On the evolution of language and the "W" word

[nadinbrzezinski]

Here

Faux "news" and "Judge" Jeanine Pirro are still flogging the fake Benghazi "scandal" for every drop they can get out of it. This Saturday, Pirro attacked former CIA director Michael Morell as a "political whore" and accused him of lying to Congress to protect Hillary Clinton.

http://crooksandliars.com/2014/04/foxs-pirro-calls-former-cia-director

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--PZrtoTUa--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/ll1bn7yqsf8zqeqwozk5.jpg

Political Whores Form Brothel

The executive director of the Republican Governor's Association and the executive director of the Democratic Governor's Association announced today that they are getting together to sell their mutual political connections to the highest bidder.

THE POLITICO reports that RGA head Phil Cox and DGA head Colm O'Comartun are now ready to completely abandon any pretense of ideals or, indeed, care for any cause greater than their own bank accounts. They are forming "a bipartisan consulting firm that will help corporate clients navigate state governments," which is the very highest calling of those who have entered the noble field of politics. Their new brothel, 50 States LLC, will be a one-stop shop where corporate interests can get all of their strategic consulting needs met by seasoned political operatives unburdened by any form of mortal soul. No longer will you, the corporate client, need to hire a Democratic firm to pursue your interests with Democrats, and a Republican firm to pursue your interests with Republicans; now, you can hire one firm that believes in absolutely nothing except the almighty dollar, saving you a great deal of hassle.

http://gawker.com/political-whores-form-brothel-1671380006

For the record, this piece has in it the definition of the term, in better language than Urban Dictionary.

http://a4.img.talkingpointsmemo.com/image/upload/c_fill,fl_keep_iptc,g_faces,h_365,w_652/msuwctueeuw6cni0anrs.jpg

California NOW President: 'Meg Whitman Could Be Described As A Political Whore'

Last week, the National Organization for Women and the PAC of the California NOW chapter took heat for their endorsement of state Attorney General Jerry Brown (D) over Meg Whitman (R) in the gubernatorial race in the wake of comments by a Brown aide that Whitman was a "whore." At the time, national NOW President Terry O'Neill said that anyone who "from here on" calls a woman a "whore" should be fired.

She might want to have a talk with California NOW President Parry Bellasalma, who today told TPM in response to a question that "Meg Whitman could be described as 'a political whore.' Yes, that's an accurate statement."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/california-now-president-meg-whitman-could-be-described-as-a-political-whore

Two points

These are all in the first page AFTER the definition from Urban dictionary. They are in order of appearance in my google search. The search term was "political **^&(&" We cannot cannot use the actual word because it is magical. This is how language is evolving. You will see this horrible term used increasingly in politics. It matters little what you do, or how much you complaint.

Now, this does not mean I would necessarily use the term in a news article. But you would be shocked how many times I have heard it used to describe politicians on both sides of the aisle and genders, in the recent past. The usage has increased by orders of magnitude in the last two years. And I fear, from reading the entries on the google that we are late to the party in my little cul de sac, that aparently is not part of the country anyway.

As you can see, the NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN did go there and called Fiorina that. You have a fox personality who happens to be a woman and black use the term for a male. And Gawker used it for a K street firm run by two WHITE males.

Now I expect the outrage brigade to tell me how this is not real, never mind it is actually sourced. Fortunately I have a World Health Organization report to read... and there is no storm, so better take advantage of THAT! (Literally calm before the storm, by two we will see if Dolores once again becomes painful... yeah play on words... but you need to speak Spanish to get it I s'pose and I would not be good enough to explain that joke. After all what would a native speaker know?)

[shenmue]

1. You shouldn't say it, and you know it.

Stop with the garbage.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. You do go and tell Gawker and NOW to stop using it

my point is that you will not stop language evolution. You can try to ignore it... in fact I recommend you do. But adults who work with language regularly realize it CHANGES.

So tell me, when a source tells me that any given local pol, or a few local organizations are that, I must stop recording and scold them? Is that your view here? Becuase it is not real life.

[geek tragedy]

10. Gawker is the new standard? nt

[NuclearDem]

15. Gawker and Urban Dictionary, apparently.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. I hope you are not too shocked when you see it in LA Times, NYT

even New Yorker.

It is coming, because this new use is becoming very common. I have more recordings with it than I care to think So once again, when somebody tells me so and so is a *()&&()) shoudl I stop the interview and scold them for their potty mouth?

[geek tragedy]

18. so, if someone calls Elizabeth Warren a "stupid whore' we should shrug our shoulders

and say "go for it?"

Myself, I think anyone who uses such rhetoric against women should be bounced from DU instantly.

Pretty sure that the NY Times won't become 4chan.

I would hope DU would also avoid becoming the kind of slime pit where such rhetoric is encouraged.

Feel free to do a google image search (remove the safe search filters) for that word and tell us how the sexual degradation and misogyny have been removed from its common understanding.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. I expect it

and I expect it with insert politician here. I have heard it very often now. Hell, I even heard it at City Council already... it was shocking, but it was what it was. So when it gets to that level... you are fighting a losing battle. Language does indeed evolve.

It has become quite normal in some circles... they include members of BOTH PARTIES. It also includes the speaking heads and political analysts. Do a search for the term. Serious.

I just used the first three entries in order.

[geek tragedy]

25. do a google image search for the word. tell us how women are depicted in the results

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. Words and their ussage do not evolve at the same speed

and like it or not, the term is here to stay. You might want to ignore it, but try as you may, it is now part of political speech.

Once again, language evolves.

By the way, did you have a problem that it was used against Carly Fiorina? Becuase that was one of the first times and people here have no problem using that term against Republicans. If you are gong to have THAT standard, be consistent.

And is this I wonder, a demographic thing? As in an age thing?

[geek tragedy]

33. "Words and their ussage do not evolve at the same speed"

what the hell does that even mean?

It's one of the favorite words of wife-beaters when they beat the shit out of women. Somewhere between "bitch" and "slut."

The word retains its toxicity--something you obviously don't care about.

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. Yes, but that is not the context of usage

in politics. Capiche? Many words HAVE MULTIPLE MEANINGS. This one is in the process of getting a new one.

[geek tragedy]

37. getting a new meaning doesn't mean it loses the old one. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

41. And exactly where did I say that?

Lingustics can be complicated, but it is best to try to behave like an adult and try not to put words into your interlocutor.

So in third grade English... THIS WORD IS GETTING A NEW MEANING THAT YOU WILL INCREASINGLY SEE. That is the point of the OP.

You can try the dutch boy trick and sit by the sea wall with your finger in it though.

[geek tragedy]

47. sure, new meaning doesn't mean primary or mainstream meaning, or that the new

meaning makes the word any more palatable or inoffensive or harmful or toxic.

It will get used in the gutters of the Internet, but no it's not coming to the NY Times.

[nadinbrzezinski]

53. I would not bet on that

Because it did in 2010

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/us/politics/03calif.html

And it did the same way I would use it... IN QUOTES... with ATTRIBUTION.

But ten years, and this new usage will be common.

[geek tragedy]

59. do you not understand the difference between reporting on the use of a word

vs adopting the word in attack?

The NY Times reports on the Confederate Flag. It does not display the Confederate Flag in order to illustrate its viewpoint.

[nadinbrzezinski]

62. I understand it

but you said it would not come. I just showed you it did.

And it did when it was still shocking, These days places like Politico are starting to use it

And once again, should I call people on their potty mouths?

Serious, because that is what I am getting from you.

And here from the DU way back machine

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4595123#4595289

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9424476

So it is okay to call the other side these words?

At least try to be consistent.

[skepticscott]

165. It means that words stay the same

while their meanings change or diverge. It means that attaching new meanings to existing words happens before, or instead of, the creation of entirely new words to denote new meanings.

Is that really such a hard concept? You're on a computer, for pity's sake..you're surrounded by it.

[Warren Stupidity]

140. a "stupid whore" would be the wrong usage, the one that should be avoided.

if instead Warren were called a "political whore" after she changed her position on a major issue for reasons that seemed entirely self serving, we should be outraged at Warren's duplicity, not at the phrase describing it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

143. But the two words would be descriptive per current usage.

As is, I expect the term to be used to the point that it loses it's power. Mark these words, but it will be used so often that it will lose descriptive power.

It is part of the highly partisan environment we live in. and the coarsening of language. Which is the only valid point these critics might have.

[geek tragedy]

144. well, apparently at DU it's okay to call Hillary a straight up "whore" so that nuance

gets lost, and there's really nothing to be lost by just dropping that word. Notice, by the way, GD hosts have a policy of locking any "don't call women whores" post, while refusing to lock any "go ahead and call women whores" post. Because apparently one is divisive meta and the other isn't.

if a person can't make an argument without using "whore" then they're either a seething misogynist or a complete moron

[nadinbrzezinski]

148. Perhaps this is too hard to understand

but I am not talking of a single politician, but how language is evolving. For the record, I expect that term to be used with that politician, and a score of others... local, state and federal. And I also mean those will be white, black, brown, male and female.

This is where this is going. And I predict that if it is used with your preferred one, people will be angry here. But it this is used with political enemies, that will be fine. So unless there is a general rule that magically infused words cannot be used under any circumstances... this is hypocrisy. I expect this in the hyper partisan environment we are in, but it is what it is. And I am daring to call it for what it is.

You asked about Warren. I expect it. I expect it just about any politician that some group or another does not agree with.

That was the whole point of that OP... I did not go far... I just went to the google. This is trying to stop a river in full flood and then some. You might not use the word. I do not quote nasty bits of language generally speaking. But this is where it is going.

And when I come to this place I hyper censor myself, because there is a group here that gets offended easily. I considered NOT posting that OP this morning for a good hour. It was not a spur of the moment. I also expected it to be alerted, because it has magical words in there.

By the way... do you remember the Vagina Monologues? DO you understand why they are still revolutionary in many ways? Somebody went ahead and took a naughty word and empowered it. I wish more here understood that. There is a movement as I type to retake the S word, another magic infused word that cannot be used here, but linguists and feminists are noticing this process. I find it fascinating. But we could not have a discussion on that here. Never mind it is happening in real time.

That has impoverished the site's level of discussion.

[geek tragedy]

149. The Vagina Monologues? That stuff maybe was cutting edge

decades ago.

Nowadays, it gets bashed as being transphobic.

[nadinbrzezinski]

150. And it is still used

to empower folks. It is still studied as well. See, we are not talking the same language, even if seemingly we are.

And we cannot have these discussions here. Impossible.

[MADem]

160. "Both" is a possibility, too, I think!

if a person can't make an argument without using "whore" then they're either a seething misogynist or a complete moron
...

[hifiguy]

335. I prefer some riff on "corporate bootlicker" myself.

Makes the point w/o reigniting the boring, tiresome, endless, inane, vacuous, pointless, endlessly repetitive "debate" about language poiicing that are enough to drive sensible people to racquetball, whisky or both.

And given modern colloquial English usage, one could easily think it a more pungent insult.

[nadinbrzezinski]

343. There are a few other terms used

that work as well, I was just pointing out where this is going. It's gone from the OH MY GOD WHITE MAN CALLED WOMAN WHAT? To Women applying it to men, using it on air at FOX and I have heard it on CNN too. To being printed on political press.

I find it interesting, because I can see this term appearing here in copy and paste, and people getting outraged over the copy and paste itself. Myself, I intend to giggle a lot. That is all there is left.

For the record there is a reason why this is happening... book recommendation

http://www.amazon.com/Even-Worse-Than-Looks-Constitutional/dp/0465074731/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1437523176&sr=8-1&keywords=it+is+worst+than+it+looks

Making my way though it. It is clear as water as to how dangerous the present moment is. But it also explains how in particular partisans (with republicans having the large dose of the guilt) being partially responsible for this.

[hifiguy]

347. I actually left DU a couple of years ago because I was so sick of the word policing

and alert stalking from the usual suspects,though mercifully a couple of them seem to have gone away for good, thank Celestia. Came back a year ago because I realized I was only cutting myself off from so many here I truly respect by letting the assholes get to me.

It's tiresome. Moreover, as the planet is sliding into uninhabitability while the plutocrats are finalizing their plans for the enslavement of all humanity, it is a time-wasting rearranging party for the deck furniture on the Titanic.

And thanks for thebook rec! Will look into it ASAP.

[nadinbrzezinski]

349. I left a year ago over overt antisemitism

and I expect it again. So when it does, I am gone.

And the problem with the language police is that if I post a thread on diapers, and how that affects working women, and the price of them... actual policy, gasp... I guess I should include a few choice words to get it to stay near the top. Otherwise it will sink.

DU is known for this pretty discussions over words, and not policy any longer. To me, it's a place you come for entertainment anymore.

[zappaman]

359. Glad you came back to tell us how much you hate it at this "cesspool" as you called it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

360. Thanks for the watch check

it works

[Brother Buzz]

363. To Hell with watch checks, did you get your calendar fixed?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025084402

[nadinbrzezinski]

365. I find your keeping tabs on my posts

endearing truly.

And it does work, my calendar too.

I love you too.

[zappaman]

370. Mine too!

[nadinbrzezinski]

372. Good I am glad

your choice of a coo coo watch could be seen as a cutesy personal attack though. Just a heads up.

[reddread]

380. Nadine, Ive known a lot of semi-retired prostitutes, and a few politicians

the semi-retired prostitutes are sweethearts.
the Politicians are WHORES.
But you know what darkness really slithers in the cesspool of life?
foul, hateful beings who care nothing or worse for the welfare of others
some people would even score crank for pedophiles.
keep walking in the light, let those dark souls cloud someone elses life.
thanks for being such a tough customer.
they arent worthy of worry,
barely worthy of pity.

[nadinbrzezinski]

381. Some pitty

people so fixated deserve some... It is the empathy in me.

And like you, I have known people who have lived very tough lives.

[William769]

13. Your point is you are trying to defend something that can't be defended

The word is disgusting the way it was used and the people trying to find the justification for this sexist bullshit shows just what type of person they are and it doesn't look kindly on them.

You can put lipstick on a pig to try to make it look pretty. But guess what? You still have a pig.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. William this might be shocking to you

but this new use is actually taking some of the sexual context away from it.

It is actually making the world LESS POWERFUL.

[William769]

19. Nothing you say is shocking. It's other things, but not shocking.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. Whatever dude

[George II]

107. Adding a new use of a word doesn't cancel out the age-old OLD use.

[nadinbrzezinski]

125. You mean like the other Indo European root, for the word KAMA

meaning love and desire? You surely have heard of the book kamasutra, right?

Yup, you are correct.

Or the old Irish cara meaning "friend"

Nope, the word has not just negative connotations throughout its 15,000 year old history of evolution. Don't get me wrong, it can and does also carry negative connotations. But those old terms are also there. You likely did not realize that.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=whore

Etymology and linguistics are just fascinating.

And what you are seeing is a semantic shift. It will be nice to stand on the side lines and watch you folks go to "war" and try to stop it. Like the little boy in Holland, with a finger on the dyke.

[George II]

129. True - but in the context and wording of that sentence from Saturday....

....the "w" word was highly offensive.

I'm proud to have been the person who alerted on it and was very disappointed that the post was not hidden.

[nadinbrzezinski]

131. I suspect that the term with the word political attached to it

will be seen more and more often, which is the point I made in the OP.

It will be attached to politicians of all parties, not just one, both male and female.

In 2010 it was a scandal when it was first used in this way by a high level politician. In the last 5 years it's gone form OH MY GOD he did not call Fiorina that! (Governor Brown in California did, and got some fire support as it were, as I pointed out in the OP), to ok... next. The term has become normalized among the political and talking head classes. I will not be too shocked to hear it on MSNBC one of these days. It's been used in Fox and CNN as well. The NYT has used it in quotes.

The other term that has become that way is media (magical word here). Hell, there is a site that uses that in their domain name.

So trying to stop this particular use is imho a losing battle.

Don't worry, I try to avoid serious discussions on this site. This thread is exhibit A. I constantly self censor myself on this site. Again, this thread is exhibit A. This has been the first serious attempt at an actual discussion in a while, likely the last for a good while. It's a time sink.

Not being able to discuss these changes in a mature adult way is very dangerous. Hell, it is damaging to whatever remains of our democracy.

It is part of the hyper partisanship that has overtaken this country. Language is a powerful tool to control. The Rs get the lion's share of it, but dems are not innocent. And if we are to have fruitful discussions and to move away from this, well self censorship needs to stop.

This site used to be known in the internets for vibrant, even muscular political discussion. That stopped a while ago. It is because of the self censorship among other issues.

This was alerted on, because apparently, a surprise to me, I was talking about HRC, when I was not I expected the alert well before I hit send becuase of the use of a magical word. We go back to self censorship and lack of an ability to discuss things.

This word by the way spit about 7,000 years ago... between it's good and bad definitions. It is one of the oldest words in Indo-European languages. It is not going away anytime soon. Anything that takes away the magic and it's power to insult is a good thing to me. And this shift, at least to me, is doing that.

Will it still be used in it's old meanings? You betcha. Words, do not lose older definitions that easily. This one has had it's ties to prostitution going back to at least Latin, not even lower Latin. That be the Roman Empire. Language evolution is kind of an interest of mine. I find it fascinating.

[Warpy]

374. Actually, "whoring" oneself to the highest bidder is an old use

It's only the prissiest among us that think using it as a synonym for prostitution is the only use it's ever had.

Even if you Bowderize the already Bowdlerized versions of Shakespeare and manage to eliminate the word from all literature (including the bible), there will still be prostitutes and there will still be people prostituting their souls to the highest bidder.

There will also be plenty of insults against women. The worst insult is that women are such tender, sensitive little flowers that they must be protected from mean old words, like any one of us isn't capable of telling you all about your ancestry, anatomy, proclivities and ultimate destination if you call us one of those many words.

[nadinbrzezinski]

375. If I don't miss my cue it goes back to Shakespeare

whoring oneself that is. Speaking of Bowdlerizing...

[ancianita]

185. One could make the case that sexist and racist words "internalize" rather than "evolve."

That epithets are internalized and made a joke. That historically sexist words evolve into other contexts to include men might just show the gradual internalizing of men's language by women who accommodate the language of historically male spheres, language which they then adapt change to apply to other contexts. So do men. As when men call each other 'cunts,' 'bitches' or 'motherfuckers.'

In the case of the historically pejorative "nigger," there's no evolving. Instead, any "acceptable" use of the word "nigger" as non-pejorative is claimed by black people alone (as in "my niggaz", or "nigga, check yo'self&quot , the enforced rule being that no white person could or should use it in any context whatsoever, (Evah evah? Evah evah.) since it is so racially loaded with dog whistle double meaning. Its use by anyone in any context is too soon.

In that case, the pejorative is 'internalized' and changed solely on black people's terms and timeline. Is what black people assert censorship? If it is, then 1st Amendment anti-censorship apologists need not worry about using it here. And yet we don't. Because respect.

As a Bernie Sanders supporter and feminist, I claim that it's too soon to use "whore" when referencing female candidates in any context for the same reason. Until a vast majority of women don't see "whore" as sexist dog whistle across contexts, it's too soon. Because respect.

I've made this case to 1st Amendment anti-censorship apologists here and have been called childish.

So the if the issue here is freedom of speech along with "evolution" of historical pejoratives, along with time spent sorting out poster use and intent of historical pejoratives, we'll see how that plays out. Because in political contexts, word use will be in play for the playaz and the played.

[nadinbrzezinski]

186. Actually with the word Nigger, used these days by rappers regularly

there is a clear age difference. Older folk in the community hate the use of the world, because they think it internalizes and all that. When you talk to the kids, and we have, it is reapropriating the term. In effect making it a term used within the community as a term of pride. I would not even think of using the word, unless we were doing an interview with a local rapper and ask about the use of that word.

There is another magical word, starts with an S, where this is just at the beginning stages. See, at DU I self censor to the point of not spelling the word out. Suffice it to say if you do a general search for the S word and linguistics you might find it.

I suspect this will accelerate with many bad words

Also with the etymology of the W word, it is one of the oldest in Indo European languages. Some of the contexts are very good indeed. Just a note, but a word that has been around for 15000 years is not all bad. It is up there in age with no.

[ancianita]

195. And 'Yes.'

But age doesn't bring dignity, respectability or legitimacy to sexual pejoratives simply because etymology explains or because of free word use. Longevity shows magical power as much through inducing fear -- thus, 'no' -- in the hearers and awe for the fear inducers who used a word to define a 'whole' woman whose sexuality was angering, to be held in check, and deemed dangerous to men because of the unfree culture of male enforcement that it was used for.

Its power lay in who controlled who said what words as well as how that power was enforced. How that power was lost will play out with the "N" word, too. Chance the Rapper just laughingly on stage declared that all white people can use "nigga", etc. All the laughter showed that, really, no one took him seriously.

Whore's pejorative 'magic' was 'lost' when men were forced to realize that the word has been an historically defensive projection of their own behaviors -- emphasis on forced since this is a pretty recent 'evolution' in the human timeline.

[nadinbrzezinski]

196. My god, do you even know a thing about the origin of the word? Serious

Because one of the roots is KAMA, you might be familiar with the KAMASUTRA. Good luck censoring a 15,000 year old word that has morphed and changed over the course of Millenia.

Then there is the word for friend in IRISH. This is why this censorious impulse takes away from language since words do have more than one meaning. They always have, and likely they always will. Even new words will evolve, because that is what language does.

Keep that bowdlerizing attitude and please do have the absolute last word. We do not have anything more to say to each other here.

Political correctness will kill the richness of language.

[ancianita]

197. I like the word. I love etymology. I'm an anti-censorship English teacher. Here, given the site's

goals, I argued that the word's use be suspended to clear space for more immediately pressing political issues.

Political correctness whores do, indeed, kill the richness. Both words have their own magic, as Republicans know.

[nadinbrzezinski]

198. Then you are surredenring to the few folks

who want to ban words, They will go after others.

Look, I just called down thread by one of these idiots a supposedly banned word, the B word. That was a clearly directed personal insult. I called the person on it and moved on.

We have a group of people here that wants to ban one word after the other. And quite honestly I am damn tired of them.

Oh and on edit. I have not used these magical words, but the articles I linked to from a google search DO. How exactly do we get rid of the word when it will be in media narratives?

