Mika Brzezinski’s erotic dance (from Salon.com)
Last edited Wed Sep 19, 2012, 11:06 AM - Edit history (1)
A new photograph in Vanity Fair offers yet another example of the "pornification" of political culture
By Karrin Anderson
Vanity Fair’s short profile of MSNBC’s Morning Joe hosts Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough ostensibly depicts them as a dynamic duo reminiscent of the great screwball comedies of the 1940s (the article references The Thin Man’s Nick and Nora). But the sassy journalist heroines popularized by Rosalind Russell and Katharine Hepburn would have balked at a photo shoot like this one—which is both reflective of current attitudes toward professional and political women and jarringly anachronistic. The notion that women exist primarily for men’s amusement (both on and off the job) seems oh so Mad Men, yet the trend toward depicting public women (especially those whose jobs place them in the realm of politics) primarily as sex objects is alive and well in the 21st century. The pornification of political culture (a process in which some women participate willingly and others have foisted upon them after their image is conscripted) has depicted political candidates (e.g., Sarah Palin and Janice Hahn) and women voters (in viral videos like this one and this one from the 2008 campaign) as strippers.
BagNewsNotes Looks like it’s Mika’s turn. Not a stripper, you say? Well, what else do we call women who dance on tables for men’s spectatorial enjoyment? Although the brief article that accompanies this picture emphasizes both Scarborough’s and Brzezinski’s various flirtations (with each other, Roger Ailes, and—in Scarborough’s case—the American electorate), the image tells the familiar story of a man who commands the attention of others and a woman who seeks only the attention of that man.
Gaze plays an important role in this visual narrative. Just as Scarborough is identified as the dominant persona on the show that bears his moniker (he’s identified as the “host,” whereas Brzezinski is the “co-host”), his gaze is turned outward while Brzezinski’s focuses exclusively on him. Rather than sitting parallel to Scarborough, Brzezinski is placed on a table—the empty chair underscoring her status as an accessory.
When women accessorize men in this fashion, it diminishes women’s credibility while simultaneously bolstering men’s heterosexual virility and strength. It’s important to note that in addition to playing up the alleged sexual tension between Scarborough and Brzezinski, the Vanity Fair piece announces Scarborough’s potential presidential aspirations. Should he worry that a picture like this one might make him look less presidential? Sadly, no. U.S. presidentiality is so thoroughly masculinized, we’ve become accustomed to seeing our presidents surrounded by women playing supporting roles, whose presence complements men’s performances as Patriarch-in-Chief. That’s one of the reasons women candidates have trouble being perceived as authentically presidential. Conversely, should Brzezinski harbor political or professional aspirations that contradict this narrative, the image would be a significant liability.
Rest at link: Mika Brzezinkski's erotic dance
Really, Mika? This was a good idea... how?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Freaky! 
I'm sure Mika's Dad is so proud...
Joe needs to take his noisy, talk-over, RINO ass over to Faux Snooze where I'm sure he would be much more comfortable.
Mika needs to be much more assertive when Joe is there. She is smart and asks good questions... aside from being a hottie.
Mika Mornings sans Joe has my vote!
I really can't stand her. 
I can't decide between her and the scab as to who the bigger dumbass is.
this specific pose before, since it seemed familiar.
New low, even for Mika. What a horrible role in life--pole dancer to Joe Scabro.
The worst politics show on MSNBC.
They need a good morning show but who can stomach this act? I've never been able to watch it for more than 15 minutes. When Mike does her little flirty pouty simpering act it's OVA.
which I don't intend to read.
But seriously..."Know your Worth"...
Wow. indeed.
Ahhh. I found it. "Knowing Your Value".
Ummm.... OK Mika. Thanks for the role-modeling.
Sheezus. 
I'm not into masochism. 
Of course she is free to choose to do whatever she wants. And the rest of us are free to choose to criticize it.
There. I said it. Nice legs.
Bake
Do liberals and progressives share such values? Actually we are products of our culture, each and every one of us. That said, I believe when acceptance of inequality is found within our character, especially cultural ingrained acceptance of inequality, we who understand the wrongness of it seek to purge it from ourselves.
A personal example:
I once fully supported Larry Flynt. His magazines were a bit over the top for me but I loved his efforts to unmask hypocritical politicians. It was here in the DU a few years ago that I was educated to the fact that sexism is racism in different garb. If I don't support racism, how could I possibly support a man who made his considerable fortune promoting racism, regardless of his good works elsewhere? Well I would not, nor will I support this man for promoting sexism either!
