Feminists

Starry Messenger

(32,376 posts)

89. I don't see the with us or against us.

Wed Jan 11, 2012, 03:20 PM

Jan 2012

I honestly don't. We all have things to contribute and I think there are women who want to be heard who haven't felt heard, because the SOP looks a little limiting as it currently stands. We all know how that feels to not feel heard, I know that you do! I think there are ways to make the SOP worded a little better, and many fruitful suggestions have been put forth already. I concur with this statement of Gormy's down below:

"What I'm hearing from Pri and justiceischeap is that asking them to divorce their LGBT identities from the argument is too much and I agree. It would be like asking you or I to respond to economic arguments without drawing on our perspective as women.

It seems to be that none of us want to have an SoP so open that it allows for raging, off-topic feuds but we do want to hear, digest, and debate issues from accepted feminist POVs (accepted as in academia includes them as feminist thought) rather than just sticking to the orthodoxy we personally accept"

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

189 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

group host / statement of purpose [View all] iverglas Jan 2012 OP

sounds good to me. nt seabeyond Jan 2012 #1

ahem iverglas Jan 2012 #2

I answer myself iverglas Jan 2012 #3

Sounds good to me! redqueen Jan 2012 #4

This message was self-deleted by its author Bunny Jan 2012 #5

true, no need for limits ;) iverglas Jan 2012 #6

I object to limiting discussion to just today. There are many DUers who don't visit forums daily, Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #7

sorry, I didn't mean! iverglas Jan 2012 #8

Then may we please start over with just a discussion of the SoP and try to get consensus on that? Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #10

I agree that a discussion of the SoP is a good idea. redqueen Jan 2012 #13

To be honest, I read it the same way initially. Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #24

again ... iverglas Jan 2012 #15

I for one agree with you completely. redqueen Jan 2012 #17

I've been around this group for a very long time and I've seen many serious disputes Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #22

how would you suggest the phrasing to be more inclusive? on edit... i also seabeyond Jan 2012 #25

It either needs to explicitly limit the statement to discussing those things outside of a feminist Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #27

I can't agree iverglas Jan 2012 #29

This reminds me of "bitch" wars in GD. Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #31

it had already reminded me of the "douchebag" war iverglas Jan 2012 #38

Wow. redqueen Jan 2012 #48

i think you should be the main host La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2012 #32

The year should probably be updated there. The statement says 2005. :) Starry Messenger Jan 2012 #9

heh heh iverglas Jan 2012 #11

I really like this: Starry Messenger Jan 2012 #16

agreed La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2012 #35

I've tried to respond to comments about iverglas Jan 2012 #12

Oops! I posted before I saw your answer to GormyCuss. Starry Messenger Jan 2012 #14

maybe simple is best! iverglas Jan 2012 #18

I think that is really thoughtful and good. Starry Messenger Jan 2012 #19

ah, third wave iverglas Jan 2012 #21

statement of purpose - thoughts? iverglas Jan 2012 #20

I like the rephrasing of the porn/prude bullet n/t Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #23

I find it problematic, perhaps in the extreme Remember Me Feb 2012 #181

I would update the year from 2005 to 2012, to reflect the move to DU3. ZombieHorde Jan 2012 #26

check post 20 iverglas Jan 2012 #28

i am not comfortable with this statement of purpose La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2012 #30

any chance of you answering direct questions? iverglas Jan 2012 #33

ofcourse i am speaking as a feminist La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2012 #34

you got it iverglas Jan 2012 #36

are you lgbtq? if so you get to decide who is and who is not a homophobe La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2012 #37

you almost seem to take my point (edited) iverglas Jan 2012 #39

actually i do think its gender not sex. transwomen for instance, imo belong to the feminist movement La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2012 #41

On the divvying up and labelling of women... Violet_Crumble Jan 2012 #40

because sometimes straight women want things that queer women La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2012 #42

let's stop beating around the bush iverglas Jan 2012 #43

i have yet to see why you get to define feminism and i don't La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2012 #44

