Godwin's Law is outdated. While it is useful to help people not to trivialize the horrors of the holocaust, the problem arises when someone like the Bush administration comes into power with an unparalleled lust for power and military victories. So, while Bush is not the moral equivalent of the Nazis, this country will devolve into a dictatorial state in its own unique way similar to what happened to the Nazis in the 1930's if we do not serve as an adequate check on their unbridled abuse of power. Drawing parallels from the Nazi's history is a valid exercise as long as it does not devolve into mindless name calling which the right is so guilty of doing.
With that in mind, I propose a new law for this community: Rush's Law. This law states that if you use a Rush Limbaugh talking point in an argument, you have already lost the argument. During the recent fights, I have repeatedly heard talking points coming straight out of the mouth of Rush Limbaugh in these forums. I'm not going to mention names -- you know who you are.
I am not trying to censor anybody or recommend banning. I do not have that kind of power. But I don't know who you are, beyond your screen name and your previous diaries and comments. When you use Rush Limbaugh talking points, you may very well be a Rush dittohead, for all I know. If you want to disagree with me, fine. If you want to take an unpopular position, fine. But don't fall back on dittohead vocabulary and fail to bring facts to the table that we can think about. Again, I am not trying to censor anybody. I am just telling you how you are coming across to me. You are coming across to me as a dittohead and I will rate it and respond accordingly. So, if you wonder why you get a low rating from me and others, that is probably the reason why.
Here are some frequently-used Rush phrases which have also crept into poster's arguments here:
It's her fault she got raped!
Variations might include: "It's her fault she's poor!" First of all, if you can figure out how to control if you're born into a poor or rich family, good for you. If you can figure out how to help a Boeing worker in Seattle over 50 get a job and make more than half of what they earned before they started outsourcing, we would love to hear your secrets. Some circumstances, like manufacturing plant closings and layoffs, are beyond our control. To blame the poor for their problems is to ignore the facts of life.
Regarding rape, only 40% of women report rapes. You are serving as an enabler, because you are ready to sit in the throne of judgment and condemn from the cozy confines of your computer rather than use such stories as an opportunity to educate yourself about rape through The Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network and other such groups. Women are afraid to report rape because they're afraid that the officer will be a person like you who will sit in the throne of judgment and blame the woman, rather than place blame where it belongs, on the rapist.
And furthermore, even if the rape is reported, there is only a 16% chance that the report will result in prison time. And factoring in the rapes not reported, 15 out of 16 rapists walk away scot-free. Even if the case goes to trial, at least 42% of all rape cases result in acquittals. And I wonder if rates are even lower for non-white women.
Rapists are not normally evil men lurking behind bushes. They are normally friends, neighbors, acquaintances, and even husbands. That is another common myth that people have about rapists.
You are a man-hater!
Wrong. Most of the women here who have talked about their experiences with rape, sexism, and discrimination have made it very clear that they do NOT hate all men. If a woman like Bluebird of Happiness writes about her personal experiences and you feel threatened, the proper way to address that is to take the passage she writes which makes you feel threatened and say, "I feel threatened by this because..." I would try to address your concerns as best I can, and I'm sure many others would as well. That's healthy. But don't try to deny the reality of her experiences or try to accuse her of being a man-hater. That is when the 0's will start flying.
Feminism, for the most part, is not about replacing our current patriarchal system with a matriarchy. But who gets more pay for equal work? Men. Who gets routinely ignored during the campaign seasons by both Democrats and Republicans for fear of being called a Friend of Murphy Brown? Single women. Who tries to control a woman's body when it's her pregnancy? Men (usually). Who claimed that we don't need an Equal Rights Amendment because we might have to draft women into the army? Men (usually). Who is supposed to be the head of the household in a typical fundamentalist family? The man. Which gender has more people elected to office? Men. Which gender has more CEO's and upper-level managers? Men. Which gender rapes a member of the opposite gender more? Men, for the reasons stated above.
So when you hear a feminist writer blasting the patriarchal society in which we live in, they are not being a misandrist. They are simply stating the fact that we are living in a patriarchal-dominated society in which white males receive most of the benefits and in which other races and genders frequently can't break into the circle unless they play along. I know of no feminist in these boards who thinks women are superior to men. All feminists here want is for all people to treat each other with proper courtesy, not to tell people to "get over it" and "move on," and not to deny the validity of people's experiences. If we are to win the battle for equality, we have to start in our own backyard, or Karl Rove will laugh at us and call us a bunch of hypocritical idiots.
