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

Feminists

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

seabeyond

(110,159 posts)
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 04:43 PM Jan 2012

fresh thread. i purpose that the sop gender issue is moved down [View all]

so it is not as if that is the most important and calling any group out. far down. all the way to the bottom. like an after thought.

lets have someone put up a clear and concise wording, clear no forum wars and all thoughts acceptable. however one wants to do it cause we know i can't

64 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I propose changing the controversial line to the following: justiceischeap Jan 2012 #1
I like your proposal. Lisa D Jan 2012 #2
Yes, I agree. I sometimes forget that men/trans can be feminists. :) nt justiceischeap Jan 2012 #3
thanks justice. and does it feel good to move down, or does that not bother you. seabeyond Jan 2012 #5
I don't care about the placement. justiceischeap Jan 2012 #6
Yes ismnotwasm Jan 2012 #54
yes... with feminist. thank you. lets see what others see. nt seabeyond Jan 2012 #4
I like this too. Starry Messenger Jan 2012 #7
I also think it should read "feminist perspective," not "woman's perspective." nt BlueIris Jan 2012 #8
I hope that members who didn't comment on the previous thread will comment here. Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #9
I think the third bullet should be removed obamanut2012 Jan 2012 #10
seeing how i am continually, consistently and often attacked in this manner, seabeyond Jan 2012 #12
You don't need the bullet for that obamanut2012 Jan 2012 #17
over 7 yrs on du and this move to du3 and more open attack, i would prefer a bullet. seabeyond Jan 2012 #22
You don't understand, it's not like that in a Group obamanut2012 Jan 2012 #26
i dont want anyone banned. and the temptation will be too great, i assure you. people cannot help seabeyond Jan 2012 #27
it was intended to be exclusionary iverglas Jan 2012 #16
Thank you for admitting it was intended to be exclusionary obamanut2012 Jan 2012 #20
I didn't admit a goddamned thing iverglas Jan 2012 #28
Then the group needs to be renamed. LeftyMom Jan 2012 #30
is it really that hard not to call other women names when discussing an issue? nt seabeyond Jan 2012 #31
Not at all, which is why I didn't. LeftyMom Jan 2012 #32
grinnin. you never disappoint. if it is not hard to not call names, then none of us seabeyond Jan 2012 #33
Feel free to put me on ignore. LeftyMom Jan 2012 #34
i dont put people on ignore. and i dont have a problem with your posts. yes, you talked to someone seabeyond Jan 2012 #35
look at all the nice shiny new names! iverglas Jan 2012 #36
You're kind of making my point. LeftyMom Jan 2012 #39
"a lot of other posters" iverglas Jan 2012 #40
My other posts in Feminists must have fallen pray to the old Deleted Subthread. LeftyMom Jan 2012 #42
be nice iverglas Jan 2012 #43
This message was self-deleted by its author Bunny Jan 2012 #19
Your opinion is as valid as mine obamanut2012 Jan 2012 #21
all of the bullets can be considered exclusionary. that is the purpose of them seabeyond Jan 2012 #23
Yes, very true. Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #44
This message was self-deleted by its author Bunny Jan 2012 #29
thank you iverglas Jan 2012 #38
This message was self-deleted by its author Bunny Jan 2012 #41
I really hate those mischaracterizations of feminists. Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #45
I vote for this. (nt) redqueen Jan 2012 #46
what are you suggesting. i am all for the discussion. i am not into having someone tell me i am a seabeyond Jan 2012 #47
I think she's saying no name calling, just exchanging ideas with no minimizing or insults redqueen Jan 2012 #48
i... i did yesterday. and it feels good not being a part seabeyond Jan 2012 #49
Yes, redqueen. That's exactly what I'm saying. Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #51
that is fine. adding a bit. the bit where it says... if discussing porn no name calling like seabeyond Jan 2012 #52
This message was self-deleted by its author Bunny Jan 2012 #53
no, I did not say that iverglas Jan 2012 #37
bunny and i are not on the same side. we often disagree, lol. hey bunny, good to see you in here. seabeyond Jan 2012 #24
I move to keep this one: Starry Messenger Jan 2012 #11
This message was self-deleted by its author seabeyond Jan 2012 #13
just for completeness, iverglas Jan 2012 #14
check out post 1 and 2 and see what you think. and thanks for this. nt seabeyond Jan 2012 #15
frankly, at this point, iverglas Jan 2012 #18
ok. nt seabeyond Jan 2012 #25
i like this post for the SoP Scout Jan 2012 #50
Why don't the hosts get picked first, and then work on the SOP later? Violet_Crumble Jan 2012 #55
lol lol. that was kinda funny. nt seabeyond Jan 2012 #56
do you think VC might be a civil servant? ;) iverglas Jan 2012 #57
I propose this concise SoP: Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #58
I approve. redqueen Jan 2012 #59
raisin hand... is anyone gonna get to call me (ready?), prude, pearl clutcher, frigid, anti sex, seabeyond Jan 2012 #60
No, I expect all the co-hosts will agree that such namecalling is unacceptable. redqueen Jan 2012 #61
Not more than once Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #62
thanks. not that i am not weary, lol seabeyond Jan 2012 #64
This message was self-deleted by its author Bunny Jan 2012 #63
Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»Feminists»fresh thread. i purpose ...»Reply #0