Because if we don’t address our own internal problems, they will grow, and we will lose strength and momentum as a progressive movement at a time we need it the most.
We are up against a political machine that is extremely skilled at what it does, and what it does best, is “divide and conquer”. They are the best at scoping out the opposition, finding the fault lines, driving in the wedges and pounding away till their target becomes too splintered or damaged to be effective. It has won them two elections so far.
I imagine the Rovians are rubbing their hands with great glee right now, reading about the recent gender/sexism battle on dkos, a major progressive website. I’d guess they find it especially delightful to see a contingent of powerful older women’s voices split the scene, because they know this group can be notoriously hard to silence or control.
That is ample reason in itself enough for any smart progressive political forum to pull up hard, and make dealing with the gender discrimination it’s ranks a top priority issue.
But there’s another vitally important reason, and I think a even more urgent one than the first.
There is a strong and dangerous movement of powerful Right Wing Religious Extremists slowly infiltrating every layer of our political structure and our government. Their goal is to take over America for God, and to run it according to the tenants of their brand of Fundamentalist Christianity.
I know a lot about what that means, having been born a female in 1940, into just such a world. It means total subjugation and control of the female gender.. It means a world where women have no freedoms not granted directly to them by the powerful “religious” males who have assumed control of everything.
This is accomplished by brainwashing both men and women into believing women are second class citizens, and one way this is done is by demeaning, dismissing and debasing the dignity and value of women through the use of sharp edged sexist language. And by not allowing non- compliant, dissenting women’s voices to be heard.
To find that same kind of language, that same kind of demeaning, dismissive attitude toward the female gender alive and well, and allowed to stand, in the year 2005 on a powerful progressive political forum is one of the most astounding and alarming things I have witnessed in many years.
I am desperate to reach those who see nothing wrong with demeaning sexist advertizing, to please be willing to at least listen to those of us who know how powerful a harmful cultural influence on attitudes it can be.
To those young men and women who piled on the concept that we are prudish feminazi nutcases, who don’t care about anything but our own narrow self interests and issues, please listen, you have never been more wrong in your lives.
To those who think we are interested in censorship and depriving you of your rights to celebrate your sexuality any way you so choose, oh no, no no. We fought for your rights to be able to express your sexuality freely and without shame. All we are asking is that you think..about the long range effects of such powerful gender-based messages on the formation of attitudes towards the basic worth of women and men. And please think about what you are really saying, when you call women like me prudes, menstruating she devils, or feminazi’s, when you don’t know us at all.
To those who have invited our dissenting voices to leave the scene, well, I can only say be careful. Be very, very careful about that you are discarding so lightly. I understand that in today’s America, age and experience are not valued very much anymore, and that we are often seen as rigid, out of date old dinosaurs with nothing of value to contribute. If this is your attitude, you cannot be blamed totally, because this is what this society has taught you from the day you could sit upright and focus on your television sets. The same with sexism. That has surrounded all of us for so long, it has come to seem normal to many. But unconscious ageism, unconscious sexism, is so incredibly dangerous a luxury.
The fact is, the progressive movement cannot afford a ongoing generation gap to continue, anymore than we can afford this ongoing gender war to continue, if we truly want to be a force to be reckoned with.
These deeply programmed negative, divisive attitudes, are some of our biggest fault lines, our weak spots, and there will always be those who will take advantage of them to cause chaos and dissension, thus dilution of our shared power, every bit of which we need more now than ever before.
So I implore those who have the visionary energy and drive and resources to set up progressive forums for all our voices, to take the lead now that you have the power to do so, and pause long enough to look at the need to unite progressive energies across the genders and the generations.
I ask you to remember that united we stand, divided we fall. I ask you to be willing to use your unique position to help remove the barriers among us, that we, as progressive, can simply no longer afford to ignore.
Because if we don’t do things differently now, we will just continue to go backwards, and one by one, the freedoms so many take for granted now, but that so many have have fought and died for, right here at home, are going to be lost.
My new grand daughter is only a few months old. I want her to have the world I fought for her to have, not the one I had to fight so hard to escape. I know you want the same for your daughters and grand daughters.
I am but one of many who will work right beside those are willing to take this on.
Progressives, it is time to tear down the walls.
Thank you.
I hadn’t quite left kos–but I find I’ve lost my ability to think before I react. Which means, of course, that I do the things I deplore.
The grandson is not quite 6 months. No matter how despairing I may feel–the price of giving up is too high.
This simple statement says it all to anyone who believes that the women who stood up for themselves and said “we are here, we matter and we will not be silenced by your rhetoric”.
Thank you for your concise and accurate assessment of what the Rovian fascist movement is trying to accomplish. I am a relative newcomer to women’s issues, involved only for the last 15yrs, but see them more in the light of Human Rights, not just a woman’s issue. As a member of a culture that has been demeaned, marginalized and in many cases the victim of genocide, I relate well to the essence of your message.
That the reichwing Christian fascists intend to do, not only to women, but anyone who disputes or fails to live by their measuring stick is very easy to see. If you fail to live by their standards, your rights as a human being and an American will be eliminated and you will be sent to a reeducation camp to indoctrinate you into the correct way of thinking. And like the Nazi’s before them, if you fail to be reeducated, you will be eliminated.
Does that sound harsh, yes, is it realistic, yes I believe that it is their goal. One simply has to look at the laws that the reichwing are passing at an alarming rate that disenfranchises whole segments of our society. How long before you are one of those segments that becomes disenfranchised by the reichwing. I can only hope that this fracture that occured at Dkos, will not be allowed to become an earthquake, that shakes our progressive movement to its very core and keeps our voices in a shadow that can never be seen or heard.
Scribe, again thank you for this enlightened approach to healing our wounds and helping those who have unconsciously and consciously been maninpulated by the MSM and the reichwing Christian Fascists.
Sidenote:
When I state reichwing Christian fascists, I in no way am implying that a majority of believing Christians believe the same way as these fascists. I know and have great respect for many christians that I come in contact with daily. I have heard many Christians state that they are appalled at the unchristian attitudes and demeaning nature of these so called Christians.
As a woman born in the 1950’s I came of age at the height of the women’s movement and at the end of the civil rights movement. Being naive and idealistic I, like many, believed that fighting the good fight was enough. I believed that being good at what I did was enough for equal treatment.
During the past 25 years there have been wins and losses in the fight for equal treatment of all. Living in California I have been isolated from most of the overt discrimination that still exists.
During the past 5 years under this administration I have watched milestone after milestone stripped away. During 2004, I thought, wrongly it seems, that we as progressives were going to work to make our differences our strengths.
Right now, I’m taking the next 5 months to fight the special election propositions in California. But the differences and attitudes that came to light will directly affect my perceptions of those working with me. I will once again, at least sub-consciously, be questioning whether the man standing next me is truly treating me as an equal. Distrust has been revived inside the party – unfortunately by Democrat men.
For now – I know where the Republicans are coming from and can fight the enemy that I know. Unfortunately it’s the “liberal” men that I will be watching – not knowing what attitudes they have.
Unfortunately it’s the “liberal” men that I will be watching – not knowing what attitudes they have.
Gosh do I agree with that Sally. And that worry concerns me deeply. If I cannot count on the men in my party to protect, respect and humanize me where do I go for political representation?
Yes, I believe in freedoms but with the golden rule. Not freedom to do anything one damn well wants to do regardless of human consequences. To me one is truly free when there is no pain.
I think one reason why I don’t expect much from the kos bunch is that kos has only one goal – getting dems elected. Others of us want ethical dems elected and progressive dems elected. Wholly differing view points.
If there is one practice that, more than any other, causes our daily rough & tumble to escalate into battles or wars with people of any different backgrounds, I suggest it is:
TELLING OTHER PEOPLE WHAT THEY THINK.
People in power positions are angered when subconscious or ignorant behavior of theirs is mischaracterized as policy.
People in vulnerable positions are angered when people in power positions attempt to correct their reports of their own experience and feelings.
The different generations have faced different opportunities and threats, so they need to understand their necessarily different outlooks and sensitivities.
I think we have a block of people from the Recent Troubles who don’t yet comprehend what they were doing. We’re going to continue tripping over this till they do.
All this applies to race relations too, if that subject would ever come up.
Now back to Day 2 of the Jackson Escape Crisis.
Excellent point, gooserock. I really wonder how much of our conflicts are magnified due to simply not knowing how to commnicate with each other effectively. I know I have to work hard at really listening to what others are saying ** with a since intention to understand what THEY mean, and not settle for what “I think they mean.” Eepcially when emotional reactions are in play and running high. One I give into my defensise rections, I do not hear accurately anymore.
and if other people do a poor job of articulating, we’ll inevitably make mistakes.
Active listening can play a role in this. A good technique of learning someone else’s point of view is to make sure you ask questions -before- making a judgement. Socrates imployed this to great effect. One of his friends who make an assertion whereby Socrates would examine the assertion by asking about definitions.. frames.. and so on. Always Socrates was polite.
A good tip for understanding someone’s POV. If you think someone is wrong or think you may be misunderstanding them start from the attitude that they are right. From that point ask them questions. It will make both you and them think about what is being said.
That takes a bit more time.. but that’s what dialogue is all about.
Unfortunately, your post comes too late to be effective, as the damage is already done. Furthermore, it seems to me, many of the people care more about saving face and maintaining that they were right. The people who need to hear this do not have open ears. In fact, wasn’t there one post who blamed this rift on the women, saying we were splintering the party?
So, who are you asking to “remove the barriers”?
As a woman, how are you going to work beside the people who tell you that your concerns are meaningless? Does your granddaughter win if we elect Democrats who have no respect for women’s rights?
It may be too late to do any good, I’m not sure about that yet. And your questions deserve an honest answer.
Who am asking to remove the barriers? Anyone willing to work very hard at identifying them accurately and then work toether to reduce them.
Personally, beyond a certain point, I so stop being willing to try to work beside those who tell me my concerns are meaningless. I determine that point for myself by how continuing to try either feeds me or drains me dry. This is why I took a break from here for awhile and roamed around other venues. This diary is here, because I know there are a whole lot of very smart people reading this site, who also want to see this movement stay united, along with those who would like to see me just shut up and leave. I’d like to support those who care about unity and porgress, and will, until it is no longer prodictive for me to do so, in my own opinion, only.
To those women who have chosen to totally disconnect from here, I applaud you just as loudly as as I applaud those who haven’t. It’s daned high time we each chose our own battles and where we contribute our useful and powerful energies.
And yes, I am worried sick about my grand daughters future if Denmocrats without genuine respect for women get into office.
Sorry to be so late responding … I lost my internets for awhile today.
I just don’t think that it should be the women, only, who work to build bridges and keep our eye on the prize. So I guess I feel, as far as the divisions in our ranks are concerned, that the burden is on the people who are creating the divisions, not those speaking out. Even if speaking out turns into walking away, like it has for some. We can’t blame the victim for leaving.
But this is the whole point of contention, I guess. People feeling victimized won’t ever get apologies from those who feel there is nothing to apologize for. So that becomes a stalemate.
Your assessment, sadly, is right on the mark.
No sooner had the dust started to settle when Kos began hammering his message that civil liberties are too hot to touch and must be quietly subsumed under the heading of “privacy”. This was a more polite version of his previous message, which was, “Shut the fuck up so we can win some hollow victories, dammit.”
Don’t ask, don’t tell, democrat-style.
Kos makes it pretty clear from his language that he thinks that gays, women, racial and religious minorities are just items on a “laundry list” — his words — and fails utterly to see that the overarching issue isn’t privacy, it’s egalitarianism, the bedrock of a free society. He fails to see that you can’t have egalitarianism with exceptions. He fails to see that you can’t have egalitarianism in private.
No amount of privacy will make women comfortable walking alone at night. No amount of privacy will make for equal pay for equal work. No amount of privacy will protect gays from violence and job discrimination. And certainly no amount of privacy will allow a black man to pass as a white man.
There are many different forms of bigotry. Kos and his cohorts, like many younger people who didn’t see the great struggles of the 20th century, are only familiar with overt, active bigotry. They are ignorant of the passive form that says, “Your rights don’t matter to me because they would complicate my political agenda,” and they are guilty as sin of it. Egalitarianism is to them something that would be nice to have, but not worth jeopardizing more important things like… like… whatever it is that they hold important. Getting home-grown Democrat bigots in office, I suppose.
The great irony here is that of all the various oppressed groups, only women constitute a slim majority. Everyone else is a minority group. And this is nowhere more true than it is in that smallest of all minority groups: middle class liberal white men. It grieves me to have to say it, being a middle class liberal white man myself, but the majority of the progressive left really needs to step up and tell this disproportionately powerful minority that their days at the top of the heap are over, and they need to get into line with the rest of us.
Yeah, at least your view gives me hope that some progressive men don’t feel like Kos does, and that some will continue to speak up.
I do agree, somewhat, with the posts that said age had something to do with it. Not just, as one diary said, that older women are more apt to speak up. But younger men and women may not really understand what life was like for women before the 60’s. How discrimination was built into the laws of this land and how many court battles it took to get tiny parts changed, one by one.
Some women in some professional fields will say they aren’t feminists, yet don’t know that they could only be teachers or nurses not so long ago.
I feel they have some sense of entitlement to part of the issue, without realizing the whole picture.
but I had a very different take on Kos’ core values diary. I thought his his “laundry list” reference was a perception he was trying to move us away from.
But I agree completely with the rest of what you say, including Kos’ blindness to many types of bigotry.
