Attacking Not Just Conservative Women
By Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy on June 19, 2009 at 6:50 AM in Abuse, Chelsea Clinton, Civil Liberties & Rights, Current Affairs, Freedom of Speech, Gender Bias, Hillary Clinton, Human Rights, Media Bias, Media, Television, Misogyny, President Barack Obama, Sarah Palin, Sexism, Women, Women and Children
(bumped up in light of Olive Garden no longer running ads on CBS “Late Show” with late night comic David Letterman.)
But all women, in my humble opinion. That is what David Letterman did with his sexist comments regarding Governor Palin and her daughter (and it doesn’t matter if he meant the OLDER one – not that much difference between 14 and 18, ya know). Here is Conservative pundit Andrea Tantaros discussing this issue with Megyn Kelly on America’s Newsroom Tuesday morning (and the clip includes Letterman’s apology, hence why it is not linked above):
Tantaros was taking off on a post she wrote on this very issue, Attacking Conservative Women. Even though she is a Conservative, she makes a lot of good points. And I say this as someone who actively fought for Equal Rights for Women, who ran in the Seneca Falls to Houston Run way back when, carrying the torch, who helped found a chapter of NOW. Because this was what was NOT part of all of that work – that it was only for liberal women. No, we were fighting for ALL women, and that is why these kinds of comments are so offensive, whether they are about Sarah Palin, Bristol Palin, Hillary Clinton, or Chelsea Clinton: because they are WRONG:
A growing trend seems to be emerging. From Perez Hilton to Playboy’s “Conservative Women Hate List” to David Letterman’s lewd comments about Sarah Palin, it appears that attacking women – specifically conservative women – is not only all the rage, but oddly, acceptable.The more acceptable it becomes to express violent, crass language against women in the public arena the more you can expect our country to fray at the seams.
I’m not talking about attacks from bottom feeder leftist blogs either. Notable mainstream brands like the Miss USA Organization, “The Late Show” and Playboy magazine have all lost their sense of humor and their sense of decency by allowing conservative women to become a punching bag — and a punch line — for the left. Forgoing all boundaries, a party that once used to claim to own the violence against women issue has embraced it and let their politics run them when it comes to the issue of misogyny.
On its face, this isn’t even a political issue. It’s a women’s issue –- a human issue that transcends politics (emphasis mine). But why, when it comes to the most serious and sensitive attacks against women the National Organization for Women spokeswoman warrants a missing person’s report?
That’s EXACTLY it – this is a HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE. This kind of language would never be tolerated if it was directed at any other group (okay, maybe at “The Gays,” as Kathy Griffin calls us, but that’s it), and it sure shouldn’t be tolerated against the largest minority in the world.
Tantaros continues:
Carrie Prejean was called the most offensive four and five letter words by Miss USA judge Perez Hilton’s after she expressed her traditional views on gay marriage. Was he scolded by one of the organization’s owners, Donald Trump? Hardly. Trump actually expressed willingness to allow Hilton to judge at next year’s competition.And that’s just the beginning. Playboy magazine published a vile, incendiary list of conservative women it would like to engage in hate sex with, and it was only after public outcry that it pulled the article. Its response was watered down, to say the least. Where was that writer’s editor? (And that editor’s mind, moreover?) It doesn’t take an expert to know that the first stage of violence is thinking about it, then expressing it, then actually doing it.
Again, about Prejean, she said NOTHING that OBAMA and BIDEN hadn’t already said. Yet, Obama got voted in (more or less), and Prejean was put on trial – for saying the same, exact thing.
And the Playboy piece was despicable.
As was this:
David Letterman made a disgusting joke about Alaska Governor Sarah Palin’s underage daughter and he didn’t stop there. He continued to make an off color joke about the Governor’s appearance making many want to invoke slaps but not against their knees.Palin is apparently more popular than Letterman. Thanks to growing pressure from viewers Letterman offered — not one — but two — mea culpas. But where was CBS from the start? It was only after the public got involved that the comedian began to react with some seeming sincerity.
For the record, Palin should never appear on his show. Protests calling for his resignation should continue with a larger message to the general population and television executives everywhere: distasteful behavior against females will not be tolerated.
