Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Dirty Words?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedDirty Words?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 8>
Author
Message
Textbook View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281
Direct Link To This Post Topic: Dirty Words?
    Posted: June 20 2012 at 06:25
Michigan democrat Lisa Brown was barred from further participation in a debate on abortion after saying the word "vagina". Republicans found the use of the word distasteful and inappropriate.
 
So you can't say vagina in a debate on abortion? Seriously?

Vagina isn't a dirty word guys. Every woman has one. The word can be used in dirty ways sure, but so can every word. An abortion discussion is not an unreasonable context for saying it.
 
To me the whole thing looks like Republican pandering to a puritanical fanbase, the people who believe that America can become a stronger country through sexual conservatism.
 
Anyway, in protest, Brown and 11 other female lawmakers protested by doing a reading of the infamous Vagina Monologues on the steps of the capitol. It turned into an impromptu rally with 2,500 people attending and chanting "Vagina! Vagina! Vagina!" together.
 
Some might find this event and this thread childish, but I think it's a concern that in the government of a supposedly liberal country, you can't use the correct term for female anatomy in a discussion about women's health.
Back to Top
Textbook View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 06:40
Here's the quote: "Mr Speaker, I'm flattered that you're all so interested in my vagina, but no means no."

Tennessee Republican Mike Callton said "What she said was offensive. It was so offensive, I don't even want to say it in front of women. I would not say that in mixed company."

Very concerning. Callton explicitly says he would say vagina in front of men, but not in front of women. What is that about? Women are so fragile and sensitive that hearing a man name their genitalia will somehow damage them? And the word vagina is offensive? You were born from one. You create your own children using one. In my view, this whole thing is just symptomatic of a narrative going back to the dawn of recorded history to stigmatise female sexuality so that men can use it to dominate them and Callton's quote backs that right up.
Back to Top
Vompatti View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: October 22 2005
Location: elsewhere
Status: Offline
Points: 67471
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 06:42
What happened to the other thread? Did the republicans hide it? (It had the V-word in it.)
Back to Top
Textbook View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 06:46
It was deleted.
I have reposted it because I do not accept that discussing the workings of the political system and gender politics is out of place in the General Discussion forum.
 
However, as an olive branch to admin, I have rewritten it, making it more reserved than the original. The original thread did contain a fair bit of histrionic ranting and I accept that it could have been seen as inflammatory. I hope my writing style was the issue, not the use of the word vagina or my anti-Republican stance, for either of those would be very worrying indeed.
Back to Top
colorofmoney91 View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: March 16 2008
Location: Biosphere
Status: Offline
Points: 22774
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 06:54
I pretty much greet every woman with the word "vagina". Vagina should be absolutely fine, but "p***y" is a word that makes me cringe when used in any way.

In any case, the speaker was most likely talking to adults, and they shouldn't be such babies.


Edited by colorofmoney91 - June 20 2012 at 06:54
Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 07:10
All seems a bit crazy to me.  To react to a legitimate word used in context in this way. How american.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 07:27
Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

All seems a bit crazy to me.  To react to a legitimate word used in context in this way. How american.
To be fair Ian, regardless of the knee-jerk reaction from both camps after the event - the objection at the time was of the context not the word, "Mr Speaker, I'm flattered that you're all so interested in my lady parts, but no means no", would have been just as inapproriate and frankly, cheap. 

Edited by Dean - June 20 2012 at 07:35
What?
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 07:35
Amanda Marcotte 
I want to address the content of the bill itself, which has more condescending sexism and outright sadistic misogyny in it than the comment thread on a blog post about women in video games. A quick summary of the ugliness within:

1) Michigan legislators have their eye on punishing women who try to get their abortions as quickly as possible after discovering their pregnancy, well before there’s any fetus to speak of. The bill forces women who want to take RU-486, which must be used in the first 63 days of pregnancy, to do so in the presence of a doctor. For the women who live in the 82 percent of Michigan counties without an abortion provider, this adds expense and time that usually result in women waiting until further along in their pregnancy to abort.

2) After all is said and done, even the existing abortion providers might not be there, since this bill is stuffed full of unnecessary regulations intended to shut down clinics, such as requiring clinics that only do medication abortion to have a full surgical suite that they will never actually use. If that expense doesn’t do them in, the requirement that they carry excessive levels of malpractice insurance will. These regulations have nothing to do with actual concerns about women’s safety. Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures around, especially in comparison with childbirth, which is 10 times more dangerous.