Sometimes, someone says something so perfectly that one just has to stand to one side and say…wow, that was marvellous.
perhaps…but it’s not too late for the society as a whole. I don’t think so. Why?
Because at its core, nothing has changed. We’re no worse off than before the 2nd wave. The problem seems to be that many men think either that there is no need for feminism — the you-already-have-enough-rights argument — or that feminism is about fringe issues — the your-rights-are-not-my-concern argument.
Several months ago I tried to write about this on DKos. I got shouted down. One guy even laid it out in bald terms of “You line up and fix racism first, then I’ll think about helping you bitches.” I paraphrase.
Garry Wills, whom nobody I think would accuse of being a radical partisan filled with too much vitriol to listen to anybody, said in a C-Span interview that feminism won, women have equal rights, we can declare victory and move on.
In other words, I don’t feel like any door of opportunity closed on us — because that door was never open in the first place.
I’m so glad you made this post. And I’m not surprised that I cannot find it on DKos. Such is the reception of important ideas filtered through the “important shit” collander.
because the dems have been guilty of cronyism just as much as the repubs. In order for us to clean house we have to get dems who have some principles and have ethics and have a backbone and have the will to fight for us and those who do not contribute to their campaigns, both.
One tiny quibble. You say:
I suppose it’s possible, but to think that Rove is paying attention to the pie fight may be to think too much of ourselves. Rove doesn’t need to dig down to the pie fight to find dissension – he can simply turn on the TV or radio and hear Biden, Obama, Edwards and others all (unjustifiably) bashing Dean. Or if he is reading the blogs, he can see Kos, Atrios and others of the blog glitterati venting about how they believe Kerry ran a lousy campaign, right there on the front page.
When we have so much high-profile infighting at the very top of our party and grassroots, why would Rove bother with the subtleties of Ginger, Maryann and too much Boston cream?
Not sure we haven’t been noticed pretty widely. I even read about it in the St Paul Pioneer Press.
But I hear your point.
But people acting in the same way he does to weaken us. Kossacks scare them, so they’re seeking to divide with by engrained differences. Sex has been a good one for them (gay marriage, religion, abortion, etc.).
I understand sexism and ageism as deeply engrained stereotypes in our culture, and they need to change sooner rather than later. Like most things, they’re changing gradually.
More importantly,
Our democracy is under attack, and if it is to survive, we must stand together. Blogs are our great connection. Blogger research is one of our greatest strengths. If we let them divide us, we will be shut up forever.
Scribe, I agree with your view, and I’m sorry if this post seems overly strong. I’ve seen my share of life in 56 years, and I’m truly afrad the 2006 election could be our last.
(or any disputes between groups and individuals where the opposing parties are at fundamental odds over an issue)
I only half-heartedly followed the blowout on dkos because work has lately pressed hard on my time. But I’ve seen it many times before online. One group gets offended by another clique that’s well represented in the site and the outcome is a blow-out with the site splintering and fracturing into two. In this case it was instigated by the site administrator, which has an even harsher result. dkos is better off without the offended parties, just as the offended parties are better off starting their own site to address those issues they consider most important.
Partly, also, I think DK is like a bee colony that has split due to being too large. It’s not just that kos offended a group, it’s also that the site is so large people can hardly get a word in without being drowned by so many others. Breaking free to a new place makes sense and in no way disparages what kos is doing.
IMO Kos would be best served by helping this group form their own scoop site (or booman accepting them into the tribune fold) and then offering a better apology. There is much that all agree upon. But kos is also right that DK need not be all things to all people. Divide and conquer only works when divisions prevent groups from collaborating on those things they agree upon. But forcing collaboration by imposing groupthink never works, and in the long run only antagonizes those whose opinions and beliefs were marginalized in the process. –M
I was debating not posting, but then I saw you’d written what I was thinking.
Any community develops some shared philosophy. Not all the members have to agree with the philosophy, but they have to accept it as a consequence of being a member. Its how they self-identify with the community.
For some reason, a community leader decided that a certain belief wasn’t going to be accepted at his site. Well, he might not understand that — but the harsh reality is that he was going to outright reject it, and in doing so publicly, he green-lighted the rest of the community to also vocally reject it.
He redefined the organizing principles of his community to be his own political agenda. That’s fine, I think we share an interest in his agenda. But my interest in belonging to his community was not simply to support his agenda.
My purpose for joining a community is simpler, and more pure. To explore politics and get more involved personally — in an atmosphere of friendly disagreement.
I still strongly feel I can participate in a community that shares that philosophy, and work with other communities which don’t, on shared goals.
I reject the notion that I have to submit to the personal interests of a 34 year old blogger and his small clique of supporters in order to participate in online-political activities.
I can actually think for myself, and its no crime to seek out places where I’m not insulted simply for doing so.
ditto!!!!! very well said…it would be very interesting to see kos visit here and read somethings he just might learn from as well. oh I know…what a dream in/of communication that would be…I know what the old sayin the movie of HUD was…”what we have here, is a failure to communicate” Well, if we were trying to offer up some avenues of communication with others, just to be put down..what is the use. I think it is kos’ loss for not treating this issue appropriately and with not being a leader except of his own ideas.
I want to give you an instance of what I ran into the other day there. They were discussing Clark. The subject came up about h. ford, from tn. I asked the person there why he/she felt the way he did {positive] about h. ford. A simple quesion. Well, the answer just showed me how shallow some of these ppl really are..his/her responce was something to this order..Oh I do not know much about him I am just promoting him for our next state senator to the belt way. When I told him/her that I did not want another person like liberman in the senate, the feeling I got was I was not welcome there. and after all the bru ha ha about liberman and taking him out..I could not believe this. I just said I was checking out th. fords voting record and did not like it. So that alone just shows if you frame the message right, you will get the truth on how they really feel and then you can debate them…if left as an assumption then one really does not know what to think.
I would agree, except I have trouble seeing basic human rights as a “clique” issue. For all his attacks on the DLC, Kos has used the very same arguments the DLC uses to tell people to shut up and toe the line in the name of victory.
Frankly, I don’t see any virtue in having to decide which brand of marginalization and oppression I want to back in the next election.
Many of us talk about Kos, but he’s really just a representative of a very large demographic in our society. We don’t like to think about that, but it’s here.
Who’d’ve thought that 20 — now “only” 19 — senators would refuse to condemn lynching?
It’s time to kick over some rocks, and while they may not be as toxic in some ways, there is plenty of rot under the rocks on the left, as we all know there is on the right.
OK, correct me if I’m wrong. But I thought the situation was caused due to an advertisement (which I haven’t seen due to Firefox + adblock being so excellent) that depicted some number of scantily clad women throwing pies at each other. This offended a certain crowd on dkos, who complained, and Kos responded by saying he didn’t think it was a big deal and those folks who did were welcome to find the exit door. Or something like that.
Mind if I ask how this relates to a human rights issue? Kos may have caused the cleave with a less than tactful act, but it is his site. Or have I missed something in the translation? –M
Actually, that was the issue that started it. It became so much more.
There was a group that started the discussion of the ad. But later, after Kos received many angry emails, he made an unfortunate comment about “the sanctimonious women’s study set” (something he admitted was over the top and cast too wide a net) and many, many males showed a severe lack of understanding about why Women’s issues were important. Markos may be included in this group, although I think after the flare up, no one was listening anymore.
Then there was a group of Women that reacted poorly as well, in my opinion. While the topic is important and their perspective was justified, their approach did nothing to repair the rift, but only encouraged the argument to escalate.
After the tempers began to flare there were some things said on both sides that shocked me. I could not believe, as a group, we were still stuck in the 50’s in many aspects. Terms such as “menstruating she-devils” were actually used as well as outright telling Women they should “shut-up”.
So the ad began a discussion, but this entire issue was not about the ad in the end.
This experience was eye-opening for me. I have taken my consideration of Women as absolute equals for granted. I knew we had much more work to do as a society, but I thought that as a group we didn’t have as far to go. I found out I was wrong. There is a large contingency that does not get why the discussion of the ad was valid. I think they need to learn why for us to maintain solidarity.
So each side took ever greater irresponsibile positions with certain individuals pushing the envelope into outright stupidity. Welcome to human nature. Human beings have an unfortunate tendency of favoring those social cliques to which they belong, and will – often without even realizing it – gladly act against their own stated ethics in support of group cohesion. IOW: people are just plain nutters. And they lie to themselves about it too. *sigh* Oh well, guess I’m glad I missed out on that whole mess. What a waste of time and energy. –M
Thanks! –M
It’s probably a bit late to jump in here, but it was MUCH more than the sexist ad and Kos’ dismissive post. This started in earnest weeks before when many women raised concerns that abortion was a core Democratic Party value which could not be traded away like a bargaining chip to win disaffected Republican voters. That was the start of the “selfish, single-issue” accusations. Next was some women’s concern that using words for female genitalia to paint Republicans as unmanly was, in fact, insulting to women. We questioned the political wisdom of alienating our own Democratic women by using demeaning language that presupposed male superiority. That unleashed a barrage of accusations that the women were trying to tell them what to do and CENSOR them, which became extremely vicious, sexist and misogynistic. The level of bile was shocking. It was in this atmosphere that the pie ad appeared.
For me, it started when several members decided that dKos was an appropriate place to discuss whether or not they’d like to have sex with Stephanie Herseth, Congresswoman from South Dakota.
June, 2004
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/6/2/1411/83976
Can you find the thread and post the link? I looked through and found a few references along the lines of “Wow, she’s hot” but no explicit discussion of ‘wanting to have sex with her’. I’m confused, because what I found in that thread was primarily discussion of anti-gay rights policy positions Herseth had taken along with debate on accepting conservative democrats within red states into the big D tent. I saw little there that I considered sexist or inappropriate. But I didn’t look down every thread either. If it was there I certainly don’t think it consisted of the majority of posters, nor did I see it coming from kos himself (in that post).
And what does “she’s hot” mean?
I don’t really want to dig through Kos to find more references. I do remember comments such as, “I wouldn’t kick her out of bed.” There were several threads that took this up.
I find evaluating women politicians on their “hotness” is disrespectful, both to the politician and the women reading the thread.
Well that’s a really good question. What does “she’s hot” mean? Is it contextual? Such as in this context, in reference to a stranger, who happens to be a professional politician, is it always “disrespectful” of the person? Or is stating that finding one beautiful and expressing implied sexual attractiveness always disrespectful? Stating “I wouldn’t kick her out of bed” seems rude (I didn’t see this comment). It implies that there are some one would kick out of bed. But that also implies personal opinion on who is and who is not acceptable. Each person determines such qualities of who they find desirable on their own, and women have criteria ruling swaths of their preferred gender out based on personal desires just as do men. Or is it the expression of desire here and no desire there that offends? I really don’t understand, but would appreciate help in doing so.
A couple of points:
a) It appears that a minority of people said things that were meant to be hurtful. They crossed a boundary from simply expressing something honestly to purposefully attempting to offend. For whatever reason. I don’t think these people are representative of the whole – either of most men, or most members of dkos.
b) Men and women are sexual creatures. This is a function of life. IMO, any ideology that attempts to suppress, extinguish, or negate this fact will only cause frustration for its constituents. Taking sexual negation to the extreme can lead to strange behaviors – see catholic priests for an example of where extreme sexual repression goes.
I would ask, in the most respectful way possible, do you think it is possible (or desirable) to end sexual banter among others in public? Is all sexual banter – that is openly expressing desire – always disrespectful (of either women or men)? IMO: these are worthwhile questions. I look forward to your response.
Best,
–Maynard
Stephanie Herseth is a US Congresswoman. dKos is a political blog. In that context, I don’t expect or find appropriate discussions of a politician’s sexual attractiveness. Especially not in the juvenile “she’s hot!” vein. If someone wanted to diary about how her attractiveness might or might not affect the vote, that’s probably fair game.
I think it demeans the woman. I have never seen posters on dKos make the same kinds of comments about male politicians. It makes it really hard for women to be taken seriously when they’re constantly evaluated in terms of their sexual attractiveness.
On a site devoted to rating the sexual attractiveness of politicians? Sure, fine. I just won’t go there. But on a general-purpose political site, I don’t think these kinds of comments have a place.
I agree that it’s a fine line sometimes. However, as a woman and having worked in very male-dominated fields, I know that it’s a struggle to get taken seriously sometimes, especially for attractive women. I imagine Stephanie Herseth worked long and hard to get where she is–serving as a US Congresswoman from South Dakota. Saying “she’s hot” reduces her to a sex object in my view. Your mileage may vary.
WHAT ???????
I missed that.
I’m glad I did. This crap is so disturbing to me when it comes from men on the left. I expect contempt for women from ridged (no pun intended) right wingers, but betrayal by the left hurts as much now as it did 30 years ago.
In all these sad discussions I don’t think I’ve stopped to mention the many, many men who were disgusted, outraged and eloquent in their egalitarianism. I have not brought it up previously because I wouldn’t expect anything less from those fine hearts and minds displayed both here and on dkos.
Thanks for this summary, and glad you jumped in. I’ve not been as involved at dkos as many of you, or for as long, but even to me it was clear that tensions were buiding over time, (in the whole party,as well as at dkos,) between those who believe we have to “give ground” to win, and those who see it as the worst thing we could do. Since reproductive issues are the ones being considered “negotiable” and because this directly affects women the most, what the hell else does anyone expect women to do BUT object?! We know how long and hard we fought for these freedoms. Now suddenly, some liberal male leaders seem willing to bargain them away, and we should just say..”Oh..ok, sure, if it’s for the good of the party?!” Not in my lifetime will you hear that from me.
