"Misogyny I Won't Miss"

[NashVegas]

Perhaps some people can come out of the fog of war enough to process this:

Most of all, I will not miss the silence.

I will not miss the deafening, depressing silence of Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean or other leading Democrats, who to my knowledge (with the exception of Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland) haven't publicly uttered a word of outrage at the unrelenting, sex-based hate that has been hurled at a former first lady and two-term senator from New York. Among those holding their tongues are hundreds of Democrats for whom Clinton has campaigned and raised millions of dollars. Don Imus endured more public ire from the political class when he insulted the Rutgers University women's basketball team.

Would the silence prevail if Obama's likeness were put on a tap-dancing doll that was sold at airports? Would the media figures who dole out precious face time to these politicians be such pals if they'd compared Obama with a character in a blaxploitation film? And how would crude references to Obama's sex organs play?

There are many reasons Clinton is losing the nomination contest, some having to do with her strategic mistakes, others with the groundswell for "change." But for all Clinton's political blemishes, the darker stain that has been exposed is the hatred of women that is accepted as a part of our culture.


more ...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/14/AR2008051403090.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

[islandmkl]

1. my third repeated response to at least the third posting of this crap:

will you miss the race-baiting, the 'economic class' warfare, the 'not ready' to lead...


Will you miss the kitchen-sink?

[Pamela Troy]

9. No, I won't miss it. And complaining about the misogyny aimed at Clinton is not "crap."

[eridani]

46. It's from the MSM and the Rethugs, not the Obama campaign and

Repeated posting here implies the latter.

[Pamela Troy]

49. It implies nothing of the kind.

[OzarkDem]

82. Its coming from the Obama supporters

and indirectly from his campaign. Obama's message and issues platform have been strangely silent on issues of concern to women voters.

[eridani]

124. Right. With that 100% rating from NARAL and all

The reason that there hasn't been much debate between the two campaigns is that there is nothing to debate. Both are essentially identical.

[unlawflcombatnt]

122. It is from the Obama supporter that dominate the MSM

And it certainly isn't being condemned by anyone in the Obama campaign.

[eridani]

123. Why did the MSM spend all of 2007 stating that Clinton was "inevitable"?

As for the Obama campaign condemning the nutcracker abomination, that would have been stupid. Better to just not draw more attention to it.

[roguevalley]

47. god, I am sick of this. they are humiliating every woman who ever

worked hard and had enough integrity to know how to lose well. fuck them.

[Pamela Troy]

50. Please explain how objecting to blatant and degrading misogyny does this.

[roguevalley]

86. its not all blatant and degrading misogny. some of it is bullshit.

but I won't argue with you. you appear to be convinced otherwise. and I don't need a lecture about degrading and blatant misogny. I am so damned old, I can remember when sexism was that, not hurt feelings looking for an excuse half the time.

[Pamela Troy]

91. Blatant and degrading misogyny IS bullshit.

If you don't want to argue, why post a message arguing a point?

[unlawflcombatnt]

62. Economic Class Warfare?

Are you kidding?

I certainly will miss the discussion of economic class warfare. It's a major issue and worthy of far more discussion than it has received.

It's no surprise to hear a pro-globalist, elitist Obama supporter imply that this is not really an issue.

Obama already thinks blue collar Americans are just a bunch of ignorant hicks to begin with.

Clearly his supporters feel the same way.

Thanks for reminding me why I'll never vote for that cowardly spineless crybaby Obama.

[greguganus]

108. You will be missed. n/t

[Swamp Rat]

120. This is the second "I will not vote for Obama" post I've seen by you.

[rodeodance]

77. and for 3rd time you are RUDE to the OP. It is polite to discuss the topic and NOT change the

focus. you can start your own threads if you want to discuss your topics.

[Scurrilous]

2. Third time's the charm.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5980412

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5978975

:thumbsup:

[snooper2]

3. Sorry, there may be some, but I have seen little sexism at play

Mostly, Hillary ran a shitty ass campaign and went in to it thinking it was "her's"

Now that that didn't happen, there are lots of reasons, but sexism wasn't one of them...

How many weeks did you here Wright all day long...
Is America ready for a black President...
Will whites vote for a black man...
Black church...

It's been fucking non-stop and now you got that stupid fucker with the racist t-shirts...not to mention right wing radio trying to tear Obama down since November......



Sexism, hmmn....I saw one stupid Hillary nut-cracker doll on Faux-n-Idiots morning show

[NashVegas]

5. I Must Ask, What Do You Consider Sexism, Then?

The monkey t-shirt was horrible, and where were you when the "Bros before Hos" t-shirts went on sale?

