently as lightning strikes kill people. Million-to-one odds against it, though it may occasionally happen.

7. Insisting rapists should not be punished with jail time.
Serious time in the big house should be the norm, not the exception.

8. Frequently taking the side of accused rapists over their victims.
Let the facts come out in the judicial system. This is not a place for prejudgment.

9. Insisting women's issues and feminism aren't important and don't constitute real politics.
They are just as much a part of "real politics" as economic and racial justice, and not separable from those issues.

10. Insisting women who object to rape porn or prostitution are uptight right-wingers.
Some are, some aren't.

11. Calling feminists prudes and Puritans
Some are, most aren't.

12. the sex-negative label 
May well have merit/accuracy in some cases.

13. Calling women c...t and b....s.
I don't. I have a rich vocabulary of gender-neutral terms for people who piss me off.

14. A whole slew of derogatory or sexualized comments about women's bodies.
In what context? Pretty murky here. Catcalling and other public exhibitions of a similar ilk are not acceptable.

15. Portraying a view of women that makes it clear someone sees their only purpose as to provide them sex
Too subjectively worded to answer.

16. anti-choice positions
I am absolutely and 100% pro-choice and have been for more than 40 years. None of my damned business.

17. opposing ACA's covering of women's reproductive care.
Quite how any thinking and reasonable person could oppose such coverage is something I cannot get my head around.

18. blaming women for their own sexual assaults.
No one should ever be blamed for being a victim of an assault or of bullying. Period.

19. arguing that violence against women isn't important
Violence against any human being is not acceptable.

20. arguing that rape isn't a societal problem
Obviously it is, and a serious one. D'uh.

21. Insisting a misogynistic mass murderer had real concerns about how bad off men have it today.
Anyone who makes that argument is too damned dumb to take seriously.

22. denying sexism and misogyny
Depends on how the terms are defined. Honest disagreement may be neither.

23. arguing that women in the US should be content with what they have
Why should any ordinary person, male or female, be content with “what they have” when the 1% are slowly and slowly immiserating the rest of the population?

24. Citing a study held out by an MRA big-wig that claims women say no when they really mean yes.
MRAs are full of shit.

25. Insisting consent is "elastic".
It isn't.

26. Insisting that consent is assumed.
It shouldn't be.

27. Insisting there is no such thing as male privilege.
It does exist, though I would argue it isn't as great as white privilege.

28. Men telling women they aren't real feminists because they disagree with them on an issue like porn or prostitution.
I will disagree with you (eta: on those issues) but whether you are a “real feminist” is beyond my ability to determine as the term is not a precise one.

ETA - Just for grins, did I pass or fail?

[BainsBane]

88. Laelth, please change your title. There is no BainsBane test

I wish you would have consulted me before posting this. I request you change the title and text of the OP to make clear it is your idea to use this as a test and not mine. Presenting it that was trivializes what my post was about, and I find it insulting.

[Atman]

106. Ouch. It hurts, doesn't it?

Yet here I am, suffering the slings and arrows of having once used the term "skanky."

Live by your words, Bains, or suffer the slings and arrows.

[BainsBane]

112. I have no problem with my words, and am not ashamed of them in the least.

I never claimed it was a test. Your words reveal who you are, as mine reveal who I am. The situation is not comparable. My list was of concerns. It never claimed to be a test or a means of judging people as good or bad. That you compare a list of concerns with a vile attack on women is hardly a suprise.

[Atman]

118. "Clearly the truth means nothing to you."

Do you really, honestly believe this? Seriously? After my decade on DU, you think truth means nothing to me? Get a grip, and stop posting bullshit hate an lies.

[LanternWaste]

148. Your martyrdom for using a misogynistic word will be given all the credibility it warrants

Your self-defined martyrdom for using a misogynistic word will be given all the credibility it indeed, warrants.

Bless your little heart.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

110. No worries Baines, His intent is Very Clear. This OP has generated some good discussion. Let it be.

Peace.

[BainsBane]

116. I will not let it be

I will not have my post plagiarized and mocked for the entertainment of men who resent the fact women speak in public about issues that concern them.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

125. Oh believe me, I know how you feel. I have been where you are now. -

All the world is a stage.

As You Like It, Act II, Scene VII [All the world’s a stage]
William Shakespeare, 1564 - 1616

Jaques to Duke Senior


All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages. At first, the infant,
Mewling and puking in the nurse’s arms.
Then the whining schoolboy, with his satchel
And shining morning face, creeping like snail
Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
Made to his mistress’ eyebrow. Then a soldier,
Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard,
Jealous in honor, sudden and quick in quarrel,
Seeking the bubble reputation
Even in the cannon’s mouth. And then the justice,
In fair round belly with good capon lined,
With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
Into the lean and slippered pantaloon,
With spectacles on nose and pouch on side;
His youthful hose, well saved, a world too wide
For his shrunk shank, and his big manly voice,
Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.