It is a VERY serious mistake for party leaders to alienate women now, and one that could hurt our chances badly.
It didn’t start with the ad. As many have said here, it started well before that with a series of dismissive responses — from Kos and others — to other threads on reproductive rights.
So, as many have said here, over and over, It. Was. Not. The. Ad. Not even as The. Underlying. Event.
I.e., women did not react, for the most part, in a manner that was hysterical, over-reacting, or impulsive (the three adjectives so often used for women to dismiss their concerns).
Absolutely.
The diaries about giving in on aspects of abortion rights and the frequency female genitals were thrown out as an insult against males and many other issues was long standing. Thank you for adding this.
If you look through my comments for months you will find I was adamantly defending Women on all of these issues.
And while I agree that the reaction from Women was justified, there was a small population that did add to the escalation. I wholeheartedly support and agree with the female perspective on this. But there is a point in an argument when it is a good idea to stop and go for a walk and come back to the table instead of continuing the shouting.
Humans don’t do well when insulted, and some will cling on to stupid misogynistic perspectives instead of seeing the folly of that perspective when the discourse is heated. Some of the statements on both sides did nothing to encourage an environment that made it possible to listen.
Believe me, I know this is an issue that is long standing and must be dealt with – and Women must be the ones that win this in the end. A female perspective and position of equality is not only desirable, but without question necessary. It is about time we end our Dark Ages mentality.
The other responses expressed quite well what I was trying to get at…. Dismissing NARAL for backing Republican pro-choice candidates (against anti-choice Dems) in a couple of races was one hot issue.
But on a broader scale, it’s the idea that anything women consider important is not part of “important shit” unless the boys sign off with approval. And that leads to a whole host of issues and values and assumptions and attitudes….
Why even post at Kos, though? I’m at a point where I’ve completely given up on that site. It’s exhausting and disheartening to read it in light of the attitudes that have been recently revealed there. I was going to go back for news every now and then, but there are other, better places for that.
I guess I admire your efforts in regards to trying to get through to them, but there’s obviously a large contingent of people that don’t “get it”, don’t want to “get it”, and don’t want to talk to anyone who does “get it”. Fine, f**k ’em, I’ll spend my time and energy elsewhere.
I still read and sometimes comment over there. In the past two days, there have been two excellent posts on abortion, with few raised tempers or trolls, even. Amazing.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/6/14/12622/3531 – the other has rolled off but was linked to here and front-paged by Atrios yesterday.
Well, I am still there because people like Meteor Blades, mcjoan, eugene, pastordan, Fredrick Clarkson, SusanHu, Booman, Carnacki, and many, many others are still there. I have found some wonderful friends there and the software allows me to find them in the noise. It is a community greater than individuals – including the person that owns the site.
My Representative also posts there once in awhile, and even commented in a Diary I did about him. There are other Senators and Congress Members with accounts and they can directly ask me to get involved in issues. It is one of the only places, currently, that this occurs. It may happen elsewhere, but not yet.
Other important issues are covered in many fine diaries there also.
There are thousands of members, and yes some of them are asses. That is true of any large population.
While I support your reasons for not wanting to be there and am glad you have found somewhere else, Kos is, and will continue to be, a place that has something to offer me (as well as here, the new eTrib and many other blogs). I feel I “get it” and not everyone over there is a Neanderthal. Some of us are there to keep this dialog open in the hopes that others will “get it” as well.
I understand where you are coming from, but there are many justifiable reasons to continue visiting there for certain people.
I agree that DailyKos is a major site, but not a major progressive site. Kos himself says the site is not about “progressive” politics but about promoting the Democratic Party. Advancement of progressive causes is often, but not inextricably, linked to advancement of the Democratic Party. Not all Democrats are progressives–Harry Reid of Nevada is not, for example.
I don’t know if a website that officially endorses the position that the right of a woman to control her body–often shorthanded as “abortion rights”–is a negotiable issue can be labeled a “progressive” website. What’s more, a website in which the proprietor and a large number of contributors invite dissenting parties to leave and never again darken their door is not a place where I want to contribute. There’s an atmosphere of disrespect–not respectful disagreement, mind you–at DailyKos that comes from Mr. Moulitsa himself.
I also think that you over-estimate the importance of websites. I don’t wish to denigrate anyone’s efforts, because they all matter, but the ACLU (by exposing the abuses at Guantanmo Bay) has caused far more bother for Rove, et al, than anything DailyKos has ever done.
They are glad we are gone–and “we” includes me, a 42-year-old man, hardly a “menstruating she-devil”–and many of the same folk who disgraced the original argument are still there, braying about how they’ve run people off and sneering at those who are still there (one of my friends sent me a link to a DailyKos diary where several of the people there wrote, “What are YOU doing here on this woman-hating website, shouldn’t you be at Booman Trib” etc).
I don’t want to set Booman Trib against DailyKos, and I haven’t–it’s actually Armando and others who are fanning those flames.
Anybody who’s left DailyKos, try an experiment: go back and see what happens. I don’t think you’ll enjoy the experience.
I appreciate what you are trying to do, by the way, but a lot of people have written the same thing, but…
…well, read my signature line. It says it all.
You’ve made a very important point, Shadowthief. Obviously, not all Democrats are progressives, and not all progressives are Democrats.
The left and right of the political blogosphere in this country are defined in largely partisan terms. On the right, this makes a fair bit of sense. The GOP has embraced movement conservatism, and the vast majority of conservatives have embraced the GOP.
Things are not the same on the “left.” First, there’s (justifiably, IMO) more suspicion by some on the left of the Democrats than there is on the right of the Republicans. But more importantly, the Democratic Party includes a lot of folks who might charitably be called “centrists,” but who are in no way left or progressive.
So long as the major “left” political sites are first and foremost partisan Democratic sites, a lot of important left voices will get shunted aside.
Don’t get me wrong, there’s a place for partisanship (I wish there were more, and better, Green Party-oriented blogs). But the left of the blogosphere could certainly use a few more explicitly progressive/left websites (some of which might even be explicitly nonpartisan) to go along with Democratic stalwarts like kos, Atrios, JMM, Billmon, Digby, MyDD, and Drum. Even Liberal Streetfighter, Next Hurrah (which I know only in passing), Pandagon, and DU although sometimes further to the left can often be Democratonormative (sorry for the neologism…I mean something equivalent to heteronormative).
you know, I think I like what you have said. I am becoming to think I am more left in thinking that some in the democratic party are. Just maybe I am a rebel with a cause….:o)
I simply do not know what to say here. I suppose I was one of the ducks in the puddle who declared to be noticed when I got very upset. We all get upset at sometime or the other about something. Yes there are those who will never see and I now know who they are. I suppose they will try to infiltate here as well. Some live to do such things to make their lives complete. I was not at kos for very long, have seen that occur. They are easy to spot once you have had to deal with those kind all your life.
I take ppl at their word when they say something. Otherwise, why would they say that. That goes for myself as well. I know that the very last day, I spoke my mind, I had just had it with the closed minds I was hearing from. I can take them or leave them. IN my real life, what I do is not going to play into those hands on the kos…but they do here in my town and in my state. However, if we have ppl there that are doing things in the Dem. party to lead the discussion in avenues for the party’s sake, then we do have a say in that. Womens rights are one of those issues…I do not take lightly to those who put women down…and that includes some women, as well. I think they were trying to show off so to speak. To me showing off is not a good thing when addressing a large group of ppl in an area such as kos. It just shows their ignorance. Like I said, If I remember correctly, the very intent of my posting is not to argue with ignorance..for to me, that makes a fool out of me. I can only hope that they got the message. Besides it is like beating your head against a brick wall and only hurting me.
I, for one do not intend on not letting the members at kos disturb me from posting a word there, if I so feel like it…I have decided to reframe my words in such a sway that I put the burden on them to explain themselves instead of me. Like my father always reminded me of…Brenda, he would say, there is more ways to skin a rabbit…..I have never forgotten his wisdom. He is right. in so many ways…
All I can say, is I go to other places to see the things talked about here and there. I am a very complexed person. I have done so many things in my life that I could share with others to give them some thoughts on, in trying to determine what they think…I have tried, and have failed…I do not care..for I know I have tried. I will continue to fight the hard fight for many issues. I intend on learning from others on a daily basis, for when I stop learning from others, is when I am brain dead, in more ways than one.
My soul intention on joining places like here and at kos is to educate me on what is really going on with others and about issues. If my thoughts on those matters do not count to them, I consider it their loses not mine. For you see, I do go and read…I just do not give them the benefit of my experience and thougths any longer. What a sad thing to have happened too…I do understand, but before I left, I had to let it be known as to why I thought they were wrong. Maybe I could have been more diplomatic, but that was just me that morning [as if I was to be the understanding one, insted of them]…Life is not a bowl of cherries…or roses or what ever….it is a hard fight on a daily basis to even stay on top of my own small world of which I live to let them get me down…I suppose that is why I am independent in politics and in life…many men and some women, and in both parties do not like me for that reason. So, I just go on and do what I feel I have to do to live and that is that. I am here now and I will fight here in my state along with the democrats to win…that is so very important. Being a smart mouth, feces stirring, arrogent person, whether young or old, is not who I want to be or be with. I applaude you and all the others who have said how they feel and then go on.
I will find the right group to settle in with and am hoping this is the place. If you will have me, that is…I hope I can contribute something to discussion. But I will not be told I am irrevelent or to shut up and sit down and that my opinion does not count…for that I say how dare you…no matter how old or young you are. It took a loooooong time to get to where I am today and I will not go back to being the meek female they want me to be. NO, I am afraid, I will not…My attitudes and ideas change on things as I live. I accept more easily than I used to could. That is not to say, I accept wrong things easier…Maybe I am just wise enough now in this period of life to know the difference and what I can do to change that…some minds will never be changed…Thank you for listening today, AGAIN…:o)
I can’t say anything about your acceptance here but I can suggest some additional sites that I think you might find very congenial:
Feministe
Shakespeare’s Sister
Pandagon
Alas, a blog
thank you…will check them/it out.
Maybe some feel that an extremely advisarial environment brings out the best in them. I prefer one of respectful consideration.
We haven’t changed parties and I think we are stronger appart. For me the conflict has ended positively.
I haven’t had much time to worry about dailykos lately. This issue is huge though and needs to be ironed out, hopefully we can get that done.
I agree with a number of posters, here, who have thrown in the towel on DK. I am among them. The level of discourse there has degenerated terribly. But, your diary resonates for me on a whole ‘nother level. What happened on DK was hardly an anomaly. Because I am a mystical thinker, I am always asking myself, how does the microcosm reflect the macrocosm? How is what is happening in my little corner of the universe reflective of a larger process? On the most mundane level, I can tell you that what happened during the pie wars was painfully familiar to me. I found it depressing, because it truly made wonder if, as a culture, we don’t have one foot nailed to the floor on gender issues. It seems like we are just going in circles.
This does not discount the advances we have made. Women can work. Women can hold credit. We actually have laws against spousal abuse, etc. These things are taken for granted, but they were hard won. The thing is, until a woman can express her feelings openly and not be mocked as a feminazi, we have a long way to go. That may seem minor, compared to not being able to vote, but it is still indicative of being treated as a second class citizen. There are the little things, like Shadowthief’s observation that when he made it clear he was male, one of his detractors backed up and apologized, and even became deferential. And there are the big things, like the hard won right to control our reproductive destinies hanging in the balance.
It would sure be nice if we could call this battle won, take our gains, and slink quietly back under the big tent, but that would be incredibly naive. I watched “Malcolm X” last night. It was a sobering reminder of a level of discrimination we left in our not too distant past. But, can anyone say race is no longer an issue in America? Of course not, as the recent Supreme Court ruling just demonstrated. Well the same can be said of sexual discrimination, and I will not, I WILL NOT, be mocked for saying so.
I guess I’ll take a deep breath and go read the comments to your post over there. I felt deeply discouraged a couple of days ago when I saw a poster over there refer to this place mockingly as BooWoman now that so many women have migrated. And even more discouraged when the comment immediately following it said something along the lines of, “all they talk about over there now is women’s and gay’s issues. BooMan has become completely irrelevent now.” The only person to speak up against those views was someone who posts here and he/she did so in a way I very much admired. But that was the only person to object.
But then on Sunday night, I believe, Armando had a front page diary about listening, believe it or not. The whole, very lengthy discussion was so calm, so reasoned, so deeply courteous that you might have mistaken it for a diary here. I don’t want to make too much of it, but at least it was encouraging to see. Or, maybe the insulters just naturally avoided a diary about listening, heh.
I’m back from reading the comments. You had a hard slog there, Scribe. Exhausting work.
Yep it was “hard work”.! But I needed to do it this time, for me. It is easier to move on once I know I’ve done what little I can.
It took me a couple of days due to “interruptions” (real life), but I did read almost all of Armando’s diary. It was really good!
Do we have anyone who is taking or has taken a course in interpersonal communication? Communication is a relatively new academic field, but it has a strong knowledge base, including the specialty of interpersonal. If someone’s into that subject this summer or next semester, it would be nice to have a diary on the topic from time to time.
One widely held interpersonal theory holds that much of our communication is habitual and self-reinforcing (reflexive). By thinking (reflecting) rather than reacting, we communicate and think! more rationally and effectively. Most important, we question.
Rovites may just be stirring the pot of reaction to redirect the energy and divide us. They don’t want us thinking about what’s being done in our names by the White House. They want to distract us from that subject, especially because folks at Kos have done great research and opened some public eyes. So they’re using one of nature’s most powerful forces, sex — just like they did when they brainwashed the republicans — and they’ll use religion if they can.
