General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: It is not about the swimsuit issue it is about basic respect for women [View all]thucythucy
(8,250 posts)Are you sure you're responding to the right post?
But you admit that DU has standards, that these standards are enforced, and that a part of this enforcement is encouraging people not to post things that violate those standards. Good so far. So then I would argue that if people are bothered by what they see, then expressing that displeasure in an on-line discussion does not make them "unreasonable" or somehow outside the pale. That was my point. That being uncomfortable with a particular image, and expressing that discomfort, isn't necessarily unreasonable, and that there should be more options on what is supposed to be a forum for political discussion than "just shut up and ignore anything that bothers you."
Evidently quite a few people here were upset by the posting of the SI cover, for reasons that have been argued back and forth. The OP is saying that he has been dismayed by the response to those people -- mostly women, I would guess -- expressing their discomfort. I agree with him on this. I mean, look at your own response to my rather innocuous post:
"...intellectually dishonest...quote mining....kinda stupid....demand they shut the fuck up..."
People such as yourself who are so vigorously and vociferously defending the posting of the SI cover in GD might get more sympathy from me if the cover had any sort of political significance whatsoever, if it was an image contributing in some way to the advance of a progressive Democratic agenda. But it isn't. It's simply more T & A, which, you may or may not have noticed, is available on several hundred million other websites, all for your browsing pleasure. DU is supposed to be a site where progressive Democrats can have discussions under the assumption that we share certain values and standards. For instance, that obvious racism, homophobia, and yes, even sexism, are not a part of the Democratic agenda.
Evidently there are quite a few people at DU who say the posting of an obvious T & A cover makes them uncomfortable. If this were a workplace, it might well be viewed as sexual harassment--contributing to a hostile work environment. You admit that DU as a community has standards, and that it's legitimate for those standards to be enforced. All well and good, and this is an important walk-back from your original position.
Personally, I'd take it further. If something I posted (or felt compelled to defend) caused such an uproar among people whom I consider to be my political compatriots, I'd take some time to try to figure out where the concern was coming from. I wouldn't use terms like "stupid" 'intellectually dishonest" etc. etc. But then maybe that's just me.
"It's not the least bit ironic...." Really? Not even a smidgen? Not even a single molecule of irony in your citing a ceremony that has been used for centuries to demonstrate fealty to the head of an entirely male hierarchy, which has been a major obstacle to women in general and feminists in particular, as a way of attacking feminists? Surely, there is at least "a bit" of irony there, don't you think? Just one teensy weensy subatomic particle of irony, surely?