[Atman]

133. At some point you must come to realize...

...that you trivialize feminism by your constant complaining that ANYTHING men say -- I'm one of them. As one of your staunchest advocates, it is an insult, no matter how many times I document that I support women's issues and women/s rights, no matter how many times I post my bona fides, you don't care. I once posted the word "skanky," so therefore I hate women. Period. The word "skanky" means I hate women. Seriously?

Don't you get what you're doing? I'm a feminist. But I'm also a writer and I use words. Lighten up, let us all just accept that the English language has lots of variations. Or don't ever, ever, ever once again ever, use a derogatory term for a man again. Ever. See? It's the language, and you use it, too. I've seen in it your posts.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

152. here is the thing, Atman ... she may use derogatory terminiology but, I doubt it is

ever gender-specific terminology.

and Really, no harm no foul. you see up above in this thread where sea and I admit to the word = b!tc4

also some feminists want the right to reclaim some words, much in the same way POC claim the N word.

I also love language and I know from where you are coming with it all.

It is just that within the context of DU3 that perhaps ... that s word is not really a good word to choose.

Make use of your extensive knowledge of the English Language. Get creative. Insult all you want .... men and women.

But, do try to use non-gender insults. You may still get a hide for insulting someone but, it will not be a hide for using a gender
specific insult.

[Atman]

156. Yet, still, someone tried to hide my post.

Maybe you. I don't know. Simply DISCUSSING the use of a particular word became cause to hide my comment.

See where I'm going? We've gotten to the point that we can't even discuss WORDS.

I don't see women as "skanky." But I used the word once in a post, therefore I am forever forbidden from discussing women's issues on DU, despite the context of my original post. Sorry, I have no patience for the thought police that try to dictate which words I am allowed to type in order to make a certain point.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

159. dude, I do not alert. Never fear of that from me. -

I am the one that has called this place a Kangaroo Court with a Mickey Mouse Jury.

of which I used to be one but, since I am down to zero chance for being called to service you don't even have to worry about that.

I can not help what the juries decide or who alerts.

The whole system is a crap shoot if you ask me.

[taught_me_patience]

202. There is a posse of alerters from HoF that try to shut down anything

they don't agree with. They've tried unsuccessfully on multiple posters in the this thread - including the thread itself! I guarantee if your post were hidden, several of them would come out and giggle and dance over your hidden post. It's been done to me and it's really sad... turns people off to their cause.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

208. and Here I am going on record to say that I do not know you much less ever laughed at you or ever

alerted one of your posts. Speaking of a turn off.

[CTyankee]

164. wow, I didn't think men were still telling women to "lighten up."

That's pretty old, Atman.

[Atman]

166. I didn't tell WOMEN to "lighten up."

I was addressing a particular poster and a particular post. Lighten up.

[CTyankee]

192. It is an unfortunate choice of words, Atman.

I shouldn't need to inform you of this.

[Atman]

195. You don't need to inform me of anything.

Just read the post.

The words "lighten up" pretty common. The was nothing gender-specific about it. It was in reference to the post, not all posters or all women. Really. Lighten up.

[CTyankee]

205. I will be patient.

So here: at one time the phrase "lighten up" was not gender specific, but it became so as some men were telling feminists that their concerns were unwarranted and they should lighten up, implying that if women simply didn't take things so seriously they would be happier. That is the context to which I refer. Perhaps unconsciously you adopted that particular unfortunate wording in a thread about sexism and it was addressed to a woman. If it had been used in another context it would not have evoked the response I made to you.

A word to the wise should be sufficient.

[LondonReign2]

184. "mocked for the entertainment of men who resent the fact women speak in public"

Oh boy.

You should have quit while you were behind.

[seabeyond]

119. except what she says is correct. it is NOT baines test. gosh, i cannot call that what it is

for fear of a hide. totally fucked up

[Tuesday Afternoon]

136. She is a correct but, it generated (maybe unintentionally by the OP) such a good jumping off place

for what has turned out to be a very enlightening discussion that I am inclined to be benevolent and allow this especially since the poster gives credit to the original author.

Stay cool, Baines.

Who knows? You may have unwittingly created the newest Internet Meme!

[lumberjack_jeff]

134. "Among the positions some feminists identify with sexism and misogyny..."

If you're not speaking for yourself, I think it's reasonable to ask which feminists you are speaking for, and which of their views you disagree with.