If I’m wrong about the Rovites, no big deal. I’ve stood up for reason. But if I’m right, we must stand in solidarity with each other against them, at DK, Booman, or wherever they strike.
(“Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.”)
In my own field (health care), I conducted training and workshops on interpersonal communications for many years. It continues to amaze me how often relationships within groups and between people can be untangled, once those involved are motivated to acquire more effective tools for communication. Some problems simpe dissolve, once the affected parties can truly hear and understand each other.
I absolutely believe you. I have seen things occur in my own life that seemed like miracles to me–tensions dissolving and people talking peacefully and lovingly, all because of intense and well-intentioned listening.
But I have a question for you. Have you ever seen it happen in a company/organization where the CEO/top dog isn’t interested in it or even takes an openly hostile attitude toward it? And, I guess, a second and related question: Have you ever seen a situation where the top dog was hostile and yet the employees/members still somehow managed to turn things around?
Ditto here re communication (mass and interpersonal) being my training and what I taught for some time. . . .
As for your question, yes, I have been in such a situation. We got rid of the “CEO/top dog.” But we had some self-governance rights. That’s not going to work in this case.:-)
Maybe they’ll stage an intervention. 🙂
Kansas, I haven’t seen communnication training work very effectively unless all involved had some degree of willingness to work toward a resolution. I did some work with corporations who wanted to improve communication between staff and management levels. Usually, the trust levels were so low as to not exist at all, by the time I was hired. More often than not,I came to realize, there was no genuine motivation at top levels to change any of their own behavior, but only to have me the lower level employees more content with the status quo. (Which is why I no longer do this work. 🙂 And the answer is no, to your second question.
My comments re: communication were general ones, not specific to the situation here. Here, along with any and all the caried problems being faced, we’re also trying to communicate with ONLY the written word, which leaves out all the main nonverbal communication channels. (Given that fact, it’s a wonder we manage to comunicate as well as we do, in my opinion. )
Thanks, Scribe.
Roughly speaking communication only occurs when the various input/output sources are in ‘equality.’ Otherwise you have uploading of information from lower grade input sources or downloading of information from a higher grade input source.
The answer to the question ‘Who Decides What is Important’ also solves the question of whether the information transfer is an up or download.
Needless to say, the ‘Who’ has control over the exchange and processing of any Information.
very good….applaude…
Any chance you could post a diary on the subject from time to time? It would be a great service if you have time!
My degree in Speech Communication was a specialty in Communication Theory – in 1975. I’ve thought about a diary on very basic communication theory, but haven’t had time.
Old Fogess (aka Catte)
Consider yourself encouraged: Make the time!
I’ll try – maybe tonight if work loading doesn’t throw me a curve
I put the following comment up at another site to try an analogy that would explain the problem in a way that might make more understandable and less volatile. Not sure how successful it was but I thought I would try it out here.
I was just a lurker at Kos so I don’t have anything invested in the site but I do have a lot invested in wanting women to support progressive causes and candidates and I can’t see how that will happen if women feel unwelcome and marginalized. What I hope is that the result of this brouhaha will be that people will work together to bring about change and thereby bring some real gain from all the pain.
I sure hope you are right! I would loe to work alnog the side of ppl who really want to make this world better for all. God only knows we have sooooooo many unjustified happenings going on today…I think this administration has amplified that so much. Yes I have told them not to divide..they can not afford to do that if they want to win.
Brings to mind an incident in the mid ’80s. The Emma Goldman Clinic in Iowa City had been firebombed.
Both local Police and FBI investigators obsessed on the theory that it had been perpetrated by my friend Steve, who was dating one of the stalwarts at the clinic. He was among, more likely the, most feminist identified male activists in the marijuana movement.
he drew weeks of intensive surveillance. Interviewing Womens’ movement activists, the Feds didn’t want to hear anything that didn’t point to him.
No Indictment ever ensued, the crime’s officially still unsolved. This might not have been the case had there been a real investigation, rather than an attempt to hang it on someone the PTB just wanted out of the way.
… has to be posted.
Image from Meanwhile back at the Ranch
via Shakespeare’s Sister
That’s awesome!
Non-Euclidian pie!
BTW, Andif…went to where you directed me earlier today. I found them to very very interesting and took the test…man, it fit me to the T…iIhave to say I dont place much in those online things such as that, but I actually had to think and was enjoying my fun thinking.. Neat isn’t it when one has to actually think….
Glad you liked them. I think of the four, Alas a Blog is the best one for extended, serious discussions (though side trips into humor and satire are never discouraged). It seems to attract a very erudite and well-informed crowd and while they encourage wide viewpoints, they don’t allow trolls.
How did this diary go over at dKos? Just wondering.
I’m one who believes that everything happens for a reason and, for those who don’t know: I did not leave dKos over the pie ad wars. Kos’s comments regarding the subject were the final straw for me after experiencing a growing intolerance for minority views. And, most of you know that my health and life took a back seat in that struggle. For that, I have suffered. And now, I have moved on.
What happened exposed some necessary realities in leftist politics. I’m not a hopeless optimist by any stretch, but I see the ramifications of that huge disagreement as being somewhat positive ie. more people are more willing to speak up strongly about women’s issues, more are willing to take action, more are willing to listen to each other, more are willing to reexamine their priorities in the grand scheme of things. Some have become humble. Some have become humiliated – and rightly so. That’s what happens when ego takes hold and selfishness and intolerance becomes public.
These new divisions are actually old ones that have resurfaced and they have done so because they need some focused attention. Unfortunately, the resurfacing has been painful, but it was certainly necessary. IMHO, what is required now is to move forward – picking up the pieces in a coherent fashion and moving on from a position of strength in a non-threatening way. That is beginning to happen and needs to be encouraged.
I’m a feminist from way back too and it sometimes irks me to no end when younger women don’t seem to understand what their predecessors have done for them and when I see men who have no clue that we’re still fighting for equality, I see we still have much work to do. We must carry on by educating them. Those who aren’t interested will go their merry way, but I’ve seen many who are willing to learn and that’s very encouraging. We have to fight the smart fight and work with those who are supportive. We can’t expect everyone to come along.
Anyway, I’m rambling, but I just wanted to add my two cents. The most important thing about all of this is to look at the leassons learned and to use them in a positive way.
There were some really good and thoughtful comments over there. There were some that were the usual accusatory and divisive but with extended justification of their beliefs. Some were just pot shots at others. Scribe and others did a good job in the comments holding their side of the debate,
I left because the Monday / Tuesday front page responses last week were over the top for me personally. I am gone 99% of the time…and only go over when a diary is cross-posted by someone here AND I feel that it could use support. I limit the times that I go and don’t deal with the other diaries.
Thanks for the summary, SallyCat. I took a quick peek over there but couldn’t even find the diary. We all choose our battles. Mine, at this point, are much more focused.
Just left there. Most stayed the hell out of it. A few still saying that the ad ought to have stayed and fuck everybody. Most people posting there so far wish that people had been respected, myself included. I will continue to post there on this issue. I made a decision in all of it that when more than a couple of people insisted that the weak left that “they called down the thunder”. Now I have realized how important this whole thing is to me and I will die at the keyboard pounding away, and return the quiet cool calmness, rest, and sanctuary found elsewhere. For me Dobson is making bank right now on people who are scared shitless of their sexual boundaries not being respected by others either, and my party looks like a bunch of idiot yahoos riding around in their underpants shooting at the moon and can’t find their ass with both hands…….where’s a person to go for plain old fashioned respect for others. I have the sex nazi Dobson or the I can’t keep my sex to myself everybody watch me dailykossers. Such joy, so much fun!
sexual boundaries not being respected by others
I read your diary where you were trying to communicate this quite accurate and powerful distillation of an essential problem at DKos and wanted you to know that I found your understanding very helpful in pinning down one of the things that make DKos such a toxic environment. I think you were very brave (but, then, I generally am deeply impressed with your courage) and reading the responses in that diary and the manner in which you were treated was my last straw with a blog I’ve worked very hard to make a functional community.
I guess I’m responding to this post to let you know that I admire you greatly, to let you know that your points were intelligent and perceptive and, also, to say that your diary absolutely confirmed for me the inferiority of what is considered leadership at DKos.
and my party looks like a bunch of idiot yahoos riding around in their underpants shooting at the moon and can’t find their ass with both hands.
psst Those people are not ‘your party’ they’re just sad little people. You have 10 times their strength and several hundred times their common sense.
I needed it today when I read it.
Overall, it was a civil and productive discussion, which was a huge relief. I could have handled “ugly,” but I sure wasn’t looking foward to it. 🙂 The diary got 20 recommends and has now scrolled away, but it was worth my investment of time and energy to post it there. In terms of it doing any good, hell, I lost my illusions about having god-like power so long ago I can hardly remember what it felt like. I just had something to say, I said it as best I could, and that’s the only end of it under my control.
Taking a break now, and I thank you all for contrubuting so much to this disussion in both places!
Thanks, scribe. I really appreciate the effort!
yes, scribe, I think what you did was well worth the reaction I certainly got from them…Now I really know what they think…That in and of itself made the world of difference to me…”pats on the back, there my Friend”
The ugly part of the discussion has moved over to Seve Gilliard’s blog now. It’s winding down, but boy, it got ugly. And being a slow learner, I jumped in. Geesh.
I’ll post the link with the caveat that it is not for anyone who sick of the whole, sorry mess.
http://haloscan.com/tb/stevenewsblog/111863914359022563
Just for your own benefit, and the benefit of your attempts to persuade, it’s really kind of annoying when a person calls for barriers to be broken down and for a healing discussion to being when their sole motive for breaking down said barriers is to the other side can finally see how competely, utterly, 100% wrong they are and how right you are.
I’m not bothered too much, because I think you’re right. But you can’t speak of tearing down walls when you just want a faster path to hectoring, so that they can more easily “listen to you” who know they know what they’re talking about, you know? Again, any biased or “coded” language used in this comment is to emphasize how some people may view your comment; people who aren’t all wrong just as you’re not all right.
do you feel that you KNOW “that [her] sole motive for breaking down said barriers is to the other side can finally see how competely, utterly, 100% wrong they are and how right [she is]?
Why do I hear echoes of a little kid and a schoolmarm here?
I’m wondering if perhaps there were a few words she used that triggered your reaction, rather than the entire post.
Well, she writes:
Sort of implying that people who oppose her viewpoint only do so because they’re brainwashed or playing into the religious rights’ agenda by having a contrary opinion to her’s. Additionally she writes:
All of those pleas for one side to “listen” put forth without a corresponding offer to listen to what the other side’s position is. Obviously people who use those slurs there at the end don’t have much to say; but there are rational people on both sides and people that refuse to listen on both sides.
She calls for unity, but the sort of unity that assumes that one side is completely right and so that unity will naturally come when everyone on the left comes to their senses and realizes the inherent rightness of the author’s position.
I generally agree with the author, but unity can’t come through a plea that people come to their senses and agree with the person making the plea. Both sides have to agree to listen and change to some degree. I didn’t see that, and people who actively disagree with the author’s position are certainly going to notice the lack of a corresponding pledge from the author
Like I said before, any seeming “little kid” or “schoolmarm” echoes here are unintended. I’m just saying that you can’t presume your side is undoubtedly correct and the other side is largely brainwashed when you call for unity of the two sides. I just don’t think that’s effective.
I hope that’s intelligible and polite.
Addison, I am more than willing to listen to anyone elses position when it is offered to me in a respectful way,and when the person talking has some willingness to also listen to me. I agree that the listening and trying to understand needs to come from all of who chosoe to remain involved with this. But I don’t care to apporach this as a debate about who is right and who is wrong, or who is to blame for what. It just was how it was for me, as a woman 1n 1940 and yes, we were ALL brainwashed by the sexist culture of those days. I am looking at sexism today as a barrier that still exists and affects us all, in terms of our being willing to work together toward common goals. Hope this helps clarify.
Very good
To take an extreme example, should the Native Americans and the descendants of the European conquerors/colonisers now come to rapprochement–but only AFTER the Native Americans agree that mistakes were made on both sides?
Sometimes, Addison, one side is ALL wrong or mostly wrong and the other side is ALL right or mostly right.
I believe the controversy over the “pie fight” to be a good example of most of the pro-Kos position (“up yours, feminists!”) being almost entirely wrong and the folk on the other side (“listen to us, we want to be heard”) being almost entirely right.
It takes a good deal of misperception, not to mention nerve, to claim that mistakes were made on both sides and to state or to suggest that both sides share equally in the guilt for the ensuing controversy and rift.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
What’s more, I find it rather appalling that you state that assuming a “hectoring” tone is solidifying the rift–as if it’s the fault of those who were offended by Kos and by others on DKos, and who were asked in no uncertain terms by Mr. Moulitsa himself to leave the site if they didn’t like what he had to say (so much for the “big tent” of the Democratic Party), that the rift continues.
Where is Mr. Moulitsa’s responsibility for healing the rift HE caused? He has assumed none, and you have assigned him none. Mr. Moulitsa has taken not one tiny step, not one, towards making things right. And I predict that he never will, because he intended to rid his site of pesky dissenters and “one issue” folk who are spoiling his paradise. Instead, Mr. Moulitsa has continued to post diary after diary in which he hectors and lectures on the One Way things must be–not sharing his vision and hoping others agree, but attempting to ram it down people’s throats and chasing away anybody who doesn’t agree.
Now, why would he do such a thing? Skip down to my last comment in this diary for a full explanation of my theory as to why Mr. Moulitsa precipitated, and perpetuates, the controversy which is the subject of this diary.
