You should. There are a few aspects to this. 1) You should feel free to say what you want when you want. 2) The more you express support for feminist issues and HOF positions in particular, the more you will be identified with HOF and thereby discounted by some. 3) If you don't want to post in a contentious thread, you can still make a contribution. This heated threads tend to result in a lot of alerts coming from all sides. If a lot of feminists are involved in a thread, that means none of us can serve as jurors in those threads. That means posts by us are more likely to be hidden that those by people attacking feminists. Lately some of us have wondered if some of the members less welcoming to feminists might deliberately stay out of threads to make themselves available for jury duty on those threads. Of course, they might just not want to enter into the fray. But my point is that even if you don't feel like posting, you can still make a contribution my making yourself available for jury duty (click around the forums a lot, for example. As your post count increases, you'll be called for more juries). It's ultimately up to you. You should say what you want but don't feel compelled to jump in if you don't want to.

As for the silent majority, I really don't know. Numbers of recs seem to support feminist views on this site, while jury verdicts too often do not. I see more people making themselves available for jury duty. Hopefully that will help. Juries really are the power on the site.

As far as what you said:

First, I am happy to speak my mind here. It's an internet board, and unlikely to have serious negative ramifications for my life (unlike expressing my views with a Republican boss around might, for instance). However, like I mentioned, I usually don't post simply because someone else has already said what I would, and only if someone hasn't do I step in. I post if I think I have something of value or importance to add to the conversation, which isn't often (note my sig line, which I forgot about, ha). My question really revolved more around the issue of whether that was something members would appreciate seeing than my comfort level and desire to post.

Second, if being labeled as a feminist and being associated with HOF has me discounted by some, screw 'em. I fully support almost everything I've seen in this forum and I believe that those who are truly against HOF and feminism should not be considered progressives.

As far as jury duty goes, I serve as often as possible, though with a still low post count and relatively new membership that isn't much. I am trying to decide whether to become a star member for that very reason. I don't think I will stay out of threads for the sole purpose of juries, though. My reasoning is that (at least in my experience) the replies are almost always more valuable than the hides. While many posts absolutely should be hidden, I would rather see someone speaking out against it and the post escaping being hid than vice versa. I personally learn much more from those responses, and were the people speaking out to avoid responding in order to help hide posts, I would miss their responses quite a bit.

Again, thanks for your response. It was quite helpful.

Edit: rereading my post, it seems as if maybe this wasn't the right place for the question. If a host thinks this should have been through pms or elsewhere, I will happily self delete. Perhaps it might help another quiet member, though. I don't know.

with this in your post:

" I fully support almost everything I've seen in this forum and I believe that those who are truly against HOF and feminism should not be considered progressives. "

I can't imagine anyone being considered a progressive and being against feminism.

Runnerup is the LGBT group. That say's something, I think

HoF Posts 30 days; 2,036 Posts all time 47,434

Feminists Posts 30 days; 204 Posts all time 11,382

Women's rights and issues: Posts 30 days;276 Posts all time 4265

LGBT Posts 30 days; 628 Posts all time 39,140

Men's group Posts 30 days; 134 Posts all time 14,072

we do good.

we are gonna get better though, you just watch. lol. i have always been the success/competitive goal type person. lol.

again, cause he had abstained and didnt want to miss with it but seeing some of the results and what was left, he felt the need to start sittin on juries. more than one came onto that thread saying, ya, they agreed. and these are the duers that jsut want a good, positive, civil environment to discuss.

so i thought that interesting that ya, the posters that did not want to be a part of the system, and how that is skewing what i thought might be happening on jury.

They voted to leave the post, but later said they could now appreciate why the post should have been hidden.

but it did not absorb, lol. sometimes that happens. i was thinking that was what she was saying. and i perused the replies.... but, i had already a couple threads on the subject, i did not want to be involved in another thread. i should go back and read what she says.

it was a saying i had not given much thought to. about 6 months/yr ago it struck me just what it said. and really was offensive to me. especially seeing how women really are not the ones that flip when scorned. and the demeaning effect of the saying.

THis is the post I was thinking of:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025244119#post11

I often find myself nodding when I read them. Your voice is a persuasive one.

Thanks!

cause there is always learning to be had. anothers insight, even if they feel someone else has said it, may be said in a way that triggers understanding in another, or triggers an exploration in another direction.

all conversation is good.

thank you for this OP.

I say become a member of HoF and wear it proudly.

I have very little tolerance for idiocy or circular logic. I also refuse to get baited, although occasionally I'll join in a snark fest.

Outside of feminist groups, there is very little productive discussion about gender issues, unless it's to somehow degrade feminism, or subvert feminist issues. For instance the majority of DU'ers, not all but the majority are pro choice, but many won't acknowledge that as a feminist issue, certain members seem to want it to be part of what I can only call a 'libertarian' agenda. Sexist language can't be discussed without it being called censorship-- I'm not the language police either, but generally, although any other kind of bigoted language is not tolerated, sexist language is so embedded, discussion is impossible.

Lately I've been talking to co- workers, who say their husbands 'don't understand' the disparity in women's issues, such as health care, so I'm not sure how far off DU is from the regular population. Interestingly, my co- workers are often much more conservative than I am, but even they can see it.

On the other hand if you have a thick skin, a high tolerance for stupid people, and are difficult to bait, it can make a huge difference in a thread. Beware-- decent logic, and well thought out arguments will be ignored or you'll get labeled 'meta'. Bains posts some of the most logical arguments out there, and is constantly be labeled this or that. RedQueen will start threads about important topics, which instantly get derailed.

In short, arguing with some of these folks is like herding cats, they go off In every direction.

exasperated with some of the arguments, as I feel that way often enough already. The lengths that some go to to dismiss sexist language and feminist issues astounds me. The language and ideas are so entrenched now. However, it seems that some of the resistance might be because this is a discussion board. I tend to have more luck making people aware of the issues in real life, and I think that's because it's tougher to dismiss when you are talking about "real" people who you actually know.

I definitely have a thick skin and am difficult to bait, a couple of things that I've learned from other forums. Sadly, my tolerance for stupidity is much lower than it should be, and I walk away from an argument far more often than I start them. Perhaps that's something to work on, as from the responses to this thread it sounds like help in the trenches is always appreciated.

And at least when you herd cats they just run, instead of actively trying to claw your face off

Then 'speak' or 'type' up. I posted last week I think - about a 'silent majority' specifically in relation to liberal/progressive men.

I think the majority of men at DU are 'for us'- but the men most for us stand back and let us speak for ourselves. Their belief in our strength and quiet support allows the 'no so much in our corner' guys to run rampant.

So regardless of gender if you think something needs to be put in writing - please do so!

Hopefully that silent majority will speak up more in the future, both here and irl. Thanks for your feedback.

However, a +1 and a comment or two shows your support.