General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: DU should be collectively ashamed that people here deny that objectification of women is a problem. [View all]ElboRuum
(4,717 posts)You have to first accept the fact that objectification is an actual thing.
I do not.
It is a word used to demonize another thing. And quite a few people have taken the time and built up a little narrative to make sure that when they say that word to demonize that other thing, the word they use seems legit.
Moreover those who take it is a fact would of course expect DU to be shamed because good progressives don't objectify, they just don't. Moreover, good progressives pull out the Wagging Finger of Shame (TM). The WFOS is just what good progressives do when they feel that they are around bad progressives. It's on page two of the Good Progressives' Code of Conduct, right after the table of contents.
Seems to me, I am a grand objectifier in the estimation of the OP, a phallopressor of the worst order. Thus I need a good heaping helping of the WFOS.
How is this NOT about me (and others who share the view)? Oh, wait. It IS. It certainly isn't about YOU, is it?
I'm surprisingly OK with this, I suppose its due to the fact that I don't get too bunged up when I'm accused of being a bad progressive. It's just the pile of dung that gets left when progressives disagree on things and one of them can't accept it.
As to conspiracy, well, don't conspiracies require more than one person? Don't they require a bit of secretiveness? It's as though there is, in your mind, the requirement for more than one person to shame another. No, the OP's doing a grand job by him/herself. I see no validity in your statement. Kind of odd for you to even suggest it, really.