Well, you’re talking about the extreme pro-ad group. Wait, let me rephrase that, the scary and reactionary anti-woman group. There were other people talking about social norms and the right of women to take advantage of those norms to make money by “exploiting” themselves. And there were people arguing against Kos’ role as a gatekeeper of morality. And so on.
These are the people that aren’t 100% wrong and need to be talked with instead of talked to. Not anyone who scoured their brain for Rush Limbaugh talking points or euphemisms for breasts in order to belittle the concerned women.
And I mentioned the tone specifically in regard to the call for unity by the diarist, and the end of the gender wars.
I’ll read your post re Kos’ motivations downthread.
at dKos might have been different during the pie fight if it was realized that the fight revealed a dominant style of communication and problem-solving that may hurt Democrats in elections?
What I observed during the pie fight is that a lot of the prominent posters had a tendency to dismiss the concerns about the ad because they were based on emotion.
I see the biggest problem revealed by the pie fight to be a monolithic adherance to a male approach to both issue identification and supporter connection on dKos that — if representative of the approach of the Democratic party — may cost us the next election as much as it may have cost us the last (see this diary for my argument on this).
In this context, the pie wars are about more than hurt feelings, individual egos, the need for respectful discussion, or the betrayal many progressive women feel when progressive men indicate they don’t care about feminism in more than a token way.
The pie wars are a sign that the largest progressive blog out there doesn’t really respond to the emotional needs of a large chunk of its supporters any better than many Democrats feel the Democratic party responds to theirs.
It was a rehearsal in microcosm for future battles.
That’s why it’s important, and that’s why I applaud you for not just turning away from the fallout, but taking the time to seek solutions.
Golden hammer award to you, katerina. You nailed another one!
That’s one thing you can expect with a young T-preference male. They take forever to learn to value emotions–and until they do, their own are always poorly controlled.
(And yes, lots of F-preference women have the same kind of trouble making good logic-based decisions.)
Thanks for the Golden hammer award. Makes me feel faintly Wagnerian or something. <g>
I was so intrigued by your reference to T-preference males and F-preference females that I had to go look it up. Had heard of Myers-Briggs before, but didn’t know much about it. Now you’ve got me interested enough, I’ll have to learn more.
This comment
Very interesting and perceptive hypothesis. It was women voters shifting to Bush that got him re-elected. What do you want to bet those women voters were Feeling deciders rather than Thinking deciders?
We really need to work on this for 2006.
And the key point being–the kinds of arguments to sway a Feeling decision are different from the kinds that will sway a Thinking decision.
Worse–the men who decided which kinds of arguments to use were all Thinkers–and they went with only the arguments that would work for them–because those were the arguments that they could trust.
The diarist says she is desperate to reach those who hold other views, she asks for their understanding, she asks to understand them . . . I have reviewed her diary closely, and to call it hectoring!
I will charitably presume that you do not know the definition (or the eytomology) of the term . . . especially as you later suggest that she is only “sort of implying. . . .”
I was just about to click on to the next diary when it occurred to me what some of the underlying basis of the recent unpleasantness might be.
“Gender Wars”. Women versus men.
Only it’s not women versus men. The whole struggle is not for the victory of one gender (or race or orientation) over the other. It’s a struggle for egalitarian coexistence.
That is, however, not what a lot of men hear. I know; I used to be like a lot of the jerks in the pie fight debate. Feminists too often complain about what “men” do, and even if everyone in the debate knows that they’re talking about “some men” or “sexist men”, everyone hears “men”, which gets subconsciously translated into “all men”.
It’s tiring to hear that all the time, especially when you’ve made an effort to rise above all that. In my case, enough of the women in my life have been severely harmed by actual male violence, sexual and otherwise, that I understand the wounded frustration that leads to lashing out intemperately. Most men, however, don’t have that experience. More than likely, there are plenty of women in their lives who could convey it, but who are afraid to speak.
The long and the short of it is that, aside from the Grade A jerks who are never going to listen under any circumstances, there are a lot of men who are simply ignorant of what women and minorities go through, but reaching them is going to require a different approach. For me, it was seeing the issue as being bigger than “just” a women’s issue. Sexism has never touched me directly, but it has hurt me indirectly but no less profoundly. Bigotry damages everyone. To get through to the ignorant, we have to find ways to reveal the hidden costs of bigotry.
It shouldn’t be this way, but it is. It’s not fair, but life seldom is. They should make the effort to open their eyes, but they won’t. We have to make that effort, to remain calm and rational, to feel compassion for the ignorance of others even when they are spiteful to us. Sometimes, there is nothing you can do but walk away from the verbal abuse and refuse to escalate. But we have to keep walking back and continuing the dialog.
I’m not saying there should be a reverse exodus to dKos, mind you. That blog may be radioactive for some time to come. But we do need to keep talking as long as we still have that right.
eodell, you have brought up a really good point I want to think about some more. Without realizing it, the way I titled this diary does set up a “male vs female” frame that I can see (now) doesn’t leave any “middle” for men or women to just be people. One could be left feeling they had to “chose sides” and yes, I can see (now) that it places all men (and all women) in the same general catagories. I did not intend that message but I may have sent it anyway. Oh the power of words to distort meaning, as well as to convey it.
I have some problem with seeing men who are invested in understanding the womans view of sexism as “ignorant.” (Too many use that word to mean “dumb.”) I think it’s just harder than hell to move close enough into someone elses life to “KNOW” how it feels. Maybe the willingness to try to understand how it is for each other, is all we need to come up with. What do you think?
Well, I certainly meant “ignorance” in the dictionary sense of the word. It’s almost cliche — or at least, it was — for reporters to go undercover to gauge the reactions of landlords, loan officers, hiring directors and others to customers with identical qualifications but differing genders and races. They never had to go far to come up with the landlord who had a great rent deal for the white man, but no vacancies for the black man. Or worse.
Middle class white guys don’t see what goes on not because they’re all blinkered, but because they simply aren’t present or, at worse, aren’t paying attention. You might see the bullshit gender dance at a busy auto mechanic if you’re paying attention, but interviewing for jobs, applying for loans, and negotiating for apartments all happen in private.
Now, the tendency a lot of white guys have to believe that women and minorities are just exaggerating is bigotry, but it’s largely unconscious, and persists in part because so much conscious bigotry is covert. There’s also a general tendency for people to want to believe that society is a better place than it actually is. That’s why I miss those muckrakers of old — they were good at opening people’s eyes to the rot they’d rather not see, but couldn’t deny once it was out in the open.
I have a vague recollection of a study when American whites were asked how much money it would take for them to have their physical characteristics changed to look African. The average was a million dollars. People may not have a verbal awareness of the costs of being ‘Them’ but they do have a sub-verbal awareness.
It beats my pair of Aces how to bring the sub-verbal awareness out such that it can be cognized.
The attacks against the women and men who objected to the attitudes and views expressed in the pie fight, for example, sounded very much like GOP attacks against liberals who object to class exploitation issues.
Liberals observe class warfare being perpetrated by the right, and the right accuses the left of waging class warfare.
Women observe gender bias in attitudes and policies of the left/progressive/Democrat (take your pick) community, and the loudest voices of that community strike back, accusing women of waging gender warfare.
The anger I feel towards their attidues is as strong as my anger towards the wingnuts. I don’t feel inclined to endorse one group of misogynists simply because they dress it up in liberal language.
If I may also add, that it’s not just dKos … many of the liberal sites that I frequent are still debating the pie/gender issue to this day. (A doozey erupted on Steve Gilliard’s blog yesterday/last night.)
It’s very disheartening to witness the debate as it spirals into such ugliness in the posts. Civil discussion seems to break down into gender insults that are personally directed, and name calling and hurt feelings.
That (1) the debate continues and (2) it quickly becomes emotional are the biggest indicators that the issue is truly monumental.
So, I guess what I’m asking is, that while it’s good to keep talking about it b/c it’s obviously a very important issue to many people, when will it become less acrimonious? Or, will it ever?
O.
I honestly don’t know, Olivia. It is peasant when we can carve out small “oasis” periods,at times like this, when, for awhile anyway, there can be some respectful two way effective dialogue. I do admit to being discouraged that it is necessary to be still having this dialogue at all, since it’s one I’ve been engaged in one way or another, for over half a century now.
That’s a good word for it. Booman certainly seems like a wonderful oasis, where well thought out posts are pondered for long periods of time, and disagreement does not result in personal attack.
Do you think that this is a problem though, because we’re basically preaching to ourselves about this issue. I mean, the people that had a problem w/ the tone of the discussion at dKos came here by-and-large.
It seems to me as I commented above, that in those blogs where the discussion begins anew between people w/ differing opinions on the matter, it continues to break down.
I guess that’s what you’re saying though. It’s discouraging that it doesn’t seem to change… I don’t know.
Yeah, Steve Gilliard exacerbated the situation when he said that he always thought feminism was rather stupid. Those were not his exact words, but they were enough to start a real donnybrook with women and RedDan and Grand Moff Texan saying the most unpalatable shyt imaginable. It didn’t have to go down the way it did, but it did.
And I’m pretty sure that Gilliard wanted to deliberately start a fight with this egregious putdown, while denying anything remotely resembling a purge occurred on DK, BUT helping yet another exodus from his readers.
The only reason I have to base this is that Steve can get pretty lippy at times and won’t give a damn how it comes out, or make nice with anyone around these issues. This time, I think, he was crude and the rest of the men (AND a couple of pro-Kos/Gilliard women) idiotic. He wanted to make sure that everyone saw his loathing.
There are true believers around Kos and Gilliard, and when you have true believers, look out. They refuse to see shyt because if they are wrong, Kos and Gilliard are wrong, too. It’s a vicious circle and divisive as hell.
Somehow I think we as liberals/progressives taken on some of the wingnuttery’s worst aspects…
I’m glad I’m not the only one who noticed the cult of personality developing around Kos. It’s seemed to me for a while that his minor celebrity status has gone to his head. The over-the-top stuff about blogs being everything short of the second coming isn’t helping either.
Not to bring that particular post into this one too much, but it did seem like SG chose his words to deliberately hurt and stifle discussion.
And it’s interesting … maybe informative is better … to note the conduct of posters as they move between blogs when they discuss this issue. In regards to comments scattered throughout this posting, it does seem that the ‘action’ or ‘response’ (not sure which word best describes it) of the host permits or sets the tone for the resulting discussion.
And the discussion here at Booman on this issue has been heads and tails above in the civility department.
it does seem that the ‘action’ or ‘response’ (not sure which word best describes it) of the host permits or sets the tone for the resulting discussion.
Abso-effing-lutely! Which is why I hate it when some people bat their eyelashes and pretend everybody’s just helpless to change it.
Excuse me. You’re in my house? Then keep a civil tongue in your head or I’ll hand you your hat. Treat my friends and family with respect. Wait your turn. Don’t shove the old people. Don’t put your feet on the furniture. And keep your dirty pictures away from my kids.
Why is this place so different? Because BooMan established one cardinal rule and expects everybody to abide by it: Don’t Be a Prick.
Kansas – I was trying to be diplomatic with my wording, but yeah, my personal observation of each of the blogs that I frequent that posted on this issue, was of a correlation between host tone and commentor tone.
I agree w/ you: Don’t be a prick is a good rule to have!
Diplomatic is good!
I guess I feel strongly about the question of a host’s responsibilities, huh? <grin>
Can we write it Old Testament style?
Thou shalt not be a prick.
Actually, I prefer Thou shalt not be an arsehole because “prick” discriminates against men…so there! But it’s the same sentiment. The vitriol comes from the top down–and, in the case of Kos, the spew of venom was not accidental but intentional (a deliberate “purge” of his site…see my comment below for a further explanation).
I think you’re correct that the tone of the host makes a difference, but let’s just say that I don’t think that’s the whole deal here.
I just went and had a look. Quite the illuminating discussion.
I’ve thought for a while now that Marisacat, over at LSF, is a smart, perceptive woman. Recently she’s been rising even higher in my estimation.
Grand Moff Texan. Sort of off-topic, but I just have to say I wanted to muffle the Moff the other day while he was pontificating over here. That guy always sounds so very pleased with himself. Is there a verb form for ubiquitous? Well, allow me to invent one. He just ubiquitates all over the place.
What the hell is a “moff,” anyway?
“Grand Moff” is a Star Wars (episode IV) reference; it was the title of Peter Cushing’s character who commanded the first Death Star, his full name was “Grand Moff Tarkan” although I don’t think it’s ever used in the dialogue.
[this non-sequitor post comes free of charge from someone who wishes she had something more substantial to add, but is enjoying the discussion anyway]
Well, THAT clears up a few things.
Thanks, Janet. Is moff just a made-up word for the movie? What would you make of a user who chooses that particular name for himself?
blksista: my reply to you is way, way down there.
…way, way down where?
Well, it was around here somewhere. Attached to your comment, the reply appeared at the then bottom of the page. Now I remember neither your comment nor mine. It’s a pity because I’m sure mine was – as always – thoughtful, informative and profound.
I am not involved in this fight and don’t even know all the detail reg. DK, but what do you think would happen if someone posted a tell us about you diary there.
Just curious….would it make a difference???
A microcosm example:
There was / is a group that is known as the Cheers & Jeers irregulars over there. A friendly, funny, snarky and totally irreverent group that posted every day in the Cheers & Jeers column by Bill in Portland Maine. The group has it’s on yahoo group and chat room.
For 3-6 months I considered myself one of the “irregulars” and participated in the chat room and Mon-Fri diaries. I have and still do email several on the site and consider them friends. Some have moved here after the recent troubles.
