She has a picture of a very old Ron Jeremy...
BainsBane (26,166 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025128262
NSFW. Old shriveled, limp dick, pasty cracker
Hasn't gotten it up in twenty years.
Attack of the White Walkers on the early bird special at Denny's.
We are told misogynistic, racist, and homophobic slurs are just freedom of speech, nothing more than words. How about these?
Is it okay to insult some people and not others? Or it is who uses the words that counts?
Shut up, Bitch. Get back in the kitchen and make me a sammich.
Lancero (547 posts)
2. Mind adding a warning to the topic for the pic?
A slur doesn't imply a artistic rendition of a penis, which is what you've chosen to post.
The DUmp is complaining of cartoon cocks?
Response to BainsBane (Original post)
Fri Jun 20, 2014, 05:28 PM
Cali_Democrat (20,698 posts)
7. This is why I love DU....sometimes there's a shitstorm going on and I have no clue...
Then I click on a thread like this and....
It's just Bit Tits. Nothing to write home about.
BainsBane (26,166 posts)
15. Let me get this straight
It's okay to refer to a woman by a crude term for genitalia, but not okay to show a drawing of a man's genitalia?
**** brain is talking about another post on DU which has George Carlin's famous words you can't say on radio.
BainsBane (26,166 posts)
52. Yes, in the subject line in an OP in GD
and the Rude Pundit did use it to refer to Ann Coulter. Someone linked to an older entry of his in one of the many threads on the subject.
Squinch (8,561 posts)
24. You were alerted and it wasn't hidden. 3-4.
Squinch (8,561 posts)
28. Here you go:
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Silly post - retaliation for other posts the OP is offended by. How about growing up?
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jun 20, 2014, 05:32 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't view this as "retaliation". This strikes me as an attempt to point out hypocrisy. I am hoping the 'poor old me' idiots can understand the point of this post. I am old and I can easily understand it.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Nope. Not hiding. People have their hair on fire over people objecting to posts that are as offensive to women and LGBT people as this is to white men. To those who object to this, and not to the ones which are offensive to women and LGBT people, this is equal to what you have defended.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Maybe BB can create another sock puppet to post shit like this.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
BainsBane (26,166 posts)
77. I figured it was a toss up
I was prepared to take a hide, which would have been my fifth, in order to make the point. It needed saying.
I got two hides for this: Some will hide anything of mine, regardless of content, as juror 6 made clear. The more salient point, however, is that people are more than happy to declare to be freedom of speech insults against those they see as lesser, but are not so tolerant of insults toward people like them. The alert and some of the comments in here show as much.
You were supportive of the thread using vulgar insults to women and others, but you have issues with this one. I find that interesting. That is the point I wanted to explore. I wanted to show that what we regard as free and acceptable speech is bound by who we are.
OMG!!! She is Sooooo brave!
