this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2024
508 points (94.7% liked)

politics

19241 readers
2259 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This stupid topic again

But sure

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

@mozz I don’t think everyone intends for it to be sexist at all, it’s just that it takes places within a context in which female professors and medical doctors frequently report being on conference panels or introduced at meetings and have someone doing the introductions talk about, ‘Dr. This, Dr. That [both male], and Amy.’ It’s just one of many subtle ways women’s professional expertise and authority are quietly diminished.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

No doubt; sounds like it sucks. But please don't blame me for misogyny that they are doing.

If you give me something to call her, equivalent to "Biden" or "Trump" or "Bernie" or things that I say about men in politics that I am talking about, I'm probably happy to start calling her that way.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

@mozz I’m not blaming you, I’m just saying that having a potential presidential nominee who is most frequently referred to by the public at large by a first name only is unusual and sets her apart from previous (male) nominees in ways which may unwittingly add to some voters’ already present feeling that perhaps she’s not really serious or experienced enough because she’s a woman.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Sure. What should I call her?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

@mozz I would just try to mix it up a bit: Kamala Harris, VP Harris, the vice president, etc. Compare it to however you refer to male/white politicians in everyday speech and just try to balance it. If you’re calling Biden Joe or referencing a conversation between Bernie and Kamala or whatever, no problem. What really shouldn’t happen intentionally or not is unequal parallels like “the VP debate between Kamala and Vance” or “Biden and Kamala need to articulate their message better.”

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Tell you what

I'll start calling her "Harris" and see how that seems. Like I say, I think you kinda have a point that it has a subtle impact even if the way it got arrived at has nothing to do with misogyny.