When the pie wars broke out there were people on both sides of the issue. There was a tremendous sense of betrayal to see people I had spent so much time online with become so vicious in their comments. I was told by one to go find another site for my fight. Another wrote multiple diaries being proud of being a sexist.
I mean no offense to Bill or the others that worked hard for calm and understanding. There are many that are truly caring people. The betrayal was painful and deep by some.
So no – it’s too late for a Welcome Wagon diary. There are undertows in the perceived calm waters – and they are ruthless.
I guess they could have used a welcome wagon a long time ago, but I was thinking more of a just tell us about you one, not to welcome anyone, I guess, but just to talk to each other a bit. Well it was just a thought and I really don’t know the situation over there in that other town.
Maybe the prob. is that it is just toooo big now and needs to split into more than one site…That is my thought. 50,000 people on one site, that’s a lot to have try to get along..
Kinda like real life, huh, you think someone is your friend and bud, then one day they turn on you…
Shortly after resigning my commission from the British Army and accepting a teaching position in the United States.
I rented a house from a lady who asked me if I had any friends in Santa Monica.
“No,” I replied, “I’m afraid I don’t know a soul.”
“Well,” the lady replied dourly, “if you want a friend here…buy a dog.”
But actually there are friends of the two-legged, descended-from-apelike-creatures variety who are steadfast and true. When you have troubles like the ones at DKos, you learn who your true friends are very quickly.
Thanks for sharing your own specific example.
I used to use it as a sig over there, but paraphrasing:
The true measure of a person isn’t how they treat people that agree with them. Its how they treat people that don’t.
I’m all in favor of the welcome wagon.
That said, the ability to hold up wonderfully flattering discussion about shared beliefs or even just friendly chit-chat isn’t a useful metric for determining who’s a good person, or even who’s polite.
I’m sure welcome wagons and community centers are great tools for socialization and normalization into the community. Its a chance to educate folks informally on expected behaviors, and the emphasis on respect for others.
And that’s all well and good. But its a person’s behavior during a conflict that means the most. And if we don’t hold folks accountable for it, that’s our loss as a community.
If the person you shared puppy and pootie pics with so joyfully in the morning rips into someone in the afternoon — and you join their side of the argument because “person A is a nice kind person who loves their kid and dog”, then all the community building will amount only to clique-forming. And that’d be a real shame.
..to babtsit. See you tomorrow if nobody burns the place down and someone is still hanging around here.
We took the matches away from Armando.
Here’s the thinking:
DailyKos is a partisan site representing the “best interests” of the Democratic Party. The people posting there represent the Democratic “netroots” and the Democratic lawmakers and other chiefs must pay attention to what is posted on DailyKos or suffer the wrath of the “netroots”.
Now, when the Democratic big shots go to Kos and see diaries about feminist and other “minority” issues, Kos is afraid that they will pay attention to those issues…issues which Kos has made clear he does NOT favour.
Therefore–those views, and more importantly, the people eloquently and consistently voicing them on DailyKos, must be swept away to a less popular venue (and yes, it is true that BoomanTribune is, at this time, not as popular as DailyKos). Out of sight, out of mind of the Democratic big shots.
I saw a similar purge at the Smirking Chimp a few months ago, and now we have reports that Steve Gilliard may also be orchestrating a “clean sweep” of his site.
In other words, it’s no accident that Kos insulted so many people on his site and explicitly told them to leave if they didn’t like his views–and has since done nothing to mend fences. Of all the words Kos wrote in that famous inflammatory front page diary, none are more instructive as to his intention than these: Feel free to be offended. Feel free to claim that I’m somehow abandoning “progressive principles” by running the ad. It’s a free country. Feel free to storm off in a huff. Other deserving bloggers could use the patronage..
I agree that everyone who is against the Republicans, and the American Taliban which they empower, SHOULD stand shoulder-to-shoulder against this common enemy. But it is Kos, and others like him, who have chosen to divide the forces at this crucial juncture. The blame falls on him, not us.
Wow. I mean, I read it “live” when it happened. But to revisit it days after the fact, and see again that things were actually worse than I recalled…
“feel free to storm off in a huff” ???
Excuse me.
Ahem. Sorry Charlie, you’re a blogger, you’re a service provider. I get bad service, I change providers. Having the former provider throw a snit as I leave isn’t exactly making me question my decision.
How long before they sell Kos flavored kool-aid?
I really have the feeling, based on what both of you have written above, that in order for the Dems to win the White House, they have to purge the Party of progressives who ‘spoil’ things for the rest of them who are just plain liberals.
Starting with Kos…Gilliard…Smirking Chimp….
Don’t they know that we’re a part of the net roots??
I really hope they have value to the party.
They have large audiences. That’s something.
But if they only use that to turn away new voices and new faces that seek to join the struggle, they’ll ultimately be self defeating — for us all.
We certainly can’t stand back and let them be the defacto voice of the liberal “netroots”, thats for damn sure. Voices, sure. But not the voice.
They had their chance. They decided pushing personal agendas took priority over being a clearinghouse. That’s fine, I’m no longer convinced a single clearinghouse could do justice to the entire netroots.
We need s strident agressive bunch to counter the dittoheads and coulter-lovers.
We need calm, rational voices to speak to the independents who tune out “both sides” of the partisan bickering and posturing.
We need nurturing and forgiving voices to accept wayward Dems back into the flock, not excoriate them for past votes they may now regret.
We are the party of many voices.
If the goal is just to be the party of the one new voice that’s better than the Republican’s one old voice, I’m not sure we’ll ever find our way to addressing all the problems that need our attention.
We are the party of many voices.
That is exactly right. That is both the strength — and the weakness — of the Democratic Party. We have many voices. We have many issues, and we have many concerns. We are the party of the Big Tent.
But for that to succeed, we need to be willing to acknowledge that every person under that Big Tent has a voice, and a legitimate reason to feel their issue (or issues) are important. We may not agree that it’s THE most important — everyone is going to have their own priorities, based on their own values and their own life experiences. But if we start with that all important first step, which is to acknowledge that the other person has valid reasons for believing their issue is important, for feeling the way they do about it, even if some of the rest of us do not — then we can begin to find the common ground where most of us can agree, and maybe get something accomplished.
We are the party of many voices, too often all talking at once and forgetting to listen. But the Republicans are an echo machine, where the issue list is never questioned, and dissent is tantamount to treason. I know which model I prefer.
Don’t they know that we’re a part of the net roots??
Ya, but what they want from the netroots is, in the words of one especially abusive Democratic party consultant is “an army of dittoheads”.
Well, I think it’s clear he wanted to pare his site down to discussing mainly electoral politics and not be “spread too thin” or whatever, but I don’t buy the idea that he wanted feminist issues to be “off the radar” in the way or for the reasons you suggest.
We cannot know what was in his mind — but from his words and earlier ones, I tend to agree with others above. I’ve seen similar actions too many times, and every time, it was to focus the followers on an agenda. And he has said he wants this off the agenda, or restated so as to make it almost a hidden agenda.
So it’s back to the “women groups” for me to fight for the agenda of many in the majority of Dems — women — who also are the majority of voters, so we can win over some more . . . because the more progressive women we get in power, the more the guys will have to come around to survive.:-)
with you Cream City……back to the real group. I am so ticked about this gross abuse that something positive and a whole lot more needed for everybody than Dailykos or Smirking Chimp is going to born and it will take over the netbase. I will do everything in my power to see to that!
It may or may not have been that calculating, but the simple fact of the matter is that Kos made it clear that he isn’t interested in feminism. He’s been making it clear for some time, too, and feminism isn’t the only progressive position he’d like to disappear. Remember when Kid Oakland bailed out because of his racist remarks about some party official or other who was a black woman? Remember the remark he made the other day about abortion being “horrible“?
I hate to keep banging on the feminist connection, partly because I think the egalitarian issue is both broader and deeper than that, but the “moderate” Dem position — which is what Kos has staked out — on abortion is a cynical smokescreen. If you take the position that abortion is “horrible”, how the hell can you really support the availability of abortion? It’s a self-contradictory stance. It’s horrible, but it’s not murder? Bullshit. That’s just the “moderate” way of trying not to alienate women voters until the election is over so you can sell them out later. It’s the same bullshit dance that Democratic presidential candidates make when they suddenly remember black voters exist and make an appearance before the NAACP six months before the election — leaving enough time for white voters to forget it happened before November. Or the meetings with gay organizations that happen twelve to eighteen months before the election. Or the meetings with union leaders that typically happen six months before the meetings with gays.
Dems have gotten so comfortable with their core constituencies that simply recognizing that they exist is the full extent of their consideration when drafting the party platform. What initiatives did John Kerry have for gays? For blacks? For hispanics? For women? For religious minorites?
Well, nothing. Unless “Hello, my name is John Kerry,” is an initiative. None of us rise to the level of even being tokens in Dem strategy these days.
So when Kos and his ilk start repeating their mealy-mouthed abortion mantra, “safe, legal, and rare”, I want to puke. That’s right up there with publicly wishing gays weren’t so blatant, or referring to a racial minority as “a credit to his race”. It’s a weak effort to avoid alienating vast swaths of society that you don’t really care about outside of election day. Kos is committed to his Republican Lite strategy in everything but name.
I don’t know about you, but I’d rather have liberal Democrats losing a few honest races than conservative Democrats winning. There is a lot more to the political process than elections. Even a failed run can change the public political discourse. And we need that change like the Sahara needs rain. Even if we take back the White House in 2008 and a chunk of Congress between here and there, it’s not going to mean a damn thing if we can’t generate the social change to back it up. Kos thinks that everything can be reduced to the balance of politicians in Washington like this was a bloody baseball game. None of that matters if the balance of public opinion is unchanged.
That’s the real victory of the Republican revolution: they’ve brainwashed our leaders into believing its about winning elections. That’s just the tail wagging the dog. It’s about — if I may be pardoned this terrible phrase — winning the hearts and minds of the American people. Kos is not going to do that. Ever. Creative minds on the left are, if anyone is.
Oh how I agree with with what you have just said. He absolutely wants libertarians and independents and greens to fall right into place with is ideals of what he thinks is going on with the party…I pretty much had that figured out in an early stage of this. But I also figured that as an independent, I had to choose sides in order to fight…and I do..I want to get things done…not only on womens issues, which btw affect men so much more than they will ever admit or know to begin with, but on wages, hunger, enviorment, well, hell you just name it…it is there for our fighting for and keeping. Actually, why, is my question, is it that we have to constantly fight to get something, when, after we win it, is way beyond me. I won the right to have credit and I won the right to be professional and so forth…This nonsence has got to stop and with the higher teir as you call it..or we will be fighting for all of our lives….I choose to guard it/them..what ever it is..but I do not intend on giving my right as an American up for anyone any time any place. I am not asking them to do it, so why are they asking me to do it..It is my civil right to be a woman and to have my abortion, if I choose to. As it stand now, the law says so. Their means do not justify their ends…anyway, that is how I see it…I will fight for a mans right to/for things just as much as my own. He has got to realize this too for when we stop fighting for his rights, he will be gone in a heart beat. It takes us both here to get the job done. I tend to think like blksistr..she has certainly had her share of fights, I would think. I will stand with her any old day and I am white. Even if I was purple I would still do it for it it is the right thing to do…
The reason we keep having to fight is that we didn’t win. We didn’t get the ERA. The Civil Rights Act is just statutory law instead of a constitutional amendment. Everything we’ve won has been a stopgap measure with the hope that we’d eventually get it carved in the bedrock of the Constitution.
Somewhere along the way, we rested on our laurels while the so-called conservatives worked assiduously to make good their losses. It was probably unavoidable. Just putting up with the endless struggle is exhausting. We had to rest.
On the other hand, we did make some amazing gains in terms of public opinion. No Republican president could get away with saying the crap Kos did last week. Most of the ugly stuff that still goes on is covert precisely because we managed to convince enough people that it was wrong. That’s a tremendous accomplishment for a single century. There wasn’t social progress like that in the entire span of human history before then.
The challenge for us today is to motivate an entire generation that grew up after the great social struggles of the 20th century. They don’t understand why we still fight because they don’t know how bad it can be.
My 26 year old, bless her heart, works in a clinic and boy does she get it. But then I took her to pro-choice/women’s rights marches from the time she was in a stroller and we talked about the struggles the whole time she was growing up. I wish more people would do the same.
I think abortions should be safe, legal, and rare too. It would lower health care costs. Most of the reasons I’m for widespread sale of the morning after pill is to quash the abortion rate. I don’t know how I feel about abortion because I don’t know if “God” — or souls, or whatever — exists or not. But I’m for choice even in my most faithful moments because we’ve got free will either way and as a male it’ll never be my choice to make.
You can hate abortion and be pro-choice.
well, I do understand your position. I was just pointing out an opinion..I want as few abortions as possible; however, we have to make them as safe and rare as posible. I believe this whole situation goes to more of education for the most part and that ensues preventive measures too. I am in the health care business and I believe in prevention as best as possible. To be educated is so very important to everyone…all over the world..I know circ., customs, standards vary from country to country, but education is so very necessary…With this come responsibility by all involved, including the patient and the supporting factors of them. There is way much work yet to be done and I hope we as a society can get to doing this instead of preventionin all that this administration want to do. ie, take condoms and such away from the ppl. Yes they do need to know the preventitive measures but then human nature is always to be given a break here too..and as well as customs etc. This is yet a whole diary of its own. Hope you get what I am trying to say.
I do not want my right, given to me by law, to have an abortion that is safe for me.
