the old dude clutches his pearls

[franksolich]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/124052640

Oh my.

The old dude lit an epic campfire, one for the rages.

Stinky The Clown (45,103 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

"Pearl Clutching"

I used this phrase in a thread the other day. The thread promptly went off track and was pretty much hijacked with a fairly long, but very uninformative, discussion of the term.

I have since google around managed to do little more than waste time, not finding anything definitive. Some say it is offensive to them personally, and to a group of people to which they belong. Other people in that very same group say it is not offensive and those taking it offensively are working at being offended. I do not side with either group. As I said, I found all of this very much inconclusive.

Nonetheless, when this first started for me, some people said the term was offensive to them. In light of that, I edited the phrase out my post and explained what I did and why. To wit:

edit to change the term "pearl clutching" to "fainting and gnashing of teeth" so as to preserve the thread's main point and because some found it offensive. I honestly didn't see it as such, but I'm gladly changing it out of respect for, and deference to, others.

That didn't stop the thread from going on and on about the term. I was subsequently directly chastised for having used it.

Until this particular thread, I never knew the term to be offensive. That didn't stop some of my more ardent critics, one of whom, to this day, while claiming to be offended, has not replied to my several attempts at contacting him/her to discuss it.

So I find myself where I was before. Is the term generally held to be offensive? Some in the thread in question said it was held to be offensive only by a very small subset. Others hold that it is widely offensive.

So I ask again - in good faith - whether the term is widely offensive or not.

I am happy to not use it, but I really dislike political correctness for its own sake. Further, if the offense taken is the province of a very few, I may choose to live my life without worry about using the phrase. On the other hand, if it is, indeed widely offensive, I will be perfectly fine living out my days not using it. It just isn't that important to me one way or another.

By the way, when someone says they're offended by something, I think we have a moral obligation to honor that. In return, the offended person has some moral obligation as well, and that is to give someone the benefit of the doubt at the first time you encounter them using a term you find offensive, particularly when they let you know they were unaware of the term's impact.

People of all kinds are perfectly capable of being complete jerks. Offensive people are often jerks, but there are times when even people who are being offended can be jerks.

yardwork (30,895 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

1. Some people find it extremely offensive. Isn't that enough? I appreciated your changing your OP.

I'm not sure why you are opening this back up with a new OP. Is this necessary? I know for a fact that many DUers were very happy that you voluntarily edited your original OP.

Warren Stupidity (25,601 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

38. We would be reduced to "have a nice day".

If we ditch everything anyone finds offensive this board will become pablum.

2ndAmForComputers (398 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

2. Until I read about the "other" meaning here a few days ago...

...I was 100% sure it referred to prudish matron ladies dressed in early 20th century fashion, vigorously holding their pearl necklaces and being outraged.

I'm sure I wasn't the only one.

MH1 (12,069 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

52. Er, um, I missed that 'other' meaning.

What you thought before is what I still think.

It seems EVERY even slightly colorful expression has some nasty alter ego within some subculture or interest group, that is totally missed by the rest of society.

Therefore, to exclude all colorful expressions that offend anyone at all - which by the above premise is every one of them - is going to lead to a very very dull discussion board. (and ultimately a very low traffic discussion board.)

But please, could you enlighten those of us who managed to miss it?

(and yes, apparently I need to get out more.)

hlthe2b (39,133 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

7. I can understand that it never occurred to you that the term can be offensive...

and I applaud you on being open to the feelings of others to determine not to use it.

I think it falls in that same group of old, quaint, terms that tend to stereotype women as weak, or prone to needless hysteria ("the vapours"-- as it were), to overreact (and thus in need of the proverbial "fainting couch")... I remember when during the 2008 campaign when the news media used terms like "cackle" to describe then Senator Hillary Clinton's voice. All these terms just reek with the stereotypes of old. Some have pointed out that the term is now used in a very derogatory way towards those who are gay... Ironic, isn't it that a term traditionally used to paint women as the "lesser" gender, is apparently now being used to deride those who are gay?