The only reason for Palin to ever appear on Letterman’s show is to demonstrate that she takes the high road, and is a MUCH bigger person than he is. I used to watch Letterman’s show, by the way, before he took every opportunity to trash Clinton – both of them (I mean, really – it has been a long damn time since the Monica Lewinsky issue, and Letterman STILL takes digs at Bill over it – there isn’t ANYTHING else going on in the world about which he could joke? That’s just lazy. And in very poor taste.)
Here’s the kicker:
The United States, a champion for women’s rights throughout the world, will have a tough time wagging it’s finger at countries that are less than progressive in their attitudes toward women and crimes against women all over the world when we tolerate hate speak at the expense of the American female, for a few laughs or fame, no less.The First Amendment protects free speech but there is no reason that we, as citizens and consumers, should buy it. When it comes to those who want to disrespect any woman, we can take it to their bottom line and not only speak out, but also boycott their business.
Violence against women is wrong, no matter what party affiliation, not to mention it’s just not funny. The more acceptable it becomes to express violent, crass language against women in the public arena the more you can expect our country to fray at the seams.
Amen, Sister Tantaros. We may differ politically, but on this issue, I am standing right with you. We have seen the open season that was declared on women last year, we have felt the effects of it, and we still are. But it is UNACCEPTABLE to decent people. And we are decent people.
As is Dan K. Thomasson, who wrote a very good piece on this issue, “Letterman’s Remarks Symbolic of National Coarseness.” Now I realize this might date me some, you know, that I expect some level of decorum and decency and all, but so be it. (I’m also a Southerner, so what do you want from me already? That was supposed to be funny, just so you know.) I think Mr. Thomasson has it right in this post, and highlights that it isn’t just women who are upset by this level of discourse:
One doesn’t have to be a fan of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her family to be offended by David Letterman’s utterly tasteless, senseless remarks about her trip to New York City. Somewhere in there may be a clue as to why NBC picked Jay Leno instead of Letterman to replace Johnny Carson on the “Tonight Show” all those years ago.Letterman told his television audience that Palin, her husband and daughter had attended a New York Yankees game where the daughter had been “knocked up” during the seventh-inning pause by Yankee star Alex Rodriguez. He also insulted every hard-working airline crewmember outside the cockpit by describing Palin’s own appearance as a “slutty flight attendant look.”
Let me note here that as the father of one daughter and the grandfather of four young ladies, three of them teenagers, and the father-in-law of a former longtime flight attendant who missed being on one of the ill-fated 9/11 planes by one day, I was particularly outraged by these mindless remarks.
To her credit, Palin ignored the assault on her own person, realizing her political ambitions have made her fair game. But what parent, even one who understands that in this country politicians can expect rough treatment, would not be angered by the gratuitous off-color assault on her teenage daughter? The Palin daughter at the game was 14-year-old Willow. Palin called the remark “sexually perverted,” which seems an apt description for one who apparently thinks the suggested rape of a child or a teenage pregnancy are laughing matters.
Letterman said he would never say that about a 14-year-old. Well, that would indicate at least he knows the consequences attached to an assault, verbal or otherwise, on an underage girl. He said he was referring to Bristol, the 18-year-old who is an unwed mother but who was not at the game — an obvious cop out. But either way, of course, he was out of line. Just because this former TV weatherman hails from the Indiana farm country (as do I) doesn’t mean he should be bombarding us with pig dung in the guise of barnyard “humor” that most Hoosiers on either side of the political aisle would consider unfunny.
Like I said, I don’t think it is any funnier if it is about an 18 yr old, either. What a pathetic excuse that is, and in no way minimizes the inappropriateness of that “joke.” And extra credit if you figure out how old Obama’s mother was when she had HIM.
