So here's the thing.
I have been really bothered lately by some diaries and comments posted on this website. This diary is an attempt to reconcile my discomfort against the backdrop of what is happening in these diaries and comments that is so upsetting me.
So.
I took a lot of time last night to think about what's going down, and here's the thing: we cannot have a progressive website without progressive ideals. Even though c99p does not adhere to any political ideology, and the FAQ does not use the word "progressive" or "liberal" (but, rather, "far-left" and "left-leaning"), the word progressive is assumed from that.
You simply cannot be far-left or left-leaning without also considering yourself progressive, yes?
From the FAQ:
Like the Occupy movement from which the name of this site derives (many of the early members of the site were active members and supporters of Occupy) we are open to people with all kinds of different ideas about how to make the world a better place. The folks already here represent a broad range of left-leaning to far-left orientations.
We are disinclined to create a lot of rules, not because we thrive on chaos, but because we'd like to foster the sort of community that values and respects the site and each other, such that respectful discussions happen between people with diverse views in an organic manner.We have only one universal, all-weather, one size fits all, batteries not required rule, "don't be an ass." (DBAA)
It's a little blunt, but it seems the sort of thing that just about everyone understands intuitively.
The coin of the realm here is kindness to others and articulate discussion of your point of view in a way that respects other people's ideas. Discussions that are characterized by the coherent exposition of evidence, facts, logic and reason, which honor the bonds of friendship that hold us together, are what this community thrives on.
Right.
So if we are a mostly progressive lot, and the goal here is to stimulate discussion that remains respectful, then I think it should go without saying that you probably shouldn't call Hillary Clinton a "bitch" in any diary or thread. And you probably shouldn't make fun of the way Hillary dresses. And you probably shouldn't go on and on and on about how Hillary is such a disgusting person for having a supposed incontinence issue.
I know that identity politics is an iffy thing around here, but I would submit that you cannot be progressive and racist, sexist, and/or homophobic at the same time. Those things are incompatible with each other. You cannot be simultaneously a progressive and also want to halt progress for a specific group of people. It doesn't work like that. Progressivism has many aspects, but chief among them are economic and social populism.
This really kind of kills me, everytime I feel like I have to focus on this, because I hate hate hate! having to defend Hillary Clinton. Because I hate Hillary Clinton for a variety of extremely valid reasons, none of which have to do with her genitalia or her dress or her health.
Please help me to reconcile this. I don't understand how other people simply do not get this.
My heart is heavy. This makes me very sad, for real.
Comments
Shiz, I sure hope you stay. I agree with you that the B word
should have the same fate as the N word, and I agree that speech here should be as free as possible.
So what are we gonna do? I would like to see the B word banned, and "censorship" go no farther than that. If I owned the site I would ban it, but I don't and I don't expect JtC to agree with me every time. If it is not banned, I will live with it.
Where are you gonna go? Unfortunately the word's use is extremely common. But I do think it's limited to just a few posters here, and so we can just go ahead and avoid their diaries and ignore their comments. There are a few people who, because of their comments in Steven D's diaries, I will never read nor uprate again, for whatever that's worth. They made their B, now they'll have to lie in it.
I think the commenter above is correct that when the B word is used to express the evil of Clinton, it's not as bad if it were used to say "women should not be President". If the use of the B word was more prevalent, or as more of a general attack, I'd be looking to leave too. But since any attackers against posters here are generally warned and then banned if they don't cut it out, I still feel pretty comfortable here. A little uncomfortable when someone uses that word. But I also agree with those saying we have more pressing issues.
One thing to consider would be a War on Women column, either regularly or as an occasional series, like we have Over There. Maybe it'd educate some folks here on some of what we have to deal with, if they haven't been paying attention.
So my recommendation would be, I hope you stay and play on your own terms. If you see a lot of misogynistic statements, send a message to the mods or admin. Let them decide. And otherwise focus your energy on issues you find more positive.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
I disagree. Use whatever word is descriptive in one's public
style. I use bitch as a verb. Many of us fled from dK when one had to carefully word anything to not have flags tossed. Let's don't start that here and contaminate c99 with that PC language. Context, context.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
I agree that we don't want to be overly cautious in our use of
language or have flags tossed at every turn.
