Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gormy Cuss

(30,884 posts)
9. I hope that members who didn't comment on the previous thread will comment here.
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 05:00 PM
Jan 2012

For those who missed the first thread, this was the proposed language:

[div class='excerpt']The purpose of the DU Feminists Group is to provide a safe and non-threatening community where all those interested in discussing and trying to resolve the problems that are inherent to women in society can come and work together free from defending the basic premise that issues do exist which specifically affect and limit women, their rights and their potential.

We believe that women do not start on the same rung as men on the ladder of success; that misogyny and sexism do indeed exist in America circa 2005; and that the progress made for women's rights is being seriously and immediately threatened by this administration.

The goal of this group is to understand the problems (and how they affect women), identify the myriad causes (and how they can limit a woman's vision and opportunity) and propose solutions (and how we can bring those solutions in a meaningful way out into the greater community).

About this Group

- This is not a group to discuss gender, class or sexual orientation rights and issues. It is specifically to discuss women's rights and issues as they affect women from a woman's perspective and experience.

- If, for example, you believe that women have already achieved "full participation in the mainstream of American society..., exercising all privileges and responsibilities thereof in truly equal partnership with men... in all aspects of citizenship, public service, employment, education, and family life,"* then this is not the group for you.

- If, for example, you believe that women who have concerns about the prevalance of pornography in our society are uptight, sexually-repressed prudes who need to be enlightened to the "facts" and "realities" of the sex industry, this is not the group for you.

- The terms "feminist/feminism" and "misogyny" have established meanings in the context of women's history. While terminology may be debated, the denigration of these relevant terms will not be allowed.

- Attempts to minimize or dismiss women and/or the issues being discussed are not welcome.

- Like-minded DUers of all genders are encouraged to participate.

* Excerpted from NOW's "Statement of Purpose". http://www.now.org/organization/bylaws.html#ArticleII


in the earlier thread, iverglas had suggested this rewording of the third bullet:

If, for example, you believe that women's concerns about the prevalance of pornography or the practice of prostitution are illegitimate, and that the women who express those concerns are speaking from sexual prudery or animus against men, then this is not the group for you.

Recommendations

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

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
Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»Feminists»fresh thread. i purpose ...»Reply #9