Thomasson continues:
Furthermore, this smutty dialog is not fit for national television. Aren’t we getting a bit tired of those who feel somehow their lofty positions give them immunity from the social restraints and standards of good taste and decency that govern most civilized Americans? It is safe to say that had Letterman’s remarks been made with any sort of racial overtone, his job would be on the line. There really is no reason for it not to be now if one subscribes to the notion that a baseless suggestion of immorality about any one no matter their color should bear some consequences, First Amendment guarantees notwithstanding.Letterman’s remarks may have been written for him, but the responsibility is still his. He has complete control of his own material. It is puzzling that after all these years, he has not learned the difference between fair comment and satire and vicious disparagement. What may be more troublesome in all this is that it furthers the incivility of today’s politics, that its nastiness moves us just that much closer to the hate line at the expense of innocent bystanders — in this case children.
Liking or disliking Gov. Palin has nothing to do with this. Those who find her politically unsettling should be as appalled as those who are her biggest supporters. Her daughter’s pregnancy and decision to keep the baby does not make her a legitimate target for scurrilous public bathroom scribbles from morons. Mothers all over the world should be offended. It may be too late for a Letterman apology, but it isn’t for CBS officials to issue a strong disassociation with his remarks. After all, he violated most of the unwritten but understood rules that have protected minor family members from such unfair attacks. They have fired people for less. What this whole matter says about our direction is downright disgusting.
Yes, it does say a lot about our direction, and it sure as hell is disgusting. We saw a whole lot of that kind of behavior throughout the Primary and Election campaigns, too. It has all been well documented here before, the shirts, the actions, the horrible comments by the MSM, Obama’s supporters, and the enabling by the DNC of the sexism or coarse discourse.
Oh, and Dave? It’s not the PERCEPTION of what you said. It is WHAT YOU SAID. Just to be clear. We didn’t misunderstand you. We heard you loud and clear. And we didn’t like what we heard. Because what we heard, what you SAID, was offensive to women, and children. Enough of the deflection masquarading as an apology. We heard what you said, Dave, and it was offensive.
Maybe the third time is the charm – maybe Letterman can make a REAL apology without pushing it off on his listeners, or claiming he was mixed up, or whatever BS he comes up with next.
And maybe, just maybe, women will start to turn him off, and others of his ilk, who demean, belittle,castigate, and sexualize us, and our children. Now THAT might be a message clearly understood by everyone, Dave included.
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
Well, Playboy has a big problem, don’t they? They attained great success for one reason, “I buy it for the stories and articles?” Let’s not kid ourselves: Playboy succeeded because it was an easily available aid to masturbation. That’s OK with me, but the internet has kind of made them irrelevant, hasn’t it? Are they going to succeed by going political? No way! The internet has them trumped there too. Bye Bye Hef! Sure was fun while it lasted, I’ll bet.
” Let’s not kid ourselves: Playboy succeeded because it was an easily available aid to masturbation. That’s OK with me”
That’s OK with you?? well, you should think again. What kind of sexuality is OK for you? Playboy is a sexist sexuality. The problem isn’t the sexuality (or masturbation obviously) but the kind of sexuality we have done, brutal and violent.
I can’t believe I’m answering this, but here goes: Julia, I like kind sweet intimate love between consenting adults. I hate cruelty, either physical or emotional. As to “the kind of sexuality we have done, brutal and violent,” I can only say, I’m not part of that “we.” I don’t demonize masturbation, and if a naked drawing or picture helps a lonely person to get it on with his or her own imagination, then fine. It’s OK with me. Violent images are another matter: that’s not OK with me. The Playboy bit on the “conservative women hate list” crossed that line.
Reverend Amy,
Thank you, that was awesome!
HATE SEX! Wow! That’s the first time I’ve heard that but it pretty much says it all about what is going on today. I’ve been looking at the lack of true humor and wit and various other side issues but I think the fact that the term exists really says everything that needs to be said.
Many thanks to you RRRA for everything you have done personally. I admire you.
“Hate sex,” to me, is an even uglier concept than “rape.” At least “rape” does not try to hide it’s animosity, whereas “hate sex” might involve a little deceptive sweet-talk to get the conservative hottie to comply . . .
And besides, what we’re really talking about with the “readers” of Playboy is not “hate sex,” but “hate masturbation.”
heh heh. it’s gotta suck being a straight man who hates women. jerking off to playboy is the closest thing to a date they’re ever going to get.
oowa
Excellent point distinguishing “hate-sex” or “hate-f***” as the disgusting Playboy hate-against-women article said.