I have yet to see where I said I did (edited) iverglas Jan 2012 #45

you came into this thread of over 300 posts and made ONE. one post. on mine. it was a jab and you seabeyond Jan 2012 #46

not everything is about you and your feelings La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2012 #55

thank you so much for taking the time to clear that up for me. nt seabeyond Jan 2012 #58

Nol but a direct question about attacks YOU made to HER most certainly IS Remember Me Feb 2012 #182

yes, my vacation is a priority over an internet argument. La Lioness Priyanka Feb 2012 #185

seabeyond, please tell me why you referenced me in that post Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #65

#30. i want gormycuss as main host seabeyond Jan 2012 #67

Thanks, I missed those. Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #73

but nothing else. there is nothing else to say about that post? seabeyond Jan 2012 #74

What things? That's what I'm not understanding... Violet_Crumble Jan 2012 #109

I want seabeyond to be a co-hostess JustAnotherGen Jan 2012 #47

you wanna be one too? ;) iverglas Jan 2012 #49

I can't be one JustAnotherGen Jan 2012 #50

snork iverglas Jan 2012 #53

I would like to say "amen" to your fifth paragraph. (nt) redqueen Jan 2012 #51

I agree. I think it's the crux of what this group is about. CrispyQ Jan 2012 #108

i was having a blast at the dinner table tonight talking about all the many groups seabeyond Jan 2012 #110

Me too Remember Me Feb 2012 #183

As a lesbian and someone who considers herself a feminist, I have a comment on all this back & forth justiceischeap Jan 2012 #52

You can't put the definition of feminism in a box ... but it seems like some can with people seabeyond Jan 2012 #54

Now I don't know if I'm getting your point justiceischeap Jan 2012 #56

ok. thanks. nt seabeyond Jan 2012 #60

You can have an opinion and state it whenever you wish Lisa D Jan 2012 #57

i have never expected, nor would i ever expect 100% agreement. nt seabeyond Jan 2012 #59

I think it is a matter of acknowledging whatever privilege one might bear in a conversation or Starry Messenger Jan 2012 #62

Perfectly stated. Lisa D Jan 2012 #66

find one post, ONE post i have not worked at, struggled with to hear the other side. ONE. seabeyond Jan 2012 #69

I'm sorry, but I was not criticizing you in any way. Lisa D Jan 2012 #71

but we are not demanding the same. it CAN NOT be just one sided. we cannot say we are putting in seabeyond Jan 2012 #72

Why are people picking sides? Lisa D Jan 2012 #79

that is the point. the whole point i have been arguing from post ONE. sides. we have the GD sides seabeyond Jan 2012 #82

why are people picking sides?? iverglas Jan 2012 #102

I'm not sure why you felt Lisa D Jan 2012 #104

uh iverglas Jan 2012 #106

I'm not dismissing your concerns. Lisa D Jan 2012 #107

and i KNOW why you felt people were picking sides. and i know you are trying your best to be seabeyond Jan 2012 #105

Taking things too personally -- Remember Me Feb 2012 #184

of course that is a factor. nor have i ever denied any of that nor been unwilling to discuss. seabeyond Jan 2012 #68

I am also speaking globally as a reply in the subthread to justiceischeap's post. Starry Messenger Jan 2012 #75

so... because i am a middle aged women i should readily accept i am a prude, anti sex, asexual, seabeyond Jan 2012 #76

so, not only do i have to listen to all these demeaning comments over and over and over from the men seabeyond Jan 2012 #78

Was justiceischeap saying any of those things in her post? Starry Messenger Jan 2012 #81

Is there something that can be done to amend that going forward? seabeyond Jan 2012 #85