I see them trying to make many in America and not all of us are women, BTW, to take our rights away. making us feel less revelent or human. There is something to be said here, if you ask me. Anyhow thanks for your opinion..this is how we do things together…
After spending a long and sleepless night with a baby who thinks sleep is a waste of good crying time, I am reminded that getting a baby made and born is really the easiest part. It’s what comes after that, for the next 18 years, that totally alters lives, womens especially, and requires 24/7/356 attention and energy.
As long as a society (in general) continues to regard all aspects of contraception, baby making and baby raising, as primarily the responsibility of women I will fight like hell against allowing anyone to dictate my basic human right to decide if, when or how I handle that responsibility.
Which is why I keep asking how. HOW can we bring progressive men and women together well enough to fight off the rabid rights attempts to do so? Along with so many other potential losses of personal liberties in the works now?
It won’t get done by by fighting and refusing to listen to everyone, thats for sure.
that abortion is “horrible”, how the hell can you really support the availability of abortion?
I do it every day. Abortion is a necessary evil. I think it should be readily available, but I think we should do everything possible to a) prevent the unwanted pregnancy first and b) to make alternatives to abortion as attractive as possible and even c) make sure everyone who is looking into getting an abortion knows what the alternatives are before making a final decision.
This might sound like I’m in favor of delay. Well, I am, but only for perhaps an hour or so. I’d like to see some sort of computer-based questionnaire that an applicant can take. If she knows about the option of (for example) open adoption and can explain how it might work for her– that’s sufficient.
I consider myself solidly pro-choice. Because there are worse things than abortion. Coathanger abortions, for example.
And you disagree with me for what reasons, Addison?
I stated my reasons for theorising as I have quite clearly.
Could you please expound on your statement?
I disagree with you cause I do. We’re talking about guesswork and psychic analysis of why someone did something. Your guess is as good as mine, and I’m guessing something different. So I disagree with you.
Great day in the morning!
“Because you say so?” That explanation doesn’t work unless you are the parent of a two-year-old child.
I have reasons and stated them quite clearly; I took the available evidence and analysed it.
I take it that your refusal to do so either means you don’t want to analyse the available evidence to draw your conclusions, or are unable to. Either way, you have a “because I say so” argument against my solidly-constructed one.
A word of constructive criticism, Addison: you’re not going to persuade many people to your point of view with “because I said so”. This isn’t DailyKos and that doesn’t work here.
Dude, don’t be so tense and don’t patronize me like that, and don’t pull a rhetorical “appeal to what works on Daily Kos” either. I’m not trying to convince you. I have no interest in convincing you. I’m telling you my opinion. I’m trying to get you to realize that we’re talking about the inner working of someone’s mind, and that based on what I’ve seen I have a different guess about what those inner workings are motivated by. I disagree with you because I do.
Repeating yourself is not an argument. “I say so because I say so.” Do you not realise how lamentably absurd that sounds?
You were the one who was patronising–“because I say so, that’s why”–and you are the one who is guessing. I am not “guessing”; I am analysing based on a wealth of evidence. You refuse to provide any analysis, and it’s quite clear that you won’t because you can’t find any evidence to support your opinion.
I look at the facts and base my opinion on them; you do the reverse, forming an opinion and then collecting facts (or, in this case, failing to collect any facts) which support your already-formed opinion. Your logical process is the same faulty one that the Bushies used to mislead the country into war–they decided they wanted to invade Iraq and then found the facts that supported that opinion. It’s a dangerous way to operate.
Now, we have made it clear that I am interested in persuading people and you are not. Persuading people is, I thought, the point of arguing–if you are not interested in swaying anyone to your side, the point of stating your (uninformed) opinion is ____? To hear yourself talk? To do what, exactly?
And yes, you are using DKos arguing techniques in a different forum. I recognise them all too well.
Ok, this conversation is over.
Thank God.
i mean no disrespect to either of you, but i have read many posts by you both, and have much admiration for the content you both have contributed.
i’m not talking about a specific post, or more about one of you than another, just that it makes me a little sad to see you both go at it hammer and tongs. 🙁
anyways, cheers —
I agree with you goldfinch. Perhaps you two above could go to the froggy cafe and settle this….that was one intention of the diary(conflict resolution)…should I put up a version 2 of the diary because it is getting quite big…
This is exactly the crap that helped kill the New Left.
Am I doomed to repeat 1969 over & over & over & over & over yet again?
“Shut Up, Sit Down, and I’ll tell you what issues are important to you.”
Excuse the hell outta me but who died and left you God?
{Rant deleted}
I don’t think he set out to purge feminists initially. I think he failed to understand the arguments of those who were defending NARAL, and honestly believed they were irrational fanatics who were harming the cause of abortion rights and the Democratic Party in general.
So he took it upon himself to lead them to reason, using a series of diaries on choice and other ‘single issues’ that had some valid points, but whose underlying purpose was to take potshots at NARAL and anyone else not ready to put all their eggs in the Democratic Party basket.
When being belittled failed to enlighten anyone — and when he felt his authority challenged over the pie ad — then he got frustrated and decided it was time for a purge.
When being belittled failed to enlighten anyone — and when he felt his authority challenged over the pie ad — then he got frustrated and decided it was time for a purge.
Yes, I think that’s essentially correct. But I would note that the ‘feminists have cooties and are destroying the Democratic party’ attitude and the refusal to communicate has been there from the get-go.
I think the purge was deliberate and connected to his ceaseless promotion of extremely conservative Catholic Senate candidates as the miracle which will save the Democratic party. It’s a strategy grounded in disrespect.
…of Kos’s political aims with respect to reproductive rights as I am of his personal views of feminists. He honestly seems to think that his various strategies will eventually get everything for everyone, and there won’t be a need for real compromise. At least, he’s always tried to make the case that his proposals would benefit reproductive rights in the long run.
But I see the feminists-have-cooties attitude as a much bigger factor. As blatant as it’s been at times, he’s never been able to admit it or address it. He’s pretty thick-skinned when it comes to most other criticism, but that one touches a nerve you only see in those who are in serious denial. And he wanted to get rid of anyone who threatened to touch it.
shadowthief, i wish i could rate your thoughts on why kos might have posted that — i wish i could rate it a fourTHOUSAND.
cheers —
Over at dKos, artemisia posted a diary on sexism. At one point, RepublicanTaliban wrote: “I’ll wade in…<snip> …two things stand out to me about your post.
My answer was also relevant to this diary, so I’m posting it here as well.
Hey, the water’s nice today!
In an informal way, you are doing exactly what I was suggesting in this diary.
I’d like to begin trying to answer these–but I’m afraid whatever I come up with will be pretty roundabout. Interestingly, I suspect that they are part of the same issue.
(Starting with #1) I wish that we were dealing with a single word here, and we could use Elgin’s attribution tool to figure out some answers for you. For example; here’s one of her word examples:
violence
Men | Women
+force | +force
+intense | +intense
+deliberate | +deliberate
+negative | +negative
+avoidable | +harmful
I don’t think just assigning attributes to the concept will solve the issue, but it might at least give us a start. I’m going to flip the sex order, just because I’d otherwise need to leave a big empty column on the left.
sexist ad
Women | Men
sexy | sexy
appeals primarily to men | ?
the context is one where sex is not wanted | ?
I think hink was speaking a very important truth inside his snark, when he suggested using his penis as a puppet. Women generally fail to recognize that men do not have voluntary control over erections. I may be able to understand this a bit better than some women, because as a person with ADHD, I have come to realize that I do not have voluntary control over my attention –in much the same way that men do not have voluntary control over their penises. I can choose my environment in such a way as to make my attention more or less likely to occur–but I cannot simply turn it on or off.
But one thing that seems pretty clear–men and women generally react very differently to mixing up sex and work. I’m beginning to suspect that neither gender has a clear idea of why. So I’m gonna guess.
Caveat–I’m thinking in socio-biological terms here (“the selfish gene”)–and painting with a broad brush.
Women and sex
Male biology generally has no “reason” to turn sexuality off in a social situation. I’d guess that most men are familiar with situations in which sexual arousal is very uncommon–but these situations are not typically part of daily life.
Women, however, do have a major biological reason to turn sexuality off–and one that IS part of daily life. Kids. Meeting the needs of one’s here-and-now child is far more important to one’s ultimate genetic success than a sexual encounter that may or may not pay off in future offspring. (And one might expect that women who have raised children are particularly attuned to this.)
In other words, for women, sometimes sex is just a bloody nuisance, getting in the way of a much more important job.
Women naturally separate sex from nurturing and loving. So do men–but differently. Most women feel that UNLESS sex is both nurturing and loving–we don’t want it.
Since nothing about the pie ads is either nurturing or loving, and since our purpose in coming to kos had nothing to do with sex–we found the ad to be of no value. Furthermore, insofar as it distracted the men from the important stuff–it was BAD.
Men and nurturance
Men, mostly because of the way they have been raised, often go through life coping with a “nurturance deficit”. For some reason, only women are “allowed” to hug men, and to offer them comfort.
In America today, for a man to be emotionally needy is psychologically risky. Like an ill or injured animal, he must hide his problem from others, lest he be perceived to be “weak”, “vulnerable”, and/or “legitimate prey.”
However, a man who shows an interest in sex is not showing vulnerability to other men. And because sex is what it is, along with the procreation comes a generous dose of nurturance and love.
Mixing a bit of sex into the workplace, then, makes the workplace a friendlier place–to men.
Who benefits from a nurturance deficit?
Behind the pie wars lies one key thing–the different ways that men and women perceive sex in relationship to nurturance.
American culture suffers from a nurturance deficit. Corporations (and Theocrats) are very happy with this–the needier people are, the more easily they can be convinced to buy stuff.
So our fighting the Pie Wars has hurt ourselves–and benefited our enemies. If we learn from this relatively non-bloody battle, perhaps we can end the culture-wide Gender Wars which feed blood to the CorpoTheocrat Vampires.
babies and breasts
This is another issue where the older women are sensitized. Especially back in the 70s, before the medical profession had done and studied the research, common wisdom was that “formula is just as good”.
One of my neighbors suggested that I was some kind of freak–because “even my dog weaned her puppies at 6 weeks”. (We won’t go into the detail that her dog’s pregnancy was only 6 weeks.)
Social disapproval for breastfeeding was intense–and looking back, I suspect that one of the prime driving forces behind the intensity was simple envy: “Why should the baby get it when I can’t?”
It’s also worth considering who benefited from that social attitude. (Can anyone spell n-e-s-t-l-e-s?)
giving and getting
All too often, men and women get into a tug of war over sex. Men who nurture their women rarely find themselves deprived of sex. A woman who feels confident in herself, and valued for her whole self (rather than just for a few temporarily-appealing body parts) is a woman who enjoys sex with her partner.
The counter to this is equally true–a man who feels confident in himself (who doesn’t “need” the approval of others in order to like himself) will have no difficulty getting and receiving nurturing as needed during daily life–and will be able to comfortably wait to act on his sexual impulses.
Now what?
It seems to me that the main issue here is one of creating a more nurturant society. (As the Crawford village idiot put it, we need to “make the pie higher”!)
Nurturance for one should NEVER be misunderstood to mean LESS nurturance for another.
I find myself guessing that some of the resentment to the idea of getting rid of the pie ads had to do with some younger men feeling that doing so might take something away from them. Not the ad itself, so much as the warm fuzzy feelings that young men instinctively associate with sexual interest.
(And ending with #2) There’s also this cultural dynamic of older women telling little boys “not now”. It’s only fair that BOTH girls and boys should have the right to grow up in a culture that accepts them for what they are. (We don’t have time or knowledge here and now to teach every woman teacher how to work with instead of against the natural learning and development styles of young boys–but that issue is extremely important if we wish to actually end the Gender Wars.)
I’d like to ask the guys to react to this last idea. What do women need to understand about men that would help both of us when women need to take the lead or when men need to do the healing?
Just as you Good Guys don’t like to be confused with the Bad Guys who hurt women–and just as you are willing to do what you have to in order to help injured women heal themselves–so there are lots of Good Women out here who don’t like being blamed for what some other woman did years ago to a young boy –and who will gladly offer what help we can to men who are willing to face and heal from their abuse issues.
I came in late to the difficulties, but couldn’t avoid them once it became clear how strongly many of the people who I’ve come to respect felt about it all.
I even finally wrote a diary of my own on the subject, and it was an eye-opening experience.
I guess I was living in my own little dKos bubble, because I had never done or said anything that raised such hackles and generated such vitriol as that diary.
I was, quite frankly, stunned. I wasn’t sure of where to go or what to do for a while. The thread in that diary reminded me of some wingnut sites I’ve been to (even that term, ‘wingnut,’ is debasing, isn’t it?), with their intense name-calling and black/white thinking.
And now reading your thoughtful diary and so many of the similarly thoughtful responses, the answer that makes the most sense to me is also getting more clear.
I’m not into new-age thinking or language, and I generally don’t read magazines like Women’s Day or Good Housekeeping, but just an hour or so ago I came across an article about Wayne Dyer and ‘the power of intention.’
I googled my way to his offical web site and read a little more. In the end, I guess you can’t argue too much with somebody who’s figured out a way to live in Maui.
That says it for me. As I look at some of the more negative comments from that diary, I’m struck by how futile it is to argue with people who make rude comments, to get them to change their mind. It even seems like the harder I try, the harder they resist.
So, I think I’m coming to a couple of answers:
That’s what I’m gonna try, anyway.
Thanks for posting the link to your diary, RubDMC. I had missed it originally, and you’re right — it was eye-opening.