I don't tend to take offense when the term is used in proper context so that it is obviously not implying a gender (or gender orientation) insult...But, I don't think it hurts to be aware of those terms that have been used inappropriately against one group or another.

RiffRandell (1,470 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

17. **** that.

The more "offensive" words in "their opinion" is fair ****ing game. I really have to laugh at some of the most vocal people against sexist words have an avatar of a particular show that is so derogatory to all minorities---fyi I love the show---and laugh it off, as the creator is a huge liberal.

.
.
.
.
.

EFerrari (160,375 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

70. Pearl clutching is gender marked because most men don't wear them.

And the term itself can be used to bully women via dismissiveness.

scarletwoman (23,267 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

82. In the larger culture it's used to describe a particular behavior that can be exhibited by either gender.

Rick Santorum is a perfect example of a male pearl clutcher, with his ultra-dramatic and exaggerated rhetoric of moral outrage.

Must we bleed our language dry of all metaphor in order ensure that no one can possibly be offended?

EFerrari (160,375 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

85. It's a gender based figure that insults people by comparing them to histrionic women. Much like calling a man "Nancy" when he's not "masculine" enough or telling a boy not to run "like a girl".

As a writer I love specific figures, the more specific the image, the better. And people use language at their own risk.

scarletwoman (23,267 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

89. Is not the female gender part of the human race?

Females can be histrionic. So can men. Just because a particular image of histrionic behavior is of a female doesn't mean that it's a behavior solely confined to females.

A metaphorical image of a particular human behavior will necessarily depict either a male or a female, since there is no such thing as non-gendered human being.

In Jungian terms every male has an inner anima (feminine) and every female has an inner animus (masculine). The anima has both positive and negative aspects, as does the animus.

It is simply not useful to deny that the feminine (as well as the masculine, of course) has any negative aspects, imho.

EFerrari (160,375 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

92. Stereotypes don't posit that females can be histrionic but that they are.

Ruby the Liberal (13,412 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

94. Actually, bigots posit that.

Stereotypes say things like "x TENDS to be" or "MOST X do" (as in most of 'em, so all get the label)

Bigots use things like "x ARE" (as in all of 'em).

EFerrari (160,375 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

119. Stereotype

A stereotype is a popular belief about specific types of individuals. The concepts of "stereotype" and "prejudice" are often confused with many other different meanings. Stereotypes are standardized and simplified conceptions of groups based on some prior assumptions. Another name for stereotyping is bias. A bias is a
tendency, most of these are good like knowing to eat food instead of paper clips, but sometimes stereotyping can turn into discrimination if we misinterpret a bias and act upon it in a negative manner.

zappaman (4,164 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

96. Except ANYBODY can be histrionic regardless of sex, race, creed, or pearls.

When are you going to give us the list of every single word or phrase you find offensive, so we can make sure we don't offend you?

EFerrari (160,375 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

117. This metaphor is not about anyone, it's female based.

And how many of you are there?

.
.
.
.
.

snagglepuss (7,485 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

162. Well said. There are people simply looking for an opportunity to take offence.

I'm offended by the word 'shit'. If someone uses it repeatedly they're on ignore. I suggest those who can't handle something as innocuous as clutching at pearls do the same.

As I said, it's a big campfire, blazing lustily.

[BlueStateSaint]

Translated:

The old StinkDUde's balls have been replaced by two tiny pearls about the size of birdshot, and Sparkly is threatening to take those away.

[Big Dog]

Nonetheless, when this first started for me, some people said the term was offensive to them. In light of that, I edited the phrase out my post and explained what I did and why.

Stinky Dude, what a weak sister. That Nancy-boy really should put on his big girl pants and stand up for himself.

[Big Dog]

EFerrari (160,375 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

70. Pearl clutching is gender marked because most men don't wear them.

And the term itself can be used to bully women via dismissiveness.

EFerrari (160,375 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

85. It's a gender based figure that insults people by comparing them to histrionic women. Much like calling a man "Nancy" when he's not "masculine" enough or telling a boy not to run "like a girl".

As a writer I love specific figures, the more specific the image, the better. And people use language at their own risk.

Beth sure has her panties in a bunch.

