Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]Ms. Toad
(34,069 posts)186. Here is the exchange, so people can judge for themselves
whether I should apologize for being disappointed that hosts of the LGBT group failed for 12 days to block the poster who attacked me in this thread:
My comment
It is a legitimate question
It is our space, we can do what we want in it, and as far as I know this particular question has not been discussed.
The beefcake threads bother me mildly - I would prefer they not be here, but hadn't said anything. The space feels pretty male to me, which is not my thing, and the beefcake threads are a part of that.
If that is what most of the people want - fine. No big deal. But I suspect over time that may play a role in who feels comfortable or welcome hanging out in this space.
It is our space, we can do what we want in it, and as far as I know this particular question has not been discussed.
The beefcake threads bother me mildly - I would prefer they not be here, but hadn't said anything. The space feels pretty male to me, which is not my thing, and the beefcake threads are a part of that.
If that is what most of the people want - fine. No big deal. But I suspect over time that may play a role in who feels comfortable or welcome hanging out in this space.
The first response:
It is our space, we can do what we want in it.....
Really? ... and just "who" pray tell is "our space".....
As I tell you what, either you missed my name "QUEERART".... or you feel you are now in charge?
Shall we now refer to you as "Madame President"?
The thread is a "call out".... no matter how hard you try to spin it.... it's a CALL OUT!
... and to say that the beefcake is "soft core porn" is a stretch beyond that rubber band can expand to....
You know it's a call out, I know it's a call out.... and your next door neighbors dog knows it's a call out.....
Really? ... and just "who" pray tell is "our space".....
As I tell you what, either you missed my name "QUEERART".... or you feel you are now in charge?
Shall we now refer to you as "Madame President"?
The thread is a "call out".... no matter how hard you try to spin it.... it's a CALL OUT!
... and to say that the beefcake is "soft core porn" is a stretch beyond that rubber band can expand to....
You know it's a call out, I know it's a call out.... and your next door neighbors dog knows it's a call out.....
My response:
I have no idea what you are talking about, or why you are so angry
This group belongs to all of us - not just you. Not just gay men. And I have no clue why you think expressing an opinion means I think I am in charge. I'm taking part in a discussion on a discussion board in a group I have been part of for a number of years.
As of the December, or so, the admins gave us control of deciding how we want our space to run. A question was raised about what we want in this space. You have an opinion, I have an opinion, other people have other opinions, we discuss them and figure out what we want.
This group belongs to all of us - not just you. Not just gay men. And I have no clue why you think expressing an opinion means I think I am in charge. I'm taking part in a discussion on a discussion board in a group I have been part of for a number of years.
As of the December, or so, the admins gave us control of deciding how we want our space to run. A question was raised about what we want in this space. You have an opinion, I have an opinion, other people have other opinions, we discuss them and figure out what we want.
And the second response:
I Tell You What.....
The "only one" that is angry is you.... "angry at men, over all"...... and.... ESPECIALLY AT GAY MEN......
So I tell you what, you go and play at being the President of the man haters club, as you are not worthy of any more of my time....
I only feed trolls twice.... and you are at your limit of "Manwiches" for today.....
The "only one" that is angry is you.... "angry at men, over all"...... and.... ESPECIALLY AT GAY MEN......
So I tell you what, you go and play at being the President of the man haters club, as you are not worthy of any more of my time....
I only feed trolls twice.... and you are at your limit of "Manwiches" for today.....
The LGBT group is a safe haven group. Regardless of what you think about whether a mixed gender safe haven group for LGBT individuals should be hosting beefcake, I find it inexcusable that it took 12 days for a poster who made the homophobic comments above to be blocked from group participation. You were understandably unavailable at the time, but you did not need to be available for the remaining hosts to act. They not only chose not to act, they were silent or participants in a continued attack on me.
For 11 days there was no formal action by the hosts toward Queerart, at which time I posted a detailed summary of my concerns in response to an inquiry about whether the LGBT group was meeting my needs. A day later, the hosts finally took action and banned the member who had attacked me 12 days earlier using specifically homophobic comments.
Your comments were basically (aside from finally banning the poster) a lot of rationalization for why there was no action. Safe space for LGBT individuals is safe space. Period. Since when does anyone else get to post homophobic comments in the LGBT group, and the hosts' response is, "the jury system worked (Halleluah) and I think that is why hosts were reticent to act further." As you said, "Our powers are limitted to . . . blocking posters" - a power which the LGBT hosts have used liberally, and immediately - except for this instance. It was inexcusable for it to have taken 12 days to block the poster. Not to mention, that it would't have happened at all except that I felt an obligation to provide a response in a second thread rather than just walk away.
While you were understandably unavailable at the time, your rationalization about the rest of it after the fact told me all I needed to know about whether the LGBT group was a place which was dedicated to making itself welcoming to all its members (something the lack of female hosts should also have been a clue about). Take an honest look at the thread I've linked to, and the response you posted above, and consider whether, had the roles been reversed, your response would have made you feel supported - or invited into further conversation - in view of the then recent attack with the sub silentio approval of the male hosts who were able to be active at the time. There was really no need for me to continue to beat my head against a brick wall - and trying to talk to you about why your response both saddened and angered me would not have been productive.