Today, I get it, Larry Flynt made his fortunes in the porn industry, an industry which promotes sexism. That same industry promotes a cultural sickness that has brought about millions upon millions of events-oftentimes horrible events women of all ages have suffered through. All too often that suffering is one they carry with then throughout their lives as memories. All too often that suffering directly caused them to die.
Would anyone here want their sister, mother, daughter, wife or female friends scarred for life-scarred by having to endure acts of racism? Well neither should we accept this scarring when the word racism is changed to sexism. Acts of sexism are no different than acts of racism and they leave behind the same
scars.
So Mr. Flynt, your work unmasking hypocrits deserves my thank you but it will never balance out the horror you have promoted! What you did/do 'is' legal. It IS also product of a sick culture we are all imersed in. That does NOT make it right, not even remotely.
The photo in the OP, supports sexism. PERIOD. When sexism is seen for what it is, a form of racism, those of us who don't call ourselves Conservative, seek to change our personal paradigms. That photo only adds to a culture of sexism and misogyny, a culture that does not understand the nightmare it creates downstream for women of all ages.
Next time you see children playing, think about this, ask yourself if you want those children, both the boys and the girls to grow up in a culture that accepts and promotes racism or its ugly brother sexism? If you have a heart that beats in your chest, you know that you want to protect them from such a fate. YOU. KNOW. IT.
Here, take another look at that photo,see it through the eyes of the millions upon millions of women of all ages who have suffered.
We are products of our culture, Mika is, Joe is, the photographer who shot the image is, each and every one of us is. It is how we change ourselves when we become aware of the negative aspects within our culture that define us. Conservatives of all nationalities seek to preserve such negative aspects, for them it is an acceptable part of life. For those of us who call ourselves progressive or liberal, we seek change.
Thank you for reading my rant. Those children I asked you to consider thank you too.
I actually find Hustler a lot more honest and less damaging than this.
OK, put down the rocks and lend me your ears, please.
Most people realize that the odd stuff in Hustler is no more real than Mickey Mouse. Hell, most men know the ladies in them are airburushed, as are the guys in Lady Hustler and Gay Hustler. Unlike Hugh Hefner, that sought to make his publication "respectable" with articles written by serious writers, Flynt never tried to pretend to be respectable. Even when he got into the poltical satire, he never tried to wrap himself in any cloak of artistic integrity.
Now, contrast this. This is not posing for Playboy, something that has gotten respectable enough that Hillary Clinton could do it and get praised for it. Come now, many Duers, male and female, would buy that issue 
No, this is Mika, presenting this as a statement of who SHE IS, and her RELATION to Joe. This is not even advertised as being supposedly sexy, but perhaps humor? Honestly, I find myself even unclear on what the point of this is. It is one thing to act silly on Saturday Night Live, but is THIS the image you want for NEWS? By it's very nature, it is confusing, awkard, and it sends a message, that even when you are supposedly a respectable female professional, you better be prepared to show some skin.
In contrast to porn, where a Fortune 500 CEO like Jenna Jameson can be frank and demand that even when you are doing stupid things for the camera, you keep a professional line drawn; in the porn industry, males are actually the low people on the totem pole, because people like Jenna know their name is what makes the money. Since stars like Jenna bought the companies they used for work for, they can make sure the male colleague behaves. Many people who watched her as porn actress were shocked when she showed behind the scenes footage, where the porn actors are actually very, very strict, and she ran a tight ship, because the actors and actresses know if they are not courteous and professional, they will NOT work in the industry, period! Simply put, if Mika and Joe were working for Jenna, Joe would be walking on eggshells, and Mika would be the star.
This is not to praise porn, but to show a point that rarely comes in. There used to be an idea of professionalism. It had exceptions, but it was always deferred to. Now, thanks to people like Joe, the Fox news crew, etc, you can have people act is throughly stupid ways and STILL HAVE THE RESPECTABILITY WE USED TO RESERVE FOR PEOPLE WHO USED COMMON SENSE. That is why this photo is worse than anything Hugh or Larry could ever do, because it is a LIE disguised as reality! It says that even the people who are supposed to be respected in their profession are not, nor should they be.
For what it is worth, as far as newcasters go, I fine Stephanie Miller much more sexy, mostly because she has a wit and brains to match. Until I watched current, I had no idea what she even looked like.
honestly, when did this show get to be so important now that its worthy of Vanity Fair profiles and analysis and hosts thinking theyre important enough nationally to run for president...?
