'White supremacy': popular knitting website Ravelry bans support for Trump

[yuna628 9,528]

23 minutes ago, Randyandyuni said:

Wouldn't it actually be more like her ex wearing a pen.is shaped hat? The Maga hat is only offensive if you don't like Trump, I've never heard of wearing external genatalia  as an item of clothing as anything but crude

There may be some that find the MAGA hat is like wearing a hat like that.  What is offensive is in the eye of the beholder. Long ago, women used to burn their bras to make a public statement, longer still, suffragists would go on hunger strikes, throw themselves into danger, utilized violence, and wore sashes. I would assume if a woman back then had thought of it, those hats may have come into protest fashion long ago. Old time suffragist movements though thought it better that a woman be dressed to impress, rather than to shock. The shock was going to be through the radical 'deeds not words'. Today's modern woman that goes to these protests are unlikely to be on the front lines of using deeds to get themselves arrested (though some might). They need something more flashy - women before them had plenty to make flashy statements, but the adoption of wearing such a hat (and suffragists actually wore very flashy hats!) has multiple messages and means different things to each woman.

Edited July 11, 2019 by yuna628

[Randyandyuni 2,682]

I would be more moved by intelligent discourse than someone being audacious in an offensive manner. If it elevated you, good for you, personally the photos I saw made no positive impression on me, although, that was not their intent

[Dashinka 23,237]

1 hour ago, yuna628 said:

There may be some that find the MAGA hat is like wearing a hat like that.  What is offensive is in the eye of the beholder. Long ago, women used to burn their bras to make a public statement, longer still, suffragists would go on hunger strikes, throw themselves into danger, utilized violence, and wore sashes. I would assume if a woman back then had thought of it, those hats may have come into protest fashion long ago. Old time suffragist movements though thought it better that a woman be dressed to impress, rather than to shock. The shock was going to be through the radical 'deeds not words'. Today's modern woman that goes to these protests are unlikely to be on the front lines of using deeds to get themselves arrested (though some might). They need something more flashy - women before them had plenty to make flashy statements, but the adoption of wearing such a hat (and suffragists actually wore very flashy hats!) has multiple messages and means different things to each woman.

But we are being told by some politicos that if something is offensive to one, it must be removed, or destroyed.

[laylalex 7,247]

6 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

It is interesting they singled out supporters of the administration.  Was the same note there for the previous administration?  Do they also censor those that talk about their Trump Derangement Syndrome?  I agree though, it is a private site like FB or IG, so they can pretty much do whatever they want related to promoting a political position.

Well, Trump supporters *can* post still, they just aren't allowed to endorse the administration's policies or Trump himself. And no, there wasn't a note for anything related to Obama because he didn't associate himself with white supremacy as far as I know. 

 

3 hours ago, ALFKAD said:

I'm curious... as you marched around in your tall pink hat, what exactly were people making you feel supported about?  What does wearing a giant va-j-j on your head signify, exactly?

I am going to assume you are a man here, but even if you weren't, it's kind of like this (and my hat wasn't tall, it was fitted to my head, which is a normal-sized head as far as I can tell). During the campaign, Trump made a number of comments about women that I (and many other women) found offensive, demeaning, cruel and sexist. These comments reduced women, in my opinion, to having their worth be related to how they look, how sexy they are, etc., rather than who we are as persons. Like only men and the male gaze mattered, and our inherent value as people was nothing if we weren't hot. I mean, I know that I have been really lucky in that way, because I'm told I'm fairly attractive, so I know EXACTLY what it's like to be reduced to how I look rather than what I think and what I do in the world. I was married to a man with very "traditional" views on what a man's role and a woman's role in a marriage is, and I think I was rebelling against that as well. I had a job to do, which was to be a wife and a mother, neither of which I had any success with in the end with him. So being around all these people who were saying essentially "you are more than just what a man tells you you should be" and "don't reduce me to how I look" and "this kind of toxic masculinity is everywhere -- from the White House to my house -- and it needs to end" was very supportive at a time when I needed to hear it most.

 

2 hours ago, Rosalind F said:

Sorry to hear that politics got into the family relationships! But probably being together with the person who actively supports the ##### Grabber was not very healthy or easy. 

 

I'm now thinking of starting to knit again  thanks for sharing!