3) Doctors will now be required to screen for domestic violence and coercion before performing the abortion. In theory, this is the least offensive part of the bill, because counseling women to make sure that abortion is their own choice is already a standard part of abortion care. The problem is that the bill’s definition of “coercion” is troublingly vague and of course, utterly one-sided. The people who stand outside of abortion clinics to scare and harass women seeking abortion are coercive and abusive, but the bill doesn’t address this at all.

4) In addition, the House is expected to pass a bill banning abortions after 20 weeks, except to save a woman’s life, on the false premise that fetuses at that stage of gestation can feel pain. Bans on these kinds of abortions have a particularly sadistic bent, since women who seek abortions at that stage usually have the saddest stories of all. These abortions are most commonly in response to fetal defects that are harder to detect earlier in a pregnancy. Women and especially young girls who are suffering from sexual trauma and extreme poverty are overrepresented in this category. Overall, only 1.5 percent of abortions happen this late in pregnancy. 

As extreme as this bill is, anti-choice legislators in Michigan have even grander goals, hoping to eliminate abortion and seriously cripple contraception access. State Rep. Mike Shirkey made this clear, announcing on the radio, “Until we completely eliminate abortions in Michigan and completely defund Planned Parenthood, we have work to do.”

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2012/06/18/michigan_vagina_dust_up_underlines_the_ugliness_of_the_anti_choice_mega_bill_.html



Edited by Slartibartfast - June 20 2012 at 07:38
Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Back to Top
Epignosis View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32588
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 07:37
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

All seems a bit crazy to me.  To react to a legitimate word used in context in this way. How american.
To be fair Ian, regardless of the knee-jerk reaction from both camps after the event - the objection at the time was of the context not the word, "Mr Speaker, I'm flattered that you're all so interested in my lady parts, but no means no", would have been just as inapproriate and frankly, cheap. 


I completely agree.
Back to Top
Textbook View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 07:52
Slarty: Hear hear. That's more like the post I probably should've been making,
Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 07:54
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

All seems a bit crazy to me.  To react to a legitimate word used in context in this way. How american.
To be fair Ian, regardless of the knee-jerk reaction from both camps after the event - the objection at the time was of the context not the word, "Mr Speaker, I'm flattered that you're all so interested in my lady parts, but no means no", would have been just as inapproriate and frankly, cheap. 


I completely agree.

As I do now. I have now read the quote which I didn't before. That'll teach me.
Back to Top
Sean Trane View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Prog Folk

Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20682
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 08:51

Geeeezzzzz, it's not only in abortion debates that censorship worksOuch

 

Some people here don't like vaginas as well!!TongueLOL

 
 
 
 
let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword
Back to Top
HolyMoly View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: April 01 2009
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Points: 26138
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 09:25
I think the word was fine (it's an actual anatomical term, after all), but her tone and her use of the word was unprofessional, sarcastic, and rather accusatory - "I'm flattered that YOU are so interested...."  Maybe she shouldn't have been barred from the debate, but I see no problem with at least reprimanding her for that.  And I'm not a Republican nor a Democrat, so I'm not following party lines here either.  I just know that if I was participating in such a debate, I'd find the tone of the remark distasteful and unprofessional.

I would expect similar treatment if I were to make such a comment at my own job.  It's not about freedom of speech or the legitimacy of certain words, it's about professional rules of conduct.
My other avatar is a Porsche

It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle if it is lightly greased.

-Kehlog Albran
Back to Top
Ambient Hurricanes View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 25 2011
Location: internet
Status: Offline
Points: 2549
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 09:41
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Amanda Marcotte 
I want to address the content of the bill itself, which has more condescending sexism and outright sadistic misogyny in it than the comment thread on a blog post about women in video games. A quick summary of the ugliness within:

1) Michigan legislators have their eye on punishing women who try to get their abortions as quickly as possible after discovering their pregnancy, well before there’s any fetus to speak of. The bill forces women who want to take RU-486, which must be used in the first 63 days of pregnancy, to do so in the presence of a doctor. For the women who live in the 82 percent of Michigan counties without an abortion provider, this adds expense and time that usually result in women waiting until further along in their pregnancy to abort.