But why is Megyn KElly making such a grossly inaccurate mistake? She used Hillary as an example of what the Obamabots do NOT attack and asked why?
Well, where was this conservative Pundit Megyn Kelly during the most sexist primaries when Hillary was bashed, vilified, slandered and attacked 24/7 for over a year!?
Kelly should be reminded by someone that she picked on the wrong woman as an example of Obamabots’ kid gloves treatment with their own liberal women!
Somebody ought to educate Kelly on this point!!!
Ditto!
I think I heard O’Lielly say once he had to “put up with (in a joking manner) Kelly and Carlson and they’re both Democrats!”
so I think she’s leaning left to start with
as left as you can lean and still work for
FauxFoxbut then a LOT of people claim to be Dems or Reps and then when you watch them vote or act it screams something else (aka Lieberdon’t, Hagel, BenNelson or even the aristocat (blonde) in Louisiana
all puzzling to me
Obviously Kelly wasn’t pay attention during the 2008 primary season where the Far Left repeatedly attacked Clinton in all matter of disgusting ways. But, of course, the Republicans are not innocent either since they made HRC a punching bag from the moment she stepped onto the public scene, nearly 20 years ago–the Hillary hatefest has a long history.
This isn’t a liberal/conservative issue because both parties have participated and are equally guilty. But as a lifelong Dem, the attacks from so-called “liberal” circles really tick me off because the Dems claim they represent “women’s issues.” Hah!
Hypocrits! Liars and potty mouths. The language that was used last year was disgusting and Letterman is simply “in the groove.”
It’s time for women of all political stripes to call all these jerks for what they are: blatant sexists. Humiliating these abusers in public is very effective.
It’s called “shame,” a word that has gone out of favor. We need to bring it back!
You are too kind – thank you.
And thanks for the good comments, everyone.
There is a real lack of actual humor these days – it’s all pretty much mean-spirited attacks in the guise of humor.
“Hate” sex – that really says it all, doesn’t it? It says exactly what these people think of women in GENERAL, not just Conservative women.
This past campaign season opened the floodgates for misogyny/sexism to be accepted in everyday parlance. I really hope that, somehow, we can stem this tide, if not for us, then for our daughters, nieces, granddaughters, sisters…I sure don’t want my nieces/grandnieces to grow up in a culture that clearly has a callous disregard for women, and which targets young girls with offensive, beyond the pale, comments…
“hate sex” really sums up the urges behind all the misogyny we’ve witnessed, and endured.
I remember a particularly startling quote from one of the blogger boys during the general (I don’t remember his name, but I’ll post if I find it).
He set it up by saying he had a really understanding girlfriend. So understanding that she was willing to enable his fantasy of f***ing Palin on his Barack Obama sheets while his girlfriend read aloud from the Constitution.
I kid you not. I’ll never forget the cold feeling that went through my body when I read that. I really started to appreciate how mistaken I was about the progress of America in eradicating sexism.
Clearly, we were fair game, and no-one bothered to hide it anymore.
I had never heard the term “Hate” sex either but I compared it to one more familiar to me and my “times”…”Grudge” sex ( using the word sex to be more polite and PC and to avoid being too vulgar)….I was able to get the total meaning…Playboy never really bothered me, it was one of the less trashy “rags” of that genre’ however, they need to stay with photo’s of female nude body and leave polotics to the polticians. God knows that they hardly need any help screwing things up..
Great post. Every time I see a photo of Letterman now, I think: perverted asshole. He doesn’t even realize how he has offended women. I don’t care if Bristol is 18, how is it funny to humiliate a teen age single mom about being knocked up? When did Bristol run for public office?
Great post! Thank you.
Letterman’s writers are young males in their 20’s and early 30’s who have been exposed to this hate speech and bahvior against women as socially acceptable for their whole lives. Look at the disgusting behavior of BO and his speech writer against HRC–not only that but look at the so called commentators and journalists in the MSM who did the same thing to Palin and Clinton as they were running for the highest offices in the country. This sexist hate speech is as vile as racist speech–and not one woman in this country should allow herself or her daughters to watch Letterman or anyone else who contributes to this hatred-it’s about time that us mothers and women all over stand up against this through boycotting products, magazines, tv shows and movies that promote this garbage.