[ancianita]

199. I get that and am here to tell you I've never been one of that group. I don't support them, even

as I categorize teh "W" word as dog whistle that opens up more indiscriminate gender pejoratives to use here.

I accepted the jury's decision but made a case to keep the language less derailing in threads.

[nadinbrzezinski]

200. Well I think it is time to push back on that group

because many of us are simply fed up with it.

As to it being a whistle... watching the words used (in the OP), on many male politicians, as well as it's cousin regarding corporations tells the these words are morphing, as far as that particular set of meanings. The old standby will remain, since it goes back to Latin (Rome), so context people.

I suspect part of the problem is a lousy educational system where PC language has gone off the rails. and made the impulse to censor that much easier. By the way, they get away with this, next comes the F word. Oh and I am sure by now you have read Skinner's comment on this. Lord knowns I do not agree with Skinner on the color of the sky, but by god he has actually said two things I do. See my sig for number one

Here is number two

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12598326#post4

[ancianita]

204. I don't check that group, usually, so thanks for sharing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

205. Neither do I,

but even the owner is going... not so fast.

[kentauros]

525. Then you might like this site,

if you don't know about it already

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=whore&allowed_in_frame=0

[nadinbrzezinski]

533. One of my favorite sites

I can spend hours there, when I need a nice distraction from work.

[ancianita]

535. Nice! Thanks!

[nc4bo]

201. Jury results......

On Mon Jul 20, 2015, 09:17 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Actually with the word Nigger, used these days by rappers regularly
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6993051

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Wait, what? Is this necessary? Perfect example of "whitesplainin"

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Jul 20, 2015, 09:38 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I'd give an explanation but i'm just going to spurt. Just leave it at PC run amok.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I'll probably be out numbered but........I do. not. want. to. see. this. word here, especially used in a subject line.


Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

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

[nadinbrzezinski]

203. Thanks not surprised it was alerted

and in reality we have had those talks. It is ironic that I am using the words of a local African American Rapper... but I guess that is white splaining. And given I am Hispanic, it is even more funny.I guess this is Jew Splaining or Chicana splaining...

Of course here is a good write up on the complexities of the word, I did not go into all of it.

http://www.tolerance.org/magazine/number-40-fall-2011/feature/straight-talk-about-n-word

Oh and the author is African American.

[hfojvt]

385. actually I have known some old people using it too

I even asked them about it. They (MT and JG) said it was okay from a black person, but not from a white. Although it was only JG who was saying it, and also L, both talking to their wives.

The young people, otoh, made a distinction between -ga and -ger. Rappers are saying 'nigga' and not the other word. D, a young black man, was insistent that those are TWO different words, one acceptable, the other not. These young people, though, also quite readily referred to girls as beaches. Perhaps their wives have now cured them of that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

388. You know that is a nice distinction of the language

I had not thought about. So next time we are in private and they trust me with this, I will ask.

I find the whole development interesting. And yes, I do talk to local rappers.

[snooper2]

55. or I'll smack your hands with a ruler!

Wait...

This is the intertubes...

can you see my fingers?

[edgineered]

3. Concur with nadin. nt

[tomm2thumbs]

4. Jury was unanimous

just sayin'

Even Meg Whitman indicates there are contexts to be taken into account. And Brown repeatedly apologized for it being used in the most negative context by someone in a conference call background.

There is a thing called 'gray' here.

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. Thanks I expected this to be alerted

Which is a statement all on it's own.

[Warpy]

178. Oh of course, you can always count on a word jumper

who only focuses on a word instead of the context in which is it used and absolutely hates to be reminded that the context changes the word completely from what s/he thinks it is.

These present day Bowdlerizers are going to find that the words they don't like are going to increase in usage just to spite them. No one likes a censor and common scolds are especially despised.

Eventually the Triumvirate is going to have to address this. Using the jury system to bully people and shut down debate has gotten out of hand.

[nadinbrzezinski]

180. Well especially since I am speaking of language evolution

and with the web, all the use of nasty bits and words, is accelerating and words are changing faster than the dictionaries can keep up/

Also these present day Bowdlerizers got that way only after that word started to be attached to DEMOCRATS I went to the way back machine and found it used with Republicans as late as this year.

That kind of hypocrisy is just grand in my view. Either you ban it completely, or you don't.

[nadinbrzezinski]

182. By the way, here is the definition

less one of these folks alerts on you

bowdlerizer
Also found in: Legal.
bowd·ler·ize (bōd′lə-rīz′, boud′
tr.v. bowd·ler·ized, bowd·ler·iz·ing, bowd·ler·iz·es
To remove material that is considered offensive or objectionable from (a book, for example); expurgate.

[craigmatic]

6. Doesn't the word just mean a willingness to do anything for money?

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Yes, and the finer point

to give up on your political principles and sell out your soul.

[craigmatic]

8. Then why are people mad at the word? In the 2 most recent cases where I've seen it used it was

used against guys. One guy was kissing corporate America's ass and this guy working for Hillary.

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. Because of the sexual context in

another entry in the dictionary. I mean Websters, This new use has not gone into a formal dictionary yet. It should within a few years, since it is becoming a common use. If I ever use it, in a quote, I will have to use Gawker's way, which is the way you use new uses per AP.

And they are fighting a losing battle, becuase it is becoming quite common in this new form, The first few times people were shocked that it was used. Now, I hear it from younger activists and even political operatives often. I admit, the first time I heard it, was about three years ago, and I had that reaction, you potty mouth, you. Now... ok... so.

In fact, I welcome this new usage of a really ancient word. It is taking some of that context away from it.

[Warpy]

206. It's a college thing

Since the word also means a woman who sells her body, they want it banned so not only will prostitution disappear overnight, so will all insults against women.

It's not going to work. People are going to start using these words to spite them.

After all, Dr Bowdler died a broken man, his attempt to make Shakespeare readable to one's toddlers as bedtime stories the butt of many jokes and his name applied to all sorts of prissy attempts to sanitize both literature and daily speech.

[nadinbrzezinski]

364. I took women's studies in college

that was a generation ago.

I do not remember having this impulse back then. We were more concerned with how language affected things like eating disorders, and Role Playing Games, the paper and pencil kind, (and a certain famous collection from Ral Partha of miniatures), But we were far more concerned with things like jobs, and equal pay and how to achieve that.

Yeah the gaming market has cleaned up it's art and that collection from Ral Partha is truly a collectors item these days... handle with care it is cast from lead. GASP, protect women and children!!!!

Language and cleaning it up never, really came up as a priority so hard that nothing else was discussed. Things must have changed. Some of my art from gaming magazines from the 1980s would give these folks fits!!! Hell, my slave market set of minis would too... in fact, they have not gone after a certain Princess Leah in slave clothing is a shock to me. They must remove that scene from Star Wars...



Oh and I got that set used from a gamer who sold it in pristine condition. After an hour lecture... and why we should get rid of small 28 mm nekkid women, and why DnD was the scourge of feminists... I wanted it... mostly out of curiosity. Years later I got into gaming. I have found that the attitude of the gaming industry is... complicated regarding women... I could write a book on the subject.

[Eleanors38]

269. Then there are the HOR submarine engines of WW II...

Built by Hooven, Owens, Rentschler for a U.S. Navy competition, they promised high output for the weight, but proved so unreliable that crews took to referencing them as (presumably) "whores." Since crews were worried about merely surviving, rather than bang for the buck, the notions of unreliability and cosmic hassle seem to have been introduced to the expression.

[nadinbrzezinski]

367. See I learn something every day

hubby is a USN ret Sub Service Chief. He might have heard more details on it. So I will ask. And look it up of course. I love language.

[Eleanors38]

450. Silent Victory, a book by Clay Blair, gives an account of the HOR engines...

...and of the naval competition that resulted in two successful engines (GMC Winton and Fairbanks Morse) and the failure of the HOR, which often left submariners stranded or traveling at low speeds in enemy seas. Perhaps this experience gave rise to a new meaning for "whore."

[nadinbrzezinski]

452. It likely did

[nadinbrzezinski]

371. Here a link to a book on this

https://books.google.com/books?id=OfsVEUYXLT0C&pg=PA66&lpg=PA66&dq=sub+crews+refered+to+engines+as+whore&source=bl&ots=1BQ8vhd-nD&sig=iht03ICzNAGl0-ZIzTv5paOFEfM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAGoVChMI8o2V39DtxgIVEEeICh2geQqB#v=onepage&q=sub%20crews%20refered%20to%20engines%20as%20whore&f=false

[Eleanors38]

462. Enjoyed the read! Thanks.

[nadinbrzezinski]

463. You welcome

[NuclearDem]

9. How is using a word meaning "selling oneself for money" to describe "selling oneself for money"

in any way, "language evolution"?

[Igel]

96. It's semantic shift.

It used to mean "a woman who has sexual relations with multiple men, often for money"; it could be said of a man, as well. As you get to the present it's more and more restricted to having sex for money or some material compensation.

As far back as the Geneva Bible, "to whore after" was an insult. Israel went whoring after foreign gods. While it meant "corrupting herself with," the symbolism was that of a woman trying to get met to have sex with them. Israel was presented as God's "wife" (symbolism picked up for Jesus + church in the NT).

For it to describe somebody who runs after ___________ (not for sex) avidly is an extension.

Media whores don't have to run after the media for money; they like the attention. "Attention whores" are the same, just not in front of a camera. "Fashion whores", likewise--what's hot, what's trendy, it's all over them.

As for it not to be language change (or "evolution"--people have changed the meaning of the word), we have a nifty compendium better than anything I could have produced, and certainly heads and shoulders above anything I could say on the fly:

http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Silke.Hoeche/Aspects%20of%20Language%20Change/types_of_semantic_change.htm

1. Widening/Extension
=> range of meanings of a word increases so that the word can be used in more contexts than were appropriate before the change
-dog =>1) specific powerful breed of dog => all breeds or races of dog
-cupboard => 1) table upon which cups or vessels were placed, a piece of furniture to display plates => closet or cabin with shelves for the keeping cups and dishes =>AE: small storage cabinet
2. Narrowing (specialisation, restriction)
=> range of meaning is decreased so that a word can be used appropriately only in fewer contexts than before the change
*meat => 'food' in general ;
*hound => OE hund 'dog in general' => species of dog (long eared hunting dog) ;
*wife => OE 'woman' =>'woman of humble rank or low employment' => 'married woman, spouse'
*girl => ME 'child or young person of either sex' =>'female child, young woman'

Or take the word "evolve": (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=evolve)

evolve (v.) Look up evolve at Dictionary.com
1640s, "to unfold, open out, expand," from Latin evolvere "to unroll, roll out, roll forth, unfold," especially of books; figuratively "to make clear, disclose; to produce, develop," from assimilated form of ex- "out" (see ex-) + volvere "to roll" (see volvox). Meaning "to develop by natural processes to a higher state" is from 1832. Related: Evolved; evolving."

So it narrowed its meaning in the 1800s (late 1700s, actually). By the mid-1900s it was still a technical term in biology, dealing with changes in the expression of genes by groups through natural selection, narrowed even further. By 1990 it meant "to change in ways that I like", which is clearly extension.

Usually a word just heads in one direction. Take "loaf warden," the guy who was in charge of feeding the serfs or the work crew in early England. It evolved into "lord". "Steorben" which just meant "to die" was narrowed to mean "to die from hunger" and is "starve."

"*drinkian", which was the causative of "drinken" (to drink--drinkian meant 'make drink' or 'give drink to') is our modern word "drench." You can drench your thirst or be drenched by the rain.

"Soak" meant to "lie (submerged in) liquid" in 1200. By 1500 it meant also "to place in liquid". By 1900 it could mean "overcharge" somebody for some good or service.

"Whore" is widening its meaning--it may continue to do so, it may freeze, it may be reversed--by analogy with a woman who runs after men for sex." The money part's been dropped out, oddly enough.

There are probably typos and bad edits in this, but I have a retaining wall to build.

[edbermac]

11. 7-0

Good, some whiny baby has their alert button taken away from them for a while.


On Mon Jul 20, 2015, 09:46 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

On the evolution of language and the "W" word
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026991544

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is just flame bait to justify calling Hillary Clinton a whore. It is hurtful to all those who objected, both Hillary and Bernie supporters, to the original thread that did so.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Jul 20, 2015, 09:57 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Normally I would side with liberal groups of which I'm not a member. But as such groups on DU show no signs of concerns for my demographic, fuck 'em. Leave it. You don't care about others. Why should anyone care about you?
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The Alerter assumes motives ("This is just flame bait to justify . . . &quot that are not at all evident. Leave it.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't see Hillary's name anywhere in this post. However, if I ever see her name in a post where she is called a political whore I won't just vote to hide I will contact the administration I will make a stink in GD and I will call attention any other way I can think of to get that poster banned. We don't need to use that language with Democratic candidates no matter who we are supporting.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If you don't like the post, ignore it. Stop wasting jury times on subjects or discussions that you don't personally approve of -- especially when what you are projecting is in the post, can't be found in the post.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: boo frickity hoo

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

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. Sadly I expected the alert.

[misterhighwasted]

27. Even more sadly, I expected the results.

Using Hillary & whore in a post is fine for Sanders fans, but using Jon Stewart's line, Bull Shit Mountain, in a Private Group post about misinformation against Hillary fans is completely not allowed.

Fair enough.
Now explain how your rally cry against word censorship, goes again?
Ya I refer back to Mr Jon Stewart.

It is as he so described it.
Thanks Mr Jon Stewart.

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. Given that I am talking of language and how it evolves

and not any particular politician, carry on.

[misterhighwasted]

136. "Word Evolution". Haa. Yup that's about how Fox News would

..defend itself.
Stewart called that brilliant defense what it was.
Bull Shit Mountain.
But that's because he saw the truth of it.
You can call it whatever you like.

I'm betting if Bernie Sanders had been called a "he-whore"for the NRA, this "word evolution" defense wouldn't even be a conversation.

Nice Try.

Spin is a RW defense strategy called out by Mr Jon Stewart.
But we all know that.

"Whore" is a derogatory word. It's meaning doesn't evolve.
Lipstick on a pig snout is correct, as posted upthread.

Time to Trash your trash thread.

[nadinbrzezinski]

137. I guess it is time to treat you like a child

there is no other explanation.

Note to self, put misterhighwasted on soft ignore.

[Adrahil]

20. The thread shouldn't have been hidden, but...

I can;t believe people on DU are actually defending the use of the misogynist word. It's rhetorical power relies on the sexual shaming of women.

[Adrahil]

72. Yeah, apparently not. Silly me. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

34. And I suppose men too

two of the examples I used where MEN.

In this context it is truly gender neutral. Whether it will remain such is a good question.

So should I ignore people when they use this term during an interview? As I pointed out, this is becoming a pretty common term in political circles. What you are seeing is the evolution of language in real time. IMHO it is actually losing some of it's sting due to this.

[Adrahil]

74. The word can be applied to men, but...

it's POWER is in the sexual shame of women. Men are not typically shamed for sexual promiscuity. Women are.

[nadinbrzezinski]

80. Ergo why it is losing it's magic

which is a term some linguists actually use to stand for power.

[Adrahil]

117. Except is HASN'T lost it's power.

It's power to shame is WHY PEOPLE USE IT. And that power is based on the shaming of women.

And so you know.... my wife is an English Professor, and some of our close family friends are linguists. I'm not ignorant of the evolution of language. I just think you are dead wrong on this point.

The WHOLE POINT of using that word is to shame the target.

[nadinbrzezinski]

120. I guess we are still stuck in the original term used

over 15000 years ago in proto European. Yes, the word is THAT OLD.

It's changed it's meanings over the millennia and even acquired a few other spellings, and a few meanings over the course of Millenia. Some are positive, some are not.

What you are seeing is a new meaning emerge in real time. I suspect with the internet the process of language shift will actually accelerate. For the record, this new term applies to the political sphere and has none to do with shaming women. I would say it is associated with the term media (magical word here) See, I don't think I can use the word even in a discussion here.

I have no problem using the word, especially when discussing it with other language geeks. But there is a problem here on DU, it is a problem of this site. And it has impoverished the site.

[Igel]

113. It's more complicated than that.

Sorry, everything involving language is more complicated than that. There are 300+ speakers of English in this country and we're not a monolithic bloc.

To understand language change, you have to understand language. Few do.

Here's an old formulation, stripped down, from one perspective: You have a set of norms for a standard language. It's a social fact that there's a standard and a variety of language that meets that standard.

The norms aren't just yes/no: There is a range of acceptability and a lot of variation. These come out as registers: high, low, formal, informal. whatever you call them. On top of that, you have varieties that are part of the language but not standard: geographical dialects, variation by age, variation by class.

An educated speaker has to be able to use the standard language in various registers. An educated speaker usually has mastery over one non-standard dialectal variant (geographical, social class).

The variation, within the standard and without, affects pronunciation and changes for fast/slow speech; how you form words; how you form sentences; meanings of words. (Okay, we're up to 1930.)


Language change proceeds in various ways. A typical way is that somebody at the nexus of various sets of speakers, held in esteem by those speakers, adopts a word. To be "cool" like him (or her) people in those groups pick up the word from him or from others. At some point it hops to another group of speakers, if it's adopted by somebody in that group held in esteem.

Of course, words don't hop from network to network just because some low-ranked person picks it up, unless somebody important also adopts it. The word has to be useful in some way: Perhaps it refers to something new, or it's trendy and faddish and shows group membership or that you're cool and stylish. (Okay, we're up to perhaps 1975.)


Individual words change their meanings in a few different ways. One of them is "widening" or "extension," as a word picks up broader or additional meanings. Another is narrowing, as it loses a range of uses.

Here's a fun example.

"Wif" originally meant "woman." An adult female. "Housewife" was the woman of the house--not necessary married, but perhaps an older daughter or sister. It narrowed to meaning "married woman", but "housewife" kept wife = woman for centuries, and we still have midwife, who may not be a wife ('married woman') at all, but is a wife ('woman').

"Woman" was wif-man, and was formed from the words that meant "wife/woman + person&quot when "wife" was becoming the word for "married woman". Later--for many, only in the 20th century--did "man" necessarily mean "male." If you held to old-fashioned norms it didn't mean "male" consistently in the 1980s; for others, it had meant only "male" for decades before that. We had language wars in the US between those who insisted on the new standard and those who hadn't gone over yet.

"Housewife" was changed phonetically. You say it in a lot of English dialects and it's less clearly house + wife. It gave us the word "hussy." Originally "hussy" just meant "housewife." By 1600 it just mean "any woman or girl"--widening of meaning. Yet by 1700 it narrowed in some settings to "a woman or girl who acts inappropriately." By 1800 it was primarily derogatory.


The result when you mix how languages are socially structured with language change that proceeds by network hopping is that you get the same "register" with two different norms for a single word. In one register, the word has a new meaning, or a meaning has a new word. It means that some people will reject the meaning as foreign while others think it perfectly natural. A little good-will goes a long way. If you're not the audience, good will says to step out. If you're in the audience, it pays to focus on what's intended and not what is specific to your network that causes offense. This doesn't meant there aren't words that are intended to be offensive. But intent matters.

"Thug" is the same way. McWhorter, a Stanford linguist, argued that the word "thug" tended to mean "black use" as a term of abuse, and was okay and slightly endearing in the AfAm community but only racist outside of it. When the interviewer pointed out a lot of counterexamples, he just said that they used the word in obsolete ways. Now, on the face of it that's quite insane: They were using it in ways natural for their social dialect. But for the dialects he was used to, he was right. His view was narrowed down to just the networks that he inhabited, forgetting 200+ million other Americans and pretty much everybody who speaks English overseas.

Another example would be "skinny"--racist for some (I've been told), but not for others. I called my own kid "skinny" and had somebody call me racist. "How am I racist for calling my own son 'skinny'?" They stopped at the word, and didn't look at meaning or at intent. Idjit. If he'd been sitting down he'd have shattered his jaw and patella, the brainless knee-jerk reaction was so strong.


That's how languages change. It's messy to start with, but with changes it's horrendously messy. We argue that changes we have adopted are fine. They're ours, of course. Those that we haven't adopted are bad, low class, corrupting the language. They're the other guy's. It all works itself out in the end.

And it's the same argument, when you get down to the nitty gritty, that was used against "swell" and "phat".

[nadinbrzezinski]

116. And this is why I love me some DU

I just learned a lot more of how this messy process takes place, Thanks

[randome]

22. If enough people say it is offensive, then there should be no problem with not using it.

True wordsmiths should be agile enough to make their points without insulting people. For you to claim, as I think you are, that you simply don't have any choice is disingenuous, to say the least.

You do not speak for all women in the world but enough women say this is offensive and that's enough for me. Why isn't it enough for you?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. This word has gone from OH MY GOD, to I hear it often

so should I scold sources for their potty mouths or just record?

I am just pointing out that this word is now becoming, in this usage, quite common. If you may, it lost it's shock value.

[randome]

35. No. You should be polite and make your points intelligently. No one said you need to scold anyone.

That's a first-rate strawman there. As I said, there are enough women who consider the word offensive and that's all I need to not use the word. It's pretty simple, really.

Those who can't stop from putting vulgarities in their writings are usually those who want to make up for their perceived weaknesses by burnishing their 'edgy' styles.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[nadinbrzezinski]

39. So reality is a strawman

cute.

You should get out more.

By the way, I have yet to use the actual term. I just pointed out that the term is now in common usage in the political press and it is used by people to refer to pols and organizations on all sides of the aisle.

I recall one of the first uses, against Carly Fiorina... and you guys were applauding it. So my recommendation is that either you do not accept for all, or realize that it is now here to stay.

[randome]

44. "You guys" was not me.

So you needed an entire thread to point out its usage? No, you're trying to justify your own lack of writing style.

The point that is being made is that use of the word should be avoided. Again, no one said you should scold anyone. But it doesn't hurt to listen to other people's opinions on the subject.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[nadinbrzezinski]

49. I love it when folks get personal

I don't alert though. But I find language evolution, unlike you, fascinating.

[NuclearDem]

57. Now there's a strawman if I ever saw one.

"You don't like using a certain word, therefore you don't appreciate how language changes."

Not to mention bemoaning personal attacks, and then immediately levying one.