So no - don't hold your breath waiting for an apology. Although it is mildly amusing that you expect an apology from me when there is not a single apologetic word in your post for the failure of the LGBT hosts to perform the simple act of immediately banning a poster from the LGBT group who made a homophobic attack on me within the confines of the LGBT safe space. Nor were there apologies from the other male hosts who were active at the time.
But - as to this thread. I was responding to your justification of a recent thread with posts of sexualized images of men (I'm guessing from the description) as appropriate because the thread was in the LGBT group. I still disagree that it is appropriate even there.
I no longer hang out in the LGBT group because of the attitude that such images are not only beyond objection, but that the male hosts who were active at the time even felt it was tolerable to ignore homophobic attacks on anyone who raised an objection. And, after the verbal beat-down I received for raising the issue, I strongly disagree that I had any obligation to hang around and chat with you, or anyone else about it - or to remain silent when it is publicly asserted that such things are ok (or inherently different) when they are posted within the LGBT group.
TopBack to the top of the page
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
ShareGet links to this post
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
436 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
That's my understanding as well. Any reaction other than utter contempt for objectification was met
Jetboy
Feb 2014
#13
The difference is that people don't go into the lounge expecting progressive political discussions.
pnwmom
Feb 2014
#14
thank you for sharing that ... some great insight in that post. Thank you. Brave post.
Tuesday Afternoon
Feb 2014
#80
You have every right tonot like the decision that I and the other hosts made in regards to beefcake
dsc
Feb 2014
#332
thank you for this. transparency ... while I think MsToad has/had a point. I hope this can all be
Tuesday Afternoon
Feb 2014
#115
I am dear as soon as I set up a blog where I can really say what I think of you
Cleita
Feb 2014
#197
If you really want to help, get involved in political campaigns...
ConservativeDemocrat
Feb 2014
#281
Thanks. I have done that in the past, but I'm slowing down and too old for the leg
Cleita
Feb 2014
#282
NO one is NOT supporting them...its about having a fair playing field on DU...
VanillaRhapsody
Feb 2014
#196
I can only imagine the ethical and mental convenience given to those who conflate civility and prudi
LanternWaste
Feb 2014
#368
"And what is more liberal than freedom?" - Cheesy, meaningless bullshit.
Gravitycollapse
Feb 2014
#22
Every Joe Blow libertarian waxes poetic about the primacy of "freedom."
Gravitycollapse
Feb 2014
#154
I was in JC Penney this evening with my SO and we walked by the women lingerie department.
RC
Feb 2014
#149
well....the "HoF crowd's" postings strike me more as the logical result
BlancheSplanchnik
Feb 2014
#276
The unintended and sometimes negative consequences of that same freedom...
LanternWaste
Feb 2014
#366
If the SI cover, which is out in the supermarkets in full view, were in fact naked women showing
Cleita
Feb 2014
#4
It's known as a fashion photo shoot. Pick up any Style, Marie Claire or Vogue and you will see
Cleita
Feb 2014
#153
Well, beach is where those photo shoots are done. What is wrong with topless anyway
Cleita
Feb 2014
#162
No I do not hate women. And yes, I know that women go topless in many places.
RBStevens
Feb 2014
#166
So are you spontaneous at your job? You do know that a fashion shoot is a job, not just for
Cleita
Feb 2014
#170
That's true so if women are buying all the bikinis, guess who they are marketing to. n/t
Cleita
Feb 2014
#255
Yeah she does post in your group - mostly in the Hot celebrity thread which I see is not one
seaglass
Feb 2014
#38
It is so obvious that opinon on this site is entirely against your views on this issue
BainsBane
Feb 2014
#211
You are objecting to not being allowed to objectify women in the General Discussion...
VanillaRhapsody
Feb 2014
#369
YOU know where.....I am not interested in those threads..they sound disgusting to me
VanillaRhapsody
Feb 2014
#376
I do. I just think that you're the bully, not the object of your vendetta.
Democracyinkind
Feb 2014
#248
While I think both HoF *and* the Men's Group have been unfairly characterized at times
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#398
You know, we may seem to be on slightly opposite sides at times, but I have no problem
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#399
I don't understand how my post could in any way be controversial or problematic,
polly7
Feb 2014
#400
It isn't, to me. But you know how people around here - on all sides - will twist others' words
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#402
I basically agree with that assessment. Though it may be as much a general human tendency to
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#406
You can usually tell pretty easily when it's oversimplification or not understanding ...
polly7
Feb 2014
#407
I agree that the caricaturing and name-calling frequently gets out of hand around here.
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#409
Cool. You're angry for call outs. And your solution for this is to do exactly what you despise.
Gravitycollapse
Feb 2014
#25
Does blocking a problem from your consciousness involve talking about it a lot?
Gravitycollapse
Feb 2014
#29
But it is mistaken from the beginning. The SI cover OP was started by a woman. nt
Bonobo
Feb 2014
#30
What is so important about your presumed right to post Kate Upton pics in GD?