But AFAIAC, the context is this: This site already has one rule: DBAA. Using the B word is as much being AA as using the N word would be. Therefore neither should be allowed. We're talking about a small group of words that are derogatory to a group of people. If someone then feels like, "all right, they agreed when I complained so I will complain more!" then we can always as a group say "No. We only disallow derogatory words. We have gone that far and we will go no farther."
There is still plenty of space beyond the use of derogatory words to have plenty of opportunity for free speech. Disallowing derogatory words does not make us another Daily Kos. It makes us not another New York Post https://www.buzzfeed.com/jwherrman/who-has-the-worst-commenters-on-the-i...
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
Please!
Please! No! Absolutely not.
Look, I'm a woman and that word does not bother me. Not a bit. It never has. It never will. Because it's a WORD. It is further, a WORD with more than one meaning in the native language.
So....perspective. OKAY? Seriously! We cannot have word police here, because if we are, it's going to get real small again, real fast. That's not a threat, it's a promise, because that's what happens. That's what always happens.
Please.
Sites without moderation have degenerated into name-calling
fests and lost readers to the point that they have shut down comments. So either too little or too much moderation is problematic. There will be a large number of women who will never join this site if they come upon B and C this and that.
If that word has never bothered you, then you have led a very sheltered life. I discussed all this in Steven D's diaries and won't go through it all again. Every meaning of the B word comes back to its origin of women being no better than dogs in heat.
Do I want the "word police" to go any further than this? No, I do not. But I do not see why we respect minorities but do not want to equally respect women. Especially this claim by others who say they are also women. Maybe you've bought into the cultural vestiges of misogyny. If so, that's too bad. Doesn't change my opinion though.
If the admins decide they're not going to restrict the uses of these words, then as I have already stated, I will still be here. And I will not be writing diaries about it unless it becomes significantly more prevalent than it has already been. But meanwhile, I have a right to express my opinion. You and I will have to agree to disagree once again.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
We have no 'flags' here
with good reason. If we do adopt flags I'm so out of here. why are you still at dkos and bringing their sick shit here? Seriously your entitled to your point of view but why call for this site to become what we all eschewed in the first place. No flags, no bannings, no time outs.
Bejeezuz woman if i can tolerate your so called PC comment's and post's then STFU about other people's opinions and stop trying to silence those of us who have had it with what's going down globally. i find a lot of what you say 'offensive' but I have no desire to shut you up or censor your language. Live and let live.
We are not a mainstream political site we are a group of people who want to exit the newspeak and phony divisions laid down by the powers that be including Democrat's and so called progressives, to divide and conquer. Censor your self and get off my back. Who the hell gets to decide what is derogatory to a group of people? You?
I'll tell who's derogatory to all groups of disfranchised people the Democrat's and their so called official candidate The Mad Bomber. If any group of people deserved 'derogatory' words it's the freaking Democratic Party and their 'selected' bogus candidate the Clinton's both of them. Talk about sexist look at Bill or Hill.
So stop pushing this authoritarian version of sexist derogatory speech control here at caucus 99% and maybe pay some attention and respect to those of us who do not agree with your sick albeit cheerful frolicking version of politics. Perhaps focus on how to get out of this mindset and figure out how to change the world with out this crap. I
'm a woman and I am subjected to sexism like Killary is and yet I still say the woman is a bitch. Too bad you don't like it I frankly don't like your politics so there you go. Maybe we all here could agree that disagreeing is not a bad thing and that sexism or PC violations are in the eye of the beholder. Maybe you should let go of dkos and you might just find a whole new world that's developing.