That’s what I’m gonna try, anyway.
Me, too. I read the diary and by the end I was thinking, “Who are these people? And why did I ever think I belonged here?”
I started to read the comments to your diary and came across this remark by RichardG:
The add must stay and the moderates who enjoy the add or who have no problem with the add should stay and everyone should work together to find a mainstream message that will give the Democratic party a majority. (emphasis added)
This is exactly what’s wrong with Kos-style thinking. We don’t want a mainstream message; we want to change the mainstream.
That’s the division between Kos-philes and Kos-foes. The former want power, and the latter want change.
thing RichardG said in the comments. If you are suffering from low blood pressure, just use your “find” function to read his comments and it will cure your problem in no time flat. No don’t. He’s not worth it.
I don’t even know where to begin expressing my anger at his attitude, but I’ll stick with this one of his comments,
“However, I do believe that women who complain about the “objectification of women” really actually hate men.
Women are sex objects along with being many other things that make them who they are.
To deny a womens sexuality is to deny reality. Men like to look at women and women should not be offended by it.”
It just makes me so damn tired. 35 years ago when the term “sex object” was much in use, the women in my circle of friends were saying, “I don’t want to be a sex object.” The men said, “Why not? I wish someone would treat me like a sex object.”
Of course we were talking past each other. We women were hearing “sex object and the men were hearing “sex object.”
We were trying to say, I don’t want to be treated like a thing. An object. I don’t want to have sex with a man who would be just as happy with one of those blow-up plastic dolls – or who wouldn’t even notice if I got out of bed and slipped one of those dolls into it – if only those dolls felt the same during sex. That the only reason that they even bother with actual human women for sex is that the technology for plastic doll manufacture hasn’t made that possible yet.
They heard, women don’t like sex, they don’t want to have sex, sex isn’t important to them.
Sigh.
I really, really love sex. I just prefer to do it with men who care that they are having sex with me – a particular, female human being.
Is that too much to ask?
“That the only reason that they even bother with actual human women for sex is that the technology for plastic doll manufacture hasn’t made that possible yet.”
Made me think of that movie “Cherry 200” starring Melanie Griffith. 😀
The blurb for it:
“In this futuristic ’80s flick, successful businessman Sam Treadwell (David Andrews), accompanied by sexy gun-for-hire E. Johnson (Melanie Griffith), travels to a post-apocalyptic wasteland on Earth. It seems that Sam’s android wife, Cherry 2000, has short-circuited, and he’s desperate to replace her. But as they buddy up to brave the dangers of this treacherous region, will Sam come to appreciate the real, flesh-and-blood woman at his side?”
It was a good movie, if you are into sci-fi flicks.
“To deny a womens sexuality is to deny reality. Men like to look at women and women should not be offended by it.”
IMHO, this is why trying to discuss objectifying ads, attitudes, etc. is usually so futile – the widespread perception that while men’s sexuality is men having desire, women’s sexuality is men desiring women – rather than women having desire.
today. I suppose that as far as the gender wars goes this wasn’t the best time for me to return to Colorado Springs. As soon as my intense grief over my Uncle subsided, I was left with taking an inventory of my recent losses and one of those my Grandma Kester who passed last year, lived here and passed here. She is my paternal grandmother so I was also stuck with that last name until I married, I know a little bit about verbal sexual abuse and harassment and I also know how to make people become snails with salt shaken on themselves when I need to address sexually harassing me. I feel personally strong on that front but that is just me and it isn’t everybody. I have a cutting from a newspaper in the early 1960’s and it is a photo of the local Democratic party leadership and it is three men and my kicking ass and taking names Grandma Kester. To have “women’s issues” so easily dismissed by Kos as “not as important as other issues” and to have people sexually harassed by him flames me bad enough. His little threat/boast email though about being able to pull all grassroots internet support for something just fucking sets my hair on fire! Who the fuck does he think he is? Then I have Armando who seems to grasp some of the issue and cares about being able to grasp some of the issue, but he isn’t Kos……so what is really going on here? I posted over there too wondering what that is all about if it is about anything. Is it playing good Kos bad Kos? My grandmother knew some players in the field by God…..she knew Gary Hart and Pat Schroeder and she was a woman and building block for the party and I just can’t even believe that anybody has even remotely entertained any of Kos’ shit about all of this and the importance of women in the grand scheme. Makes me fucking sick to be completely honest, and mad as hell. Who does he think he is?
He thinks he’s a party bigwig, that’s who he thinks he is. Congressmen post on his site, after all. It has yet to occur to him, apparently, that he’s just a source of free advertising for Democrats, and no politician with a brain cell to spare is going to pass that up. His value consist solely in the number of eyeballs he can bring to party messages.
And that, really, is why he doesn’t worry me too much. Grassroots support isn’t hierarchal. As he progressively alienates more and more people, he’ll fade from view. Maybe he can redirect his efforts to cheerleading gay-bashing discussions on his chain of baseball blogs.
We, individually and collectively, are the grassroots. Kos doesn’t yank anything. It’s his status that is subject to being yanked.
Maybe he can redirect his efforts to cheerleading gay-bashing discussions on his chain of baseball blogs.
To be fair, I don’t recall Kos ever leading gay-bashing on his site–but I may have missed it?
And the only thing more boring than watching baseball is talking about watching it. And the only thing that could possibly be more boring than that is reading a blog devoted to talking about watching baseball….
The reference was more to the notorious homophobia of the baseball crowd than it was to any remarks I’ve seen Kos make in the past.
As far as I can tell, gay rights really aren’t on Kos’ radar any more than women’s or minority rights are.
Then you must have been thrilled to read that dialogue about green tea that went on for about (what are units of computer distance called?) a half hour. Two men – no one else – trying to out-maven the other on the fascinating subject.
Sorry I missed the green tea discussion. I like vanilla chai myself.
And it was an honest question about the homophobia–I’ve no doubt that homophobes are not only tolerated but encouraged on DKos. Boys will be boys you know.
That isn’t true. I have never seen the derogatory use of “fag,” “homo,” “pansy,” or any other homophobic epithet or euphemism used at Daily Kos without that comment becoming hidden or severely downrated.
Homophobia is not tolerated nor encouraged at Daily Kos, your inability to doubt that notwithstanding.
No, it’s true because I say so. Its my opinion.
Or, to put it another way: “I disagree with you cause I do. We’re talking about guesswork and psychic analysis of why someone did something. Your guess is as good as mine, and I’m guessing something different. So I disagree with you.”
This conversation is over!
Haha, I’m really sorry my refusal to engage you in a battle of telepathic powers — vis-a-vis Kos’ diabolical schemes — upset you so much.
It’s a good thing you’re not telepathic, Addison. You don’t want to know what I’m thinking right now! Actually, you needn’t possess psychic powers to make a reasonably accurate guess of what I’m thinking right now.
And all in good sport–I’m genuinely not upset. As you yourself would say, mellow out, dude. It’s just a Net site…not like we’re going to set fire to one another’s villages or something.
I’m sure he’s operating from the kindest of paternalistic intentions. Such is his right, as is his right to believe in the sweet smell of scat. I had growing skepticism about much of his prioritizing of issues over the months, but I lost all respect for him over the past couple of weeks.
Citizen Kos
Rogers stops as he gets directly in front of Kane.
ROGERS
You're the greatest fool I've
ever known, Kane. If it was
anybody else, I'd say what's
going to happen to you would be
a lesson to you. Only you're
going to need more than one lesson.
And you're going to get more than
one lesson.
(he walks past Kane)
KANE
Don't you worry about me. I'm
Charles Foster Kane. I'm no cheap,
crooked politician, trying to save
himself from the consequences of
his crimes -
INT. APARTMENT HOUSE HALLWAY - NIGHT - 1910
Camera angling toward Kane from other end of the hall. Rogers and Emily are already
down the hall, moving toward foreground. Kane in apartment doorway background.
KANE
(screams louder)
I'm going to send you to Sing
Sing, Rogers. Sing Sing!
Kane is trembling with rage as he shakes his fist at Rogers's back.
Citizen Kane
Guess what folks…I have yet another idea here…Today I got the second half of a female exam that once a year I can afford to have done..Sure it is not a comfortable thing for me to have done, but It just might save my life someday…
I was thinking sitting here and reviewing some posts and thinking to myself that I can afford this right now, but what about in 5-10 years from now…can I afford this…if this group of nutcases in the Congress and WH get their wishes I will not be able to do this much longer..so there goes my knowing if I am in good health or not. They do not care about someone like me or others that do not have health care now or in the future. Think about this for a moment. Even you guys..will you be able to be tested for prostrate cancer in the future? And all the other preventive test and exams done that we take for a given. Now this is womens rights, just in a different way of seeing things. Might we discuss things in that manner so we can take things in a whole wide range of issues..This is bout to burst wide open…lets be on top of thsi for heavens sake…What will my medicare be like in a few years once they get their hands on much more of my given rights as a human…Thanks….
The tone is a lot different here. People seem a little anal at the other place.
great diary. thoughtful, with lots and lots of very thoughtful comments below it.
a good tonic for what was a disappointing day at kos for me.
there was a front page diary on nancy grace. one of the first responses was a poster passing along a comment his wife had said about her “hatchet faced bitch.”
i mean, after the “pussies, twats and bitches” thread, after the pie threads and all the related discussion. right there, one of the first comments.
so i said something about it. and was promptly troll-rated by lots and lots of folks. i was pretty polite, but frank.
so sad.
i feel like every time i try to “get back into the room,” there’s another smack in my face, another thoughtless gender slur that i (and everyone else who sees this as unacceptable) is supposed to bounce over.
a little while ago i wrote a short post that included a sentiment along the lines of “knowing who the enemy is, but suddenly looking around and wondering ‘who the hell is with me in my foxhole?'”
blacks did not win their rights because whites fought for them (‘tho many did). african-americans won progress because +they+ fought for their rights. if our suffragette forebears had heeded the men (and women) who urged them to wait, that progress would come in time — as if progress is fairy dust sprinkled on the heads of a deserving populace at just the right metaphysical moment — we +most assuredly would be still waiting for the vote.
one of the reasons i’m so implacable is that women’s rights, civil rights, children’s rights — they’re +human+ rights.
thank you for the great diary. a welcome read after a disappointing day.
cheers —
Thank you for putting forth this cogent and sensitive argument. I was a witness to the melt down on dKos and it brought up lots of questions for me.
For example, I noticed that there are some progressive posters on dKos who are extremely reluctant to give up their sexist rhetoric, the right to call someone a pussy, etc. However, these are sincere, dedicated, and activist progressive thinkers.
So in order to understand this, I had to acknowledge that there’s a different dynamic in gender than in basic human rights issues. I won’t presume to be able to anlayze this, but at the roots it may (I say may) come down basic chemisty (i.e. testosterone). There may be something about a man’s need to assert himself, especially in a culture that is so conflicted when it comes to sexual identity.
The other thing that I have observed has to do with the market value of contraversy. For example, this contraversial issue has generated more comments than any other diary. It generated an astronomical amount of activity on dailykos, including 10,000 hits on the contraversial ad in question.
This brings to mind certain presences on dKos that have a knack for generating conflict and fomenting contraversy. I’m not saying that this is a deliberate strategy. But the aim of a political blog is political. It is not about spiritual development. Political issues are always contraversial since political issues are always “politically motivated.”
I hope this makes sense, it has been a long day, so if not please ask questions.
Again, I appreciate your intention towards healing in your comments concerning women’s rights, thank you!
I had a wonderful opportunity yesterday to discuss the issues of sexism with a very bright and powerful 23 year old woman. I mostly listened, because I want to understand her view. It wasn’t easy to just listen, but I managed, and as she felt heard, rather than judged, she opened up.
To her, that ad was not sexist. To her, it is a example of the power women have to use their bodies as they choose. She just doesn’t see “sexism” where I see it, because she has been totally surrounded by this kind of advertizing and MTV type TV since she was small, so to her it’s like “What’s the big deal?”
She listened equally well to me then, as I shared my concerns about what’s happening now, that threaten the rights she was born into, as a woman, and has always had. Her life is busy and full of pursuring her own dreams: she hasn’t time to follow the news, and has no trust in any of it anyway. She knows she should, but… She also feels theres nothing she could really “do” about any of it anyway, and said it’s very hard for people in her age group to get real worried about things that “might happen, years from now.”
I went away from this more worried than ever about how life might be for generations of women just being born now, if we can’t get our own crap together long enough to stop the right wing religious extremists from taking over America.
seems to me, and this is my first post on this topic, that their is a fundmantal problem to deal with.
You all know what that Supreme Court Justice (Powell?) said when asked to define pornography, I presume? “I kow it when I see it.”
It seems to be even more difficult to define “offensive sexual advertisiing?” Having lived in Italy for the last five years, I can tell you that the defintition of offesive sexist advertsising is much,much looser over here than it is in the US. But wown do not have any trouble with it. It depends on exactly what you mean by sexist adverstising. Is a naked woman or man (full fronta nudity) on the front page of almost every newsmagine and gossip magaine sexist advertising? If it is, then why are absolutly no Italian women (regardless of age) offended by it. On the contrary, in their opinion, it is perferctly natural and healthy?
I did not see the dkos ad or any of the comments becaue I have been extremely ill. So what exacly is the real problem here? Is it the ad itself (in which case I would need to see it to be able to judge) or the comments (in hich case I would need to read them). I am unable to formaulate any judgement in this matter becuae of lack of information. And now,it appears, noone is willing to provide me with a basis for deciding one way or another in this partcular question.