2) After all is said and done, even the existing abortion providers might not be there, since this bill is stuffed full of unnecessary regulations intended to shut down clinics, such as requiring clinics that only do medication abortion to have a full surgical suite that they will never actually use. If that expense doesn’t do them in, the requirement that they carry excessive levels of malpractice insurance will. These regulations have nothing to do with actual concerns about women’s safety. Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures around, especially in comparison with childbirth, which is 10 times more dangerous.

3) Doctors will now be required to screen for domestic violence and coercion before performing the abortion. In theory, this is the least offensive part of the bill, because counseling women to make sure that abortion is their own choice is already a standard part of abortion care. The problem is that the bill’s definition of “coercion” is troublingly vague and of course, utterly one-sided. The people who stand outside of abortion clinics to scare and harass women seeking abortion are coercive and abusive, but the bill doesn’t address this at all.

4) In addition, the House is expected to pass a bill banning abortions after 20 weeks, except to save a woman’s life, on the false premise that fetuses at that stage of gestation can feel pain. Bans on these kinds of abortions have a particularly sadistic bent, since women who seek abortions at that stage usually have the saddest stories of all. These abortions are most commonly in response to fetal defects that are harder to detect earlier in a pregnancy. Women and especially young girls who are suffering from sexual trauma and extreme poverty are overrepresented in this category. Overall, only 1.5 percent of abortions happen this late in pregnancy. 

As extreme as this bill is, anti-choice legislators in Michigan have even grander goals, hoping to eliminate abortion and seriously cripple contraception access. State Rep. Mike Shirkey made this clear, announcing on the radio, “Until we completely eliminate abortions in Michigan and completely defund Planned Parenthood, we have work to do.”

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2012/06/18/michigan_vagina_dust_up_underlines_the_ugliness_of_the_anti_choice_mega_bill_.html

 
I see absolutely no "sexism" or "misogyny" in any of these components of the bill.  They're trying to make it more difficult for women to have abortions, in order that less human beings may be killed.  You may as well argue that the law discriminates against murderers because it imposes penalties for killing people.
I love dogs, I've always loved dogs
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 09:43
Please, please - I beg of you. Do not turn this into an abortion debate.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Ambient Hurricanes View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 25 2011
Location: internet
Status: Offline
Points: 2549
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 09:45
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Please, please - I beg of you. Do not turn this into an abortion debate.
 
I wasn't the one who brought it up.
I love dogs, I've always loved dogs
Back to Top
Smurph View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 11 2012
Location: Columbus&NYC
Status: Offline
Points: 3167
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 09:52
Why is contraception an issue? We should make it readily available. Do we REALLY want more poverse babies running around?
 
Also, why is abortion an issue? It only makes sense to me that if you make abortion illegal, everyone will get crappy coathanger backyard abortions and stds and crime will rise. I'm not really personally for abortion, just like I'm not a huge fan of alcohol, but as soon as that became illegal it started a whole shizzton of crime.

Also, why are ANY dirty words taboo anymore? I mean, we've already brainwashed our children into oversexualization and fisted our culture and pulled some brains out of it's ass. Basically, I still hate everything.
 
 
But really this whole freaking out over the word vagina feels like a joke. She shoudl have been kicked out though not for her use of vagina, but her tone of voice and the way she was attempting to argue her position.
 
Do you REALLY think that condescending to people and using a spiteful tone of voice is going to change ANYONE'S opinion? This woman is doing nothing to help her cause at all. What an idiot.


Edited by Smurph - June 20 2012 at 09:53
Back to Top
HolyMoly View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: April 01 2009
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Points: 26138
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 09:56
I think it's time politicians were held to the same standard of professional conduct and ethics that the rest of us are.
My other avatar is a Porsche

It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle if it is lightly greased.

-Kehlog Albran
Back to Top
HolyMoly View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: April 01 2009
Location: Atlanta
Status: Offline
Points: 26138
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 09:56
..........aaaaaand we're off
My other avatar is a Porsche

It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle if it is lightly greased.

-Kehlog Albran
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784
Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 20 2012 at 10:04
Originally posted by Smurph Smurph wrote:

 
Do you REALLY think that condescending to people and using a spiteful tone of voice is going to change ANYONE'S opinion? This woman is doing nothing to help her cause at all. What an idiot.


You realize the supreme irony here right?
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 8>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.201 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.