[snooper2]

20. I must have missed that one..

And yes, that is equally fucked up...along with calling her Billary

I was for Obama since day 1...and Edwards was my second choice

You want to know the first reason? Dynasty and Plutocracy....I'm fucking done with it...

BUSH
BUSH
BUSH
BUSH
CLINTON
CLINTON
CLINTON
CLINTON
CLINTON
CLINTON
CLINTON
CLINTON
BUSH
BUSH
BUSH
BUSH
BUSH
BUSH
BUSH
BUSH
AND YOU WANT MORE!!!!!
AND YOU WANT MORE!!!!!
AND YOU WANT MORE!!!!!

NOOOOOOOOOO

It's OBAMA TIME!!

[NashVegas]

22. You Certainly Did

They've been on sale at Cafepress.com - Cafe Press! - for a year.

Adams, Roosevelt were considered dynastic, as well, by the way. They aren't looked upon so badly.

[jakem]

6. besides, with three nuts, you WOULD be cracking them all the time...

[Pamela Troy]

11. Then you either haven't been paying attention, or you don't know sexism when you see it.

[Captain Hilts]

12. I just don't count on men - A Cowboy fan at that! - to recognize sexism against women. nt

[snooper2]

16. I recognize all "isms"

Yes, there has been some, but it's not the REASON SHE LOST!!!!!!!!!

Get that through your skull...She thought it was over on Super Tuesday and got smacked down...She blew her money on stupid shit, like $500,000 on valet parking

10's of millions on Mark Penn's shitty firm...counted on Washington insiders....


Oh, and the Cowboy's reference, what's that; football envy'ism' :rofl:

[Pamela Troy]

19. The op explicitly acknowledges that there are other reasons she lost.

And where does the poster you're replying to say that only sexism is to blame for her defeat?

Like strawmen much?

[NashVegas]

21. Does It Have to Be the Sole Reason She's Losing, In Order for Womens' Anger to Be Justified?

[snooper2]

24. This line right here..

"But for all Clinton's political blemishes, the darker stain that has been exposed is the hatred of women that is accepted as a part of our culture."


I don't think that is nearly as prevalent in society as it is being made out to be...

Nancy Pelosi speaker of House; Condi Sec. of State...

[dorktv]

68. Yes. Because we should not be worrying our pretty little heads about how

vicious people have been to Senator Clinton as a woman.

From Bros before Hos T-shirts to "Iron My Shirt Hillary" to people claiming she only cries for political gain...there has definitely been a major strand of sexism in this campaign. Not going to claim where it came from but it WAS there.

However, women cannot complain about it. Who knows why?

[madmom]

98. Don't forget the "cleavage" and "PMS" moments.

[greguganus]

111. What's wrong with cleavage? n/t

[Pamela Troy]

114. It's inappropriate to bring it up about a woman unless she's working

at Hooters.

[madmom]

121. Not a thing, but you don't point it out to the whole world, and since there isn't anything wrong

with cleavage why was such a big deal made out of it in the first place?

[ElsewheresDaughter]

17. then you need corrective lenses

[eridani]

63. Not from Obama, and not from DU

There sure the hell has been from the rest of the world, though.

[rodeodance]

76. the sexism is all around you.

[eridani]

80. Yes, our culture is saturated with it

And what in bleeding hell can a single presidential candidate do about that?

[Phillycat]

97. Really.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcdnlNZg2iM

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

4. LOL

[Fredda Weinberg]

7. Sadly, this is nothing new ... we blew our chance. n/t

[Radical Activist]

8. Yuck. Not another "my group is more oppressed than that group" post.

That's one bit of bullshit I definitely won't miss.

[Pamela Troy]

10. Where does the poster say this?

[Radical Activist]

13. The editorial says it right here:

Don Imus endured more public ire from the political class when he insulted the Rutgers University women's basketball team.

Would the silence prevail if Obama's likeness were put on a tap-dancing doll that was sold at airports?

[Captain Hilts]

14. And Imus deserved it for many reasons. But his comments about women, in general, are accepted. nt

[Radical Activist]

18. So here we are arguing about

whether misogyny or racism are more prevalent and accepted in the media. Its a pointless, divisive and ultimately destructive argument to have. I'm suspicious of any writer who takes that approach to the issue. Why can't the writer discuss misogyny without divisively claiming that Obama had it easier?

[Pamela Troy]

15. It that untrue?

Would "the silence prevail if Obama's likeness were put on a tap-dancing doll that was sold at airports?

And how does this translate into "my group's more oppressed than your group?" At best, it's saying that overt misogyny is considered more acceptable than overt racism, which is not the same thing.

As an Obama supporter who's posted here about the rise in both overt misogyny and overt racism, I'm struck by how reflexively some people here clap their hands over their ears when either misogyny or racism is pointed out.

