Feminists

LeftyMom

(49,212 posts)

30. Then the group needs to be renamed.

Wed Jan 11, 2012, 06:35 PM

Jan 2012

Either there needs to be a group for feminists, with all the variation in opinion that rather big tent includes AND a Feminist Opinions iverglas Approves Of group (call that whatever you like,) or the SOP needs to be modified to include feminist thought as a whole. The current exclusionary approach where only Feminism As Understood By Straight, White, Middle Class Women Who Think All Important Feminist Thought Occurred In the Seventies counts as real feminism is preventing the thoughtful discussion of women's issues and needs on DU.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

64 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

fresh thread. i purpose that the sop gender issue is moved down [View all] seabeyond Jan 2012 OP

I propose changing the controversial line to the following: justiceischeap Jan 2012 #1

I like your proposal. Lisa D Jan 2012 #2

Yes, I agree. I sometimes forget that men/trans can be feminists. :) nt justiceischeap Jan 2012 #3

thanks justice. and does it feel good to move down, or does that not bother you. seabeyond Jan 2012 #5

I don't care about the placement. justiceischeap Jan 2012 #6

Yes ismnotwasm Jan 2012 #54

yes... with feminist. thank you. lets see what others see. nt seabeyond Jan 2012 #4

I like this too. Starry Messenger Jan 2012 #7

I also think it should read "feminist perspective," not "woman's perspective." nt BlueIris Jan 2012 #8

I hope that members who didn't comment on the previous thread will comment here. Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #9

I think the third bullet should be removed obamanut2012 Jan 2012 #10

seeing how i am continually, consistently and often attacked in this manner, seabeyond Jan 2012 #12

You don't need the bullet for that obamanut2012 Jan 2012 #17

over 7 yrs on du and this move to du3 and more open attack, i would prefer a bullet. seabeyond Jan 2012 #22

You don't understand, it's not like that in a Group obamanut2012 Jan 2012 #26

i dont want anyone banned. and the temptation will be too great, i assure you. people cannot help seabeyond Jan 2012 #27

it was intended to be exclusionary iverglas Jan 2012 #16

Thank you for admitting it was intended to be exclusionary obamanut2012 Jan 2012 #20

I didn't admit a goddamned thing iverglas Jan 2012 #28

Then the group needs to be renamed. LeftyMom Jan 2012 #30

is it really that hard not to call other women names when discussing an issue? nt seabeyond Jan 2012 #31

Not at all, which is why I didn't. LeftyMom Jan 2012 #32

grinnin. you never disappoint. if it is not hard to not call names, then none of us seabeyond Jan 2012 #33

Feel free to put me on ignore. LeftyMom Jan 2012 #34

i dont put people on ignore. and i dont have a problem with your posts. yes, you talked to someone seabeyond Jan 2012 #35

look at all the nice shiny new names! iverglas Jan 2012 #36

You're kind of making my point. LeftyMom Jan 2012 #39

"a lot of other posters" iverglas Jan 2012 #40

My other posts in Feminists must have fallen pray to the old Deleted Subthread. LeftyMom Jan 2012 #42

be nice iverglas Jan 2012 #43

This message was self-deleted by its author Bunny Jan 2012 #19

Your opinion is as valid as mine obamanut2012 Jan 2012 #21

all of the bullets can be considered exclusionary. that is the purpose of them seabeyond Jan 2012 #23

Yes, very true. Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #44

This message was self-deleted by its author Bunny Jan 2012 #29

thank you iverglas Jan 2012 #38

This message was self-deleted by its author Bunny Jan 2012 #41

I really hate those mischaracterizations of feminists. Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #45

I vote for this. (nt) redqueen Jan 2012 #46

what are you suggesting. i am all for the discussion. i am not into having someone tell me i am a seabeyond Jan 2012 #47

I think she's saying no name calling, just exchanging ideas with no minimizing or insults redqueen Jan 2012 #48

i... i did yesterday. and it feels good not being a part seabeyond Jan 2012 #49

Yes, redqueen. That's exactly what I'm saying. Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #51

that is fine. adding a bit. the bit where it says... if discussing porn no name calling like seabeyond Jan 2012 #52

This message was self-deleted by its author Bunny Jan 2012 #53

no, I did not say that iverglas Jan 2012 #37

bunny and i are not on the same side. we often disagree, lol. hey bunny, good to see you in here. seabeyond Jan 2012 #24

I move to keep this one: Starry Messenger Jan 2012 #11

This message was self-deleted by its author seabeyond Jan 2012 #13

just for completeness, iverglas Jan 2012 #14

check out post 1 and 2 and see what you think. and thanks for this. nt seabeyond Jan 2012 #15

frankly, at this point, iverglas Jan 2012 #18

ok. nt seabeyond Jan 2012 #25

i like this post for the SoP Scout Jan 2012 #50

Why don't the hosts get picked first, and then work on the SOP later? Violet_Crumble Jan 2012 #55

lol lol. that was kinda funny. nt seabeyond Jan 2012 #56

do you think VC might be a civil servant? ;) iverglas Jan 2012 #57

I propose this concise SoP: Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #58

I approve. redqueen Jan 2012 #59

raisin hand... is anyone gonna get to call me (ready?), prude, pearl clutcher, frigid, anti sex, seabeyond Jan 2012 #60

No, I expect all the co-hosts will agree that such namecalling is unacceptable. redqueen Jan 2012 #61

Not more than once Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #62

thanks. not that i am not weary, lol seabeyond Jan 2012 #64

This message was self-deleted by its author Bunny Jan 2012 #63