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#403
If one sees any of the opinions expressed on here as "extremely controlling and
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#405
It just is funny that you don't see belittling men at every opportunity as analogous
Bonobo
Feb 2014
#37
I agree that there's been over-the-top rhetoric all around. And my own frustration with things
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#410
"When I read posts like JTFrog's I am reminded what is truly at stake here."
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#408
And so to end the Gender wars you call out only the men and tell "men" they must change...
Drew Richards
Feb 2014
#40
Well, I am glad you set me straight "its use is most appropriate here in this discussion"
etherealtruth
Feb 2014
#62
I especailly like your point about words that are used in everyday language
etherealtruth
Feb 2014
#86
I don't think DU'ers literally believe that women aren't people. But their worldview is myopic and
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#412
Its usage reminds me of an appellation applied to another group of people
etherealtruth
Feb 2014
#99
And here is a perfect example of what I am talking about...a direct personal attack on my character
Drew Richards
Feb 2014
#396
10 DUers? You need to recount. I have seen hundreds of posters come out against these images.
Squinch
Feb 2014
#120
Are they really attacking all men? Or only those men who belittle women seeking social justice
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#411
I agree that you and others have been treated unfairly. I'm not perfectly objective
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#418
You're a good person, and there's certainly nothing wrong with being a dreamer!
polly7
Feb 2014
#423
Another example of incorrectly framing a position with which you disagree.
Gravitycollapse
Feb 2014
#77
I am correct in this instance. Incorrectly framing feminist arguments on DU is a beloved pastime.
Gravitycollapse
Feb 2014
#132
If the default is still "human" = "male" then I don't see how "humanism" is some great marker
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#413
"No meaningful legislation possible" is probably correct, in this instance.
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#414
The real question is why is it an issue and what are we to do about it?
Tuesday Afternoon
Feb 2014
#129
I think the Hosts should be held responsible for that behavior in their forum....
msanthrope
Feb 2014
#146
It's worth noting that one of the -few- hides I've had, was for speculating that someone wasn't what
Warren DeMontague
Feb 2014
#175
I'm actually a carefully constructed AI algorithm, sort of a research project at Caltech
Warren DeMontague
Feb 2014
#180
Sure, you laugh, but the only thing standing between me and total world domination
Warren DeMontague
Feb 2014
#187
bs. just bs. that is all. and thanks for the link so people can read it for themselves and
Tuesday Afternoon
Feb 2014
#219
TA, I got your analogy right away, and I think that your words were twisted for dramatic effect
R B Garr
Feb 2014
#269
I'd like to hear an explanation of this 'analogy' that equates a woman with a dog...
Violet_Crumble
Feb 2014
#355
So pointing out that a post is sexist is 'sanctimonious crap'? Uh oh-kay...
Violet_Crumble
Feb 2014
#374
Actually I did appreciate that you explained where you were coming from in relation
R B Garr
Feb 2014
#377
Now one question for you: what is meant by the implication someone is a man-hater?
R B Garr
Feb 2014
#388
Yes, you do have it wrong RainDog - it did not start with someone comparing Riff's behavior
seaglass
Feb 2014
#220
So because someone called someone a name three months ago, that is why multiple
Squinch
Feb 2014
#230
And one post calling someone a name 3 months ago will reverberate through the ages...
Squinch
Feb 2014
#320
"...objectification theory itself is based upon shame-based views of the human body."
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#424
People are so often their own worst enemies. Getting bogged down in personal beefs
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#427
I have no interest in scoring points against either gender of human being.
another_liberal
Feb 2014
#105
Surely, after being behooved repeatedly in such a fashion, now you have repented.
Warren DeMontague
Feb 2014
#141
"Sexy Christian love offerings"? That phrase is about 10 billion kinds of wrong...
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#419
But, we have to allow the perpetually outraged among us to have something to focus on.....
kiawah
Feb 2014
#173
I think that the swimsuit photo arguments are only an outward manifestation of a deeper issue.
lumberjack_jeff
Feb 2014
#208
and my experience is the opposite- because of maternity leave- the bread winning Moms I have known
bettyellen
Feb 2014
#344
One only needs to take a look at who is actually getting posts hidden.
redgreenandblue
Feb 2014
#256
I've long suspected most of our anti-woman posters are mad because they're not getting laid.
LeftyMom
Feb 2014
#316
OMG, Benny. If you seriously didn't understand that post was flamebait, you need
Squinch
Feb 2014
#317
I get the first part, where you made up a ridiculous story about being the innocent victim.
Warren Stupidity
Feb 2014
#323
Of course not. But she has just as much right to an opinion as he does.
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#393
And even if true, that doesn't relieve anyone of the responsibility to not be an asshole...
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#394
yes, that line was most telling for me as well. I was just going to copy and paste that sentence
Tuesday Afternoon
Feb 2014
#359
The level of hostility is completely unreasonable. WTF is this guy's problem?
nomorenomore08
Feb 2014
#395
You "would really like to spit in the face of a couple of posters here" and "feel the need to piss
bettyellen
Feb 2014
#339