[Radical Activist]

23. huh

You wrote: And how does this translate into "my group's more oppressed than your group?" At best, it's saying that overt misogyny is considered more acceptable than overt racism, which is not the same thing.


Yes, its exactly the same thing, especially when used in the context of arguing that Clinton had it harder than Obama. I'm happy to talk about racism and misogyny in the media but I deeply dislike editorials like this one that present it as a "racism v. sexism" debate at a time when that's being used to divide Democrats.

[Pamela Troy]

26. Is "huh" a "yes" or a "no?"

No, saying that to express one form of overt bigotry is more acceptable than expressing another is not "exactly the same thing" in any context as saying that one group is more oppressed than another. As a white southerner with a faint but detectable southern accent, I know that it's more acceptable to stereotype people like me as "bigots," "rednecks," etc. than it is to stereotype black people. That does not make white southerners more oppressed than African Americans. Statistically I still have a better chance at employment, a higher income, better housing, and better access to medical care than most African Americans.

What's dividing Democrats and Americans in general is racism and misogyny -- not pointing out obvious examples of racism and misogyny.

[Radical Activist]

83. You're playing a definition game to avoid the point.

Fine, if it makes you happy then take out "oppressed" and insert "bigotry is more acceptable" into what I wrote and all statements still apply. Like this one: I deeply dislike editorials like this one that present it as a "racism v. sexism" debate at a time when that's being used to divide Democrats.

My point remains the same regardless of which term you care to use. And isn't overt bigotry a form of oppression?

[Pamela Troy]

85. How am I playing a "definition" game?

Words have meaning. In order to have a sensible discussion, those definitions need to be respected. It's not a "game." It's communication.

And there is absolutely no question that overt sexism is considered today to be more acceptable than overt racism. This is a truth you would plainly rather we not talk about.

[Radical Activist]

87. And there's my point.

Now you're playing the game of whether racism or sexism is more acceptable in society. Its a futile argument that neither side can win and its being used to divide people. That was my point and its true whichever definition you use. That's why your parsing words was a distraction and beside the point.
Unless you can switch from being a white woman to a black man and experience the lives of both people yourself then you are in no way qualified or capable of settling that argument. To think otherwise is arrogant and ignorant.

[Pamela Troy]

89. It's a pity that you think this is a "game." I don't.

I'm not sure how you imagine the statement "overt sexism is currently more acceptable in society than over racism" to be some sort of a gambit involving feints and scores. I consider it simply a statement of fact.

Why do you object so much to it?

[Radical Activist]

92. That's your opinion and it can't be proven as fact.

And once again, I refer you back to the editorial which does in fact reduce it to "some sort of a gambit involving feints and scores." That's exactly what I find unproductive. Why do you think arguing about which is worse in society is better than condemning and fighting both?

[Pamela Troy]

94. If it's an "opinion" it's one that has a great deal of evidence to support it.

Evidence that the OP cited. You seem to object to her doing so. You have framed your argument as if the validity of her opinion is beside the point. You'd just rather she not say it, whether it's valid or not.

Where in the editorial does she reduce this issue to "some sort of gambit involving feints and scores?" And please, don't just gesture vaguely in the direction of the piece and say, "over there." Give me a direct quote.

[Radical Activist]

95. Post 13. I already answered that.

You're arguing in circles and avoiding my point that articles like this one degrade into divisive arguments about society that distract from efforts to actually make positive change. Why not just agree that sexism and racism are both problems that need to be confronted without delving into an argument that can never be resolved or proven either way? Please tell me what's healthy and productive about that. I've asked several times now.

[Pamela Troy]

99. No, actually you didn't.

Pointing out a double-standard is not the same thing as playing a "game."

Which of your points do you feel I've avoided? Yes, sexism and racism are problems that need to be confronted. Why, then, do you object to them being confronted?

It's healthy and productive to point out the kind of misogyny and double-standards the OP addresses because bigotry cannot be fought without confrontation. What's NOT healthy and productive is ignoring it and hoping it will go away.

[Radical Activist]

101. You avoid my point

by pretending that I'm arguing we ignore misogyny. That's a straw man argument.

Again I'll ask, how does getting into an argument about which is more prevalent/accepted in society (racism or sexism), an argument that the editorial started and that has gone on in this thread as a result of the editorial, healthy or productive? How does that help address or resolve either issue?

Please don't pretend that wasn't part of the editorial because we see that is the conversation that the editorial lead to in this thread and its the direction you yourself have taken this discussion.

[Pamela Troy]

104. You've not been participating in this argument?

If you truly thought discussing this was "unhealthy and unproductive" you would not be posting here.