[Depaysement]

121. I can add a 29th

"You don't believe a woman should receive pay for equal work."

[Tuesday Afternoon]

157. I thought of that but, I think it is kind of covered in the #4, maybe ... the one where

men are not more oppressed than women. This is one reason why Men are NOT more oppressed than women.

[CBGLuthier]

139. I have a test of my own. Are you rude and insensitive on the internet

Question 1. Do you make fun of other's sincerely held beliefs?

That is all.

BTW, you passed, and by passing, you failed.

[treestar]

142. to Kill a Mockingbird was fiction

I see no benefit to false rape charges for women generally. At least now nowadays (might have once been necessary to get around non-marital sex when caught, as in the Victorian age - but the Victorian age is long over).

[Nye Bevan]

215. The Duke lacrosse case was real, however.

Several young men's lives could have been ruined.

It's rare, yes, but it does happen.

[ieoeja]

147. #6 with a cavaet. Not all false charges are equal.

GOOD: 27
ADEQUATE: 1


False charges reported to the police are very rare. Somewhat less so in the Bible Belt where women often feel the need to protect their reputation. But even there they are rare. Ironically, most false charges are probably caused by misogny in the society causing a woman to feel the need to make a false charge to protect herself.

Ditto on all rarity and cause regarding unreported false charges if made seriously enough to cause harm to the man in question.


However, what is not at all uncommon in the Bible Belt are false accusations of rape as purely a matter of form. The woman with three children, all by her husband, "all by rape", she says. She is lying. Everybody knows she is lying. And she knows everybody knows she is lying. Otherwise she wouldn't say it because she doesn't want to cause her husband any trouble. But she is allowed this fiction so she can maintain her self-image of a good, moral woman (in her eyes) who would never, even in marriage, willingly have sex.

Then there was the girl I knew in college angry that her boyfriend was playing football with the guys and was now too tired to rape her. Her exact words. Western modern Christianity concerns itself with the virginity of the spirt rather than the body. If she claims all of her sexual encounters is rape, then she gets to claim virginity. Everybody knows she is lying as well. And she knows everybody knows she is lying. But she's going to wear white at her wedding, damn it!

These false accusations are not going to cause direct serious problems in the real world. And it is the symptom of some seriously fucked up mental issues. And societal ones. But since they have no direct consequence, they are actually quite common.

They do cause serious indirect problems. Assholes lump these unserious false accusations in with the serious ones so they can make bullshit claims. Worse yet, they cause people to doubt rape allegations.

Plus they are the #1 cause of foot-in-mouth disease for GOP rape candidates.

[stage left]

163. I just looked at Bain'sbane's original post.

This is not her test, Laelth, it is yours. And, in my opinion, you fail utterly.

[Iron Man]

176. I don't do purity tests.

[Moosepoop]

222. Neither does BainesBane.

See post #62: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025460497#post62

[AverageJoe90]

230. I sincerely wish I could believe that. I really do.

But I'm afraid that pretty much every experience I've had with her has utterly disproved that theory entirely. And I'm not alone, either, nor is she the only offender in this regard.

[steve2470]

198. with all sincere respect.....

I would re-word your misogyny test. Again, with respect and no snark intended. Peace.

[AverageJoe90]

201. This is a decent OP, IMO.

I suspect that we may disagree on a few things, but regardless of that, this was a well-thought out response to BainsBane's OP.

Unfortunately, though, I can't help but suspect that not toeing a certain party line has probably now marked you into the "Bad" category in a few eyes(hell, I just got 'splained to by a certain someone on the other thread that I apparently didn't get women's issues, and I think I might have actually initially agreed a little more with her OP than yours).

[LeftyMom]

220. $50. Standing offer. nt

[boston bean]

226. I'll throw in another $50, if it helps!

[LeftyMom]

234. STFUstarter could save DU! nt

[boston bean]

235. Skinner could be a millionaire before he know it.

[malthaussen]

231. I think you misinterpret the intent of the post to which you are responding.

As the OP cites "positions some feminists identify with sexism," it is clearly, to my view, simply listing important issues, and not suggesting that one need to conform to all to pass a purity test.

-- Mal

[Raffi Ella]

240. This Violates the SOP of GD.

Calling out members like this is not permitted. The negative impact this kind Disruptive Meta has on our forum is not welcome here. If you have a problem with a member please take it up with Admins or put them on ignore.

DISRUPTIVE META-DISCUSSION

Positive threads about Democratic Underground or its members are are permitted.

Threads complaining about Democratic Underground or its members; threads complaining about jury decisions, locked threads, suspensions, bannings, or the like; and threads intended to disrupt or negatively influence the normal workings of Democratic Underground and its community moderating system are not permitted.