Amen riverlover
I do not understand why people here are so open to rules and PC thought control. We all know real hate speech and language when we come upon it and no one here is going to let it pass unnoticed or unchallenged. I just don't want to see this site get all authoritarian under the guise of PC or offensive words. I get offended by lot's of stuff i see posted here in defense of certain pols, Democrat's and persona directed politics. Of course Obama was the victim of racism but that doesn't mean he's not a racist in his global and American agenda and policy. Of course Hillary is a victim of sexism but she promotes and implement sexist/racist policy and an agenda that is nothing but. What a degradation of this site considering what all humans face under the ruling global 'oligarchical collectivists'. thank you river lover, 'what you said'.
Amen to both of you n/t
I think that this is getting a bit ridiculous
I am reminded of what we used to say as kids, if someone used a bad, bitching, down-putting word toward another person. "Those who use it, are it themselves". I currently feel at that level of conversational wisdom.
The reason some would like to see another level of conversational style, is not a matter of wanting to censor someone's words, but to keep away distraction to fact-based and political issues and the desire to have less emotional venting overpowering other essays. When the target is a person on this site, who is "showered" with bitching love, with lovely bad words, it falls under the only rule that there is. Dont' be an asshole. When the target is a poltician, oh well, check if their policies and what they support is worth a bitching judgement.
Don't you think it's ridiculous to even have to write this out again?
I am more upset about someone, who obsesses all day long over someone else, whose writing style uses a lot of imaginative "bitching" espressions, more or less for effect. Over the years I have read several female writers using that 'style'. I don't get upset about it, because to me it's a writing style question. What bothers me more is about what is "bitched" about not that someone "bitches". It seems some folks see racism in everything, others see sexism in everything, and some of them make it their writing activism's mission to point that out, whenever they believe to see it. Of course, what they see is in the eyes of the beholders. When it is not based on the policies of a politician it's a rather subjective view point and becomes easily a point of distraction. That again is not that interesting to have on the long run.
I have never read here a comment where someone used the word "nigger" or "cunt" in deragotary ways to insult a member of this site. I have seen a lot of "bitch" thrown around by people who have a lot "burning fire in their bellies against that lady Hillary Clinton".
Some do it quite artistically, others are blunt and you sense their hateful feelings. I wonder if "banning" this word would change any of the author's feelings that are behind the usage of that word. I guess not. I bet, the next thing that would happen after the ban has put on the word bitch, that we will have a new word that will end up serving the same purpose.
All you may ask an author to do is reflecting on his/her hate potential. Obiously that doesn't work with some people, but you can dream and hope.
If JtC, the admins or Joe come up with a list of banned words (other then cunt and nigger)I will be very interested iwhat kind of words they would choose. I kinda sorta hope they would expect writers here to know how to express themselves acceptably and wouldn't get into such kind of "bad word list regulations".
https://www.euronews.com/live
I would love to see insults associated mostly or exclusively
with women consigned to history. However, I don't think words should be banished here, although calling a fellow poster a bitch would fall under the general rule against personal insults. Persuading people to evolve past using certain words is better than censorship, even though it's slower. Except for those who are, IMO, asses--and intentionally so, people don't even spell out the n word anymore. Sure, it took way too long, but it finally happened. I think people will eventually realize that they really do not need to call anyone a cunt, bitch or pussy. Either that or women will take ownership of the words, as gays took ownership of "gay."
Hey, let's try to adapt harridan to common usage
It means the same as the offensive B-word and has more syllables!
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
'harridan' = 'unpleasant women'
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/harridan
So that won't make a difference, if 'sexist language' is the issue. There's a short list of synonyms at that link, all used about 'unpleasant women'. If we have to choose one to indicate HRC, my pick would be 'she-devil'.
I'm serious! Those who consider the right to use sexist language a Free Speech issue here at c99 may refer to her as 'that she-devil!'
(And btw: My favorite among the newly-minted monikers for HRC is 'Her Heinous'.)
Actually,
whoever came up with Her Heinous has my undying gratitude. I had nothing else but that B word, knowuttimean?
How about
"Thou mewling tardy-gaited moldwarp?"
http://www.pangloss.com/seidel/Shaker/index.html
You'll still have to be choosy about words like "whoreson," but Shakespearean insult generators can be fun.