[Radical Activist]

105. No. I haven't.

I haven't made any claim in this thread that one is worse or more common or more accepted than the other. That's at least the third time I've asked you the question and you just avoided again. I'll stop taking you seriously now.

[Pamela Troy]

107. No, you've argued the claim, or rather, you've objected to the OP even

pointing it out. And I haven't "avoided the question." I've answered it directly. You just don't like the answer.

[Radical Activist]

117. Wow are you ever obtuse.

Please show me where exactly you answered this question or answer it now:


Again I'll ask, how does getting into an argument about which is more prevalent/accepted in society (racism or sexism), an argument that the editorial started and that has gone on in this thread as a result of the editorial, healthy or productive? How does that help address or resolve either issue?

You haven't answered yet. I'm waiting.

[Pamela Troy]

125. It neither hurts the cause of feminism, nor helps it.

So why have you gotten into an argument about which is....etc.?

Pointing out such a double standard is certainly worthwhile. You seem to object to this. I disagree with you. The result is this exchange of messages. Now you're trying to pretend that you've had nothing to do with the length of this thread..

Sorry, but unless someone is physically forcing you to post here, you're "argument" is absurd. If I've argued at length here, it's in response to your posts.

[janx]

25. Most of her examples are from the media.

Howard Dean does not control the media. So pulling him into this is completely illogical. I will say that I'm dismayed at the examples she's noted here.

[NashVegas]

29. Dean Could Have Had a Little Something to Say

When Obama surrogate JJ Jr went off on "Hillary's tears" on nat'l tv (you know - the tears she didn't shed for Katrina victims), as well as Dem. Party ops who went on TV.

He could also have busted some media balls behind the scenes.

[Warren DeMontague]

27. I like the sneering way she puts "change" in quotes.

Yeah, we're all out to get Hillary 'cuz she's a woman. Had nothing to do with, say, her vote for the IWR. Nothing to do with her stubborn refusal to admit said vote was a mistake.

The Hillary Nutcracker was idiotic, but it was peddled by right-wing pinheads; same people who will now sell shirts with Curious George over the words "Obama '08". The guys who said "Iron My Shirt" at the Hillary rally are imbeciles of the first caliber.

But let's get real. Hillary didn't lose because of sexism, and to argue that the campaign has been one long assault on her gender is just facile.

[Pamela Troy]

28. Where in this OP does it say "we're all out to get Hillary 'cus she's a woman?"

[Warren DeMontague]

30. I think the idea that the onus was on Howard Dean, for instance, to denounce the Hillary Nutcracker

is just goofy.

Somehow it's his responsibility? :shrug:

[Pamela Troy]

31. This doesn't answer my question.

Where in this OP does it say "we're all out to get Hillary 'cuz she's a woman?"

[Warren DeMontague]

65. I quote from your OP:

"I will not miss the deafening, depressing silence of Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean or other leading Democrats, who to my knowledge (with the exception of Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland) haven't publicly uttered a word of outrage at the unrelenting, sex-based hate that has been hurled at a former first lady"

Again, what specific "unrelenting sex-based hate" was Howard Dean supposed to break his "deafening, depressing silence" over? The Hillary Nutcracker?

The problem with your facile OP- and I know a lot of people who, for whatever reason, were heavily emotionally invested in HRC's candidacy are having trouble thinking clearly these days- is that, again, it makes the cheap and totally ridiculous point that there was some gimungous "unrelenting" barrage of "sex-based hate" thrown at her, and at least implies that this was somehow related to her losing the nom.

Bullshit. She lost because she ran a shitty campaign based on "inevitability", she lost because she voted for the Iraq War and then REFUSED to cop that said vote was a mistake, she lost for a lot of reasons. So, if there was some broad based fusillade of "sex-based hate", big enough that Howard Dean's silence on the matter was "shameful", where was it? In the Hillary Nutcracker sales at the airport? The 2 "iron my shirt" idiots?

In the media?

Surely you can't mean the media. For fuck's sake. The media, who told the nation that Hillary was the "front runner" and "inevitable" based solely on the bullshit the Clinton campaign was feeding them? That media? The media which until recently played along with the notion of a horse race when the facts and the numbers have been irrefutably saying that Obama will win?

No, sorry. There has been no "unrelenting sex-based hate" thrown at Hillary Clinton. There have been some examples of sexism, to be sure- but nothing that rises to the level that Howard Dean should be "shamed" for not speaking up about... again, what?

Did the Obama campaign higher-ups tell the media, essentially, that America "isn't ready" for a woman president? Did Obama's wife say Hillary won Pennsylvania because it's full of women? No.

