Skip to main content

View Diary: Racism in context (448 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I disagree with that. (19+ / 0-)

    You can't oppose racism and sexism selectively. To say that nobody should ever breath a hint of racism when discussing Barack Obama but it's ok if you are talking about Clarence Thomas turns the whole thing into a political game. My view is that people playing such games are not people whose opinions I take very seriously.

    •  I would agree with that example, but you (5+ / 0-)

      initially made your point using Sarah Palin.  Can you name a political figure trafficking in sexist language/imagery/ideas as much as Palin.  I can't.  It's a confused message at best.  At worst, you're picking a fight within your coalition to defend someone who is the very model of that which you're opposing.  It's not a productive endeavor.

      "Because I am a river to my people."

      by lordcopper on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 06:50:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I have a fairly equally poor regard (14+ / 0-)

        for both Palin and Thomas. If you believe in first amendment principles you defend the rights of unpopular minorities to express their views. One can criticize Palin's views without joining her in the gutter.  

      •  There is no difference between the (7+ / 0-)

        two examples: the principle is exactly the same.  (And I see little to choose between Palin and Thomas, save perhaps that Thomas is more dangerous.)

      •  The issue with the Sarah Palin example is not (7+ / 0-)

        whether Palin has trafficked in sexist imagery (yeah) or whether she in any way deserves our respect.  The issue is whether a woman should be attacked by defining her as female -- in a way that makes femaleness derogatory and contemptible.

        To use a parallel example most people "get" more easily, you don't attack Clarence Thomas by referring to him with the n-word, no matter how badly you think of him. Because to do that uses language that attacks him through his blackness, by defining blackness, in an emotionally charged and powerful way, as contemptible and inferior by it's nature.

        When you attack Palin by calling her a cunt, you are reinforcing negativity toward women in general, reinforcing language that powerfully defines femaleness as contemptible.

        We don't do that.  Not out of respect for Palin but out of respect for women.

        --------------------- “These are troubling times. Corporation are treated like people. People are treated like things. …And if we ever needed to vote, we sure do need to vote now.” -- Rev. Dr. William J. Barber

        by Fiona West on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 11:22:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Really? Have you ever referred to a guy as a (0+ / 0-)

          d@%k, or myriad of terms which mean the same thing? Or do you use this same argument when it happens?  

          "Because I am a river to my people."

          by lordcopper on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 01:07:40 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I have never referred to a man as a dick. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            BMScott

            I think it's kind of the same thing, so I don't do it.  It's not fully the same thing, because it doesn't have the centuries-long accumulation of contempt, or the association with violence.  It's not so likely to be the precursor to being hit or sexually assaulted or hung from the nearest tree. Words come to carry weight as a culture evolves.  "D*ck" is not so heavy.

            And men don't object to it; or if they do, they haven't come to the point of developing a common response that they've shared with us.

            But I don't use it anyway.  I actually don't like using sexually charged words as an expression of hostility or anger or contempt.

            There are lots of other words.

            Do you really believe that calling a woman a cunt is no more an expression of hostility and contempt than calling a man a dick?  That it carries no more charge?  Is that really your experience?  It sure as hell isn't mine.

            --------------------- “These are troubling times. Corporation are treated like people. People are treated like things. …And if we ever needed to vote, we sure do need to vote now.” -- Rev. Dr. William J. Barber

            by Fiona West on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 04:05:11 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I don't use the term, I actually refer to it as (0+ / 0-)

              the "C-word".  The only times I've ever heard it used was by women (attempting to be tough in a traditional male environment).  The word means nothing special to me. I think of it as a crass term that is contrary to the image I cultivate.  

              I've noticed that the word "bitch" is also purported to have some special meaning to women.  Again, the only people I hear referring to women as a "bitch" are other women.  I wouldn't associate either word with "sexism".  I would just presume it to be a derogatory term.

              "Because I am a river to my people."

              by lordcopper on Tue Mar 11, 2014 at 04:24:05 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (135)
  • Community (62)
  • Elections (40)
  • 2016 (38)
  • Environment (36)
  • Bernie Sanders (36)
  • Hillary Clinton (31)
  • Culture (30)
  • Media (29)
  • Republicans (29)
  • Climate Change (27)
  • Education (23)
  • Spam (23)
  • Congress (23)
  • Civil Rights (22)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Barack Obama (21)
  • Labor (21)
  • Law (20)
  • Texas (20)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site