I agree – except that I think every time you hear any of this in the company of young girls you use it as teaching aid. You tell them not to accept any of this stuff.
They need to learn they have their own identity and self-respect that is not dependent on what others say and think. If they hear anything degrading to them that is supposed to be “funny” from friends, they are free to walk out. They don’t have to put up with it. They are better and smarter than any dumb “friends” who think this stuff is amusing.
And it is OK to be a lone wolf if others don’t live up to your standards.
The video with Megyn Kelly and Andrea Tantaros is the second time I have heard comments on FoxNews that suggests ONLY Sarah Palin suffered the disrespect, sexism and misogyny. They were talking about the fact these things only seem to happen to conservative women. Megyn said, “What if it had been Hillary Clinton?” Andrea said, “They would defend her.”
Where were they during the campaign of 2008? Palin was defended as much as Hillary was, but Hillary’s defenders did not come from the dem party or women’s groups any more than Sarah’s defenders. I will admit that Hillary and Sarah were treated differently, but I would be hard pressed to say which got the worst treatment. If I had to say I would say Hillary because she was brought down from being the front runner even though she continued to win primaries. Sarah Palin continued to draw the crowds for McCain as well. The point is, the conservatives seem to have forgotten or never really understood what Hillary had to endure. It is really beginning to get to me.
That comment was so inaccurate, I had to listen again to make sure I had not misheard. These two women missed the point, entirely; and NP and CMc and the other female D’s who are BO sycophants are only a heartbeat away from disfavor to becoming the next victims of the misogyny machine.
Golly, thanks for allowing the possibility that Conservatives are not always totally evil
LOL – ah, heck, you know what I mean, right?! Oh, dear – I certainly didn’t mean to offend anyone, and hope I didn’t. Please bear in mind that I clung to the far left side of the Dem party my entire life until last year (5/31, to be exact), so I am still working through some of the prejudices that come with that belief position. I realized I had been sold a bill of goods that wasn’t necessarily so. Anyway, my bad!
Honestly, I have to say, I have been impressed by Andrea Tantaros. Her arguments are usually well crafted, researched, and logical. She sure holds her own against Bob Beckel…
NYCGirl, EXCELLENT points.
Thank you! Good post, good discussion of a topic that will only become more and more relevant as we go forward to 2010 and 2012 — Unfortunately!
However, Ms Tantaros either didn’t do her research, or intended to tell the lies about NOW, Joy Behar and Hillary. NOW, for the most part, didn’t defend Hillary, and Joy Behar never complained about the media’s treatment of Hillary. In fact, she was part of the hate and sexism.
I have said many times, NOW is not about women’s issues other than abortion and lesbian rights. They never have been. Perhaps they were more outspoken in some areas of the country, but not where I came from that had many activist women’s groups that no longer exist. They would not begin to know how to respond to the sexism that both Hillary and Sarah endured.
I get very tired of hearing about where is NOW and all the women’s groups? I keep telling them they don’t exit. It bothers me greatly that all the media people seem to think NOW speaks for women. They have NEVER spoken for me although I have always supported their primary causes.
I agree, and I really like and agree with your earlier comment at “Comment by FranSC | 2009-06-18 00:49:14″ I was also shocked (shouldn’t have been) at the comments from Ms Tantaros about Hillary during the primaries. Was she living in a cave all that time?
I am getting so sick and tired of the sexism directed at women on either side of the political spectrum. And what is worse, is many on the left supporting the sexism directed at both Hillary and Sarah, and many on the right supporting the sexism directed at Hillary. I agree with their outrage over Sarah, but where was their outrage over Hillary?
When are we going to get to the point where we, as women, refuse to support sexism directed at any woman, regardless of political identity? Until we do, it will be difficult to confront the men (and women) that perpetuate the sexism. If the great majority of women condemned the sexism, then the sexists would lose more than half their support.