[nadinbrzezinski]

60. Here comes more

BRAVO!!!!

[MADem]

45. Bravo!

Vulgar words do distract from grammatical and spelling failures, I guess...




It's not just women who find the word offensive. I don't think many men would like their mom called that word, or their partner, or their children.

Common courtesy is uncommon on DU, apparently. It's more important to be "cool" than "polite."

[nadinbrzezinski]

50. Another we cannot discuss langauge evolution

instead attack the poster because they are pointing out how this is evolving,. BRAVO!!!!

[MADem]

64. Maybe you missed the conversations. We've discussed it. It's a bonehead move to call a woman a

whore.

If that's too hard for you to figure out, that's your problem at this point in time.

No one is "attacking" you--stop playing the victim. If anything, this thread is an attack--on those of us who think your ill-advised insistence that people should be ALLOWED to call women "whores" is offensive, sexist, stupid, bullying, shitty, mean, rotten and childish.

How ya like them apples?

For someone who is so insensitive as to how your use of the WHORE word impacts those of us who think your use is wrong, you sure can play the "My FEEFEES are hurt" card when someone calls you on YOUR hypocrisy!!!

"Waaah, I'm being ATTACKED because people object to my churlish use of an assholish word!!! WAAAAAH!"

[nadinbrzezinski]

66. Call me back when you guys don't use this langauge with Republicans

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9424476

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1877038

[MADem]

69. What is this YOU GUYS shit? I don't know those people!!

What--you're trying to use COLLECTIVE guilt, now?

That would mean that "I" am responsible for the bullshit you're spouting.

UGH!!!!

Sorry--it just doesn't WORK that way.

Another major fail in your logic. Give it up. You are WRONG on this one.

You should self-delete this shit thread before someone cuts and pastes your words, and you can't deny them down the road.

[nadinbrzezinski]

73. Pointing out the hypocrisy

Oh look that term here again

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=160x22813

[MADem]

93. No you aren't--your goal was to make the casual skimmer think that I wrote that shit,

and that is some rude nasty game you are playing, there.

I am not responsible for the posts of the DUers you are repeatedly 'calling out' with your little links--they aren't even participating in this conversation, but you are NAMING AND SHAMING them with out-of-context links--why is that? Do you think it's "OK" to accuse people of behavior in a thread where they aren't even participating?

If you were honest, you'd send a DUMAIL to all those people and invite them to respond to your accusations. You ARE calling them out, and you ARE accusing them of questionable conduct--even though the context of the posts is that they are from YEARS ago.



Let us know when you get that done. And if you don't do it, we'll know what you're playing at, here.

[nadinbrzezinski]

100. I am playing no games

you are

[MADem]

163. No--I am telling it like it is. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

168. Keep playing... because that is what you are doing

it is personal to you.

[MADem]

211. No, what's personal here is your conduct.

I don't need to describe it-it is self-evident.

[nadinbrzezinski]

246. Mild personal attack

keep 'em coming

[MADem]

265. You continue to demonstrate that you're unclear on the meaning of the term. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

298. Now a version of you are ignorant

Personal attack

[MADem]

300. Now you're trying to put words in my mouth--how disruptive!

[nadinbrzezinski]

301. Keep digging.

I am sure it is quite entertaining to have this behavior pointed to you it is not civil. It makes DU suck, but please be outraged over a word

By the way, so far you keep snickering at your bad behavior. It is kind of well cute. It is textbook of yes, bully behavior.

[MADem]

302. What's "not civil" is making a case for the W word used towards women

on a progressive/liberal website.

Keep digging.

[nadinbrzezinski]

304. So noting that the political press is using

It regularly with at this point mostly men, from google evidence, is making a case? I guess your and my definitions of making a case are very different. By the way if this same progressive site did not applaud it's use against political enemies, including women, I would take your protests more seriously

But at least this is an attempt at discussion, not a personal attack. I will call that progress.

[MADem]

306. Yes it is. This isn't a discussion, though. There's only one non-misogynist view on this topic

and that is that you shouldn't call women whores, even if you read it in the paper.

Any other POV is the opposite of progress, and should not be championed on a liberal/progressive website.

[nadinbrzezinski]

307. That is a strange definition

And ignored the fact that language has never remained static.

By the way, good luck getting rid of a word that goes back 15,000 years, has split at least twice in master usages. And seems to be doing that now in real time.

This strikes me as the height of hubris to think you can stop a flood.

But amuse me, as the use continues to be normalized, what are you going to do with paper quoted with the dreaded terms in them? For the moment quotation marks, but even that is changing.

Will you ban people for merely quoting the paper? Will you deal with the fact that people here have used it...repeteadly and that even Skinner pointed this out?

[MADem]

308. No, it's not. Calling women whores is wrong. And I have no desire to "amuse" YOU. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

309. You insist on not trying to have a conversation

What part of this is now regularly being used with men are you obtusely missing? This was the point of the. OP. MEN. Or did you miss the pictures attached? This is what is technically called a semantic shift.

[MADem]

311. I am not insisting on anything. Calling women whores IS wrong. No "insisting" needed.

Saying "Men can be called it TOO" doesn't change that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

312. I am talking of a change

In language. You also keep missing I am not using it.

You also keep insisting this is justification. I will not join you in alerting for two reasons though. I do not alert. I also do not believe this is a winning strategy, especially when ignoring language has never ever worked.

Third, I suppose, I hate censoring others.

And by the way, given this site users have a long history of using it, hypocrisy comes to mind. And I recommend you read what skinner wrote at ATA over this little subject. My only disagreement with him, given how hyper partisanship is coarsening the language and that it has been used for political enemies, I am all but surprised it was used that way by aneub. Something about sowing the wind.

Because of that hyper partisanship I expect the use of many naughty words to accelerate as well. DU has played a small part in that process by the way. I could recommend a book on this if you are interested

[MADem]

313. Yes. And I'm the King of England. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

315. Nice way to deflect from the discussion

but here is the book anyway.

It is worst than it looks

http://www.amazon.com/Even-Worse-Than-Looks-Constitutional/dp/0465074731/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1437515339&sr=8-1&keywords=it+is+worst+than+it+looks

Some other readers might be interested in the process. I find it fascinating, and quite frightening, at the same time.

[MADem]

325. I am not interested in your literature recommendations. Why would I be?

You're the one who doesn't have a problem with "that word."

We have nothing in common.

[nadinbrzezinski]

326. Ah, you have no interest as to why for the normalization

of the language you hate. Or the fact that partisan sites have a little to do with this ahem, normalization. Last time I checked DU is a partisan site.

By the way, UNDERSTANDING why things happen does not equal not having a problem with a word. Nice further deflection and lying.

You are right, we have nothing in common. I try to have adult discussions and avoid attacking people, but somebody else might be interested in that book which is now required reading in some places, including news rooms.

You keep responding, I will keep responding.

I have all day.

[MADem]

328. I don't hate the language, but I have no respect for those who play cutesy games with it.

Calling a woman a whore is not cool. I object to it.


There is no "yes but" and there is no mitigating "discussions" that can change that.


If you really wanted to have "adult discussions" you wouldn't have started this thread in the first place, and you wouldn't have engaged in pointless goading/baiting throughout.

I see you.

I have all day ... and all night, too. Don't threaten me.

[nadinbrzezinski]

330. Jesus age, you still cannot understand that I am not ok with it

but I understand the difference between calling somebody a political whore, will use it now, is not sexual, and calling somebody a whore IS. The former I will see in political press increasingly, cannot stop it, period, end of discussion, The former is never ok, but I see it used with political enemies here often. The word HYPOCRISY comes to mind. Look it up.

I am not threatening you. This is a promise. You will get a response every time.

I will keep answering your barbs. That is all you have now, anger. I feel sorry for you, but that is another matter. And I mean it, I feel very sorry for you.

[MADem]

391. Yeah, that's why you wrote an OP on it. And you've written hundreds of posts to keep your little

"w-word" thread kicked.

These aren't "barbs." You don't understand the meaning of that word, either, I see.

Feel sorry for yourself. You have no empathy for people who get that word thrown at them--so your "concern" towards me is plainly insincere. You can't read people very well either--I'm not "angry"--but you plainly are.

Keep threatening, too. Doesn't bother me in the slightest.

[nadinbrzezinski]

392. You mean an OP that deals with the fact that WOMEN

are calling men political whores? Or the fact that a political site called a K street firm a political brothel and the two men running it political whores?

I guess their mommies did not know they were truly women when they were born.

I would use the barb you used against me about reading, but I think I don't have to. It is clear from this post you really are on a crusade of your imagination. And are doing to me what you do to every other poster that dares point this out to you, but you twist things around.

Is this part of the derailing tactics you like to use? Because it is not working. Though it is quite entertaining when adults behave in this way.

[MADem]

393. You are excusing/normalizing the use of the word.

Too clever by half. Offensive. Unprogressive. Not liberal.

You are seriously justifying use of the word by saying "Oh, it's MEN I'm insulting-that makes it all OK!"

[nadinbrzezinski]

394. Recognizing when things are happening

and then asking why is part of human curiosity. By the way...I hate to point this to you, here is your lance by the way, it's already normalized. Windmill is that way, go till at it.

[MADem]

395. No. You are excusing/normalizing use of the word. Fail.

The wind is blowing in the opposite direction. Use of the word is NOT acceptable--except in rightwing venues.

[nadinbrzezinski]

396. Hmm like CNN

nice to know. Or the New York Times? The Gray old lady had long stories as early as Carly Fiorina...so did CNN. So did MSNBC. Wait, those are mainstream sites. Should I add the LA times? How about the San Francisco Chronicle? The Mercury News?

That is quite the earliest that it was, back then over shock value but it was. It's accelerated. That is the point I was making in the OP. That the term, when preceded by at least one word has undergone a semantic shift. Look that up in a dictionary. Language does that. The use of the word without any of those words is still not acceptable, and still contains it's ancient meaning.

Go ahead, twist what I just typed. I expect it.

And anyway, usage here is quite common, so we go back to Skinners statement on this. I also go back to Hosea, sow the wind, reap the windmill.

[MADem]

397. You aren't the NYT or CNN. You are an anonymous poster on the internet writing bad words for shock

value. FAIL.

You also FAIL to provide cites for your assertions. Another FAIL.

[nadinbrzezinski]

398. You mean the fact that the stories ran

means I am quoting news stories for shock value. Thanks for twisting.

Ready for some sweet crow
After spending millions of dollars on advertising to court Latino voters, Whitman's campaign was thrown off kilter by revelations that she had employed an illegal immigrant as her housekeeper for nine years. A new firestorm erupted Thursday night for her Democratic opponent, Jerry Brown, after The Times obtained a voice mail message that captured a private conversation between Brown and his associates in which one of them could be heard calling Whitman "a whore" during a discussion about whether she had cut a deal to gain an endorsement.


http://articles.latimes.com/2010/oct/09/local/la-me-1009-fiorina-whitman-20101009

Democrats were initially worried about Mr. Brown, who did not run a particularly active campaign until after Labor Day. His campaign also committed a number of gaffes, the most serious in October when a recording surfaced of an aide’s calling Ms. Whitman a “whore.” Mr. Brown apologized, but never identified or fired the staff member who made the remarks.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/03/us/politics/03calif.html?_r=0

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/39740008/ns/msnbc/t/last-word-lawrence-odonnell/#.Va85CTqCOrU

And I had forgotten about mother jones
Jun 13, 2008 - ... and the wealthiest Americans," Fiorina appeared on CNN to defend the Arizona senator. ... When the outsourcing of jobs turned into a national political issue, ... out Carly Fiorina, a failed corporate manager and aspiring political hack. .... Another Big Business Corporate Whore who is a member of the "I ...


http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2008/06/why-carly-fiorina-symbol-corporate-excesses-mccains-favorite-ceo
I think this makes the point. Giving you proof is a matter of using the Google. Here, your lance Don Quixote.

[MADem]

402. It's not "sweet crow" when you rudely refuse to provide the links in the first place.

It's also not "sweet crow" when your quickie google search doesn't turn up what you claimed you had--the only thing you're "showing" everyone is that you don't even do a good google,

Your NYT link says that the W-word was a BAD thing for your governor's aide to do...don't you even read the shit you post? This is not an endorsement of the use of the word--do you know what "gaffe" means? Good grief~!

So that's a fail.

Your NBC link does not have the word in it. AT ALL. FAIL again.

Your MOTHERJONES link has the word .... in one of the READER COMMENTS. FAIL once again.

The LATIMES is a similar fail--it's simply reporting on the same story in the NYT. It's not "endorsing" the use of the word. It's reporting on how the Brown campaign has a potty - mouthed aide.

You'd better fire up your fryer, because you're the one eating the crow, here.

You just don't get it. It's almost embarrassing to realize how much, too!! The only one cheering for the W-word is .... YOU.

Thanks for rolling it out for everyone to see!

[nadinbrzezinski]

404. They are there

if you cannot read, or refused to, is not my fault. You might be suffering from denial. It is a common condition. But it is happening. You might need more quotes...

Mercury news has disabled copy paste, but you should be able to find it in the damn headline.

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_16290279

And this is from 2009 from Raw Story...Congressman Grayson in this case by the way

Grayson apologizes for calling lobbyist ‘whore’

https://www.rawstory.com/2009/10/grayson-apologizes-calling-lobbyist-whore/

Jesus now from ABC news.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/jerry-brown-aide-calls-meg-whitman-whore-11831287

And the center of radical RW politics, SLATE

It's in the headline, so you should be able to find it, no problem

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2010/10/11/of_course_conservatives_are_going_to_have_fun_with_jerry_browns_aide_calling_meg_whitman_a_whore.html


More LA Times

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/oct/09/local/la-me-1009-governor-20101009

You might not remember this since you were not in California, or more likely it violates your world views, ergo you have blocked this.

You might want some from my SDUT, but in 2010 that was a very much RW paper...

[MADem]

408. Your links are saying the WORD IS BAD. Your thesis is not that. You argued "evolution" --these

links of yours say the EXACT OPPOSITE.

You could send me a link to the dictionary for all these links have to do with your thesis.

You're supposed to produce links that demonstrate that the word has become "acceptable" to use.

Every link you have been able to produce with the word in it says the OPPOSITE of your claim.

FAIL, FAIL, and yes--FAIL again.



Keep digging--this is getting amusing. You'll be on the other side of the world by morning.

[nadinbrzezinski]

410. Now progress

read the OP carefully. I did point out in the OP that when this scandal happened it was a scandal.

Now...the political press...notice the dates on the articles in the OP, they are much later, the word has become normalized, only if preceded by corporate and political or media. That is the thesis.

The term alone has not. Why? It has the same sexual connotations going back to Old Rome. But the new uses don't have those exact negative connotations. They have others. Such as you are selling yourself for money or selling away your principles.

Go on, try reading that and ask yourself why this is happening.

[MADem]

412. No "progress." You had to delete your ugly, hateful post where you actually figured

out what a real personal insult was, and directed one at me.

By your words and actions we know you.



You stand alone with your nasty, 'edgy' word that only YOU think is "normalized." Write it to your heart's content, because you're the only one who finds it "cool."

[nadinbrzezinski]

417. Please do point out where I have said it is cool

i wants links on this. And a direct quote.

I will point this again. Third time might sink in, I apologized and removed the post.more than apologizing and removing the post I cannot do. Well you would prefer if I went away, or worst, but that's ok.

You have been posting personal attacks all day, and all night and all day. So you saying you were insulted is interesting. The difference is that I am validating your feelings and apologizing. Now for a third time.

Somehow I don't expect you to do that. It is what it is.

[MADem]

418. That's the thesis of your thread.

I have not posted a single "personal attack." That is utter rubbish. When you misspell something, I'll point it out. When your grammar is poor, I will point it out. How hard is it to spell-check and proofread?

You call yourself a writer--you are held to a HIGHER standard, unless you're just saying that's your "job"--anyone can make things up on the internet. lPeggy Hill writes for the Pennysaver, after all.

You, so long as you are crying about "personal attacks," posted an UGLY video that was a direct insult to me that you quickly deleted after you were sure I saw it and noted it--now THAT was a "personal attack. It was also a cheap, sleazy shot. I am not "saying" I was insulted--believe me, after what I've seen of you, you do not have that capacity at all. It was the attempt on your part that is NOTED.

The fact that you did that in the first place says more about you than you perhaps realize. I don't need or want your "apology." Maybe next time you find a conversation doesn't go your way, you'll refrain from that kind of behavior. It's childish and disruptive.

You weren't honest about the content of your links--and I proved that, too. Anyone reading this thread can see that you made claims you didn't back up.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either you endorse this hateful, sexist word (and it IS sexist because it is used more frequently and with vicious vigor against women), or you don't.

The arc of society is bending away from hate speech directed at/about women. That word goes in the OPPOSITE direction. Yet you keep doubling down and claiming it's normalized. It's not. Evolution is taking us AWAY from expressing ourselves in that fashion. You should try to figure that shit out. Otherwise, no one will defend you when someone flings that word your way. And it will serve you right.

[nadinbrzezinski]

425. Sadly it is not

it is about a change it is a what is happening, how it is happening, some of why

Language changes.

And yes, you have been quite dismissive, you keep twisting what you are told and you are not interested in having a discussion.

Also society is not moving there. You and your social group might. But to say society is moving there is to quote you utter rubbish.

What is starting to happen though is that some groups of women are appropriating that hate speech and turning it on its ear. This again is a small, limited group. I would be silly to say society is.

This is obviously very emotional for you. Ergo you are not capable of having an adult discussion. I am attempting with you, and utterly failing, a graduate level discussion on the evolution of language.

So once again, let me demand from you a link to where I said it is cool. By the way, that is part of the process. It likely happened 10 to 15 years before the first SF Gate article that started the process, if not longer.

By the way, you also are claiming I am for the use. Please quote me where I have said I am in favor of it. Once again, understanding phenomena is different from favoring them. Adults can have these discussions calmly and rationally.

[MADem]

426. That jumble of words just doesn't make any sense at all.

And parroting back the odd word I use (rubbish) doesn't make it any clearer, either.

The link--one more time--since you didn't understand me the first time I said it--IS YOUR OP.

Ask me again, I will tell you the same thing. YOUR OP is the source of the rather fetid Nile.

[nadinbrzezinski]

433. Ah yes, another pushing of buttons attempt and

mild personal attack.

I was wondering if you were going to stick to the 5 post rule.

[MADem]

440. You are pushing your own buttons, by repeatedly asking the same question, over and over and over

again. Your buttons are your own problem, not mine. And once again, you --who call people names with nasty videos and then quickly delete them--are still having trouble understanding that stating facts is not a personal attack. In fact, false accusations--like repeatedly, falsely, accusing me of "personally attacking" you--could be construed as a personal attack. So check yourself.

I answered your question several times now, the answer is not going to change.

I have no idea what your 'five post rule' is--and I don't want to know, either, so don't enlighten me.

[nadinbrzezinski]

442. I did not realize classic british commedy was a nasty video

now it is not just a failure to communicate but an age difference.

By the way, John Cleese is considered a comedic genius. You might want to google up Monty Python...

As to the five post rule, you are averaging a personal attack about every 5 posts.

[MADem]

470. And THAT's why you quickly deleted it and offered a halfassed apology wrapped in insults. Yep!

Age difference? I LISTENED to Monty Python on reel-to-reel tape. I think you might have to re-calibrate your insult meter, there.

If you are going to try to talk down to people, you'd do well to know your audience. Such fail!

You obviously don't read very carefully--what did I say about your little five post rule? Do you always force things on people after specifically being told they aren't wanted?

I haven't personally attacked you, not once, but by you continuing to shop that falsehood, you are personally attacking me.

And, so long as you're going to continue to tell us that you are a writer, you desperately need an editor. Pro tip: Not a personal attack. A fact. An editor would help you fix mistakes like British, not british; comedy, not commedy; Now, not now.

[nadinbrzezinski]

472. You felt a classic John Cleese tape

that ran on KPBS for years as part of the Monty Python show was a personal attack. Ergo, as an adult would do, I validated your feelings.

But we are really not only having a failure to communicate, but also a failure of common cultural markers.

I suspect that failure will continue though. And you are not getting the last word. But you are getting once again an apology. I did not realize classic British comedy was insulting to you. Now I know. So I will not bring any of those very funny clips to your attention.

[MADem]

474. Awww, look at YOU! You called me a LOONY with a bit of "classic comedy" and now--after you

deleted your offensive video that you were using specifically to insult me--are trying to BACKTRACK and pretend you meant to offer me a bit of HUMOR?

Get OVER yourself! That takes the cake! You do know the admins can see that's not the way you played it, don't you? You can "invent" rationale for your inattentive readers, but they're all - seeing.



Keep pushing your own buttons--now THAT's "classic comedy."

[nadinbrzezinski]

476. Nah did not call you a loonie, but told you would be able to find the word easily, analogy

you felt I did, why I apologized

An ability to accept apologies when offered is also a sign of emotional maturity. Since you will not, this speaks about you... not in a good way.

You will not have more apologies, since obviously you are not capable of accepting them. And I expect you to keep insulting me and not acknowledging it. It's not like the last three days don't have plenty of evidence of that.

So be it...

On edit, you will not have the last word.

[MADem]

483. You called me a loony. That's why you deleted the video.

And you didn't apologize.


You wrote a rambling justification with the word apology in it, that was NOT an apology. But that's fine, because I don't want an apology from you. I know it would not be sincere, based on everything you have said in this thread.

I see you for exactly what you are. Your own nasty words and your snarky deleted video betray you.

I've already had the last word. Now you're just spinning in a circle.

[nadinbrzezinski]

485. I did apologize

your inability to accept it is your issue.



You are STILL NOT GETTING THE LAST WORD.

I expect you to get even more personal though.

[MADem]

487. Tammy told you all about your "apology."

Let's do a little memorializing.

nadinbrzezinski
485. I did apologize
View profile
your inability to accept it is your issue.



You are STILL NOT GETTING THE LAST WORD.

I expect you to get even more personal though.

[nadinbrzezinski]

488. That is her interpretation, she is free to it

but in her case if I posted to her that the sky is blue outside my window right now she would question my motives and try to read my mind. She does indeed believe that I did not apologize... her mind reading skills, likes yours, need recalibration. I mean that.

