Feminists

obamanut2012

(27,932 posts)

20. Thank you for admitting it was intended to be exclusionary

Wed Jan 11, 2012, 06:07 PM

Jan 2012

I'm also tickled pink to see that now I'm being called out by you for posting in LGBT. I feel honored to be included with the other ladies you have called out about this.

I neither ask for nor want to "inspire your confidence." You do not control what people post outside of this group, nor what we post in it.

I refuse to engage with you anymore, for as JIC stated, you cannot discuss, as your post to me proves.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

64 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

fresh thread. i purpose that the sop gender issue is moved down [View all] seabeyond Jan 2012 OP

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