If you want to stomp your feet and say "it's not fair" that Hillary isn't going to be the nominee, that's your prerogative. But this OP imagines some grand campaign of sexist attacks on her based on extremely slim examples and evidence.

[Pamela Troy]

66. First of all, it's not my OP.

Second, how does that quote from Dean translate into the OP writer saying that "we're all out to get Hillary 'cuz she's a woman?"

Third, I'm an Obama supporter.

And fourth, the OP itself makes a point of not blaming Clinton's defeat on the sexism she was subjected to. Or did you miss this part:

"There are many reasons Clinton is losing the nomination contest, some having to do with her strategic mistakes, others with the groundswell for "change." But for all Clinton's political blemishes, the darker stain that has been exposed is the hatred of women that is accepted as a part of our culture."

[Warren DeMontague]

67. Okay, I quote from THE OP. The idea that there has been some overwhelming mountain of sexist attacks

on Hillary-- that it has been some major part of the story; it's ridiculous. Yet the OP you seem to be defending, whether they're your words or not, asserts that said mountain of sexist attacks must have been so great, so inescapably horrid, that Howard Dean's silence on "the matter" (what matter?) is "shameful".

Like I said- if there is some massive hatred of women that has been exposed through this campaign (again, this seems to be the assertion) where is it? The Hillary Nutcracker? Randi Rhodes going off drunk? I'm sorry, but those do not constitute blaring indications of widespread, "culturally accepted hatred".

Understand what I'm saying?

[Pamela Troy]

69. No, it is not ridiculous. Hillary Clinton's candidacy has plainly brought out

a very nasty streak of misogyny in American culture. Aside from that "cute" nutcracker toy and Randi Rhodes invective there's:

The Republican anti HIllary Clinton Group called Citizens United Not Timid.

Penn Jillette's amusing "joke" about Hillary and "White Bitch Month."

NPR editor Ken Ruden and columnist Andrew Sullivan comparing Clinton to the murderous psychopath in FATAL ATTACTION.

Chris Matthews referring to Clinton as a "she-devil" or the repeated remarks about how she looks like "everyone's first wife," how her voice is like "nails on a blackboard," how she's "nagging," "shrill," "screechy," etc., how she "claps funny," how she's "broken down," when she got slightly choked up on camera, how she "lost it," when she became slightly heated during a debate, etc., etc. etc.

Understand what *I'm* saying here?

[Warren DeMontague]

70. Point by point.

Bet you dollars to donuts the "Republican Anti-Hillary group Citizens United Not Timid" will morph into a Republican Anti-Obama group soon enough. Oh, wait, there already is a "Citizens United" preparing attacks on Obama. So who is "Citizens United Not Timid"? A quick search in google showed that they have a url -I'm not going to link it- but no website up.

So whoever the "Republican Anti-Hillary group Citizens United Not Timid" is, they can't even afford the four bucks a month or whatever it might cost to get together a respectable website. More likely, the "group" you reference is one guy. Am I to understand Howard Dean is responsible for personally denouncing every low-IQ GOP ginkus who thinks he's being clever when he comes up with a dumb acronym?

But I'm glad we can all agree that the GOP is what we really ought to be focusing on. Which makes threats by Hillary "supporters" to vote for McCain or sit this election out all the more idiotic. Which makes Hillary's cozying up to the likes of Richard Mellon-Scaife, or her statements, earlier in the campaign, that McCain was more qualified than Obama to be president, all the more confounding.

Yes, it's important to remember that we are all Democrats, and it is important that WE win in November.

Penn Jilette? Who let him out of Vegas? Seriously- A comedian told a vaguely offensive joke? Stop the fucking presses. You're right, it's an outrage. But I'm not sure it rises to the level of national crisis. Oh, wait, did I say comedian? The guy's a magician, ferchrissakes. Let's just say he doesn't have what you'd call a very large megaphone.

I'm not familiar with Ken Ruden. Andrew Sullivan has been a Democrat for about 5 minutes. Again, I'm not sure he's Howard Dean's personal responsibility.

Chris Matthews has been known to cross the line on numerous occasions. I'm sure if you look hard enough, you'll find he probably has said something vaguely off-note or unfunnily offensive about pretty much everyone in U.S. Politics. If I recall, he said Barack Obama was "surprisingly clean"- or maybe that was Joe Biden.

Still, I think if you're trying to paint some picture of a grand misogynist pattern, you need more paint. Like I said, if anything, the media acted as a serious booster for HRC's early campaign, accepting without question Clinton Staff Spin regarding her "inevitability" and "front runner status". There wasn't a whole lot about her gender, but there WAS a lot of talk re: how she had this thing in the bag. They said the same thing about Rudy, once again proving that the "conventional wisdom" waterheads, the same people who tell us the "values voter" is all powerful (the same people who tell us America is "not ready" for a Black President) don't have half a fucking clue as to what is really going on.