I don't see the with us or against us. Starry Messenger Jan 2012 #89

i ahve asked a couple times how it needs to be worded. i dont care. i havent heard anyone put a seabeyond Jan 2012 #91

sorry, but you just do not know the history iverglas Jan 2012 #103

You are not a prude, not anti-sex, and not asexual, etc. Lisa D Jan 2012 #83

thank you for talking to me like a person, instead of a caricature. i think that is what i was seabeyond Jan 2012 #86

as the person who posted this in the thread where I was attacked iverglas Jan 2012 #61

Okay then. Let me be the first. Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #63

gormy? can you find any posts where this other side (since i have been put on a side i dont want) seabeyond Jan 2012 #70

seabeyond, I've argued repeatedly over the first bullet point because I believe it was and is Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #77

what you're hearing ... iverglas Jan 2012 #88

What you're hearing is not what was said. Gormy Cuss Jan 2012 #93

let's not be disingenuous iverglas Jan 2012 #101

i ahev to agree with iverglas. you guys are saying that lioness has issues. i dont get what they seabeyond Jan 2012 #90

Thank you for getting what I was saying. justiceischeap Jan 2012 #95

how do you want it worded so you are comfortable with you. i want your whole body in, not just a seabeyond Jan 2012 #96

I posted it in the thread you started. justiceischeap Jan 2012 #97

uh huh iverglas Jan 2012 #84

Question Lisa D Jan 2012 #64

me personally iverglas Jan 2012 #92

Thank you for your answer. Lisa D Jan 2012 #94

It seems you're angry with me justiceischeap Jan 2012 #80

there we go iverglas Jan 2012 #98

"I am simply one of many who has had too much of being attacked, and not engaged." justiceischeap Jan 2012 #99

Please don't leave. Lisa D Jan 2012 #100

thank you for writing out what i was too busy too La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2012 #111

do we need to start fresh with a new thread and put this one behind. someone type the SOP, seabeyond Jan 2012 #87

there are some who need to spend an hour reading this thread iverglas Feb 2012 #112

oops! look what my mailbox gave me as I posted that last iverglas Feb 2012 #113

This isn't helping things... Violet_Crumble Feb 2012 #114

really? then how about this one? iverglas Feb 2012 #115

unbelievable; beyond belief iverglas Feb 2012 #116

Where is this "let's all get along spirit"? How ironic you've forgotten what thread this is. CreekDog Feb 2012 #117

Are you serious? I use the phrase 'to call a spade a spade' all the time... Violet_Crumble Feb 2012 #118

I'm damned if I can find it now iverglas Feb 2012 #121

Is it that important to you to use the phrase "call a spade a spade"? CreekDog Feb 2012 #131

there is NO racial connotation in the term. YOU are creating one. but that is not the facts. nt seabeyond Feb 2012 #134

Actually spade is a racist slur used against black people. tammywammy Feb 2012 #141

And "to call a spade a spade" has nothing to do with that usage. redqueen Feb 2012 #142

I've updated my post. tammywammy Feb 2012 #148

One person. redqueen Feb 2012 #153

There was a much longer thread years ago on the phrase tammywammy Feb 2012 #155

I don't think it's racist the way she said it, either... redqueen Feb 2012 #156

I will also say that tammywammy Feb 2012 #160

tar baby is and has always been, hands down, a racist term derived as a derogatory seabeyond Feb 2012 #157

yes. it is. that is why i didnt use it. and then i did research on spade for spade because of seabeyond Feb 2012 #144

Yes, there are people on DU that say the phrase is racist. tammywammy Feb 2012 #150

yet FACT would argue what some people think. but, i recognize we have had this discussion on our seabeyond Feb 2012 #152