The PC Crowd!
As Kid Oakland wrote in his diary about the PC movement, the phrase "You're not PC!" was a way in liberal high schools in the West to express social disapproval of racist and homophobic terms. That was clearly a mistake in 20/20 hindsight, as it presents liberalism as something that it is not: an ideologically-driven set of beliefs and values that people must subscribe to or be considered bad.
Liberalism is the belief that all human beings are equal and that we should actively work to achieve that equality regardless of race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. Liberalism also values safety nets such as Social Security and Medicare as basic human rights in addition to the rights granted under the Constitution. Liberalism holds that we should actively examine our own values from a religious, ethical, moral, and practical standpoint and that we should always be prepared to answer with facts.
Political Correctness, as defined by Rush Limbaugh and other right-wingers, has no place in liberalism. So to accuse liberals of being "PC" is a factual error and damages the poster's credibility.
On the other hand, the right-winger have always practiced Political Correctness. Back in the 1960's, long before the term "PC" was ever introduced, my dad's bible college would mark students down for not following the established doctrines or for demonstrating any kind of independent thought. Emperor Dobson demands that Bush do what he says on abortion and other such issues, or the GOP will walk the plank in 2008. These are classic examples of Political Correctness on the right.
"Pussy" is not sexist because if it were, [insert proposed term here] would have to be considered a slur against [insert proposed group here]!
That is a smokescreen used by Rush to foreclose meaningful discussion about how we use our language in our society. But the problem is that the second term has nothing to do with the first term. Each word is unique in its usage and interpretation by its audience and must therefore be considered individually. So, to say that a second word would have to be thrown out because it is a slur against another group might be a valid topic for future discussion. But it has nothing to do with the original word that caused all the furor in the first place.
And fears that examination of how we use words here and elsewhere would stifle creativity are groundless. Martin Luther King could speak and write without slandering any groups of people. Other such writers and speakers include Gandhi, Dickens, Twain, Feingold, Dean, Durbin, Boxer, Conyers, and Lakoff. A good way to see how you can use language effectively and not use blanket smears against any groups would be to read a good book rather than picking fights with people on these boards and accusing them of being PC.
Liberals hate male sexuality!
Wrong. Liberals and feminists hate the use of inappropriate male sexuality. Last night, I made the point from my own experiences that glancing and smiling is OK and makes the woman feel flattered, staring beyond the first glance is bad and makes even my friends uncomfortable, and leering and catcalls is embarrassing to a woman just like I would be embarrassed if someone did that to me. In addition, what a man does and thinks about in his own bedroom is his own business. If a man and a woman have consensual sex, that is their business as well.
When the man crosses the line is when he starts to believe that only his feelings should matter and that the woman is just an object. That is a dangerous attitude to take. Modern psychology shows that psychopaths of any gender believe that the world only exists around them and that the world exists to benefit them. Therefore, when they rob a bank, they are only taking what is rightfully theirs. Or when a man rapes a woman, he is only taking what is rightfully his. That is the kind of twisted logic that happens when men -- and women -- decide that only their feelings matter and that the feelings of other people don't matter.
The women I know appreciate being complimented for their looks and appearance. But they do not appreciate being regarded as mere sex objects for my personal gratification or anybody else's and they do not appreciate men who try to overwhelm then by calling them every few hours to see if they're OK, showering them with gifts, and being jealous if they talk to another guy.
These are a few examples of Rush's phrases that I have seen used here. This is not a complete list, so posts with any other Rush phrases I didn't include are welcome.
The problem with using a Rush Limbaugh phrase is that it forecloses any kind of meaningful discussion. That is the poster's way of saying, "I'm right, and that is the end of the discussion!"
Finally, this is not an attempt to censor anybody. I am simply telling people how their attempts to attack feminism and far-left thinking come across to me. In order to play any meaningful part in the discussion, people must do more than just use Rush Limbaugh's phrases and attempt to out-shout the opposition like CNN Crossfire.