I did apologize

Your inability to accept it is YOUR ISSUE. NOT mine.

Of course your inability to see how you get personal often, and complaint when you are offered an apology for what you thought was an insult and it was acknowledged as the way you feel, is kind of tragic in a way. By the way, I do not expect an apology from you, because I do not believe you are capable. If you do, I will, unlike you accept it and move on.

I do expect more personal attacks from you though.

And once again, you are not getting the last word. It might take time, since we do have some actual news to cover today... in the field, but trust me, you are not.

[MADem]

495. No one is trying to "read your mind." Paranoid, much? She summarized your very words.

But hey, nice insult directed at HER, too! You're full of 'em today, aren't you?

nadinbrzezinski
488. That is her interpretation, she is free to it
View profile
but in her case if I posted to her that the sky is blue outside my window right now she would question my motives and try to read my mind. She does indeed believe that I did not apologize... her mind reading skills, likes yours, need recalibration. I mean that.

I did apologize

Your inability to accept it is YOUR ISSUE. NOT mine.

Of course your inability to see how you get personal often, and complaint when you are offered an apology for what you thought was an insult and it was acknowledged as the way you feel, is kind of tragic in a way. By the way, I do not expect an apology from you, because I do not believe you are capable. If you do, I will, unlike you accept it and move on.

I do expect more personal attacks from you though.

And once again, you are not getting the last word. It might take time, since we do have some actual news to cover today... in the field, but trust me, you are not.

[nadinbrzezinski]

497. When you tell me I did not apologize when I did

I think you are trying to tell me, again, a bully tactic, that I do not know what I think or believe

By the way, calling somebody paranoid IS A PERSONAL ATTACK.

I expect nothing less from you though. So it is what it is.

I will not alert you, because I do not alert... but it is a personal attack.

[MADem]

507. Anyone can read your words, you know--unless you want to delete THAT post, too!

You probably also want to learn the difference between a question and a statement.

nadinbrzezinski (139,558 posts)
497. When you tell me I did not apologize when I did

I think you are trying to tell me, again, a bully tactic, that I do not know what I think or believe

By the way, calling somebody paranoid IS A PERSONAL ATTACK.

I expect nothing less from you though. So it is what it is.

I will not alert you, because I do not alert... but it is a personal attack.

[nadinbrzezinski]

508. And people can read your constant

personal attacks.

I apologized to you. That is what adults you. You, on the other hand... continue to attack.

We are now to once every two posts.

I must say, the fact that you have yet to get a rise from me must be extremely frustrating though. But you won't. That is a promise

It also must be frustrating to be faced with a strong woman, who is self assured and is standing to your constant attempts at pushing buttons. They used to work. It does not any longer. I recommend you move on. And no, you are NOT getting the last word.

Alas we are off to cover a small demonstration... so your last word will be temporary.

[MADem]

509. Only they aren't "personal attacks." But there you go, "mischaracterizing" yet again.

That's rather a disruptive tactic.

nadinbrzezinski
508. And people can read your constant
View profile
personal attacks.

I apologized to you. That is what adults you. You, on the other hand... continue to attack.

We are now to once every two posts.

I must say, the fact that you have yet to get a rise from me must be extremely frustrating though. But you won't. That is a promise

It also must be frustrating to be faced with a strong woman, who is self assured and is standing to your constant attempts at pushing buttons. They used to work. It does not any longer. I recommend you move on. And no, you are NOT getting the last word.

Alas we are off to cover a small demonstration... so your last word will be temporary.

[nadinbrzezinski]

510. So a tape was considered offensive by you

and I recognized it and took it off, but you calling me paranoid is not a personal attack when you are being told bluntly that it is? Latest example.

How exactly does that work? You get to decide what is an attack on me? Is that the standard? That telling the victims that they are not being attacked is also textbook

[Kali]

511. !

Of course your inability to see how you get personal often, and complaint when you are offered an apology for what you thought was an insult and it was acknowledged as the way you feel, is kind of tragic in a way. By the way, I do not expect an apology from you, because I do not believe you are capable. If you do, I will, unlike you accept it and move on.

fucking gold right there!

[MADem]

513. Ain't it, just!

Like walking through a maze in a house of mirrors!

"I called you a loony (garble garble your fault), but I'll accept your apology!"

[nadinbrzezinski]

516. I know you cannot recognize it

[MADem]

517. I recognize "it" just fine.

nadinbrzezinski
516. I know you cannot recognize it

[nadinbrzezinski]

518. Well I truly feel sorry for you at this point

will not say why. But this inability of yours is truly YOUR PROBLEM.

It is what it is, and it is also goes with the behavior at play.

Now I need to write an article on the protest outside of the National Meeting for ALEC in San Diego. Was just a small raucous affair, with about 3500 people. So if I do not pay attention for a little while I got a lot of sound and photos to go though. But I promise to be back. You shan't have the last word.

I love activists by the way.

[MADem]

519. Isn't that special.

nadinbrzezinski
518. Well I truly feel sorry for you at this point
View profile
will not say why. But this inability of yours is truly YOUR PROBLEM.

It is what it is, and it is also goes with the behavior at play.

Now I need to write an article on the protest outside of the National Meeting for ALEC in San Diego. Was just a small raucous affair, with about 3500 people. So if I do not pay attention for a little while I got a lot of sound and photos to go though. But I promise to be back. You shan't have the last word.

I love activists by the way.

[nadinbrzezinski]

521. Yup it is

photos are transferring from card to drive.

I actually have empathy for you, but in this case, the only person that can do something about it is you. To do that you need self awareness.

[MADem]

522. Ah, more insults! Fix yourself before you give advice, there!

nadinbrzezinski (139,566 posts)
521. Yup it is

photos are transferring from card to drive.

I actually have empathy for you, but in this case, the only person that can do something about it is you. To do that you need self awareness.

[nadinbrzezinski]

524. If you feel that is an insult

my apologies, and my full empathy. Really, truly.

Don't expect you to take it, but that is ok. At this point though you will have the last word. You know why? empathy. I truly feel for you. I truly do. And at this point it would be cruel for me to continue with this. I now understand how deep the issue really is.

I recommend you put me on ignore, though you are going on soft ignore. I will only engage you if you do such from now on in any other thread that I ever am present at, and not always either. I do not mean to make you suffer or cause any pain. Bullies do that. Normal people don't

Have a good life.

[MADem]

530. No.

nadinbrzezinski (139,569 posts)
524. If you feel that is an insult

my apologies, and my full empathy. Really, truly.

Don't expect you to take it, but that is ok. At this point though you will have the last word. You know why? empathy. I truly feel for you. I truly do. And at this point it would be cruel for me to continue with this. I now understand how deep the issue really is.

I recommend you put me on ignore, though you are going on soft ignore. I will only engage you if you do such from now on in any other thread that I ever am present at, and not always either. I do not mean to make you suffer or cause any pain. Bullies do that. Normal people don't

Have a good life.

[zappaman]

526. Was Sgt Jay Polk there?

I heard he was back from his sooper dooper secret Syria mission!

[nadinbrzezinski]

527. Adorable

I also feel extremely sorry for you. I know what drives you. It is what it is.

[zappaman]

514. Especially when it comes with a lecture about how to use language

You can't make this shit up!

[nadinbrzezinski]

523. I am sorry you feel that is a lecture, but trust me, that is your issue

not mine

[nadinbrzezinski]

520. I am sorry this is funny to you

but I am sure you did not get it. In fact, swarming is also part of the behavior.

You guys are making me laugh

[zappaman]

444. Yes, you should use google to figure out what Monty Python is!

Oh, the condescension is thick, ain't it?

[nadinbrzezinski]

445. Nope, it is a fact

The Meaning of Life is particularly funny. Of course not fit for DU... apparently

The Life of Brian is also very funny. Again, not fit for DU... it is some horrible video apparently. I am quoting MADem on this.

So not condescension. Recommendation, I understand how you miss that, or why.

I am expecting you to use that coo coo clock again. You do hate me that much. I find it endearing in a way... it is cute.

[zappaman]

446. Since you like language...

condescension
noun con·de·scen·sion \ˌkän-di-ˈsen(t)-shən\
: the attitude or behavior of people who believe they are more intelligent or better than other people

[nadinbrzezinski]

448. recomendation

rec·om·men·da·tion
ˌrekəmənˈdāSH(ə n/
noun
a suggestion or proposal as to the best course of action, especially one put forward by an authoritative body.
"the committee put forward forty recommendations for change"
synonyms: advice, counsel, guidance, direction, suggestion, proposal
"the advisory group's recommendations"
the action of recommending something or someone.
"he selected his staff by personal recommendation"

[zappaman]

449. At least spell it right if you are going to lecture.

"Recomendation"

[nadinbrzezinski]

453. ah predictable

a spell flame

How bully of you.

By the way with you I expect a personal attack almost every time, Sad that you do not disappoint.

[zappaman]

456. No, what's predictable is you lecturing on language and

Showing us you don't even know how to use it.

VERY predictable.
And cute.

[nadinbrzezinski]

458. How cute

the bully continues in the attempt to push buttons.

In your case please proceed governor. Your personal attacks are not even that creative most of the time. Same rehashed junk.

[zappaman]

459. Adorable even!

[nadinbrzezinski]

461. .

[nadinbrzezinski]

414. Here your normalization

of the term and semantic shift as early as 2010 from the SFGate, in this case with corporate.

http://www.sfgate.com/entertainment/morford/article/Back-off-I-m-a-corporate-whore-2464204.php

Adding this from nutritional anarchy just because, poor Elmo, even beloved childhood characters are getting it.

http://www.sfgate.com/entertainment/morford/article/Back-off-I-m-a-corporate-whore-2464204.php

You might remember media whores, or maybe not.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Whores_Online

Though media whores is a term that is still in flux.

From CNN, in the headline, so easy to find.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/08/justice/texas-adrian-peterson-child-abuse-hearing/

Should the word alone be used with a woman? Nope...but the word is changing with other conjunctions. You can try to be insulted, or really be insulted, but this happens often. Hell, there is another word that you will surely object to, that is starting the process of reapropistion by the group it is usually used against. The process is very early, but we will have this same discussion in 10 years if DU, and you and I are still around I suspect.

Language is a living beast. It changes...it is what it does.

Oh the word starts with the letter S...and I intend to follow that. I am actually rooting for them succeeding in doing that. Taking stings away is kind of great. But I guarantee the equivalent of gay pride t-shirts early on will raise many an eyebrow.

Language evolution is complicated. And please, misinterpret what I just wrote.

[nadinbrzezinski]

399. One more thing, telling people their sourced views

see bellow, after posting a link to the gray lady above to another poster, that they are just anonymous posters is also a personal attack. In this case it is trying to hit at egos. Bullies do this in school yards, this is a variation of that.

[MADem]

400. Below, not bellow. And you are anonymous to me, and you didn't provide links to prove your claims.

Anyone reading this can see that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

401. Yup, and people are seeing I am calling you out

on your bully behavior.

In fact, I am pointing at you and having a grand time laughing at you.

Oh and spelling flames are also part of that bully behavior.

It is rip roaring hilarious and betrays your insecurity. Why I feel sorry for you. This is about putting me down. Must be really frustrating when it stops working.

[MADem]

403. You don't apparently know what "bully" means either. You are shopping serious errors of fact.

Telling you so may FEEL like you are being bullied, but that's not bullying--that is your own embarrassment at being caught out telling untruths.

And that is what you were doing with your assertions about those links.

They did not say what you claimed they said--and I proved it by simply READING them.




Correcting the spelling and grammar of someone who boasts about their writing abilities constantly on this board isn't bullying either. That's simply pointing out what appears to be a serious contradiction.

I think the one with the insecurity and frustration here isn't me.

You keep posting crap and I keep refuting it.

Next?

[MADem]

406. Now you're calling me a LOONY for pointing out that you made up that stuff about those

sources you couldn't produce? What class! You have reached rock bottom, you know.

Now that--since you're unclear, plainly, on the concept--IS a DIRECT PERSONAL INSULT.


I am still waiting for your link from CNN...thought I'd forget? You thought wrong. Tick tock!

Cough up ONE link where that word is being "accepted." You can't. No one "approves" of it. Except you. When it's reported on, it's being treated as a disgraceful comment.

I'll bet you're laughing! It's a normal reaction to embarrassment and humiliation.

[nadinbrzezinski]

407. Nope, I am telling you

that the word you insist is not being used

Should be easy to spot

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6997264

Seems you need this posted twice.

Your lance My Lord.

Oh and you fully lack a sense of humor so my apologies, will remove that post. Will not attempt humor again, my bad

[MADem]

409. You called me a loony and that's a direct personal insult. Further, you didn't tell the truth about

the content of your links.

And my sense of humor is just fine--I'm laughing my ass off, watching you twist away from your own OP, getting angry, posting personal insults, and making shit up.

Only took you four hundred posts to figure out your thesis is a joke.

Democrats don't endorse that word--it's why your governor was embarrassed when his aide used it.

Grab a clue.

[nadinbrzezinski]

411. And I apologized and removed it

something I have yet to see you do.

Ergo I behaved like an adult

[MADem]

413. You apologized? More like you realized you stepped way the fuck over the line, as you do. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

415. Look if you cannot accept an apology

that is truly your problem. But I will repeat myself I am sorry. My apologies

Now I suspect we shall continue this in the morning. We are going for a record. Mostly I will not let you have the last word. Promise and all.

[zappaman]

416. Yup.

[tammywammy]

420. This isn't an apology

Oh and you fully lack a sense of humor so my apologies, will remove that post. Will not attempt humor again, my bad

It's a personal attack ("you fully lack a sense of humor&quot that happens to also have the word "apology" in the same sentence. It's along the same lines of "I apologize if I offended you", which is a classic non-apology.

Ergo I behaved like an adult

An adult wouldn't wrap their "apology" with a personal attack. An adult would have said "you're right, that went over the line and I apologize for calling you looney."

[MADem]

423. Thank you so much for that succinct deconstruction! You held the mirror up beautifully. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

432. Trust me neither of you is Michelle Foucault

And your mind reading skills need recalibration.

[nadinbrzezinski]

430. Yesk yes it is

not accepting an apology speaks of the person that refuses to. Now it is two.

SO I have no further obligation... you might now go on in your but this is not an apology rant. Please do.

You see adults recognize and validate the feelings of others. I have. But I cannot do more than that.

[tammywammy]

434. What exact part of your apology "validates the feelings of others"?

Here's the "apology":

Oh and you fully lack a sense of humor so my apologies, will remove that post. Will not attempt humor again, my bad

Is it the personal attack ("you fully lack a sense of humor&quot ?

I clearly laid out why that's not an apology (again, personal attack). It does make me wonder if this is the same type of non-apology you gave to boston bean when you stated the word "c**t" made you think of her (your insult that wasn't meant to be an insult).

My previous post gave you a perfect example of a real apology.

"you're right, that went over the line and I apologize for calling you looney."

You could even shorten it to "you're right" (this is where you validate the other persons emotions), "I apologize". See: "you're right, I apologize."

I suggest for all future apologies you start with that basic example, adding a personal attack negates the act of apology.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1576759016/ref=mp_s_a_1_8?qid=1437585584&sr=8-8&pi=AC_SX110_SY165_QL70&keywords=how+to+apologize&dpPl=1&dpID=41t8BnzGA1L&ref=plSrch

[nadinbrzezinski]

436. Thanks, I expected it

you deserve no further response. An apology was given, not accepted.

The irony is that I am getting attacked by the same poster every 3 to 5 posts... and she has been told this repeatedly. Instead of acknowledging it, she keeps telling me how I have no idea what I am talking about. That, free clue, is not validation, but further pushing of buttons.

Less than two minutes ago she used a classic version of you cannot write, which is both an attempt to derail and a personal attack.

It is also classic bully behavior.

[dionysus]

529. tilt. nt.

[dionysus]

528. come down from the cross, we could use the wood for something useful.

[randome]

51. This thread.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[MADem]

52. Before the train left the station, too!

You could hear the screeching, twisting metal and the loud BOOOOOOM! the second the POST button was hit!

[Brother Buzz]

172. The wreck may have started inside the station but it concluded outside

[AtheistCrusader]

176. A for effort.

[haikugal]

421. Well some here have done their best to derail it, that's abundantly clear! nt

[Gormy Cuss]

40. The word you are looking for is "its," no apostrophe.

"It's" is a contraction.
As it stands your second sentence makes no sense "..it lost it is shock value."

I usually wouldn't point this out but you're a writer and discussing language in this thread.

[nadinbrzezinski]

43. That is fine with me

whatever...

[JoePhilly]

75. The overloaded meaning of the word "whore" is a FEATURE, not a bug.

You get to call Hillary a "whore" and then act like you only mean one of the meanings of the word.

Its a variant on the GOP Southern Strategy.

You get to say what you really mean, and then act surprised when some one calls you on it.

The overloaded meaning of the word "whore" is a FEATURE, not a bug.

[nadinbrzezinski]

81. Read 76 Joe

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

[MADem]

28. Outrage brigade? Please--you just stuck your foot in it.

If you can't see that, no one can help you.

No one called Hillary a "political" anything. They used the word, without modifier, not once, but TWICE.

And you .... defend.



SMH.

[William769]

32. It's the same o same o here on DU.

It's driven by money, so in this instance the majority gets to rule without minority consent.

[MADem]

38. Never seen anything like it here--this is crazytime.

People will toss ANYONE under the bus--people of color, women, gay people, you name it--if it gets in the way of their favorite advancing.

Talk about having "situational integrity." If anything is "anti-progressive," that quality is!

[William769]

42. You nailed it!

They keep the bus's gas tank always full for when it's needed.

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. Yes, outrage brigade

You welcome

By the way, you told me once that you did not want to talk to me, so why are you talking to me?

[MADem]

68. "You welcome?" Thought you were a writer!

And "by the way," you told me several times that you were putting me on ignore.

Guess you just can't quit me, is that it?

When people try to advance sexist, hateful, MRA themes using a cover of "language," I'm going to comment and call out. Too "f-cking" bad if you don't like that.

Get over your victim mentality, and start understanding that the larger community here doesn't appreciate deliberate sexist tropes or themes hiding behind a faux screen of Free Speech.

We KNOW it when we see it. And I see you coming a mile away.

[nadinbrzezinski]

70. None of you is going ever on ignore

that is a feature that does not exist as far as I am concerned. You take advantage of it.

And you project just fine.

As I said, call me back when your integrity includes not using these words on the other side

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x465351

By the way, pointing out that this is used on the other side here, regularly.

[MADem]

82. That's not ME, either. Give it up!!!

You know what? You're so busy calling out Random DUers on their ANCIENT use of a word (people do evolve, you know--except, I guess...YOU) that I'm NOT going to give you a chance to delete and hide your words; here they are, memorialized FOREVER. Take it away, Wayback Machine!!!! Your ugly little screed, with its two lousy recs, for all to read, years from now:

On the evolution of language and the "W" word

Here



Faux "news" and "Judge" Jeanine Pirro are still flogging the fake Benghazi "scandal" for every drop they can get out of it. This Saturday, Pirro attacked former CIA director Michael Morell as a "political whore" and accused him of lying to Congress to protect Hillary Clinton.


http://crooksandliars.com/2014/04/foxs-pirro-calls-former-cia-director

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--PZrtoTUa--/c_fit,fl_progressive,q_80,w_636/ll1bn7yqsf8zqeqwozk5.jpg

Political Whores Form Brothel

The executive director of the Republican Governor's Association and the executive director of the Democratic Governor's Association announced today that they are getting together to sell their mutual political connections to the highest bidder.

THE POLITICO reports that RGA head Phil Cox and DGA head Colm O'Comartun are now ready to completely abandon any pretense of ideals or, indeed, care for any cause greater than their own bank accounts. They are forming "a bipartisan consulting firm that will help corporate clients navigate state governments," which is the very highest calling of those who have entered the noble field of politics. Their new brothel, 50 States LLC, will be a one-stop shop where corporate interests can get all of their strategic consulting needs met by seasoned political operatives unburdened by any form of mortal soul. No longer will you, the corporate client, need to hire a Democratic firm to pursue your interests with Democrats, and a Republican firm to pursue your interests with Republicans; now, you can hire one firm that believes in absolutely nothing except the almighty dollar, saving you a great deal of hassle.


http://gawker.com/political-whores-form-brothel-1671380006

For the record, this piece has in it the definition of the term, in better language than Urban Dictionary.

http://a4.img.talkingpointsmemo.com/image/upload/c_fill,fl_keep_iptc,g_faces,h_365,w_652/msuwctueeuw6cni0anrs.jpg

California NOW President: 'Meg Whitman Could Be Described As A Political Whore'

Last week, the National Organization for Women and the PAC of the California NOW chapter took heat for their endorsement of state Attorney General Jerry Brown (D) over Meg Whitman (R) in the gubernatorial race in the wake of comments by a Brown aide that Whitman was a "whore." At the time, national NOW President Terry O'Neill said that anyone who "from here on" calls a woman a "whore" should be fired.

She might want to have a talk with California NOW President Parry Bellasalma, who today told TPM in response to a question that "Meg Whitman could be described as 'a political whore.' Yes, that's an accurate statement."


http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/california-now-president-meg-whitman-could-be-described-as-a-political-whore

Two points

These are all in the first page AFTER the definition from Urban dictionary. They are in order of appearance in my google search. The search term was "political **^&(&" We cannot cannot use the actual word because it is magical. This is how language is evolving. You will see this horrible term used increasingly in politics. It matters little what you do, or how much you complaint.

Now, this does not mean I would necessarily use the term in a news article. But you would be shocked how many times I have heard it used to describe politicians on both sides of the aisle and genders, in the recent past. The usage has increased by orders of magnitude in the last two years. And I fear, from reading the entries on the google that we are late to the party in my little cul de sac, that aparently is not part of the country anyway.

As you can see, the NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN did go there and called Fiorina that. You have a fox personality who happens to be a woman and black use the term for a male. And Gawker used it for a K street firm run by two WHITE males.