PS I like "Harridan" a lot,
and it's one of those words I never went far enough to actually look up the meaning of it.
"She Devil". Yeah, that works, too
What about references to characters
in the Wizard of Oz? Or should that movie not be brought up.
Beware the bullshit factories.
good point! Is "witch" out of bounds? "Which Hillary" too?
remember (2008) when Obama rubbed his cheek with his middle finger and Hillary supporters said it was Obama saying "$%^^& you" to Hillary? Remember when they freaked out when Obama said "you're likeable enough, Hillary"? Remember when Hillary said one thing, then contradicted herself and people took her logo, had the arrows pointing both directions and said "Which Hillary?" and they freaked out because it sounded like "witch" and that rhymes with b----?
Where do we want to stop this? Just with the b-word? (seldom used here) and the c-word? (never seen it here)
I'm not calling people trolls when they make this a big issue but I do think the behavior is trollish in that it distracts and shuts down without providing a solution.
I readily understand women and their supporters objecting
to words that demean all women, like bitch. I do not understand the perceived inability to discuss Hillary without using such words. I just don't and I don't think I ever will. I am not asking anyone to respect Hillary, only to stop disrespecting women as a group. "Bitch" disrespects all women.
As I have posted before, I don't use dick or prick either, just to be more than fair. I don't think it's the same thing because people were not discriminated against under the law simply for being born with male genitalia. For example, it was not until 1900 that every state in the U.S. gave married women a right to own property, as late as the 1970s, state law could ban a woman from serving as administratrix of a will--and we all know about the vote. http://www.nwhp.org/resources/womens-rights-movement/detailed-timeline/ Men suffered no such legal disabilities solely because of their genitalia.
Hey Timmethy
no wicked witches references. We have to keep this debate clean and scrubbed of any language that is sexist or racist and offensive to any group that dares to over look the gender, race or whatever these assholes that rule the world. These people are so racist, sexist, homophobic and so anti humanistic that it makes your head spin. so tell me me again why I'm not allowed to call them names or be 'derogatory' to these monsters.
They are not worthy of respect regardless of their race, gender or any other demographic category. Humans all of them deserve respect and none of the pols of mass deception deserve anything but total rejection regardless of their gender, race or political party in this farce of democracy that is both global and here in the USA,USA,USA. Now this is what obscenity looks like including and currently featuring the the Clinton's.
I think that intent matters a lot.
I haven't been keeping up to speed with this issue, since I've been busy with work for the last few weeks and haven't had as much time to check in and read everyone's essays, but language is an inherently slippery business and replete with unintended meanings and implications. When it comes to the use of questionable terms and labels, I really think that intent has to be considered. What did the author intend to say? Were they deliberately trying to be racist/sexist/homophobic, etc. or were they simply conveying a point in an unproductive way, perhaps in frustration?
That said, I also think that people should be more considerate and thoughtful in their use of language. I personally try not to use loaded gendered pronouns or terms because I know that they can be easily misunderstood. I get why people are referring to Hillary in a certain way, and while I personally feel that it is unnecessary, I also wouldn't censor them or try to shame them by calling them out. I think that most people, if asked politely to consider their use of language, would do so because their intent usually isn't to offend or upset those that they are engaging with. Sometimes it's unconscious, or a careless mistake, or something that they're just not aware of. It happens more often than one might think.
I've also seen situations where attempts to regulate the use of language have gone too far. I've seen folks publicly shamed for referring to a difficult task or situation as a "bitch" and have been personally called out in the past as an "ableist" for referring to idiotic actions by politicians as "retarded." If it goes so far that one needs to constantly police their use of language, it inhibits open discourse and the free exchange of ideas and creates a tense environment. Like with anything else, a balance has to be struck. Language only exists as a vehicle for communicating meaning, and unfortunately it's an imperfect tool that often contains loaded associations that we didn't intend to include. Hopefully it will be less of a problem if everyone is just more thoughtful about their use of it and give others the benefit of the doubt.
Pages