Misogynistic attacks against Hillary Clinton are unacceptable. Part of the problem has come in when some of her supporters conflate ANY attacks on HRC with sexism. If I say that I think her IWR vote was a problem and she ought to admit it was a mistake, that's not me being sexist, that's me having a problem with the clusterfuck known as the Iraq War.

If all you've got is that a talking head or two may have said she sounds "Shrill", however, I still think the premise of a grand pattern of sexist attacks- that Howard Dean "shamefully" needs to address- is more than a little weak.

[Pamela Troy]

88. And a Point-by-Point response:

I: Bet you dollars to donuts the "Republican Anti-Hillary group Citizens United Not Timid" will morph into a Republican Anti-Obama group soon enough.

So what?

I: But I'm glad we can all agree that the GOP is what we really ought to be focusing on. Which makes threats by Hillary "supporters" to vote for McCain or sit this election out all the more idiotic.

This OP is not about Hillary supporters threatening to vote for McCain.

I: Penn Jilette? Who let him out of Vegas? Seriously- A comedian told a vaguely offensive joke?

On an nationally broadcast cable show. And his remark did not take place in a vacuum.

I: I'm not familiar with Ken Ruden. Andrew Sullivan has been a Democrat for about 5 minutes.

Again -- so what?

I: Chris Matthews has been known to cross the line on numerous occasions. I'm sure if you look hard enough, you'll find he probably has said something vaguely off-note or unfunnily offensive about pretty much everyone in U.S. Politics. If I recall, he said Barack Obama was "surprisingly clean"- or maybe that was Joe Biden.

Chris Matthews' consistent and persistent attacks on Hillary Clinton are well known. If you think he doesn't attack her more than he's attacked other public figures, you haven't been paying attention.

I: I think if you're trying to paint some picture of a grand misogynist pattern, you need more paint. L

Nonsense. You'd merely think up excuses to dismiss them on a point by point basis.

[Warren DeMontague]

96. The core of the argument is that the mountain o' sexism is so inescaple that Howard Dean's "silence"

on the matter is "shameful".

Look, sexist attacks on Hillary are out of line, as are racist attacks on Obama. But what you have there isn't a "mountain", and all the hyperventilating in the world isn't going to raise it to the level of something that shames Howard Dean because he hasn't bothered to bring them up.

Also, the home shopping network is "nationally broadcast on cable". There are cooking shows for pets nationally broadcast on cable.

That doesn't mean a whole ton of people are watching them.

[Pamela Troy]

102. "Mountain" is your term. Not the OPs. What you're doing here is

attempting to bolster your own claims by hyperbolizing the language of the OP, trying to make it sound as unreasonable and melodramatic as possible. Using the term "hyperventilating" to describe a reasoned post that takes pains to provide backup for its argument is another rather dishonest tactic.

Look, (to borrow a phrase), if you want to take issue with something someone has posted, take issue with their arguments. Don't directly or indirectly ascribe terms to them they haven't used, or attempt to paint them as somehow out of control. Such tactics imply that you can't directly address the points they've raised.

Penn Jillette made his remarks on MSNBC LIVE. That is no more the equivalent of the "Home Shopping Network." than is Chris Matthews' show.

[greguganus]

112. Dean knew denouncing it publicly would cause their sales to go through the roof. n/t

[Scout]

34. give it up Pamela, there are many willfully ignorant posters here when it comes to sexism

thanks for trying though, i'm with you

[Scout]

32. k & r n/t

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## DON'T DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our second quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Whatever you do, do not click the link below!

[NorthernSpy]

35. I won't miss bomb threats, vandalism of campaign offices, or Stormfronters advocating assassination.

I won't miss t-shirts likening Barack to a monkey. I won't miss Pat Buchanan beating the drums for Hillary explicitly because she's "one of us" -- white.


I won't miss "he's not a Muslim, as far as I know -- I'm taking him at his word."


I won't miss Hillary's Southern strategy ("... working, hard-working Americans: white Americans").


Yeah, there are a lot of things I won't miss.

[POAS]

45. And where was Howard Dean when

those things took place?

Was he just standing by?

Maybe the original poster or other supporters of the OP suggest an answer!

[seaglass]

36. It's made me rethink my allegiance to the Democratic Party.

I'm not even a Hillary fan but as a woman I am completely disgusted by the way she's been treated. This primary season has been disillusioning to say the least.

