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)
17. Either one believes that words have power or one does not.
Tue May 21, 2013, 11:48 AM
May 2013

Exercises in taking ownership of words works for some but not for all. If I'm called a bitch it doesn't do anything to my self-esteem but I don't like the word's use as a way of denigrating women. Bitch is just reduced calorie c**t.

But back to why the above proposal was made. In most public arenas we use language filters. For example, most people don't swear in church or in an elementary school. Most people won't use deeply charged racist terms in public even when they believe that other races are inferior. Why? Because we have social conventions on language usage. Such conventions do change over time, but we always have words and phrases that we self-censor based on the social situation. Yes, we do in fact police words by social agreement.

The above proposal was an attempt to reach some common understanding on DU that sexist language is as welcome as racist or homophobic language. The point is moot though since admin thinks there's no reason to do this.

Recommendations

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

Proposal to Amend DU TOS Language [View all] Gormy Cuss Dec 2012 OP
I agree... Deep13 Dec 2012 #1
True. Most sites already have that. nt TheBlackAdder Dec 2012 #4
Based on some recent Meta discussion, it will make at least a small difference Gormy Cuss Dec 2012 #5
Please do. greatauntoftriplets Dec 2012 #2
Perhaps you need to ask the 3 Male Admins to: "Make Me A Sandwich While You're At It"? TheBlackAdder Dec 2012 #3
eliminating bigotries also removes opportunities for organizing and education.... mike_c Dec 2012 #6
Perhaps by restricting misogynistic comments, it forces Introspection. TheBlackAdder Dec 2012 #7
We can have discourse without being mysoginistic. Deep13 Dec 2012 #9
Absolutely not. Words, alone, devoid of meaning should not be banned. Messages of hatred may be. leveymg Dec 2012 #8
Sure you can. TheBlackAdder Dec 2012 #11
The OP does not request banning specific words. Gormy Cuss Dec 2012 #12
So, what you seek to ban are gender-based or referencing insults? leveymg Dec 2012 #13
I'm seeking to have more clarity in the TOS on bigoted speech here. Gormy Cuss Dec 2012 #14
These are expressions I do not like seeing here... Deep13 Dec 2012 #10
This message was self-deleted by its author ShazzieB Jan 2022 #24
I wonder how many examples libodem Mar 2013 #15
Either one believes that words have power or one does not. Gormy Cuss May 2013 #17
This message was self-deleted by its author ShazzieB Jan 2022 #25
Policing Language and the Necessity of Policing Sexism and Misogyny jaclynisradical May 2013 #16
This message was self-deleted by its author ShazzieB Nov 2020 #23
I Think This is a Great Discussion to Have dballance May 2013 #18
Your last paragraph here is key IMHO. Gormy Cuss May 2013 #19
This is good and I hope it happens. openinclusivity Sep 2014 #20
I support this proposal... awoke_in_2003 Sep 2014 #21
It seems they have not lately yuiyoshida Jan 2015 #22
i vote yes. Lunabell Apr 2023 #26
Yes LeoLady8558 May 2024 #27
Welcome to DU, LEoLady! lastlib May 2024 #28
welcome to DU gopiscrap May 2024 #29
Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2024 #30
Latest Discussions»Alliance Forums»Women's Rights & Issues»Proposal to Amend DU TOS ...»Reply #17