Lecturing “PUMAs”

“PUMA” is an acronym dreamed up by Conflucian “SM” at The Confluence on June 1, 2008 at 3:39PM. SM is a woman with experience in advertising and public relations, and she’s really good at thinking up clever acronyms and slogans. This time she created one that went viral within days after she posted this comment [one typo edited].

SM, on June 1st, 2008 at 3:39 pm Said: Edit Comment
HURRAY FOR HILLARY!!

Thank you Puerto Rico!

I am making an announcement. I am now a member of the PUMA party.

P arty
U nity
M y
A ss

Rico, give everybody a round of Barcadi & Coke on me!

The comment appears on this post by Riverdaughter. We had all spent the previous day, May 31, following the Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting of the Democratic National Committee, held in Washington DC. We were getting freqent updates from Garychapelhill and Mawm who attended the meeting and took turns live-blogging. Everyone was excited. We cheered Mawm when he famously (written up by Dana Millbank in the Washington Post) yelled out “Lipstick on a pig” at the point in the meeting where it became clear that Barack Obama would be forced on the party rank and file whether we wanted him or not.

The RBC had handed Obama votes from the Michigan Primary, even though he did not appear on the ballot. Even worse, they had given Obama 4 of Hillary Clinton’s votes in order to ensure that he would be ahead in pledged delegates going into the Convention. Later that night, Riverdaughter put up this post, giving credit to SM.

A couple of days ago, over at Liberal Rapture, someone named Tamerlane posted an essay in which he condescendingly lectures “PUMAs” about what the “PUMA movement” should be about. Tamerlane claims that

The [PUMA] acronym debuted on June 2, 2008, posted by a guy on a blog run by a woman, in response to DNC calls for unity following the travesty of the 5/31 RBC meeting. I saw the post and declared myself a PUMA that very day on my favorite blog. The name PUMA – and the concept – spread like wildfire across the blogosphere and the real world.

Tamerlane doesn’t name his “favorite blog,” so I have no idea what “blog run by a woman” or “guy on a blog” he is referring to. Whatever. The acronym PUMA was born here at The Confluence. Yes, it did go viral very quickly, and apparently one of the first places it spread to was Tamerlane’s “favorite blog.” SM dreamed up PUMA in response to the events that took place at the RBC meeting, but I think she was expressing pent up anger over many events that had taken place during the Democratic primaries, including the horrendous sexism and misogyny directed at Hillary Clinton by the media, the so-called “progressive blogosphere,” and the Obama campaign.

Now Tamerlane wants to explain to those of us who were here at the beginning of PUMA what the name really means and what the “PUMA movement” should be doing, but isn’t doing; or is doing very poorly, or something like that. The gist of the criticism seems to be that there is just too much talk about “women’s issues” by people who call themselves PUMAs or people whom Tamerlane labels as PUMAs (he is the expert on who and what PUMAs are, you see). Tamerlane says that

An enduring definition of a PUMA might be someone who:

- Holds generally moderate political views;

- Opposes the radicalization of the main political parties;

- Resists demagoguery, including sectarian appeals;

- Upholds free speech and the neutrality of the press;

- Supports fair and open elections.

Oh really? I’m in favor of free speech and fair and open elections. I don’t necessarily think everyone in the press needs to be “neutral.” I don’t hold moderate political views–my views are pretty far left. I don’t have anything in particular to say about “radicalization” of political parties. I’m not really sure what that means, but I think we could use some radicals on the left in this country and I’d like to see one of the parties represent what used to be liberal Democratic views. Tamerlane thinks PUMA should provide an “alternative to the revolution of the Democratic leftists and the coming GOP counter-revolution.” So I guess I’m not a PUMA, according to Tamerlane; since I think we need to actually locate some Democratic leftists.

You’ll notice there is nothing on Tamerlane’s list about equal rights for women or gays or about highlighting sexism and misogyny in the government or the media. That’s because Tamerlane doesn’t think PUMA should be doing things like that.

Sadly, key PUMA cadres have already cast (in their minds a least) the future form of PUMA. It is to be a radical feminist organization. Ironically, the very activists who once denied that PUMA was just a handful of bitter women are now intentionally limiting membership to bitter women. This metamorphosis started gradually after the election, but has picked up steam.

Darragh Murphy’s PUMApac, which originally did some good work combating the charade of the Denver convention, has openly morphed into a battered women’s support group. From a “[male chauvinist] Pig of the Week” award and a “woman-lynching” forum, to new-age mumbo-jumbo about the spirit of the tribe’s matriarchs, Murphy’s blog bears little resemblance today to its avowed goal of being “a voice for the 18 million Democrats who have been told our votes and our voices don’t matter.”