Now I expect the outrage brigade to tell me how this is not real, never mind it is actually sourced. Fortunately I have a World Health Organization report to read... and there is no storm, so better take advantage of THAT! (Literally calm before the storm, by two we will see if Dolores once again becomes painful... yeah play on words... but you need to speak Spanish to get it I s'pose and I would not be good enough to explain that joke. After all what would a native speaker know?)
2

I guess you haven't gotten to that "important" report you "have" to read....

Guess the Lois Lane-ing is less important than crashing and burning on the internet, eh?

[nadinbrzezinski]

83. If the site is not going to use those words

it is not used to anybody, including your political opponents. That is integrity, something you might want to look up in the actual dictionary. And yes, I need to get back to work.

Now don't expect me to simply "soft ignore you" and abide by your request.

[MADem]

94. You are CALLING OUT individual DUers who are not participating in this thread with those links.

I'd call that pretty nasty.

[nadinbrzezinski]

101. I am pointing out the language has been used

either do not at all, or stop being a sanctimonious person.

[MADem]

158. No--you're naming and shaming DUers who aren't even here to defend themselves.

That's not being "sanctimonious," that's telling you what you are doing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

159. So now pointing out that these words are liberally used

on this site is shaming? You must draw from a different set of the language One I will add, where hypocrisy is A-OK

[MADem]

161. You found a few examples from WAAAAAY back in DU2--and you're calling that "liberally used?"

Of the thousands and thousands and thousands of posts, you found three or four people to pick on, who aren't even here, and you're declaring victory?

Hypocrisy is the least of YOUR problems--you have no sense of scale.

[AtheistCrusader]

164. Hillary supporters seemed to find ONE case of a 160-post-count newbie using the word in the OP and

declared victory. So yeah, funny that.

[MADem]

166. And I'm sure if Mrs. Sanders were called that vile word from a "160 post count newbie" the

FeelTheBern team would let it go, because LANGUAGE.

Please.

[nadinbrzezinski]

169. I expect the term to be used with him too

I also expect open antisemitism as I already told you. Once that starts I am gone. I expect it to be very much tolerated. As is we already have the beginnings of it. so my days here are counted, and not for a good reason.

By the way, I am not a partisan, unless you count my man\woman\it big money, who should have those terms hurled at it. So trying to tell me that I would get annoyed over that use of the words, is kind of hilarious.

[MADem]

171. You'll be the one using it, then--I don't think anyone who doesn't support him as their first choice

would use such a crass, disrespectful gutter term.

[nadinbrzezinski]

174. Why would I use it?

Learn to read.

What I wrote is that I EXPECT IT.

I expect the term to be applied to a whole panoply of politicians. And I also expect antisemitism to be tolerated here, because it already has. That speaks not well of this place.

[MADem]

210. Because YOU are in the minority here, CHAMPIONING the use of the word.

Your issue is not simply one of expectation--you are an advocate for the term.

You're going to have to do a lot of post-deletion to walk back that fact.

If you want to take up the "antisemitism" banner, like you're a hero for that cause, you're doing a very odd mash-up, pairing that with your cheerleading of the "W" word in this very thread.

smh. You're not fooling me one bit.

[nadinbrzezinski]

241. You should re-read that OP carefully

it is part of the political lexicon. But I will repeat myself. Would I use it? Likely not. But the use of this term has increased by orders of magnitude. I expect it. It is like expecting people to call their political enemies carpet baggers. Fun fact, because you likely do not know that. Carpet bagger was not that popular when it made it's first appearance back in the 19th century.

I predict political whore is going to be in our political lexicon like that nasty term. Because it already is. You can only hold back the vandals at the gates for so long. Given how much the word whore has been used here over the years as recent as... 2015, save me the faux outrage. What is next in your cleansing of language? How many words do you want to remove that bother you? Adults usually can deal with things they do not necessarily like. Can you?

For the record, coarsening of political language is a product of hyper partisanship. You got a small smidgen of the guilt over that one.

[AtheistCrusader]

170. Jane Sanders isn't, to my knowledge, a politician.

So the context would have been completely blown and your analogy is spurious.

However, I would have clicked alert just as fast as I did with that newbie.

[nadinbrzezinski]

177. She wrote MRS... I missed that

I thought it was her calling on Mr, Sanders. and the outrage brigade.

Usually wives are left out of it, but even those barriers have been falling, and that is quite unfortunate. Not surprising when one understands how hyper partisanship is developing.

[MADem]

215. That's because you don't read.

MRS. Sanders is the former PRESIDENT of Burlington College.

She is a public figure and has been for many, many years.

[AtheistCrusader]

218. Public Figure != Politician.

Subset/Superset. Political pundits belong in that subset as well.

The term used by captain 160-post is applicable to the subset, in American politics and common parlance. It has even been used here, just less often against people identifying as liberal or democratic.

If you think I'm stretching meanings or being disingenuous, go click in that search box in the upper right for the site, and look for Ann Coulter Whore.

I cringe at it, I don't use it, I don't like to see it here. But you'll see not everyone shares that opinion, and it is part of common American political parlance.

[MADem]

221. If you really do "cringe" at it, then why are you endorsing the use of it in this thread?

By trying to crap on me for objecting to it, and that IS what you are doing, in post after post after post, that's precisely what you are doing, you know.

You obviousy don't "cringe" enough to direct some of that cringeworthy ire at the person who merits it, who is endorsing the use of the word, here.

But hey .... whatever. You can either put your money where your mouth is, or you can play the "Oh well, so-and-so said it, so it must be ok....everyone ELSE likes it, so who am I to stand up for women and others who take issue with calling women whores?"

smh.

Situational integrity sucks.

[AtheistCrusader]

224. Let me stop you right at your bullshit subject line. Nowhere have I "endorsed it". Try again.

[MADem]

226. It's not bullshit--everyone can read what you've written here--your words endorse--you don't have

to say "I endorse this" to make it clear that you have been supporting the OP's premise with every doggone post you've made here. save the one where you tried to hop off the train with a plea -- after all those posts--to talk about policy/material stuff--yeah, whatever.

People CAN read and your musings here are not visible to just me, you know.

[AtheistCrusader]

232. I said I would ban. I said I alerted. (I did) If you can't understand that, then yes, let this

thread fork stand for all time as testament to your reading comprehension. Ironic, after you accused nadinbrzezinski of not reading in this post: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6994033

You demonstrated an amazing ability to completely reverse something I said, and a double-down on just flat out skipping most of the rest of what I said. Stop that.

You also seem to have missed this bit in the OP:

Now, this does not mean I would necessarily use the term in a news article. But you would be shocked how many times I have heard it used to describe politicians on both sides of the aisle and genders, in the recent past. The usage has increased by orders of magnitude in the last two years. And I fear, from reading the entries on the google that we are late to the party in my little cul de sac, that aparently is not part of the country anyway.

That is not materially different from my position of not expecting to see it HERE, but acknowledging it's part of the political lexicon in the US.

[nadinbrzezinski]

242. Nice personal attack

I read. I also have dyslexia. I am now expecting you to attack the dyslexia.

Please, more personal attacks. For somebody annoyed about them, I am not surprised you use them.

Waiting here for the next personal attack.

[MADem]

248. I'm supposed to know your personal history?

In order for an attack to be personal, one has to be aiming at a KNOWN weakness. A writer should be able to figure out that basic device. If I called Bernie Sanders a lousy lumberjack, that would only "work" if I knew he had lumberjack skills in the first place. See how that works?

I see how you play it--here are two examples from this thread of yours:

When someone suggested you "get down off the cross" (a common expression that any WRITER should know), you took personal offense based on religion.

When people note (and several have, in this thread) that you--and you frequently tout your writing skills, here--don't read what people write, and have issues with spelling, punctuation and grammar--you quickly play the "I have dyslexia" card?

Maybe you're in the wrong line of work if you've not developed coping skills to overcome this issue.

Maybe, too, you should put your resume in your sig line, that way you would avoid (cough) "personal" (cough) attacks.



Are you going to say that pointing out your abject hypocrisy is a personal attack, too?

[nadinbrzezinski]

258. Well one starts by not telling people

They can't read.

Nice justification for your behavior though.

[MADem]

261. When you don't -- clearly -- read the words on the post, that is not an untoward inference to make.

Keep playing the victim, though!

[AtheistCrusader]

262. Yet you did it with me.

I would ordinarily not deploy barbs about a user's reading comprehension, if not for you saying something like you did in post 215.

Cheapening discourse. That's a barn door you opened.

[MADem]

266. You are the person affecting a dislike for a word while cheerleading a thesis that takes the

opposite view, coming after me repeatedly. Then you buddy-buddy with your cordial pal and trash talk me.

I have eyes. I can see. You own a piece of the "cheapening discourse" real estate with your own
'playing both sides of the street' behavior.

[AtheistCrusader]

268. I didn't cheerlead the thesis.

There you go again.

Saying I understood it and the motive behind it is not exactly cheerleading.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cheerleader

Can you see that?

[MADem]

270. You're running more interference for it than a championship defensive line.

So, whatever.

Some came to sing, some came to pray.

[AtheistCrusader]

273. Wow, pro football must be super easy then.

Maybe I should switch careers.

Inquiry; didn't understand your last line. Found a song lyric that continues 'some came to keep the darkness away'. Was anticipating an attack, don't understand the use in this case.

[MADem]

275. I don't understand why you came to this thread.

I don't think I ever will.

For someone who affects the POV that they don't like seeing women called "whores," you're doing a great job shitting on others -- like me, specifically -- who have articulated that oppositional POV.

[nadinbrzezinski]

286. Keep at it

[MADem]

287. Why? You seem to be doing JUST FINE all on your own. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

290. You are doing just fine

Justifying nasty behavior.

Please do continue

[MADem]

292. Too bad you can't rec your own thread more than once, eh?

Please do continue.

[nadinbrzezinski]

294. Do proceed

The justifications are becoming even more amusing by the second. And there you go with yet another personal attack.

Will not be alerted, just notted

[MADem]

295. Go ahead and alert on it--I am simply pointing out that you rec your own thread--

just like you're kicking it with these goading/baiting comments you're making.

Truth IS a defense, you know. I tell the truth. You still haven't learned what a personal attack is, either, I see.

Oh, since you're a writer, you'll appreciate this slight edit--the word is NOTED, not "notted."

And you'd do well to include a period at the end of your rather truncated sentence.

[nadinbrzezinski]

297. Please continue

I am not the one attacking you every three posts. Just noting you are.

I am not goading you. Just pointing out you are still doing it. Next I expect to be told somehow I deserve it. Not just have that implied.

[MADem]

212. No. Not blown. She's a woman in VERY public life--not a private citizen.

She recently resigned (under a bit of duress) from a very high visibility university position, the presidency of Burlington College. Here, read all about it:

http://vtdigger.org/2011/09/27/jane-sanders-resigns-presidency-of-burlington-college-reaches-settlement/

Since word began to circulate that Sanders might be leaving, both bitterness and hope have resurfaced in emails and website comments about the school. Grill believes that it will be “a good deal easier for the devoted and well-qualified instructors and staff at Burlington College to do their good work without Jane Sanders’ obstructions.”

My analogy is NOT spurious, unless you have a backward belief that only "women politicians" are public people, and high ranking university officials, business leaders, and other well known female persons in public life are somehow "not public" because they weren't elected/appointed.

[AtheistCrusader]

217. I missed the part where Public Person and Politician became interchangeable terms.

One is a subset of the other. The smear by the 160-post newbie applies to the subset not the superset.

So yes, the analogy is spurious. If the newbie said 'public w-' or 'publicity w-' sure. Your analogy would make more sense. University President is not a political position. Depending on the university, he or she may be a state employee, but it is not a position of governance over the state. Has zip to do with being a well known female person in public life. It would make no more sense to call Kim Kardashian by that insult.

Now, ridiculous technicalities aside, we don't disagree that it was an inappropriate smear, or what should happen to that poster as a result. Skinner disagreed with us, called it deplorable (paraphrase) but not ban-able. I'd have banned him or her. Where you and I part ways is in your wild threshings about how much of Sander's support agrees with or 'defends' that noob. Or with the many mad posts now about how 'now it's ok to call X, Y' bullshit extrapolations. It's not. The sky is not falling. DU is not rotten to the core. We did what we could, the term has some relevance to American politics however distasteful and unwelcome here, but the admins didn't find it ban-worthy. Get over it. Let's move on. We don't even know what that poster's motives were, we could be wasting time burning good will right now, by design, and that makes us suckers.

Lets move on to policy, material issues. Someone calls Hillary a misogynistic term, I'll race you to the alert button, ok?

[MADem]

225. Your parsing at this stage borders on ABSURD.

She is a public figure because she was President of a college, she is a public figure because she is the wife of a senator, and she is a public figure because she's on the list of potential first ladies.

Are you seriously trying to suggest that calling a public figure (like your Ann Coulter, e.g.) a whore is NOT OK because they weren't elected? That only "elected" status of a "politician" (or appointed--since HRC wasn't "elected" to be Secretary of State...or are we relying on her Senate years to make it "OK" to name call?) makes it "OK" to use that word?

Good grief--the pretzel logic is nothing short of astounding.

NOW you say "let's move to policy, material isssues?' NOW--after you've been riding to the rescue throughout this thread in support of calling Hillary Clinton a whore?

REEEEALLY? Forgive me if I find your sudden "concern" about policy/material issues disingenuous.

Someone DID call Clinton a "misogynistic term." That's what this entire thread is about. Good grief.

Nothing surprises me anymore.

[AtheistCrusader]

228. No, you seem determined to energetically misunderstand everything I say.

Are you seriously trying to suggest that calling a public figure (like your Ann Coulter, e.g.) a whore is NOT OK because they weren't elected?

No, I wouldn't even call her that myself. Also, you somehow managed to take the opposite meaning from what I said. I said political pundits belong to the same subset of Public Figures as politicians. Not sure how I could be any more clear on that point. How you got it backwards is boggling to me.

or are we relying on her Senate years to make it "OK" to name call?)

This is borderline outright LIE. I didn't say it was ok. I said I would have banned the poster. I said it was a deplorable part of American parlance (language) in the political realm. That is an acknowledgement that it exists, and that it might get used, but a clear statement that it is not acceptable here.

riding to the rescue

No, it's not 'riding to the rescue', it's more like 'calm down yo'.

support of calling Hillary Clinton a whore

I didn't actually see anyone support that, but admittedly, I have not read every single post in this thread.

That's what this entire thread is about.

Yeah, I get that. I said I'd alert. I DID alert so a note would be sent to the Admins, even though it had already failed a jury. Let me repeat my last post, since you apparently didn't read it.

Now, ridiculous technicalities aside, we don't disagree that it was an inappropriate smear, or what should happen to that poster as a result. Skinner disagreed with us, called it deplorable (paraphrase) but not ban-able. I'd have banned him or her. Where you and I part ways is in your wild threshings about how much of Sander's support agrees with or 'defends' that noob. Or with the many mad posts now about how 'now it's ok to call X, Y' bullshit extrapolations. It's not. The sky is not falling. DU is not rotten to the core. We did what we could, the term has some relevance to American politics however distasteful and unwelcome here, but the admins didn't find it ban-worthy. Get over it. Let's move on. We don't even know what that poster's motives were, we could be wasting time burning good will right now, by design, and that makes us suckers.

Lets move on to policy, material issues. Someone calls Hillary a misogynistic term, I'll race you to the alert button, ok?

[MADem]

230. I don't "seem" to be doing anything of the sort. Look, your words speak for you.

If you actually gave two shits about women being called whores, you'd spend more time saying so, instead of playing a flanking game to support the OP's premise.

I was born at night, but not last night. Like I said, people can read what you wrote and they can judge for themselves.

And speaking of not reading (and I did read every damn word you wrote, FWIW) that's a pretty slick trick to call a QUESTION a LIE.

smh.

Situational integrity.

[AtheistCrusader]

233. No, 'My Words' don't speak for me anymore after you've regurgitated them back through your misunders

tanding.

I gave a shit, I alerted, the alerts have been considered by not only a jury, AND the Admins, but by Skinner himself. I disagree with Skinners decision to allow it to stand in this venue. Please get that through your skull at some point.

By all means, bystanders are welcome to judge what I wrote. Just not through your inability to grasp it.

[MADem]

253. I expect people to go to the source -- so give that "regurgitated" nonsense a rest.

It's all right here, in black and white.

You're spending all of your efforts defending this OP and denigrating me for the crime of objecting. Why, I have no idea.

[AtheistCrusader]

259. Odd you don't know why, since I've stated it plainly.

[nadinbrzezinski]

167. Perhaps since I was looking for the examples for the first time

this was used by a major politician and people here applauded since that was a political enemy.

So wah to you too. Want more RECENT examples?

here, bonus point DonViejo is quoting Salon

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251311996

And this from THIS YEAR

http://www.democraticunderground.com/106498

[MADem]

213. You keep calling out DUERS who aren't participating in the conversation.

Pro tip "Nadin." That is rude. Here's another pro tip: I am not responsible for the behavior of others. You can tell me what other people have done all day long. Understand this--I don't give a shit. I am responsible for MY conduct--as YOU are responsible for yours. Stop pointing "over there." That's what a child in kindergarten does -- "Well so and so did it TOOOOOOOOO" is not an adult excuse.

You can dig way back in the archives and find feminists calling one another the "B" word, too. They've evolved. What is wrong with you that you can't manage that?

Segregation used to be the law of the land, women couldn't vote or own property, and slavery used to be legal. Should we go back to those old days as well?

The word is offensive. You keep doubling down on it and use spurious "examples" that fail in context of DUers using the term -- and those DUers aren't even in this conversation.

Your use of the word is offensive. Your attempt to point the finger at DUers who aren't even talking to you about this issue is doubly offensive.

[AtheistCrusader]

219. That seems like a bullshit argument.

Your attempt to point the finger at DUers who aren't even talking to you about this issue is doubly offensive.

The climate of what is, and is not acceptable to say at DU is relevant. What people say when referring to 'enemy' politicians and their lackeys, sets the tone for what *might* be said when two democratic candidates with contentious bases and divergent records come to loggerheads.

I am of the opinion that if Sanders wouldn't say it about Hillary, that's a good indicator no Sanders supporter should either. (Unknown if our intrepid newbie is actually a sanders supporter or not)

But if the term is commonly used at DU, and most of the time nobody says shit about it, then the 'offense' of pointing that out is purely imagined by you.

[MADem]

220. The term is NOT commonly used at DU.

It is rarely used, and this poster is digging back in the archives, even "thanking" the Wayback Machine in this thread, and putting up old posts made by people who aren't even participating in this thread.

There's no imagining happening here--she's calling out DUers who aren't even here by linking to ancient posts.

[AtheistCrusader]

222. I see plenty of it using the simple search built into DU.

Normally it is directed at hostile politicians or their allies. Normally.

[MADem]

227. It's not "plenty" in recent years. Even the thread starter had to use the

Wayback Machine to find her callout posts.

[AtheistCrusader]

234. I did not have to use the wayback machine.

Why would I give two shits what level of effort someone else had to apply, when I just used the built in search myself? Non-sequitur much?

I just got into it with people in this fucking thread, wherein 'c--t' was excusable because he was talking about women to an American audience, but he was 'australian' so that's ok.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017253396

Some of us can work search pretty good. You'd be surprised how many misogynistic terms are just fine and dandy on DU in the 'right context'.

[nadinbrzezinski]

235. It was DU 's way back machine

better known as the search feature.

Nice try

[MADem]

250. You didn't say that, though--did you? Of course you didn't.

But you expect people to read your mind....?

[nadinbrzezinski]

252. Since I wrote DU way back machine.

But I have discovered you are not just literal. And I will leave it at that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

236. Yup

this is why I take this faux outrage as precisely that.

Even Skinner stated this fact at ATA.

What other words will the outrage brigade want to "ban" next? How do I keep my precious eyes from it? I pulled three examples from fucking media. (Fucking will be targeted).

So what happens in the real world when an article is linked? And gasp...as the article points out the offending word is in the quoted paragraph? These language nannies are trying to contain a stream in flood. You can't.

[AtheistCrusader]

237. Personally I would have banned that user with a 'lurk more' message, but i'm not going to make a

federal case over it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

239. And they are

when I posted this OP I did not realize, gasp I know, bad on me...that the whole outrage was over the magic term (anybody who allows language to hold such power over them, I feel sorry for them) by a neub, with HRC. Imagine my "shock" (another term to target, and clutching pearls) since the term is used regularly with political enemies and media types.

Would I be annoyed (and I am a woman) if any of these idiots called me a media whore? Considering the source I would consider that an honor at this point. Given the history here, again, I expect it. So the faux outrage is just that.

It is also always the same folks. It is getting damn annoying.

[dionysus]

531. !!! "Here's another pro tip: .... Understand this--I don't give a shit."

[AtheistCrusader]

147. What you call 'nasty', I call 'context'.

[MADem]

157. So, you approve of calling out DUers for words they said years ago, when they aren't

even participating in this thread?

OK!

[AtheistCrusader]

162. If it's relevant. Sure.

Have fun spelunking in my post history.

[MADem]

214. Totally uninterested in spelunking your post history--that's Nadin's forte.

Years ago, there was less awareness of how people could be hurt by the cruel or misappropriated use of words. Ask the Ghost of Richard Pryor why he will never say the N word again--when it was a stock-in-trade phrase with him coming up.

Some people GAIN awareness. Others double down about their "rights" because their "rights" are more important than the dignity of others.

[AtheistCrusader]

238. Years ago? How about weeks ago?

I'm all for changing the discourse. Plenty of threads to tackle this problem without trying to hang it round the necks of 'Bernie suporters', etc.

[MADem]

251. You are not "all for changing the discourse." Your words in this thread belie that assertion.

As does your nudging and winking with the OP.

[AtheistCrusader]

257. I am cordial with the OP, because I read and understood the original post.

I get the idea.

Nothing belies that claim. I have, and will, alert on any misogynistic language leveled at anyone. I've alerted on fat jokes. I alerted on that 'c--t' 'comedy' sketch on gun control that was loved so much. I alert a lot on shit like that, and I will continue to do so, and I will continue to serve on juries and vote hide with context and explanation when I see it.

I've been quite damn clear about that.

What I will not do, is pretend the sky is falling because one 160 post asshole said something offensive, a jury failed to hide it, and admin/site owner review also failed to spike the user.