Oh my gosh, his Trump support was the least of our problems!!!!  It was just a symptom of how messed up our marriage was. I never should have married him in the first place, but I thought I loved him enough to overlook how controlling he was. In the beginning, I really appreciated his take-charge attitude and how he always protected me. (The fact that he was wealthy helped, I admit, which is really dumb but I was SO young when we met.) But he is like Trump in the way that he just assumes that if he wants something, he can have it and nothing will stand in his way. He regrets letting me go, I know that from the number of passes he has made at me since we separated and divorced, and the fact that he is currently harassing my boyfriend in an attempt to get him to leave me. So mature. 

 

And you should DEFINITELY start knitting again! I am going to as well.  

[Boiler 43,429]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

But we are being told by some politicos that if something is offensive to one, it must be removed, or destroyed.

Correct, we are in an era of inclusion and diversity and a symbol that is so obviously against this, that is offensive to millions hardly matches that.

 

Odd that Obama who operated Concentration Camps  would get a pass?

[Dashinka 23,237]

3 minutes ago, laylalex said:

Well, Trump supporters *can* post still, they just aren't allowed to endorse the administration's policies or Trump himself. And no, there wasn't a note for anything related to Obama because he didn't associate himself with white supremacy as far as I know. 

 

I am going to assume you are a man here, but even if you weren't, it's kind of like this (and my hat wasn't tall, it was fitted to my head, which is a normal-sized head as far as I can tell). During the campaign, Trump made a number of comments about women that I (and many other women) found offensive, demeaning, cruel and sexist. These comments reduced women, in my opinion, to having their worth be related to how they look, how sexy they are, etc., rather than who we are as persons. Like only men and the male gaze mattered, and our inherent value as people was nothing if we weren't hot. I mean, I know that I have been really lucky in that way, because I'm told I'm fairly attractive, so I know EXACTLY what it's like to be reduced to how I look rather than what I think and what I do in the world. I was married to a man with very "traditional" views on what a man's role and a woman's role in a marriage is, and I think I was rebelling against that as well. I had a job to do, which was to be a wife and a mother, neither of which I had any success with in the end with him. So being around all these people who were saying essentially "you are more than just what a man tells you you should be" and "don't reduce me to how I look" and "this kind of toxic masculinity is everywhere -- from the White House to my house -- and it needs to end" was very supportive at a time when I needed to hear it most.

 

Oh my gosh, his Trump support was the least of our problems!!!!  It was just a symptom of how messed up our marriage was. I never should have married him in the first place, but I thought I loved him enough to overlook how controlling he was. In the beginning, I really appreciated his take-charge attitude and how he always protected me. (The fact that he was wealthy helped, I admit, which is really dumb but I was SO young when we met.) But he is like Trump in the way that he just assumes that if he wants something, he can have it and nothing will stand in his way. He regrets letting me go, I know that from the number of passes he has made at me since we separated and divorced, and the fact that he is currently harassing my boyfriend in an attempt to get him to leave me. So mature. 

 

And you should DEFINITELY start knitting again! I am going to as well.  

President Trump associates himself with white supremacy?  My point was that the site was limiting political speech apparently for just one side.  Again, it is their right, but certainly very hypocritical.

[laylalex 7,247]

2 hours ago, Randyandyuni said:

It is rather sad, but to be honest, being with an intolerant liberal was probably just as hard for him

Um, NO. I tried not to talk politics with him since it usually led to him yelling at me for what an idiot I was for supporting Hillary Clinton and universal health care. He would say, "Look at the mess we have in Britain with the NHS. You want THAT for America?" He also said Clinton would lead us into war and a recession, which would do nothing for us as a couple financially, and did I really want my lifestyle to be affected by my decision to cast a ballot for a war hawk? I usually just shut up and let him tell me what I should be thinking.

 

1 hour ago, yuna628 said:

I would suppose it wouldn't be much different than her ex wearing a MAGA hat, surrounded by people that wear it and feel supported as such.

He has one, but he finds baseball hats to be "vulgar" so it stayed on a shelf.

 

1 hour ago, ALFKAD said:

Perhaps.  But I think the motives are way different.  That's why I am asking her, since she obviously felt inclined to participate.  I have never met anyone in person who would have done that, so I am curious to learn more of the motivation behind HER participation. 

Please don't tell me what my motives are. I had an entire marriage full of a man telling me what my motives were. 

[Dashinka 23,237]

1 minute ago, Boiler said:

Correct, we are in an era of inclusion and diversity and a symbol that is so obviously against this, that is offensive to millions hardly matches that.

 

Odd that Obama who operated Concentration Camps  would get a pass?

I wonder how many transsexuals were offended...