What are your thoughts on the words "cunt" and "bitch"? redqueen Feb 2012 #139

yes i've called out name-calling in all kinds of forms CreekDog Feb 2012 #158

I'm sorry, but the notion that "call a spade a spade" iverglas Feb 2012 #140

and now in other news ... well they ain't gonna have iverglas to kick around for a while! iverglas Feb 2012 #178

oh no! i hope you get better quickly. Scout Feb 2012 #179

Why lie? Your photo is jacked from the Internet Whoa_Nelly Feb 2012 #187

Have you ever broke your stock photo? LeftyMom Feb 2012 #188

............. Whoa_Nelly Feb 2012 #189

Depending on where you live, yes, "to call a spade a spade" would have racial overtones justiceischeap Feb 2012 #127

we understand. if you will google the saying, you would know that spade for spade was established seabeyond Feb 2012 #132

Well, it's a common turn of phrase here in Australia and has been for ages... Violet_Crumble Feb 2012 #171

well why don't you tell me? iverglas Feb 2012 #119

Post removed Post removed Feb 2012 #120

ha,yeah iverglas Feb 2012 #123

+1 ellisonz Feb 2012 #176

thanks for that! (nt) iverglas Feb 2012 #177

You're welcome. ellisonz Feb 2012 #180

disagreeing with Iverglas is breaking the rules of the forum? CreekDog Feb 2012 #124

calling her a bigot for saying spade a spade. the hostility of your post. false claims seabeyond Feb 2012 #125

you see NOTHING beyond the nose on your face, and i'm not too sure about that. Scout Feb 2012 #126

for taking iverglas to task over what many call a racial slur CreekDog Feb 2012 #128

Who calls that a racial slur? redqueen Feb 2012 #135

y'know actually iverglas Feb 2012 #143

Oh right, good point. I missed the start of it. redqueen Feb 2012 #146

another point. not about objectionable pageant because every person that had issue stated FIRST seabeyond Feb 2012 #151

Ha yes, I'm probably the only one who is so militant about that stuff. redqueen Feb 2012 #154

we have defended four gay WOMEN and we have been attacked for each one. seabeyond Feb 2012 #147

Well I am one person (but I guess you're saying my opinion doesn't count as your ONE DUer) CreekDog Feb 2012 #161

Are you fucking serious? redqueen Feb 2012 #164

The use of the word and/or the specific term is unwise CreekDog Feb 2012 #165

The use is problematic, I already agreed elsewhere about that... redqueen Feb 2012 #166

I didn't call that poster a bigot --nope. CreekDog Feb 2012 #167

Oh yes, that's right... that's you not knowing the context - again. redqueen Feb 2012 #169

And ah yes, priorities. I ignored this part because it is patently untrue. redqueen Feb 2012 #168

Post removed Post removed Feb 2012 #186

+1 ! Vanje Feb 2012 #170

No, but turning up just to have a go at a member of this group sure is... Violet_Crumble Feb 2012 #172

i never used the term "Pearl Clutcher" CreekDog Feb 2012 #129

ummm..... you really did not read iverglas's posts before going into your rant and criticism? seabeyond Feb 2012 #130

well i quoted her other posts CreekDog Feb 2012 #133

pearlclutcher, post 115. fuckin bigots by prism, post 116. misrepresented seabeyond Feb 2012 #136

This message was self-deleted by its author redqueen Feb 2012 #137

I read them, I did not *memorize* them CreekDog Feb 2012 #162

you didnt address the accusation of bigotry with pearl clutching. you didnt address the people in seabeyond Feb 2012 #163

something I'd also just like to point out iverglas Feb 2012 #122

You're saying you have never used the "alert" function? CreekDog Feb 2012 #138

are you saying that you don't tell the truth iverglas Feb 2012 #145

do you have any intention of participating for the group according to the group's stated purpose seabeyond Feb 2012 #149

of course I am following the rules and as host, if this discussion is against them CreekDog Feb 2012 #159

Point me to the rule that says it's okay to appear out of the blue and abuse a member of this group. Violet_Crumble Feb 2012 #173

need a quote of what you're talking about. CreekDog Feb 2012 #174

Here ya go... Violet_Crumble Feb 2012 #175