The term is offensive, and I do not like it. Yet it is part of American political dialogue, and I can understand when and why it gets used by people willing to employ that language, and I keep the use in context, even though I don't like it.

We can chat till the general election is over about all the shit I don't like, yet can understand when/why other people use it, even if I think it cheapens public discourse.

[MADem]

264. Sure--whatever you say.

If you spent one tenth of your energy focusing on the policy discussions you seem to care (cough) so much about, this board might be improved.

If you really thought the word was so awful, you'd spend less time fighting with me and more time explaining to your "cordial" little buddy why her thesis is in error, but apparently you're loving her comments. Conversely, I take issue with calling women in public life that word (and in private life, too--but we don't normally hear that day-to-day) and you have to double down and give me shit.

smh. I have eyes and I can see.

[AtheistCrusader]

267. You assume too much.

If you use the search well enough, you can find Nadin' and I going at it just as you and I are arguing now. (I don't recall what over)

This is my biggest problem with this whole ordeal. People who see alliances and conspiracies everywhere in every thing, people unable to conceive of any disagreement that isn't a concerted effort to smear and destroy their favored candidate.

THAT's my core objection with your position. This was a serious issue, but not half as serious as certain parties have made it out to be, and then turned around and used it as a weapon against an entire group of people who had not a damn thing to do with it.

Until someone proves that not only the 160 post newb is a sanders supporter, but also the four mystery 'leave it's' in the alert are sanders supporters, people should probably stop trying to read into the unknown motives of each poster, and then attribute it to people who may have had nothing at all to do with it.

[MADem]

274. All I can say is this--you appear, to me, to be playing both sides of the street.

You affect (to me) a dislike for the term, yet you run interference on behalf of the OP while I am trying to argue against the use of the word. Anyone reading this thread like a team sport would assume that you weren't wearing the same color jersey as I am--and IMO they'd be right to make that assumption, because that IS how you are coming off.

So, if I can't (cough) figure out how sincere you are, I don't think it's my fault.

It is by your WORDS that I know you...see how that works?

[AtheistCrusader]

278. Technically I am.

I've made it clear I don't like the term, and don't tolerate it. I also understand some others will attempt to use it in this POLITICAL context.

When more people agree with me, the term will go away in this venue because any post that employs it will cease to exist.

I also recognize that it has a common use political, not sexual context. I tend to reject that because the word itself is a feminine smear, you almost never see its male counterpart even when in reference to a male politician. But that is the common use, I recognize that.

It'll change. It's already changed somewhat from DU2.
In the meantime, let's mush on.

[MADem]

279. Your vigorous defense of the OP ensures that the word will survive here at DU

longer than it otherwise might have. You've given aid and comfort to those who take the opposing view.

Heckuvajob. If that's how you "don't tolerate" please, please, please don't "help" me to object to this or other forms of denigration in future. I simply don't see you as a useful ally given your comments here.

[AtheistCrusader]

282. Bullshit.

I was a small part of taking it to the final court of appeals. (An admin alert that was reviewed along with umpteen others by Skinner/admins.)

That's it. We can go no further. No more recourse except to take my ball and go home.

OR I can recognize Nadin's point, still oppose the use, and move on and be productive.

I don't desire to round every edge, and pad every corner in life. I don't expect a word/use like that to be acceptable in this venue, but hey, I didn't think c--t was either and I got roundly shouted down on that one, and couldn't alert anything for 24h. Such is life.

I can oppose that word and simultaneously coexist with people who want an abrasive term like that (in the political context) on-tap for use. I don't necessarily enjoy it, but it is what it is. Had skinner decided differently, or an admin int he food chain below him decided differently, this conversation would be different. If it hadn't been for umpteen OH SO NOW ITS OK TO CALL PEOPLE X hyperbolic threads and smears on Sanders supporters, this conversation would be different or I might not have even cared to participate.

Choices were made.

Look, I'm a father, and I'm trying to navigate shit like my six year old son coming home and saying things like 'I don't like pink' because he's picked up that girly=bad negative shit from his classmates. I can't just demand to know why that's a bad thing or punish him or go stomping into the school, and at th end of the day expect to have won this battle in anything that can be considered an actual win. I can scorched earth the fuck out of this problem, but fail to solve the problem. I have to be a little more flexible than that. That might mean I buy a VERY pink shirt for myself and wait for him to notice it. Something a little more tactical than THOU SHALT NOT THINK POORLY OF FEMININE CHARACTERISTICS (so-defined by society, I think pink is fine/neuter.)

In this case, positions have been staked out, temperature of the rabble and the administration documented, no clear solution presented itself, or could be forced, so uh, yeah. Next issue for now. Always open to reviving it.

[MADem]

284. You don't give yourself enough credit, there.

Believe me, you did a fine job of muddying the waters. It's nice that you walk the walk IRL, but your comments here did give aid and comfort to those who espouse the alternative POV.

[AtheistCrusader]

285. I disagree but

I doubt either of us can convince the other of anything at this point.

[LanternWaste]

31. I imagine if one is compelled to use it...

I imagine if one is compelled to use it, it reflects rather poorly on the breadth of one's grasp of the English language... or one simply want to rationalize a thumb-in-the-eye phrase.

Regardless, I'd guess that attempting to justify vulgar language as anything but vulgar is in and of itself, rather illustrative of the level of discourse one may expect from that source.

[nadinbrzezinski]

46. So let me ask you also,

when a source tells me that so and so is a political magic word here, I should stop and scold them for their potty mouth?

Because that is what I am getting from you folks. The world and in this particular usage, will continue to spread. I will not try the stop the flow of water at the dyke with my finger. You feel free to do so.

[MADem]

48. Oh, snap!

[JTFrog]

223. Indeed. n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

56. Obviously NOW is a rightwing, anti-feminist, group that wants to insult women. K&R

What, not a whore? - Othello Act 4 Scene 2 William Shakespeare

[nadinbrzezinski]

58. Good one

[NuclearDem]

61. The Huckleberry Finn defense. Lovely.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

67. Yep. And, it's true here too.

Do you believe that NOW intended to insult all women? How does using the word Whore (yes, I used it and I'm not sorry) to describe venal politicians (rightly or wrongly) insult you?

[NuclearDem]

86. Whoosh.

NOW's intentions aren't the issue.

You basically saying "Shakespeare said it, so it's alright" is akin to someone using n****r because Twain used it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

89. Well if you are going to be consistent

you will not use that term with any politician, including your political opponents. I just don't expect it, Though that would be the equivalent of standing at the dyke with your finger in trying to stop the flood. But at least that would have some more integrity.

[NuclearDem]

98. I don't use that word, even for people I don't like.

Swing and a miss.

[nadinbrzezinski]

99. Will you call people here who do?

I doubt it.

[NuclearDem]

103. I do, and I have.

Swing and a miss again. Is the idea of someone principled really that difficult a concept for you, Nadin?

[nadinbrzezinski]

104. I will pay attention and complement you when I see it

And no, it is not a difficult concept,

Is the concept of semantic shift difficult for you? By the way, when in an interview somebody uses the term, I cannot stop and call them on their potty mouth. That is inserting yourself in the story.

[NuclearDem]

108. Nobody's telling you to stop doing your job.

You came come down from that cross.

[nadinbrzezinski]

111. Actually it was quite implied

thank you

And as a jew I find the use of a cross insulting. Not that I will stop you from using it.

[NuclearDem]

118. Is the predominate use of the allusion to the cross

to convey, in a hyperbolic sense, an exaggerated sense of persecution, anti-Semitic, or simply a cultural reference most people in the primarily-Christian West would understand?

For your rather feeble attempt at drawing a parallel to "whore" to work, it would have to be the former, but sadly, it's the latter.

[nadinbrzezinski]

122. As I said, I will not stop you

pointed it out, that is it.

Not interested in controlling your use of language. It is not my way.

[NuclearDem]

123. People have explained to you why "whore" is offensive.

Explain to me why my use of that phrase is offensive to you.

If the offense is genuine, I'll take it into consideration. Something tells me it's not.

[nadinbrzezinski]

124. It is, and I also explained to you a "semantic shift"

this is a term you do not understand.

I am not interested in controlling your language, It is not faux outrage, or faux insult. That is all I will say about how I personally feel about the phrase climb down from your cross. Like if somebody uses the world Womyn here, it grates me, bad spelling, but I will not try to control people and their use of language. As I said, I am not interested in controlling how you speak.

I have yet to use the magical word, beyond direct quotes in POLITICAL MEDIA and how it is shifting. I will not use the actual magical word on this site, becuase you folks go into outrage mode. Why I used the letter W... but was not going to change the actual news stories.

Discussing langauge evolution is not something that can be easily done on DU. There are many subjects that you cannot have an adult discussion HERE. We have them at other places, where we do not censor ourselves. The fact that we have to censor ourselves here is not good.

Note to self, do not tell nucleardem a damn thing that might be insulting to me. Will not bring any of this up ever again.

Carry on.

[NuclearDem]

126. "this is a term you do not understand."

I know exactly what it means. You don't seem to, however. A semantic change would be, say, "gay" changing in meaning from joyous or jubilant to a synonym for homosexual.

A word that means "sells oneself to another" does not make such a semantic shift when the "new" definition depends on an understanding of the old definition to have its effect. The reason "corporate whore" works as an insult is because the word "whore" already insults someone's purity. No, that's not a "semantic shift."

Like if somebody uses the world Womyn here, it grates me, bad spelling

It's not bad spelling. It's a version of the word that some feminists use--it removes "man" and "men" from "woman" and "women."

Discussing langauge evolution is not something that can be easily done on DU. There are many subjects that you cannot have an adult discussion HERE. We have them at other places, where we do not censor ourselves. The fact that we have to censor ourselves here is not good.

No, you're not capable of it. This entire thread is rife with you insulting, patronizing, and talking down to others. You make discussion of these subjects enormously difficult when you do that.

Note to self, do not tell nucleardem a damn thing that might be insulting to me. Will not bring any of this up ever again.

Again, if you explained why it's offensive to you, I would in all good faith take into consideration. That's the attitude I've taken for the five years I've been here. Since you just seem to be ducking out of it and comparing it to a pet peeve, then I'm inclined to believe it's not comparable to use of "whore."

[nadinbrzezinski]

127. please proceed and do have a last word

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

95. Look up the word "context". It might help you.

I have no problem in using the word whore when describing politicians of either gender. Do you?

[NuclearDem]

102. I do, because I know where the word comes from and what it means.

Plus, enough people have told me how unnecessarily offensive and hurtful it is that I've simply decided to not use it.

That's a pretty easy thing to do for someone with a rich enough vocabulary.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

109. Good for you.

Poor Shakespeare and Twain (and countless others) who weren't as rich in vocabulary as you.

[NuclearDem]

115. Sad that your standards of what's socially acceptable or not are locked centuries in the past.

Understanding the historical context in which Shakespeare and Twain wrote their works is not justifying using those words now.

What other 19th century standards and cultural practices do you think deserve a place in the 21st?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

139. Do you think that other writers, modern writers, avoid the evil word?

Steinbeck, Hemingway, Heller, Eugene O'Neill, James Joyce, Vladimir Nabokov, Tennessee Williams, Lillian Hellman, Barbara Kingsolver, Arundhati Roy, the writers from NOW?

Are they lacking in vocabulary or context?

Are you aware that "in the context of the 19th century" the use of the word "whore" by writers was frequently censored by those with poor vocabularies.

How does one improve one's vocabulary by eliminating words?

[nadinbrzezinski]

141. Oh steinbeck and Hemingway are so last century

For the record, I see the word in usage in modern day literature all the time. Maybe it is what i read. I will add a few sci fi writers to that list.

At the risk of getting some folks riled (again), remember when the Vagina Monologues came out?

They are STILL quite revolutionary by the way

http://thetriangle.org/entertainment/vagina-monologues-play-addresses-womens-plight/

[randome]

151. I've read Steinbeck and Hemingway. I learned much from Steinbeck and Hemingway.

You are no Steinbeck or Hemingway.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]

[nadinbrzezinski]

152. Why the need for the personal attack?

A mystery to me.

But one I will never try to solve. It is just a mystery of the universe. Why people have the need to constantly insult others? I guess it makes them feel better.

[randome]

153. Not an attack. You presume to lecture the world on proper writing.

I'm simply stating my opinion that you don't know what you're talking about.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]

[nadinbrzezinski]

155. But you are engaging in a nasty personal attack

while you state your opinion. You can do that without attacking, or perhaps you are not capable. Again, a mystery to me.

I do not alert. But I do point these mysteries out.

[MADem]

229. I share your view. Basic spelling and grammar are not optional elements of even marginal writing. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

317. Ah yes, another personal attack

how many so far MADem? Once again, this is what makes this place suck. It is also a tool of the bully.

I will try to be nice here and point to you that after reading on the behavior extensively, it does not work anymore. But please do continue. I am waiting for the next personal attack.

[MADem]

324. That's not a personal attack. That is an accurate observation.

You keep repeating that term....repetition doesn't make something that is not true, true, either.

[nadinbrzezinski]

327. I know exactly what it means

you keep denying you do it. Which is kind of very cute. Oh and that is another personal attack. Telling the person you are attacking they do not know when they are getting attacked is one as well.

Keep it up. You are doing great. You are trying to get me angry and all you are getting is smiles.

It is actually hilarious.

[MADem]

329. Oh really? You don't say!

Keep it up. You are doing great. You are trying to get me angry and all you are getting is smiles.

It is actually hilarious.

[nadinbrzezinski]

331. Yup, you are funny

bad comedy, but at this point it is what it is.

[MADem]

332. Oh really? You don't say!

[nadinbrzezinski]

334. Please do continue

that snicker emoticon is cute.

[MADem]

340. If you insist....

Please do continue

that snicker emoticon is cute.

[nadinbrzezinski]

344. I do, I do, by all means

Please.

[MADem]

351. OK.

I do, I do, by all means

Please.

[nadinbrzezinski]

352. .

[MADem]

353. OK.

.

[nadinbrzezinski]

354. .

[MADem]

355. -

.

[nadinbrzezinski]

357. .

this is kind of even funnier... but what can I say? Snicker...

[MADem]

366. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=268142

[nadinbrzezinski]

368. I know that is what you wish

[MADem]

377. .

I know that is what you wish

[tammywammy]

373. That's good news, glad to see that troll gone. n/t

[MADem]

376. Skinner came through for us.

I guess he doesn't like "that word" directed at women, either!

[nadinbrzezinski]

379. Ok, but I am not directing the word at women

just pointing out that it has been used here constantly against political enemies of both genders, and that the word is evolving in the political press. Adults can discuss these issues in a mature way, and language should be discussed in a mature way.

Skinner also pointed out that the history of this use on DU is long. Here I will post his statement for you to read.

Star Member Skinner (60,514 posts)
4. I agree that person is a troll.

He dropped a turd in a thread, stared a shitstorm, and then made no effort whatsoever to explain himself. Furthermore, he has a history of inflammatory comments like this.

To be clear, as much as it pains me to say it, I don't think that specific post is by itself cause for banning. As you know there is a very long history (including here on DU) of people using the word "whore" to refer to public figures (both male and female) who are doing the bidding of powerful interests. People on this website routinely post about "corporate whores" or "media whores" and barely anyone thinks it is out-of-bounds.

But the fact that this was aimed specifically at a prominent Democrat who is also a woman does bother me very deeply. I am really disappointed that large numbers of DU members (including a majority of the jurors on that post) thought that that post was within bounds. And it wasn't a jury of "trolls" either -- the jurors who voted to leave the post were all long-term members with thousands upon thousands of posts and stars next to their usernames.

So I guess the takeaway here is that we need to decide what kind of community we want this to be. We have the power, though our posts and through our jury service, to set a higher standard. We just have to decide to use it.

And another thing: For people who are seeing this through the partisan lens of the Democratic presidential primary, it seems to me that that supporters of every Democratic presidential candidate have an interest in curbing this kind of language. Obviously Hillary Clinton supporters don't like seeing their favored candidate smeared in this way. But supporters of Bernie Sanders or other Democrats should not want to see this either, because it makes them (and by association, their candidate) look very bad.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12598326#post4

So call me silly, go ahead, but I doubt it is because of that word use.

[MADem]

386. .

But the fact that this was aimed specifically at a prominent Democrat who is also a woman does bother me very deeply. I am really disappointed that large numbers of DU members (including a majority of the jurors on that post) thought that that post was within bounds. And it wasn't a jury of "trolls" either -- the jurors who voted to leave the post were all long-term members with thousands upon thousands of posts and stars next to their usernames.

So I guess the takeaway here is that we need to decide what kind of community we want this to be. We have the power, though our posts and through our jury service, to set a higher standard. We just have to decide to use it.

And another thing: For people who are seeing this through the partisan lens of the Democratic presidential primary, it seems to me that that supporters of every Democratic presidential candidate have an interest in curbing this kind of language. Obviously Hillary Clinton supporters don't like seeing their favored candidate smeared in this way. But supporters of Bernie Sanders or other Democrats should not want to see this either, because it makes them (and by association, their candidate) look very bad.

[nadinbrzezinski]

387. Yes, and

the fact that this has been used here for years is also part of it, let me re-quote it for you

Star Member Skinner (60,514 posts)
4. I agree that person is a troll.

He dropped a turd in a thread, stared a shitstorm, and then made no effort whatsoever to explain himself. Furthermore, he has a history of inflammatory comments like this.

To be clear, as much as it pains me to say it, I don't think that specific post is by itself cause for banning. As you know there is a very long history (including here on DU) of people using the word "whore" to refer to public figures (both male and female) who are doing the bidding of powerful interests. People on this website routinely post about "corporate whores" or "media whores" and barely anyone thinks it is out-of-bounds.

But the fact that this was aimed specifically at a prominent Democrat who is also a woman does bother me very deeply. I am really disappointed that large numbers of DU members (including a majority of the jurors on that post) thought that that post was within bounds. And it wasn't a jury of "trolls" either -- the jurors who voted to leave the post were all long-term members with thousands upon thousands of posts and stars next to their usernames.

So I guess the takeaway here is that we need to decide what kind of community we want this to be. We have the power, though our posts and through our jury service, to set a higher standard. We just have to decide to use it.

And another thing: For people who are seeing this through the partisan lens of the Democratic presidential primary, it seems to me that that supporters of every Democratic presidential candidate have an interest in curbing this kind of language. Obviously Hillary Clinton supporters don't like seeing their favored candidate smeared in this way. But supporters of Bernie Sanders or other Democrats should not want to see this either, because it makes them (and by association, their candidate) look very bad.

Now let me add a nice piece from the bible that actually applies here.

They sow the wind, and so they will reap the whirlwind!

When you use this language for political enemies year after year, after year, after year, after year, it will be sooner or later be used on your allies.

But I am not looking at this though any partisan lens. YOU ARE. So my issue is not whether it correct that it was used... it is not, so we are very clear. It is that it has been used to close to two decades now. See about that coarsening of language you refuse to read on becuase of partisanship? Mind you, the other political side has the elephant side responsibly on this, but dems are not innocent lambs to the slaughter.

If you cared about it, you would realize why this is happening, or least be curious as to why we are getting this coarsening of language. You are not. Your only interest is in scoring points.

So are we going to stay overnight? So you know I intend to get some sleep, so I might have to get the last word in the morning.

[dionysus]

532. you bullying, personal attacker, you...

[JoePhilly]

63. I don't care how anyone else has used it in the past.

This is a democratic board, and it was used in reference to a female democratic candidate for President.

And its use is defended by folks who consider themselves to be the "good" liberals.

[nadinbrzezinski]

65. I am just pointing out that it is being used

more and more to describe members of the political class

Would I use it in a news story as I wrote? Most likely not, and if I did, would be in quotes with attribution to the speaker.

Moreover, using these words is fine when used for a republican but not ok with democrats?

My theory is that partly due to partisan sites, this is why this language is becoming normalized.

Yes way back machine

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9424476
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1877038

[JoePhilly]

71. The overloaded meaning of the word is a FEATURE, not a bug.

Its was a way to call Hillary a "whore" and then pretend the intent was something else.

Similar to the GOP Southern Strategy.

You get to say what you really mean, and then act surprised when called on it.

The overloaded meaning of the word is a FEATURE, not a bug.

[nadinbrzezinski]

76. Sadly I am not talking about HRC

I am talking of language evolution, Sometimes a cigar is a cigar

here more of this use

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=160x22813

[JoePhilly]

84. I'm not referring to your use of the term.

I'm referring to how it was used by some one else here on DU.

[nadinbrzezinski]

85. Well I am sure somebody will use that term

that way with all politicians sooner or later. It is due to that evolution of language.

[JoePhilly]

90. You are playing with the abstract notion of the word. I'm not.

I am referring to how it was actually used ... not some theoretical notion of how it could be used ... or might be used ... in the future.

It was used here on DU. About a female democratic Presidential candidate. A candidate who has been attacked on a very personal level for over 2 decades. A candidate who now gets attacked personally here on DU, on a regular basis.

[nadinbrzezinski]

97. I am referring to the here and now actually

it is not theoretical.

I expect that use for that particular politician in a paper or two, not just a blogging site, soon.

For the record I expect open rank antisemitism against Sanders here and in papers. And we just saw what Trump did with McCain and his military service. This is an echo of what the other side did to Kerry's military service.

It is part of the hyper partisanship that has taken over the country, a different, but related ball of wax.

[JoePhilly]

105. I doubt we'll see rank antisemitism against Sanders here on DU ...

... and if it does appear (say a troll decides that would be fun) ... I do not expect anyone on DU to defend it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

106. As soon as it makes it's undeniable appearance I am gone... not a threat, a promise.

but the related ball of wax, has to do with coarsening of language due to that hyper partisanship

There are good books on the subject.

I have been making my way though this one

http://www.amazon.com/Even-Worse-Than-Looks-Constitutional-ebook/dp/B00FK8Y274/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1437416559&sr=8-1&keywords=it%27s+even+worst+than+it+looks

It will make a lot of what we have seen even more clear, and to be frank, scary.

[haikugal]

504. I'm purchasing the book on your recommendation, thanks! nt

[sadoldgirl]

77. All this outrage seems to me making

a mountain out of a molehill.
I am a woman, but I am not so terribly prudish
that I cannot distinguish the two different meanings.