[lastliberalintexas]

38. I think that's what is most disturbing

I am not a Clinton fan either. In fact, if anyone cared enough to search my posts they could see that I have opposed her nomination for a few years now on DU. Yet even I (and you) can see the sexism involved in some of the attacks on her. (Hell, I'm white, yet I can see the racism involved in some of the attacks on Obama)

I wonder why these other people can't? Or won't? Are they so hung up on challenging the idea that sexism is the ONLY reason that Clinton lost? I think most people who have made the sexism charges agree that there are other factos involved, so that's just a non sequitor. It makes me sad, and sadder still that it makes me happy I don't have any daughters.

[whatchamacallit]

37. I only hate one woman

[greguganus]

113. ...should I ask? n/t

[LisaM]

39. There was another OP posted on racism today

and the last time I checked, it wasn't being swarmed by people stung by the sexism they've seen.

Is it really so hard to condemn sexism on its own terms?

[lastliberalintexas]

43. It has always been that way on DU

Every time a gender issue is discussed in which women are the targets, victims, oppressed, the thread is swarmed with people who want to argue some male daominated issue. I think the worst offenses have been in the female genital mutilation threads in which men have refused to discuss that issue and instead turned the threads into discussions of male circumcision.

I miss NSMA. :(

[NashVegas]

44. Oh God ...

I miss NSMA, too, and we used to duke it out all the time.

[lastliberalintexas]

79. Yes, and she's not the only one

There are a number of older posters I never see anymore, some driven away, some banned and some have just disappeared quietly. The level of discourse on this site has swan dived in recent years, and this primary has been much worse among the supporters even though cleaner among the candidates. Perhaps there is a reason this is the worst fundraiser yet.

[ShortnFiery]

40. More "feigned indignation" from the fans of "Our Lady of Perpetual Victimhood"

After awhile, this meme gets real old.

THINK "The boy who called 'Wolf.'"

This TACTIC is way lame. :thumbsdown:

[Pamela Troy]

51. More utter incomprehension from peope unwilling to acknowledge

gross misogyny when it's biting them on the nose.

[anigbrowl]

58. Clinton is not all women, and what I think of her is my opinion of one person

It has no bearing on my support for other women in politics. I've been pushing Gov Napolitano of AZ as a VP pick for Obama for some months now.

[Pamela Troy]

64. This isn't about you.

[dsc]

74. and I bet you a hundred dollars that if she is picked

the media will do to her, in the exact same way, as what was done to Hillary. Then you will see the point of the OP, but it will be way, way too late.

[Darth_Kitten]

52. Try reading the post.....

geez......

[BlooInBloo]

41. So the primary is Clinton versus Imus?

:shrug:

[crimsonblue]

42. why should Dean do ANYTHING?

He never said anything sexist.. He is not at fault.. but thanks for playing...

[kwassa]

57. because Dean represents the leadership of the Democratic Party

and as such, his toleration of sexism is an example.

That's why.

[crimsonblue]

72. That just makes no sense...

Why does he have to apologize for something he had nothing to do with? Going on your logic, I want an apology for how Obama has been treated. By not saying anything, Dean's toleration of racism is an example.


You see how idiotic you sound?

[kwassa]

It makes complete sense.

It is not a question of him apologizing, it is him taking a stand AGAINST SEXISM.

and please hold the name-calling.

[kwassa]

81. It makes complete sense.

It is not a question of him apologizing, it is him taking a stand AGAINST SEXISM.

and please hold the name-calling.

[NashVegas]

127. All He Had To Do At Any Given Time

Was send out a memo and/or a press release.

[AnnieBW]

48. I Agree, and I'm an Obama Supporter

Like I said... HRC is pounding the glass ceiling. She's not going to break it, but she's making it easier for the next woman to run for President.

[MethuenProgressive]

53. "the hatred of women that is accepted as a part of our culture. "

Not only accepted, but celebrated.

[alarimer]

54. I hear crap every single day that has nothing to do with Clinton.

Some of it is directed at my by my (male) coworkers and the general public. It's perfectly okay for some drunken redneck piece of shit to ask my marital status WHILE I AM WORKING while they would never ask men that. Also the jokes I have to endure.

There is so much sexism around and most people do not even see it, or they find it perfectly acceptable.

[sufrommich]

55. A perfect example of sexism on DU that many found

perfectly acceptable were the numerous(and I do mean numerous) posts which included pictures of Hillary looking old,I'm sure we all know which picture I'm talking about,as if a woman looking old in public were somehow proof of her villainy.It was sickening and blatantly misogynistic.

[anigbrowl]

59. Garbage. Unflattering photos are normal political stock

And no, I've never posted that photo of Clinton on a message of mine - in fact I rarely go in for posting photos. But here's one I do like:


This is my VP pick. So take your 'misogynistic' BS and chew on that.