Oh really? Don’t you love the way Tamerlane uses the term “cadres” to refer to blog that he perceives as being too concerned with “women’s issues?” Elsewhere he actually refers to Pumapac as a “coven.”

And what about when Murphy and her “cadre” or “coven” or whatever other insulting name Tamerlane cares to dream up spent a couple of weeks combing through the Obama stimulus bill to find out what was really in there? I guess Tamerlane thought that was a petty exercise too? You see, Tamerlane has a bit of resentment against Darragh Murphy and Pumapac.

I’d joined PUMApac early on, believing its stated mission. A few months ago, after a running online debate with Murphy and her gang, during which I was variously:

*accused of perpetuating the oppressive patriarchy;

*told that lesbianism made my existence superfluous;

*advised I should be thankful I was allowed on a women’s blog, but must be a respectful guest;

I quit.

Uh huh. I see. The poor guy was traumatized by a bunch of mean old “bitter” “radical” women. Tamerlane also attacks our friend Donna Darko, calling her vision of PUMA “ranting.”

Donna Darko recently upped the volume by ranting:

PUMA is about two things:
1) the stolen nomination which was more shocking than 2000 because Democrats stole from Democrats
2) historic misogyny also shocking because it came from Democrats and progressives

Race and racism never entered the picture.

PUMA is a battered women’s support group. The DNc/RBC/Dean/Brazile/Pelosi/Reid were the rapists, Obama/his supporters/the MSM were the batterers. PUMAs/rape victims/battered women are not believed and are furthermore blamed for the abuse.

PUMA websites are meant to be safe spaces like POC blogs and feminist blogs where we can commiserate with one another and vent about the abusers.

PUMA is also a Democratic primary reform and feminist movement.

Tamerlane doesn’t care for Donna’s view of PUMA–too female oriented? I won’t post anymore of Tamerlane’s screed. You can read the whole thing if you want to. I’ll just highlight one of his comments in which he references The Confluence:

I was a regular reader of Confluence during the elections, but became turned off by its increasing women’s issues content. (And don’t tell me Confluence was always a women’s issues blog, or you belie your claim that it’s a big tent.) In particular, I found the endless “Betty Jean” stories inappropriate. The poor woman and her daughters were surely suffering, but it was not news fit to print. The heavy insinuations that all men were violent maniacs offended me. (Only about 4% of men display violent anti-social behavior. The other 96% of us are basically puppy dogs.)

Oh really? So the attempted murder of two sisters and the permanent disabling of one of them is “not news fit to print” according to Tamerlane? I beg to differ. That particular case, as well as the rampant violence against women in this country are news and deserve plenty of public attention. And I’d love to see the source of Tamerlane’s statistics on male violence vs “puppy dog”-ness. He’s not too good with that “linky goodness” thing.

All I can say is that after reading about Tamerlane’s vision of what PUMA is and should be instead, I have to say, “no thanks.” As for his views of The Confluence, I hardly think he is a regular reader if he thinks we are a “women’s issues” blog. What is the difference between “women’s issues” and “real issues” anyway? Since many Conflucians are women, some of us do write about the need for more women in government and politics and for equality for women in society and the workplace, but it’s hardly an obsession for us. To be honest, I don’t see The Confluence as a “PUMA blog” either. We are part of a coalition of blogs that objects to the way that Obama was elected–and that includes, but is not limited to, the use of misogyny to denigrate and diminish powerful women.

I’m very sorry that poor Tamerlane got his feelings hurt during some interactions with scary women at Pumapac. After reading what he has written in posts and comments at Liberal Rapture, I can only imagine that his description of these events is colored by his dislike and disrespect for women in general. As for PUMA, well maybe the term has really lost its original meaning. But that is another discussion.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that I’m really getting tired of being lectured by various people around the blogosphere about what and who we are or aren’t are and what we *should* be doing. If they want to attack us and call us names, they can go right ahead. There are even a bunch of silly “anti-PUMA” blogs where contributors pore over our posts and comments and obsess about what we are saying and doing. What is wrong with these people?

I say to Tamerlane and all the rest of the trolls who are so *concerned* about what *we* are doing, if you think the world needs changing, go do it yourself. If you want to change the Democratic Party or the Republican Party, go ahead and do it yourself. Don’t tell me to do it. I’ll decide my own goals, thank you very much. I really don’t respond well to being bullied and lectured and critiqued by people like you. So, go ahead, use the PUMA acronym–as you say, it’s in the public domain. Go do something valuable for society for a change and get the hell off my back.

UPDATE: In the comments, Myiq2xu writes:

I nominate Tamerlane as the PUMA candidate for President in 2012. Let’s see how many votes he gets doing things his way.