How often do I read the word f#%$ here, and it is
not used in a sexual way. Yet nobody complains
anymore.
Yes, Nadine is correct about the evolution of
language; and there are many words that used
to have only sexual meaning, but by now have
acquired another one.

[nadinbrzezinski]

78. Thanks I started going to the DU wayback machine

and picking choice OPs using those words. Even the one referenced in the OP.

[PassingFair]

184. +1

I AM a prude, and the term "corporate whore" doesn't bother me at all.

[still_one]

79. There is no question in my view that the meaning of "W" changed after George W Bush was president

[randome]

88. But the word 'santorum' originated by intelligent design.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

[still_one]

92. Yes, and it is only 5000 years old

[olddots]

87. The Stuff Of Thought

by Steven Pinker is a good book about language and change .

[nadinbrzezinski]

91. Thanks for the reading recomendation

I just got it on Kindle, will read it.

[Prism]

110. It's a "DU debate"

Meaning, offline, no one on earth gives a damn and no one would waste their time arguing about it. Everyone knows the colloquial usage of whore. Pretending it's woman-centric and isn't used every single day towards men betrays a willful obtuseness that is required as a baseline to even begin the argument. You literally have to pretend to be an idiot to even get into this.

But this is online, so we like to pretend this is Serious Activism.

I don't know why. I guess to paper over the dread truth - we're lazy folk who waste a lot of time online doing nothing.

This is very nothing.

Fun sometimes, though!

[nadinbrzezinski]

114. I do not consider DU serious activism

By the way, around 2004 i did consider it a serious place. But over the last few years I consider this a place you come have a conversation, and never change views, or rather very rarely.

I just like how language does indeed change. It is actually a side interest of mine, how language changes. It might be since writing is a serious pursuit of mine.

As to off line people not wasting their time. I am betting this has become an issue of discussion at the AP... and whether or not to add it to the style book. In fact let me check I got the 2015 edition here. Nope, not in the Style Book yet. As you know things like "ilegal" are off the style book by now. That one actually made news.

It would also be of interest among linguists.

On a far more general term... it is part of the coarsening of the language due to hyper partisanship

Here, one of the books on this. I am actually getting though this one. It's conclusions are rather dark and scary.

http://www.amazon.com/Even-Worse-Than-Looks-Constitutional-ebook/dp/B00FK8Y274/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1437416559&sr=8-1&keywords=it%27s+even+worst+than+it+looks

[Prism]

119. There are some gems

Oddly enough, in a thread about this word, Cleita dropped some knowledge about the evolution of English slang and social propriety of usage in regards to the Norman conquest and the English common tongue. Really interesting concept that I hadn't heard before.

It's actually a strange two-tiered system of language we're working with in this country. You bring up the Style guide. Ok, so the media don't want to use words, but regular folks will continue to. So we have a kind of "pretend" language that is used officially, and then we have word usage everyone else uses in daily conversation.

And people get really worked up about that pretend language. They need it to exist. And, hey, I'm willing to indulge them. I don't use whore on this board because the drama it will cause is hardly worth it. I'll engage in the Pretend Language. We all do to some degree. We do at work, we do in certain social situations. But Official Pretend always engenders this fury and passion.

But there's no real application. Ok. So on DU, I suppose we will play Official Pretend. Still doesn't affect how I speak offline, or my friends and family, or anyone really. Just as long as we're here. It's Pretend time.

Humans are funny creatures.

[nadinbrzezinski]

121. Humans are funnny creatures

what bothers me about this place, is that folks have no issue in using those magical words against their political opponents, It is a hyper partisan site, so no surprise there. Why I recommend that book. Republicans get the lion's share of the responsibility, but democrats are not quite innocent.

As to the media, it is by it's very nature a very conservative and slow moving institution. And if you knew some things as to who owns the AP, it will make even more sense. It will get used. like in 2010 with Carly Fiorina and the New York Times piece on it. They just used it in quotes and with attribution. That is how you use these words not in the style guide. This is why Gawker used it that way too.

I just pointed out that the word is morphing in front of us. And to many here, that morphing will be very painful. These days I hear it at least once a week in the streets. I used not to. But if you are stuck in old uses, I fear to say it, middle class white uses, you are going to be in shock. And I expect a good old fashioned language war.

I expect the word to be applied to national politicos on all sides very soon. We have moved from Oh HORROR, how dare you in 2010... to he, she, it is a political whore. The term has been normalized.

[olddots]

112. logically Earth would have a universal language

Ego may be anti logic and even computers may have egos prpgramed into them someday so language will keep growing and searching for identity .

YO backards is OY .

[nadinbrzezinski]

128. Languages are disapearing faster than ever before in human history

so we might very well be moving in that direction.

[BainsBane]

130. Misogyny is especially useful

In demonstrating contempt for women, which is in fact it's purpose. It is the purpose of calling women c...ts, something you also defended in an OP, and of calling them w....es.

Let's review what is acceptable in order to promote one candidate over a woman: calling the female candidate a "c...t" and a "w...e." Reverting to NRA talking points about "exploiting a tragedy" and defending immunity from civil liability for multi-billion dollar gun corporations; making false claims about campaign finance law; and telling actual leftist activists, Black Lives Matter, they need to apologize to members of the political elite for exceeding their place. In addition, I have seen attacks on members who discuss homophobia, like horrible bigotry toward family members dying from AIDs, for what is evidently the far worse crime of using the "f word." F word, a travesty, w...e, and c..t, perfectly acceptable.

My, this "leftism" certainly is interesting. Funny how it manages to affirm straight white male privilege over the subaltern and defend the corporate power of the gun industry. No wonder some think they can get the Tea Party folks to support their candidate.

[nadinbrzezinski]

132. I am sure it will come as a shock to the former CIA director that

he is a woman, or the two political operatives in DC.

Linguistic shifts happen all the time. This one is happening in real time.

By the way, please proceed governor, and do have the last word on this.

[mercuryblues]

133. I guess because

this is your umpteenth op supporting calling women whores; we could say you are whoring for hits. Once a whore, always a whore.

[nadinbrzezinski]

134. I guess you are into personal attacks instead of noticing that three of the people

who were called political magical word here, were MEN. Perhaps the OP was not clear enough for you, but that is why it had photos attached.

I am sure it will be a surprise to them that they are now magically women.

By the way, carry on with the personal insults instead of behaving like an adult.

[mercuryblues]

135. I don't understand

using the word is not a personal insult or attack, it is just a word in the world according to nadin. You are being disingenuous. You know damned well why you posted this. According to you all words that dehumanize women are acceptable, because there are bigger fish to fry. You exhibit a complete disconnect on how those words help to create and feed into the injustices that women and minorities experience. Because it is just a word. Now it is a word that has a new meaning, according to you. Of course your new interpretation of the word relies on the actual meaning of the word.

So how can I have insulted you, when the word is not an insult, by your definition?

[nadinbrzezinski]

138. Nah what you are incapable of understanding is that the magical word

attached to the world political is now going to become very common, rather it has become quite common. Try to stop a rushing river. That is what you are trying to do.

But you cannot be taken seriously as an adult who wants to discuss anything. Given that you missed the pretty pictures of MEN. Men who had those TWO WORDS attached to them. Somehow that violated your sense of reality.

Do carry on and have the last word

[mercuryblues]

145. Well gee

thanks for your permission.

The magic word, as you now call it, has historically been used to shame women. When it is used with a man's name attached to it, it is nothing more than an attempt to feminize the man. To compare him to a woman, if you will. Of course the woman being inferior and nothing but a "magic word".

You think it is ok to use, I get that. What you fail to grasp is words do have distinct meanings. Sometimes they are negative and used to shame women, so they know their place. What I do not get is you accusing me of attacking and insulting you, when you have created several threads and written many replies defending the use of the word because your definition of it is benign . You can't have it both ways.

[misterhighwasted]

146. Because it's just more from Bull Shit Mountain.

No one simplifies a point like Jon Stewart.
My IGNORE List just keeps getting longer & longer.
Thankful for its existance!

[misterhighwasted]

142. "Word Evolutionists" would not be insulted by this, but rather it would become a

..good opening for intellectual & open discussion..over & over & over.
Like saying "attention whore", for instance. Some will say, it's simply the evolution of a once insulting phrase.

I believe that is the meaning of this Op.
Derogatory seeming insults are merely the evolving languages of society. Consideration & human sensibility be damned.
Maybe it's more about the evolution of not-giving-a-shit.

[ancianita]

202. ...

even as I 'get' both sides of the word use argument. Thanks!

[kath]

190. How is this nadin's "umpteenth op supporting calling women whores"? Links please.

[nadinbrzezinski]

194. It is not

so you will be waiting a while for those links

This was alerted as well since apparently I was also calling a certain democratic presidential candidate the word. I was not surprised at the alert, (since I used a magical word), but I was surprised as to the why? Never did that presidential candidate come to mind.

Mind reading skills are also sucky at this place.

[mercuryblues]

271. reasons

should be tolerated:
Richard Pryor diffused the racial impact the N word through his routine. Because no one nowadays would use the n word as a slur. So sexist slurs will also be diffused with their use. If women get offended by using sexist slurs to degenerate them, they are just like the NSA. Trying to eliminate sexist slurs is McCarthyism. Activists use the language-therefor it is acceptable. Not wanting to hear women being called "magic words" that reduce them to nothing more than a sexual object is censorship and that leads to banning all books.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026792887#post48

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025127500#post113

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3107561

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5376691

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025126363#post64

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025135477

[kath]

281. FAIL. You said this is nadin's "umpteenth op supporting calling women whore". NONE of your links are

To an OP (do you know what that is?) about the word " whore"

Most of your links were not OPs at all, just posts within a thread, and were about other words. Most were from seven years ago. In many of them the W word wasn't mentioned at all.

THIS thread, right here, is the ONLY one started by nadin about the word " whore".
Please don't spread lies.

[mercuryblues]

288. you fail at comprehension

the 1st link I posted


http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026792887#post48

she self deleted.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026792887#post48

implying a DU member is..

[kath]

310. NO. of all the links, that is one of the very few (if not the only one)that was actually an*OP*,

, and it is about the word NYC_SKP used, NOT about the word"whore".

Your assertion about nadin starting "umpteen" threads (which is what an OP is - the start of a thread) about the W word is utterly false. This is the ONLY thread.
but nice try.

[nadinbrzezinski]

314. I read your two links

and then read one of the responses from Sabrina about how DU is known about just one issue when it comes to women... naughty words.

I had to smile... and as Sabrina pointed out in one of those responses... and she is right...

If I want to discuss the ERA, I never think of DU as a place to post it. If I want to discuss about diapers and child care, a critical issue for women of working and even middle class background, this is the last place that will be posted.

If I decide it would be best to talk about women and their role in civil rights and how in many cases women were otherised even by their own movements and relegated to secondary roles. DU is the last place to have that discussion.

This OP is just about a change in the language the political press is using as well as many of those I happen to interview regularly... where a term, let me spell it for you, careful there not to be too shocked... political whore, is getting normalized.

Now here is the irony of the whole thing. This place applauded Governor Brown calling Carly Fiorina a Political Whore. This place has used that term, whore and nothing more, with Anne Coulter, Rice, as well as Palin, and those are the ones I remember... so spare me your outrage.

When it is used against political enemies, sooner or later it will be used against your own. Do I like the term used against women? No, not really. Do I get the difference between calling somebody a whore and somebody a media, corporate and political whore, yes. The difference is extremely large. Suffice it to say that semantic shift means that it has none to do with sex 

You might want to understand that, because that use is going to increase, and it will be posted HERE on the DU, at the very least in quotes from gasp... papers.

[mercuryblues]

322. lol

I am done with you. Seriously. You defend the usage. I personally don't like being degraded with slurs. You like to use them. You claim you work for a media outfit, try using some of those words in a story. See how far you get. But to you this is normal language that has no meaning. It's mighty phat of you to think that degrading women in this way has no actual affect on their daily lives. On legislation that limits their medical choices.

Because this place applauds it means women shouldn't speak out when they the term is used? Why do you delete so many posts where you support the use of your magic words.

[nadinbrzezinski]

323. You can speak

but I can fight back when the hypocrisy just oozes.

By the way, you are the one ascribing those words that power. I am just respecting you by referring to them for what they are.

Also lying is not nice. I would like to point that out. You might want to use a tool I refuse to use here. That is the ignore button. That way you will not see my posts.

By the way, free clue. Pointing out a semantic shift, look it up in the dictionary, does not mean I agree with the use of the word when attached to Palin, Coulter et al. It has been used often at DU. But if people use the term with things like Political attached to it, I have come to understand it has not one bit to do with sex or prostitution. This is what a semantic shift does to language. We are in the middle of one.

Oh and skippy, I am a woman so spare me. I am also a minority, so further spare me.

[tammywammy]

333. oh yes, her defense of the word c**t

And her hidden post to boston bean was quite a gem

But you were the other person I was thinking off as that word left the mouth of one of the characters

For those not paying attention, "that word" is c**t.

[zappaman]

337. Not a shocker.

[nadinbrzezinski]

338. And while it was never meant as an insult and I apoloogized to her

she refused to accept the apology, so at this point it her who chose to remain insulted.

By the way, when people object to certain language, and that specific language is used in a movie, they should avoid that movie.

So it was a PSA that if you object to the language. so you are not insulted, do not pay good money to watch a movie that will have a word you are insulted over. So we are clear, that piece of 30 second dialogue referenced the differences in colloquial use between British and American English. It made clear what it means in the United States as well.

It was not a defense of the word, but a statement of fact. If you are going to go watch movies and you do not want to even hear that word, or pay when somebody says it, avoid SPY.

[tammywammy]

345. Ahh yes, the ol' "I didn't mean to insult her" excuse.

But you were the other person I was thinking off as that word left the mouth of one of the characters

"That word" being c**t. You heard the word c**t and thought of boston bean and another, I'm going to go out on a limb here, woman on DU that thinks we should hide posts calling women c**ts.

I just don't see why she, or any one with rudimentary English skills, would think you were insulting boston bean.

[nadinbrzezinski]

346. You know most adults do take apologies when offered

She did not.

So at this point after apologizing three times publicly, I have no more obligations to her, or her friends.

You might take that as a hint, and you may very well have the last word on this thread. I expect you to pull this every so often, because that is what you do. But I stated a fact, I apologized since she did feel insulted and I recognized that. So as an adult I did.

Take it as you wish.

[zappaman]

369. For some, when people question or correct you, it's "bullying".

But calling a female DUer a "c__t" is cute.
Adorable even.

[nadinbrzezinski]

378. Well since it was not meant that way

but a warning NOT TO GO WATCH a movie where the questionable term is part of the script, and I did apologize to her... which is what adults do... publicly.

She refused to accept the apology, so I have no further obligation. Her refusal speaks about her. I might add, not in a good way. Given that she gave her GWCW post this morning it is kind of funny that you two brought that up, since you complaint usually when that happens... except for your enemies. I know I am your enemy, at least in your mind. You are truly a collection of 1s and 0z for me.

I do find you adorable though. Truly an adorable collection of such binary code.

[mercuryblues]

422. the perrennial victim

yet claims women who object and stand up to being marginalized are making themselves victims.

[nadinbrzezinski]

468. Wrong, the victim who is now finding the bullies rip roaring hilarious

by the way, do point where I am favoring the use of the words I want a direct quote.

I think I will wait an eternity since I have not said that

Understanding phenomena is not necessarily condoning phenomena. Just putting your fingers in your ears when you hear a word you do not like, it will not change the new uses, or for that matter the old uses.

But please proceed.

[nadinbrzezinski]

296. Personally I am not surprised they

Ned to spread lies.

If some folks stopped doing that I would be pleasantly surprised.

By the way I posted the OP just as a general observation where language, in particular political speech is evolving.

If this place did not use the whore word against political enemies often I would take the outrage more seriously. Alas, it was defended with Fiorina. The first time used by a high level politician. (2012). And it was used with Palin, often in fact.

Those two are the most obvious examples involving women. It has also been used with coulter.

Then there are the other regular uses with corporations and media. So the protestations leave me smiling. A search of the archives will have some of these as late as 2015.

[quickesst]

154. I suspect...

....be it whore, corporate whore, attention whore, and on and on, if whore is accepted as just another word here on DU, and used without fear of any consequence whatsoever, it will make many here very happy. Especially those who support a candidate that is not a woman. It will be like small children who learn that the word poop is not really dirty, then spend the next week running around yelling poop poop poop poop because they think they're clever and getting away with something. this is the endgame, and anyone with a 6th grade education or above should know it.
Now, having said that, I actually agree with your op, but, I also happen to believe that it is just a smoke screen to cover what I believe in my above statement. This being DU, I would almost bet good money that if the word whore is accepted, it will show up somewhere in practically every anti Clinton post henceforth. You know, POOP POOP POOP, and being clever.

[nadinbrzezinski]

156. I am just making an observation

I actually interview folks regularly in the local arena. And you know what? The term actually made it to one city council meeting, when one of the witnesses used it to call one of our members of the city council such during open comments.

The room came to a standstill. You could hear a pin drop... person was asked to leave... and person did not call any of the women such, but one of the male members of the Council. That is when it was clear to me... this has moved to normalized speech.

Did anybody use that piece of tape? No... nobody did. But it was one of those moments when I went... something has happened here. It is when I really started to pay attention to its usage among pols, and in political media.

By the way, there should be context attached. If I call you a magical word, as a personal insult there should be a consequence, likely. But if I call a person engaged in politics et al, a corporate, media or political attach magical word here, then it is part of that normalized speech.

As to the politician in question... I expect that word to be used with her, and many others, perhaps before 2016 is over. IF people are going to say nyet to the word this has to apply to ALL politicians, regardless of party.

[quickesst]

173. like I said...

...I agree. I am really just anticipating the cleverness, and the different ways it will be used in what more than a few will believe to be clever. Didn't work out too well for one popular poster. How do you think people would react if I used the word 'niggardly' at every opportunity even if it was appropriate to my statement? Without benefit of the definition, I suspect many would perceive it's use as me being clever in order to mask racism. It's "normal" speech. It's not just context. It's also perception, many times flawed.

nig·gard·ly
ˈniɡərdlē/
adjective
1.
not generous; stingy.
"serving out the rations with a niggardly hand"
synonyms: cheap, mean, miserly, parsimonious, close-fisted, penny-pinching, cheeseparing, grasping, ungenerous, illiberal; More
antonyms: generous
meager; scanty.
"their share is a niggardly 2.7 percent"
synonyms: meager, inadequate, scanty, scant, skimpy, paltry, sparse, insufficient, deficient, short, lean, small, slender, poor, miserable, pitiful, puny; More
adverbarchaic
adverb: niggardly
1.
in a stingy or meager manner.

[nadinbrzezinski]

175. Well I expect the clutch their pearls brigade to continue to fight a losing battle

That is exactly what it is, You can hold off the vandals at the gate only for so long, especially when the gutter word has been used regularly on this site for close to the whole existence of the site when it comes to republicans, mainstream media, et al

They just clutch their pearls when it is applied to a democrat they like. Not necessarily all democrats.

I call that hypocrisy.

[quickesst]

187. I thought...

....I had expressed my point pretty well. Apparently not well enough. I understand how that could be as I am not very skilled when it comes to discussion, debate, or argument. So with that, I will withdraw and pursue something more appropriate for me. That means I'm going to go watch the latest episode of The Strain.

[MADem]

272. Using that word would require you--if you weren't trying to "secret snark" -- to have confidence

that most DUers are well educated. That word isn't even associated with the similarly-sounding racial slur in any fashion.

They share a few letters, but they do NOT share the same root origin. One is NORSE, the other is Spanish/Portuguese by way of Latin.

It has "phonetic similarity" but nothing more.


There were several controversies about people using that term and having it misunderstood in the not-too-distant past:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_about_the_word_%22niggardly%22

I think, relative to this thread, there's another word that could be hauled out for purposes of "misunderstanding" and that's this one:

hoar·y
ˈhôrē/Submit
adjective
1.
grayish white.
"hoary cobwebs"
synonyms: grayish-white, gray, white, snowy, silver, silvery; More
2.
old and trite.
"that hoary American notion that bigger is better"

https://www.google.com/search?q=hoary&oq=hoary&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.3338j1j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8

[quickesst]

289. Yes

That's another one, but I am also surprised at how many educated people as well as the uneducated assume the wrong meaning in those words without much thought due to their phonetic similarity, which is where being educated should come into play.
That said, I think the whole "whore" thing is an attempt to water down the term so that certain folks can use it every chance they get with impunity. It doesn't matter if they put corporate, attention, or any other word before it. It's an opportunity to link a name to one of the most egregious slurs there is. One can cry all they want that it is not used in the context of a man/woman selling their body for money, and technically they would be right, but what is laying right under the surface will be glaring. Again, as always, that's my opinion.

[MADem]

291. I agree with your "water it down" assessment and share your opinion.

I think that 12 recs for this (to include the OP rec'ing her own thread) is 12 too many.

This is DU, not Free Republic. Or at least it always was.

[quickesst]

299. Ha

Good point. They're pretty transparent.

[Kali]

471. so a person who used the term got the reaction of

The room came to a standstill. You could hear a pin drop... person was asked to leave...

and you call that "normalized" ?

[nadinbrzezinski]

475. Given that now people use it

regularly, including political operatives, yes.

The first time is shocking, the second time might be, when you have people using it regularly and NOT IN A SEXAUL WAY, against both males and females we call that semantic shift.

That is the term you are looking for.

If my computer had the same reaction you folks have, it would refuse to work given the sound that is in it. Some of that sound does contain very naughty language used by a lot of people now.

[Kali]

479. um...

the term would have no meaning if it were not for the original SEXUAL DEGRADATION of a "ruined" woman.

that is the point.

now I am not sure I personally give that much of a shit about the word or its usage, but you posted an example that was supposed to back up your claim that is was normalized, and in FACT the example demonstrated the EXACT opposite. you do things like that a lot. you get called on it and then you often self delete or claim to be some victim of bullying. it is bullshit, nadin. absolute bullshit. you make mistakes and then act like the world is attacking you.

[nadinbrzezinski]

481. You do know the word goes back 15,000 years

and that some of the roots stand for desire and others for beloved right?

