I just have to say something about this dynasty crapola

[tblue37]

69. A couple of jurors (one who voted to hide it and one who voted to leave it)

commented that the poster might not have been aware that the person he was replying to is gay.

Frankly, I don't think that matters. Name-calling is unnecessary and inappropriate (and a TOS violation) anyway, but certain labels are especially loaded, even when not being used against members of marginalized groups, because their "insult value" depends entirely on the marginalization and devaluation of those groups to work at all.

It does not promote progressive values to call Hillary a "corporate wh*," even if we don't like her cozy relationship with big banks and corporations (I voted to hide that post, too, BTW); to call protesters against police brutality "thugs" (regardless of their race); to call Ann Coulter what she is often called (I can't even bring myself to write it because it feels like writing the N-word and insults transgender people so much more than it insults Coulter!); or to suggest that politicians and others whom we deeply disapprove of are gay.

None of those personal characteristics should have any value as insults, because they simply should not be taken to mean that people deserve to be shamed, discriminated against, or devalued for them.

I agreed with the person who alerted on the post and voted to hide it, just I also voted several days ago to hide the post that called Hillary a "corporate wh**."
___________

NOTE: I used asterisks with the word "wh**" because I don't like the idea of having that word linked in my post with Hillary's name. Such linkages to specific persons' names tend to affect search engine results--which is, of course, what happened to Rick Santorum. Therefore, even when deploring the use of the label against her, I would be promoting it if I spelled it out next to her name (twice, yet) in my own post.

On Edit: FYI, I was Juror #1 on this alert. I seldom vote to hide, because I am big on open discussion, but certain things do seem to cross the line, and thoughtlessly using such slurs--even without consciously meaning to be homophobic, misogynistic, or racist--is one of those things.

Such carelessly slung slurs make DU feel really hostile to the marginalized groups the insults are based on. We lose good DU members that way.

Another Edit: Obviously I remembered the results incorrectly. Three jurors, not two, commented on whether the poster knew the person he replied to is gay, and all three voted to hide the post anyway, whether the alerted on poster knew or not.