[laylalex 7,247]

1 hour ago, yuna628 said:

There may be some that find the MAGA hat is like wearing a hat like that.  What is offensive is in the eye of the beholder. Long ago, women used to burn their bras to make a public statement, longer still, suffragists would go on hunger strikes, throw themselves into danger, utilized violence, and wore sashes. I would assume if a woman back then had thought of it, those hats may have come into protest fashion long ago. Old time suffragist movements though thought it better that a woman be dressed to impress, rather than to shock. The shock was going to be through the radical 'deeds not words'. Today's modern woman that goes to these protests are unlikely to be on the front lines of using deeds to get themselves arrested (though some might). They need something more flashy - women before them had plenty to make flashy statements, but the adoption of wearing such a hat (and suffragists actually wore very flashy hats!) has multiple messages and means different things to each woman.

Thank you, yuna! I was at the March to feel amongst kindred spirits, who may not have all had the same message to carry, but who all were sick of being told by men what women are or should be. 

 

9 minutes ago, Randyandyuni said:

I would be more moved by intelligent discourse than someone being audacious in an offensive manner. If it elevated you, good for you, personally the photos I saw made no positive impression on me, although, that was not their intent

There was a lot of intelligent discourse that day. There were some great speakers, and I had a number of good conversations with women AND men about the state of the world. Not all of them I agreed with (some were to the left of me, some to the right) but it wasn't all pink hats.  

[Boiler 43,429]

3 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

I wonder how many transsexuals were offended...

https://www.freep.com/story/news/2018/01/10/pink-pussyhats-feminists-hats-womens-march/1013630001/

 

The Women's March is back in 2018 with its Power to the Polls anniversary protests on the weekend of Jan. 20-21. The focus during this Women's March reboot is to register more women to vote, and to elect women and progressive candidates to public office. 

But this time when marchers take to the streets in cities from Lansing to Las Vegas, there could be fewer pink pussyhats in the crowds.  

The reason: The sentiment that the pink pussyhat excludes and is offensive to transgender women and gender nonbinary people who don't have typical female genitalia and to women of color because their genitals are more likely to be brown than pink.

"I personally won’t wear one because if it hurts even a few people's feelings, then I don't feel like it’s unifying," said Phoebe Hopps, founder and president of Women's March Michigan and organizer of anniversary marches Jan. 21 in Lansing and Marquette.

[laylalex 7,247]

11 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

But we are being told by some politicos that if something is offensive to one, it must be removed, or destroyed.

But Ravelry isn't a politico? 

 

5 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

President Trump associates himself with white supremacy?  My point was that the site was limiting political speech apparently for just one side.  Again, it is their right, but certainly very hypocritical.

Well, it's your right to disagree.  I am not sure I completely agree myself, but he and certainly others in his administration have aligned themselves (in my opinion) with white supremacist organizations.

[Boiler 43,429]

Raveley clearly  is political, quite why they allow members to promote designs that are offensive to minority groups is worrying.

[laylalex 7,247]

4 minutes ago, Boiler said:

https://www.freep.com/story/news/2018/01/10/pink-pussyhats-feminists-hats-womens-march/1013630001/

 

The Women's March is back in 2018 with its Power to the Polls anniversary protests on the weekend of Jan. 20-21. The focus during this Women's March reboot is to register more women to vote, and to elect women and progressive candidates to public office. 

But this time when marchers take to the streets in cities from Lansing to Las Vegas, there could be fewer pink pussyhats in the crowds.  

The reason: The sentiment that the pink pussyhat excludes and is offensive to transgender women and gender nonbinary people who don't have typical female genitalia and to women of color because their genitals are more likely to be brown than pink.

"I personally won’t wear one because if it hurts even a few people's feelings, then I don't feel like it’s unifying," said Phoebe Hopps, founder and president of Women's March Michigan and organizer of anniversary marches Jan. 21 in Lansing and Marquette.

Um, this was the 2017 march I was on. Not 2018.

 

5 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Raveley clearly  is political, quite why they allow members to promote designs that are offensive to minority groups is worrying.

I'm a member and have been for some time. It is NOT a very political space! This just such a small portion of what goes on there which as I said is about knitting and crochet. 

[Boiler 43,429]

There were transgender and nonbinary people in 2017, they did not suddenly come out of thin air.

 

I thought there were a lot of members sharing designs and promoting pussyhat's? Despite the offence caused to PoC and other Minorities the site did nothing. 

[yuna628 9,528]

35 minutes ago, Randyandyuni said:

I would be more moved by intelligent discourse than someone being audacious in an offensive manner. If it elevated you, good for you, personally the photos I saw made no positive impression on me, although, that was not their intent

Yes well, you could point that out about a lot of different groups.