Language is complicated.

And by the way, the earliest roots for the sexual implication are not ruined woman, but harlot.

This word is almost as old as the word NO, in Indo European languages. It has split at least twice, and gone though many semantic shifts. It is doing that right now.

Does that mean the old meaning goes away? No. But it does not mean that new uses are emerging in the political press.

These new uses are the ones that have no sexual undertones.... unless selling your principles stands for sex worker somehow.

You might try to stop the water rising over the dyke, but sooner or later it will overcome you.

[Kali]

484. for a writer, historian, reporter, mega-expert at everything, and gigantic intellect

you are remarkably obtuse. you keep on with the posts defending words like "cunt" and "whore," I am sure you are making great progress at...something.

[nadinbrzezinski]

486. And how predictably you go personal

Which is far from surprising.

[zappaman]

489. Don't forget the "n word"!

She likes throwing that out there too!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6993051

How...edgy!!!

[nadinbrzezinski]

490. You do know that African American Rappers

are appropriating the term right? You need to get out more. And you need to look up why that happens, and how.

I am happy to see young folks doing that. And by the way, you are familiar with Richard Pryor? I guess too much before your time.

Here

http://www.richardpryor.com/

He was one of the first people to do that. And I used the term in precisely that way. I guess you are incapable of having adult discussions, while personally attacking people and NOT actually contributing anything to the discussion.

Yup, laughing at you.




You are a bully

[zappaman]

491. You're gonna lecture us about rap now?!?!

[nadinbrzezinski]

492. Nobody is lecturing you, except of course in your imagination

You needed to be told the context of the use of the word because obviously you did not get it the first time.

but here once again.

[Kali]

493. yeah, I see she is now an expert on rap and Black culture too.

has she posted any lectures in the AA group yet?

[zappaman]

494. A few.

But for some odd reason, those posts were mostly ignored.
Guess they already knew about rap music?

[nadinbrzezinski]

498. I see that you two are in a fine series of personal attacks

Lovely, and expected.

[zappaman]

179. Thanks for the lecture!

[nadinbrzezinski]

181. Thanks for the kick

[nadinbrzezinski]

189. Ah yes, we can use the words to insult

but the irony is completely missed.

My irony meter broke a while ago. Why are you so well, nasty, to use your word. See I will not use the magical words you attached to nasty, since they do have a certain power for you.

But you completely missed, and will continue to miss that language does evolve, By the way, the day people here ban completely the use of certain magical words in ALL circumstances I will take it seriously, your complaints that is. I would for the moment like you to read what Skinner said about the W world, See I still am not using it

Here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12598326#post4

Perhaps after you read that exchange you might understand why I take this faux outrage as exactly that,

Oh and thanks for the kick.

In a normal site that worked, I would alert on you, since that was a directed personal attack. But the system does not work, So you "skate."

[Little Star]

191. Pffffftttt....

Oh, by the way nadin, stop clutching your pearls (as you like to put it, see just above). It wasn't an insult. It was just a few words that hold no power over you.

[nadinbrzezinski]

192. How mature

once again, thanks for the kick

Feel free to have the last word...

[treestar]

207. that hide kind of proves nadin wrong

in context, it was not quite a fair hide, but the fact they did it shows words can be OTT, rude, etc.

[zappaman]

208. Nadin wrong?

[MADem]

216. Yeah, and she "didn't alert," either!

[nadinbrzezinski]

243. I know you will not believe it

but no, I did not alert. Nor did I alert on your personal attack on me up thread. I do not play juries, I don't alert...no matter how bad the personal attack is. Somebody else did. And I wish they did not.

[MADem]

245. You are correct, I don't believe it. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

247. Of course you don't

no surprise there, given your behavior. DU'ers please do not alert on her stalking, bully behavior and personal attacks. I want them to stand.

I don't want her to get a vacation on my account.

[MADem]

249. That's right. Based on your posting history, I've come to a conclusion. And you surmised it

correctly.

No one is stalking or bullying you, Nadin. That's another false accusation you're making.

[nadinbrzezinski]

254. GO on

please continue

[MADem]

276. There's nothing more to say. Go re-read what I wrote, if you didn't get it the first time. nt

[MADem]

280. I don't need to continue. The point was made, and clearly, too.

This isn't the first time you've used that sad retort--I'm sure it won't be the last, either.

If that's all you've got, that's all you've got.

[nadinbrzezinski]

316. YOu really are into attacking people

I will keep pointing this every time you do.

That is now a promise

(Even though it is guaranteed to be a time sink)

[MADem]

389. Oh, look--a "personal attack." nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

390. .

[Gormy Cuss]

240. Sorta. That hide is a personal attack.

One can't call a specific DUer that many bad names without juries stepping up to block it.
\
However, what makes this thread a meta-licious failure is that the whore discussions were based on whether it's acceptable on DU to call a woman candidate a whore. The community apparently doesn't find that offensive enough to hide.

[nadinbrzezinski]

244. When I authored this OP

and midway through it, I did not know the whole brouhaha was over the use of the word on a political ally. It's been used here so much on political enemies and media types...

I know bad me, don't spend day after day on DU and get the inner fights. To me language and the evolution of it is fascinating to me. In the real world these terms, political wrote and media and corporate are now in pretty common usage. Yeah, used to bother me, but really cannot stop a flood.

[treestar]

336. well it is but nadin is arguing the word is not that bad

or whatever so when the post called her that, she couldn't complain. But I suppose the jury could. lol

[nadinbrzezinski]

339. And I did not alert

see how that works Somebody else did.

You can call me all kinds of names, I won't alert on you, I will point and laugh at you, but I will not alert you. I do not believe the system works.

In fact, one of your pals has been averaging an attack, from mild to slightly more severe and creative every five posts or so.

I find it hilarious. Bullying no longer works.

[Kali]

496. nadin don't do "wrong"

[nadinbrzezinski]

505. Except that I did not alert

and I ask none to alert on your attacks either. I do not want you to get a vacation on my account.

[haikugal]

512. Context...it's not what you think it is.

There are such personal attacks here and they slide all while some people are in an uproar over a discussion about how language flows and changes in usage and meaning. This thread is an eye opener about DU for me. I never would have expected it from liberal adults but then I was clearly wrong!

[Capt. Obvious]

193. .

[Brickbat]

183. National Organization For Women.

[zappaman]

209. Easy peachy!

[Brickbat]

231. Language evolutions are always 100 percent valid, I guess...

[nadinbrzezinski]

382. Language evolves whether you like it or not

it is not about being valid or not. It is how society uses language, and this one is changing in front of your very eyes. It does not happen often... nor this fast.

Given this particular original word gave you both the roots to the kamasutra (KAMA= desire) and this, why are you surprised? By the way, the ties to prostitution go to Rome. Linguists believe the first break into two major roots happened about 7,000 years ago.

Some of the roots give you the words for beloved in Old Irish.

You might want to explore the origin of language... it can be fascinating.

Regardless, this is a semantic shift that does not preclude other definitions or uses. It adds to it, and I expect these new uses to become increasingly common, and they are actually gender neutral... and take some of the ties to actual, honest to goodness prostitution, off it.

Will it become the primary supra definition of the term? Time will tell. I suspect it might, since American political language is getting more and more coarse due to hyper partisanship. DU has a small part in this coarsening of language by the way, since it is a partisan site.

Now you try to get rid of a word who's origins go back 15,000 years. I not just dare you, I triple dare you.

[Brickbat]

383. My comment was a snarky reference to your error, which I found ironic.

Rapid semantic change and coarse political discourse are much more common than you seem to think.

[nadinbrzezinski]

384. Well we at least seem to agree on something

that must be a record.

Good, at least you got it.

As to the irony... whatever.

I take it for what it is...

[Blue_Adept]

255. I look forward to the day when I hear words that offend me

Because for some reason, I just can't seem to get offended by words like that. It never registers in that way.

Word evolution is definitely curious and I'm actually amused by it all here, because it again shows the kind of stratification going on within the site itself.

A lot of what gets argued about here wouldn't even register among the younger set talking politics out on other platforms. The conversation there is a lot more interesting when you get down to it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

256. Absolutely

Why I seldom post on policy here any more.

[Blue_Adept]

263. I was never a heavy poster from back in the day

and less so since I restarted my account with DU3 (it didn't transition). There's just a whole lot of navel gazing going on here with tempests in a teapot while the world whizzes by for many, not realizing the way some things change quickly.

[nadinbrzezinski]

293. This is partly the result of hyper partisanship

They can see the issue, in this case they object to. They do not understand why it is happening. Or the fact they have contributed a grain of salt. This in general is the coarsening of the language.

While not understanding why this is happening and trying to stop the flood waters...they can avoid discussing income inequality. I take the faux outrages anymore as distractions.

I wrote the OP since I find that language evolution interesting, almost in an academic sense. The brouhaha is at this point rather entertaining

[haikugal]

515. What refreshing remarks...thank you!

Where would you suggest? I'm very sincere in asking because old as I am I'd like to see what's being said elsewhere. I've mixed it up in some surprising forums but have lost interest in much of the back and forth because it doesn't inform me. Can you suggest somewhere that would be good?

If you don't feel you want to post about it then PM me, I'd be happy to hear from you.

[truebrit71]

260. The 'w' word? Wanker, wally, whore?

Fucking sick of the poutrage police around DU nowadays....I wish they would all just grow an 's' word, and realize that there much more serious things to get angry about...

[hifiguy]

341. "Willy"

And I concur entirely in your judgment.

[nadinbrzezinski]

356. They are few, they are proud

they are eternally outraged



Whore.. political whore, to be specific.

And you are not the only one that is sick and tired of them. They make this place suck. They also make sure real issues, such as pay, are not really discussed here. Or for that matter policy. It is a derailing strategy from real issues. They are frustrated though. At least on this thread it has not worked, so they have gone personal.

It used to get me pissed. Now it just makes me chuckle.

I got to wonder if these folks are just young and never really gotten hit over the side of the head with real life? Or products of the PC police?

[olddots]

277. ever notice that calling someone a prick

is worse than calling someone a dick ?

[nadinbrzezinski]

319. Yeah I have

And in the streets if somebody does that... I just stand back...

[ericson00]

283. I can't be too offended unless

it is being used in a context that would only be used for a woman. If someone calls Bush a whore for the oil industry, I'm not gonna mind or think its sexist.

[nadinbrzezinski]

318. Which is part of the semanitic shift

From the research I have been able to do, it started to be obvious in the early part of the century, ironically during the Bush Administration and with media. The words "media whore" were obvious and a site used that in their domain name. MediaWhores'com. Some uses started earlier than that, but not by much. This is part of the confusion. We are in the midst of it.

So some people are having a hell of a time with this shift

[hifiguy]

342. That's because you are sensible.

[kydo]

303. For me the W word has evolved to mean this bad four letter word

bush

[nadinbrzezinski]

305. Well there is that one too

😅

[B Calm]

320. I remember when the W word was in reference of Bush. .

[nadinbrzezinski]

321. Yeah but these days, becuase of a small group of folks

Last edited Tue Jul 21, 2015, 05:49 PM - Edit history (1)

you have to be careful not to use words with almost magical powers.

It is time to push back on that, because sadly a lot of terms the outrage brigade is always eternally outraged, are becoming common. They are becoming normalized. And it is time to understand the difference between the use of the term "whore", which has it's usual sexual connotations going back to oh ROME (and should not be used, but if they are to be consistent should not be used against political enemies HERE either, and it has, often) and the new uses, meaning selling your principles, or shilling for people.

Usually the word is preceded by either of three words, and it is increasing.

But given the use of the word on this site over it's existence this outrage only leads to two things, shurgging of shoulders and the word hypocrisy in bright bold neon letters.

[B Calm]

361. Political correctness sometimes goes way too far. It can get so bad

it could, if it isn't already, scrare people away from the democratic party.

[nadinbrzezinski]

362. Yes

but here it is a derailing tactic to stop people from arguing actual policy.

If I post about diapers, it will sink. If I post about language...

[backscatter712]

348. Does this mean I can't call Scott Walker or Chris Christie "Koch Whores"?

Christ, this language policing bullshit is tiresome.

If you have to go apeshit and demand censorship because somebody on a forum used a word, you clearly need to get a life. And some psychotherapy.

People have been using the prostitution metaphor to describe politicians performing quid-pro-quo since the beginning of politics.

[nadinbrzezinski]

350. According to the langauge police

no you can't. You abuser you.



And this is why I find it quite hypocritical too. It is used often for political enemies, but goodness gracious should it be used on an ally... I might not like it when it is used alone with any woman, due it's sexual connotations.... but if you use the word with corporate, political et al, the semantic shift has occurred.

By the way, I will not alert on you for doing that. I just don't alert. But expect the language police to do so.

[treestar]

358. you are making an analogy

to women selling their bodies for money. So it reinforces the idea. It doesn't go away because you are saying male politicians sold themselves to the Kochs for money. It's a metaphor, you are still saying it is evil for a person to sell themselves for money. Whether it is a politician or a woman. It wouldn't be "bad" to sell yourself to the Kochs if it wasn't "bad" for a woman to sell themselves for sex. So it still has a negative factor.

[randome]

419. This reminds me of Capt. Kirk arguing for war in front of the Organians.

Last edited Wed Jul 22, 2015, 06:11 AM - Edit history (1)

Sure, you have the right. And for not taking other people's feelings into consideration, you're thinking in only one dimension.

Such a sad waste of the intellect.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

[zappaman]

424. Perfect.

[Kali]

427. in before the self-delete!

this is almost as classic as another flame-baiting attention-...um, ...seeker... who may return today!

[nadinbrzezinski]

428. Why should I do that? To please the same group

of nattering nannies that want to sanitize language? If you all don't want to see this, it's simple, stop responding. But you all are now where we all can see your user names. Frankly I was wondering if you were not well? Usually you jump in within hours.

Glad to see you are ok.

[Kali]

429. why do you usually do it?

[nadinbrzezinski]

431. What? Try to have an actual adult discussion?

I don't know, I should have learned by now that Democratic Underground is not a place where adults hang out, or rather it is a place where a minority goes out of it's way to derail discussions. It has not worked... and it will not work. SO my recomendation is that you stop responding, and chiefly put me on ignore. You are not going on ignore, but this way, you don't have a temptation.

[zappaman]

435. Bonus points for telling us how much you hate DU again!

Why do you post at this "cesspool"?

[nadinbrzezinski]

437. I am glad you enjoy it

to be frank, it is a small group that makes the place suck.

Now you are all collected in one OP. It is kind of grand. If I were to use the ignore feature... I could be a busy beaver. I just don't. Mostly it is more fun to see your hate on display. I know I am your enemy. You are binary code to me.

Are you going to call me crazy again by using a coo coo clock? I found that to be especially infantile and bullish.

[zappaman]

438. I do!

I'm still waiting for you and Taverner to "take DU down"!

[nadinbrzezinski]

439. I am glad you do

I guess you come here to bully and harass people. We all have our reasons. It must be really frustrating when it stops working with the mark.

Time to move on son, to another mark.

[Kali]

441. uh this subthread was about your potential self-delete,

I asked why do you usually delete in reply to you asking why should you. try to follow the conversation.


yes we all know you hate DU, you can barely make a post with out telling us. lots and lots and lots and lots of posts telling us.

[nadinbrzezinski]

443. Nah, it is just a few nattering nanies that I find disagreable

since they cannot disagree without getting personal.

I do not hate. That would be a strong word. Also once you realize how bullies work, it is comedy gold. Ah the attempts to do this pushing of buttons and not working is kind of funny.

So you get the image, I am in the DU school yard, pointing at the bullies and having a good belly laugh. All these attempts at derailing are so funny. Yet, we are still talking, some of us, about how language evolves.

[Kali]

447. nanies?

a few? that doesn't seem to be the case from reading almost anything you post. you very rarely refrain from insulting the members here. frankly, that is closer to acting like a bully than a few folks who may feel offended by your insults and talk back to you on occasion.

so back to the question: why do you self delete?

[nadinbrzezinski]

451. Perhaps you should not avoid the not so hot posts

And it is a few. It is always the same few people that attempt this.

You are among them. What can I say?

It is cyber stalking, It is cyber bullying, but it is not working anymore. So sad when the mark realizes it and literally laughs back.

Time to find a new mark.

[Kali]

464. I am sure you think that makes sense,

but really it does not. Why do you self delete, again?

[zappaman]

465. Guess you don't know the language!

[nadinbrzezinski]

467. .

[nadinbrzezinski]

466. Why do you insist on asking a question?

why do you? Everybody on this site has done that at some point.

Regardless I find your reason to jump into this curious. Is this another attempt to derail. YES.

So with that... comedy gold

[Kali]

477. *sigh*

nadin OP - blah blah blah OK to call people whores

THREAD - train wreck flame war

Kali - in before the self delete

nadin - Why should I do that? blah blah

Kali - why do you usually do it?

nadin - blah blah no answer

Kali - uh this subthread was about your potential self-delete blah

nadin - blah blah no answer

Kali - blah blah so back to the question: why do you self delete?

nadin - blah blah no answer

Kali - blah Why do you self delete, again?

nadin - deflection about other people blah big ass smiley no answer

Kali - rehash of stupid subthread and final time asking: why do you self delete?


edit to add:
nadin - deflect about other people again blah blah

[nadinbrzezinski]

478. Should I point to other folks self deleting threads? Are you going to go harrass them too?

Nah, according to some of you that would be a call out, even if it would be context in this case.

Bullies demand answers... that is a bully tactic... it is funny.

[zappaman]

454. You don't hate?

Then why did you once say about the hundreds of DUers that were on your ignore list..
"I don't care whether they live or die".

How nice.

[nadinbrzezinski]

455. Nope I don't hate

I now think people like you though are nothing more than binary code, with a nasty habit of getting personal. But I get it, you cannot help yourself.

It is about your need to put people down. The irony though is amazing.

So there. laughing at you.

[zappaman]

457. Yes, because saying you don't care if DUers you have on ignore die...

Is so loving!

[nadinbrzezinski]

460. Still laughing at you

not with you, at you.

[zappaman]

469. Laughing about DUers dying?

Nice to see the real loving person you are.

[nadinbrzezinski]

473. Nah specifically laughing AT YOU

[zappaman]

480. I don't think DUers dying is a laughing matter.

Sad to see you do.
By the way, you never answered my question...
Are you and Taverner still planning on "taking down DU"?

At you...

[nadinbrzezinski]

482. Since I am laughing at YOU

and not others... FAIL

[Texasgal]

500. LOL! Funny!

She literally got her ass handed to her and she just cannot stop! smh!

[nadinbrzezinski]

502. I did?

You really think the bullies won? Of course you do.

[Texasgal]

503. You are the bully.

You should stopped yourself. Ofcourse, bullies don't know when to stop.

You got your ass handed to you and yes I think it's funny. Why? Because your bully behavior needs to be taken down a notch.

[nadinbrzezinski]

506. Yup you are correct

bullies never know when to stop. Why the attacks over two decades continue and now the mark is laughing at them.... and I suppose you as well.

Here is a hint, you want to have an adult discussion, I am all ears. You are about pushing buttons. I am laughing... hard. Nor are you going on ignore.

[Kali]

534. oh no!

you are NOT going on ignore!!!

DU bullies have been attacking her for over two decades!

incredible, since she has only been a member for 12 years and the site hasn't existed for two decades.

oops did I use the word incredible?

in·cred·i·ble

adjective
adjective: incredible

1.
impossible to believe.
"an almost incredible tale of triumph and tragedy"
synonyms: unbelievable, beyond belief, hard to believe, unconvincing, far-fetched, implausible, improbable, highly unlikely, dubious, doubtful; More
inconceivable, unthinkable, unimaginable, impossible;
informal hard to swallow, cock-and-bull
"I find his story incredible"
2.
difficult to believe; extraordinary.
"the noise from the crowd was incredible"
synonyms: magnificent, wonderful, marvelous, spectacular, remarkable, phenomenal, prodigious, breathtaking, extraordinary, unbelievable, amazing, stunning, astounding, astonishing, awe-inspiring, staggering, formidable, impressive, supreme, great, awesome, superhuman; More
informal fantastic, terrific, tremendous, stupendous, mind-boggling, mind-blowing, jaw-dropping, out of this world, far out;
literary wondrous
"an incredible feat of engineering"
informal
amazingly good or beautiful.
"I was mesmerized: she looked so incredible"

Origin
late Middle English: from Latin incredibilis, from in- ‘not’ + credibilis (see credible).
Translate incredible to
Use over time for: incredible

[Agnosticsherbet]

499. Hysteria is a great example of word evolution. It once refereed to a condition that affected women

caused by disturbances in the uterus.

A bit later, it refereed to sexual dysfunction and women treated by having a doctor massage their vagina to cause orgasm.

Yes, that was rape by a doctor because a woman was overly emotion or simply said no to her husband.

It references to uncontrollable, emotional excesses culturally defined as problems of women.

No one today, uses hysteria that way, or hysterical or any other word related to hysteria.

We don't even think of it that way.

Yet, anytime we use the word "WH__re", we should realize that this word is used because it specifically degrades women. If we call a banker a "wh__re" we are saying that he is nothing more than a woman that sells herself for money. Like using "b__ch" or "c__t," these insults are meant to demean the person is nothing more than a lowly female.

I find that ugly. We live in a culture when women's sex organs, female dogs, and and female sex for profit is a vicious insult, especially applied to a man.

I don't use those words, but opinions may vary.

[nadinbrzezinski]

501. That is an excellent example

and I think that word is undergoing that shift. that semantic shift.

It still has the old meaning, but when it is used with a few words before it, it loses the attachment to women and sex, and acquires the meaning of selling your principles or selling your soul.

What you just described is not just a semantic shift but a change in the supra definition of the term. I do not think we will see that, at least not for a few decades. Hysteria took a couple generations.

I do not use the words, but I understand why it is happening. It is something I personally find fascinating how language does that.

You could also say that hysteria, a put down, also received another process, and that is the process of appropriation of the term by a group that it was used against. A better more modern example of this is the word Gay. It used to mean happy (It is still in the definition, in the US not the Supra term though), It became a term of scorn, and these days it is a term of pride by the group it was used against.