[thundley4]

EFerrari (160,375 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

70. Pearl clutching is gender marked because most men don't wear them.

And the term itself can be used to bully women via dismissiveness.

Only the faggots that don't swallow, wear them right Beth?

[miskie]

Why don't we just rewrite the phrase in a way that the primitives will unanimously approve of ?

I think "Clutching his/her anal beads" would fit the bill nicely for them...

[Celtic Rose]

When I hear "Pearl Clutching", I get an image of a Victorian matron in all of her offended glory.  Anybody who is offended by that phrase needs to pull up her big her panties.

[USA4ME]

Really!?!  A 200 post thread on the phrase "pearl clutching??"

Is there any reason the primitives shouldn't all be summarily executed?  Well, besides the fact that their stupidity is entertaining?

.

[Delmar]

DUde, this taking offense by your fellow DUmmies is just a tactic you lefties use to shut people up that you disagree with.  You should just tell them to knock off the fake outrage and that this is Murica, a free country and you can say whatever you want and if they don't like it you have something else that they can clutch.

[Ballygrl]

I don't find the term offensive, but then again I don't take offense to much, those that take offense to everything seem to be kind of unhappy people anyway.

[Ballygrl]

2ndAmForComputers (398 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

2. Until I read about the "other" meaning here a few days ago...

...I was 100% sure it referred to prudish matron ladies dressed in early 20th century fashion, vigorously holding their pearl necklaces and being outraged.

I'm sure I wasn't the only one.

What other meaning is there?

[Ballygrl]

Reading Beth's post I just have to . She can protest all she wants, but yes, women get hormonal and yes they at times clutch their pearls at some stupid things because it's hormones talking. Why is it that they can't face simple facts? not all, but I've seen enough women get hysterical, myself included. No matter what, they're never going to be as strong as men hence my reluctance to see them have bigger roles in the military, and why I think standards shouldn't be lowered for them to do things like become firemen, fireperson, firewomen, whatever the term is. There are physical and hormonal differences of the 2 sexes, there's nothing wrong with that.

[AllosaursRus]

WOW! *I bet they'd really get pissed off with terms like "Asshole Bandit", "Hershey Bar Highway Recipient", or perhaps "Egor the Butt ****er", I'm sure that'd get rise out of 'em!It's real easy to spot the liberals in the crowd. They're the ones who get offended when anyone says "bite me"! You've just either committed a faux pas, (hell, I don't know haw to spell it, it's not in my spellin' dictionary), or invited some door knob sucker out on a date!

[BEG]

Reading Beth's post I just have to . She can protest all she wants, but yes, women get hormonal and yes they at times clutch their pearls at some stupid things because it's hormones talking. Why is it that they can't face simple facts? not all, but I've seen enough women get hysterical, myself included. No matter what, they're never going to be as strong as men hence my reluctance to see them have bigger roles in the military, and why I think standards shouldn't be lowered for them to do things like become firemen, fireperson, firewomen, whatever the term is. There are physical and hormonal differences of the 2 sexes, there's nothing wrong with that.

This ought to piss off the progressives. 

[youtube=425,350]YdYjycEs7Ow[/youtube]

[Ballygrl]

Quantess
23. What gets me, is that once a small group of people have decided,

Last edited Fri Feb 24, 2012, 06:51 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)
after much debate, that a term is categorically "offensive", then everyone is expected to be on the same page.

No, we haven't all agreed! So people should not expect DUers to never use controversial terms like douchebag, pearl clutching, ginger, etc. We can't even all agree on "bitch".

MadrasT
29. "Ginger" is on the "do not use" list now???

For real?

Ginger is an offensive term to use for redheads? Seriously, doesn't politically correct speech get a little boring?

[Ballygrl]

LOL BEG, Minky and I were just talking about how much we love Adam Carolla on Celebrity Apprentice. The Man Show that he did with Jimmy Kimmel was so funny.

[Ballygrl]

Summer Hathaway
41. I signed up for the political interaction

But I stay for the melodrama - pearl-clutching included.