[sufrommich]

78. Calling it "unflattering" is my point.

Sure there are unflattering photos of the other candidates,but they aren't considered unflattering because they comment on the candidates age,with that photo of Hillary,the only comment being made is that she's old,as if that alone is worthy of mocking. You're attempt to minimize it,doesn't change that fact.

[NashVegas]

56. The Frank "TJ" Mackey Generation?

Bunch of sweethearts.

[eridani]

73. True, but it's from the MSM and the wingnut whackjobs n/t

[rabidgeorge]

60. Excellent article by the great Marie Cocco

Great detailed list of sexist attacks on Clinton.

[anigbrowl]

61. I've processed it. It's junk.

Yes, some misogyny has been directed at Clinton and it's deplorable. But all criticism of a woman politician is not misogyny - only that based on her gender in disregard of her individual qualities. Thus 'I won't vote for Hillary - women are unfit to lead' is blatant misogyny. 'I won't vote for Hillary because I think she's dishonest' is a personal opinion.

Every politician comes in for disgraceful personal attacks. Remember Rush's 'comedy' song 'Barack the magic negro'? Democrats regularly refer to Bush as 'chimpy' and speak of 'rethuglicans' - as if this were any better than them calling us 'dimocrats'. I could go on and on. Frankly, I don't think Clinton has really had it any worse than other politicians. Nobody has seriously questioned her ability to lead based on the fact that she's female.

The writer asks how would crude references to Obama's sex organs play. Well, see for yourself - James Carville suggested a week or two back that is Clinton gave Obama one testicle, he'd have two. Sounds like a crude reference to his sexual organs to me, and from the Clinton camp, no less.

What the writer fails to get is that Clinton is not the only woman politician. So, she's breaking new ground by running as a female candidate, but you could equally well argue that most women don't have the advantage of being married to a two-term president at the beginning of the campaign. Personally, I prefer candidates that make it on their own - and indeed, we have a bunch of successful female governors as examples. But for some people it's Clinton or no-one, apparently.

[ccharles000]

71. I absolutely agree with this article.

[rodeodance]

75. REC

[merh]

84. Did you send an email or call the Hillary campaign to demand

that she cut off all associations with Carville? How about the pansy comment, did it offend you?

[Vinca]

90. Yep, Obama's gotten a free pass. After all, isn't being a black man

in America an advantage? Especially when your name rhymes with the most hated terrorist in the world. And, hey, that monkey on the t-shirt thing was just a joke . . . right?

[madrchsod]

119. the joke was on them--

they are being sued by the curious george people

[mkultra]

93. bah blah blah

she lost and its not because shes a woman, its because shes a liar.

[Scout]

100. you obviously failed to comprehend the OP, if you even bothered to read it...

because that is not what the OP is saying.

Fucking duh.

[madmom]

103. Some of the remarks to this post proves that the dumbing down of America is working.. I

can't believe how many replied without understanding what was being said here. It did NOT say Clinton lost because of sexism, it did NOT say that racism was ok. It is pointing out that sexism still exists in this country as does racism, and it's a pity.

[Pisces]

106. Clinton played the sexist crap by calling herself a girl and accusing the men of being

boys that ganged up on her. She should be ashamed of herself. No self respecting woman would ever play that crap in business. Boo hoo the boys are ganging up on me!!! Are you crazy. I am a business woman and would never call myself a girl!!
You crazy feminist need to take a hard look at the definition of feminism and then analyze the way your candidate chose to bring up the sexist bullshit to the media. Don't forget the crocodile tears to boot. She doesn't represent me that's for sure. This sour grapes from the losing group is getting old and turning to vinegar fast.

[Pamela Troy]

109. Riiiight. She ASKED for it! It's all HEEEER fault!

Where have I heard this crap before?

[Scout]

115. "you crazy feminist"

see there you go ... we feminists are either nuts or sluts!

[bigtree]

110. yep, she asked for it

:eyes:

[SIMPLYB1980]

116. K&R!

[madrchsod]

118. i do not like her policies

and in my opinion relied on the flawed judgment of those around her during this primary. is that sexism?

she started out with name,money,and 20% lead over all the candidates before iowa. the people around her spent tens of millions,underestimated david axlerod,and created some huge mistakes. she came in third and she won one demographic.

after that the press and the nets smelled blood in the water and the people around her never understood how to effectively manage/deflect the msm and the internet to protect her.

one can list hundreds of links proving it was sexism or racism in the democratic primary but what the bottom line is..barack and his team did a better job in managing the msm and the internet than did hillary`s team.

[Pamela Troy]

126. No, what the OP describes is sexism.

Did you even bother to read it?