This site, if I'm remembering correctly, used to be about politics, and the inevitable infighting between posters was based on differing views as to how the Democratic party should move forward.

Is the party too far removed from its original ideals? Has it moved too far to the center, to the left, to the right? Where does constructive criticism end, and non constructive bashing begin? Where do we, as a party, go from here - and why, and how? How do we combat the GOP memes, their framing of the important issues to our detriment?

These used to be the topics that were discussed, debated, argued about here. Feathers were ruffled, some GBCW posts ensued - but political discourse was what it was all about. And those who found that discourse unpleasant or unsatisfying moved on - of their own accord, or by virtue of being shown the door.

DemocraticUnderground is now full of OPs about who said what to whom, who should be a forum/group host and who shouldn't, who used a phrase that offended whom, who is bullying who, who is stalking who, who is being insensitive, who is part of the "cool" gang, who is an untouchable member of the "elite" who can post whatever they want without fear of being banned, which jury members are biased, which jury members are not paying attention, and (my personal favorite) who said something that could be construed as anti-anything if viewed in a certain light at a particular time of day by a group of people who seemingly have nothing better to do with their lives.

DemocraticUnderground used to be about political discussion. It is now a site about itself, pearl clutching and all.

Skinner
43. If you avoid the Meta forum, it still is a site about politics.

There is very little drama out there, and the discussions are good and mostly civil. With much less censorship than we had on the old DU.

Nonetheless, the draw of the meta forum is hard to resist for some. This is where the drama lives. Unfortunately, I get the sense that the perceptions formed in the Meta forum seem to be tainting how people view the other forums.

We (the Admins) have been wondering if we should shut down Meta and replace it with the old Ask the Admins forum. Just a thought for people to consider.

Oh no, we love the META Forum.

[AllosaursRus]

After reading all this tripe, I still do not understand how "clutching pearls", is some kind of derogatory term.

Guess I'm just old school. Never heard the term until yesterday, and I thought it was talkin' 'bout queers.

(edited to add)

DemocraticUnderground is now full of OPs about who said what to whom, who should be a forum/group host and who shouldn't, who used a phrase that offended whom, who is bullying who, who is stalking who, who is being insensitive, who is part of the "cool" gang, who is an untouchable member of the "elite" who can post whatever they want without fear of being banned, which jury members are biased, which jury members are not paying attention, and (my personal favorite) who said something that could be construed as anti-anything if viewed in a certain light at a particular time of day by a group of people who seemingly have nothing better to do with their lives.

Heh! Courtesy call for NadaBrain, courtesy call for Nadabrain! You can pick up the phone on tarmac 6!

[Ballygrl]

zappaman
203. You never would have had to ask this question...

if you just grew a pair.

[GOBUCKS]

Ginger is an offensive term to use for redheads? Seriously, doesn't politically correct speech get a little boring?

I had never heard the word "ginger" used as a derogatory slang term for redheads until it was on South Park.

Makes me feel a little nadinesque.

[franksolich]

Oh my.

Two things from my fellow alum Skins stick out:

With much less censorship than we had on the old DU.

So he's coming clean, admitting it.  Good for him.

We (the Admins) have been wondering if we should shut down Meta and replace it with the old Ask the Admins forum. Just a thought for people to consider.

franksolich considered it, and likes the idea of going back to the ATA forum.

That way, nadin and others can't bully other primitives.

[Ballygrl]

But frank, the META forum is kind of amusing.

[franksolich]

But frank, the META forum is kind of amusing.

But I rather more enjoyed the spectacle of watching my fellow alum apply the lash to the primitives.

It's not anything I get my jollies out of, but these are only primitives after all.

[67 Rover]

Stinky The Clown (45,103 posts) "By the way, when someone says they're offended by something, I think we have a moral obligation to honor that."

Stinky, I am offended that you are wasting Oxygen that snakes and snails can put to better use not to mention the latter are more productive to society.

[miskie]

I am offended by Stinky's screenname - it implies all clowns are smelly, whereas I have it on good authority that about 18% of them actually aren't, because they bathe regularly.

I believe for the good of clowns & mimes worldwide, you need to change your name to something less offensive.