I would have to disagree with this:
Comment by FranSC | 2009-06-18 01:04:35
“I have said many times, NOW is not about women’s issues other than abortion and lesbian rights”.
I do understand that you went on to share that this might have pertained only to where you lived. But, I wanted to point out that in NOW’s early history lesbians were expelled from the organization, and then later re-instated with an apology. I think NOW, like most organizations, has struggled with inclusion on all fronts. However, they have been outspoken advocates on many issues, not just abortion and lesbian rights, and have fought many good fights.
That being said, I am no longer directly affiliated with them. My interest ended at the time when I felt they were throwing women (particularly working class women) under the bus. And I continue to be dissatisfied with their blatant denial of sexism in the political realm. I understand why they think they have to do this, but I don’t agree with the logic. In the long run, the legacy we are leaving our daughters, and all young women, is one of continued oppression. The crumbs they are devouring are getting smaller and harder to divide, and in the end, young women will be left starving for equality.
Of course, altering this behavior will not entirely eradicate sexism, it’s part of a system that must be dismantled from its root. However, I think NOW and other organizations could help alleviate some of the damage by choosing to dig in, suffer short term losses, and fight for the long range goals. It’s now or never, baby.
Several years ago, my upstairs neighbors, a young married couple, church missionaries, had invited me over dinner. Relating this information to friends, I actually said, “They’re Republicans but they’re nice.” Hearing these words flow out of my mouth, I was shocked. Immediately, I corrected myself. “I mean, they’re Republican and they’re nice.”
Feel better?
When we first came to Hollywood we took out an entertainment attorney and his wife for the evening. We went to “La Cage Aux Folles” a drag club that had great performances and hilarious CLEAN humor.
We all enjoyed the show. When we left we proposed that this Texas couple take their parents there when they came into town. The wife looked shocked and said “Oh I couldn’t. My parents always vote Republican!”
As recent immigrants we thought that was a pretty funny comment. It took us years to realize that everyone is expected to fit the presumed mold of their politics.
So now we are single-payer, gay marriage, abortion rights advocates who would like to see Teddy Roosevelt trust-busting and FDR’s financial rules reinstated. We want the government out of our bedroom and back to regulating banks and Wall Street.
We love Hillary and don’t like or trust Obama.
Guess that makes us politically homeless right now.
Well, then, welcome home.
RRRevAmy, I agree – both Andrea T. & Megyn K. have become favorites of mine as well. But they still don’t quite get it about Hillary and the “imagined” women’s groups out here that remain silent.
Whatever groups that are left were and are just as silent about Hillary as they are about Palin. Laura Ingraham is like them as well, railing constantly about where are the feminists? Where is NOW like NOW is THE voice of liberal feminists.
Since you helped found one of the NOW Chapters, I’m sure with your leadership NOW was much more effective in combining many women’s issues and not the narrow view they have always had in most of their chapters. In the heat of the women’s movement in NC, NOW simply was not that strong. The Women’s Political Caucus way outnumbered them and trumped their effectiveness because of that group’s continuous lobbying and interaction with legislators, congress people, and most elected officials. I do realize that was not the case every where. Today, NOW should not be looked at as “THE VOICE” of women, although I’m afraid it is.
It’s good to see Gov. Palin taking on the issue of “sexism and misogyny masquerading as humor” with passion and conviction. I only wish she had given it the same level of attention when she was running for v.p. last year. At that time, she saw fit to accuse Hillary Clinton of “whining” about the savage treatment she was receiving at the hands of a male-oriented media machine.
I know that Gov. Palin chose to downplay the “slutty flight attendant” slur that was aimed at her, and to highlight the rape joke about her daughter. But if Palin runs for national office again, or even if she just stays in state government in Alaska, she will have to acknowledge eventually that the cruelty is not due to a “liberal bias” in the media. Hillary was hardly a conservative. The savagery was aimed exclusively at the females in the race. At some point Palin will have to address herself to the sexism against HER. And I have news for her — it will not come only from the “liberal media”. Palin’s own party is gearing up for a smackdown against her if she runs again — and that will not be pretty either.
This morning on one of the morning shows this reporter said, “If you get right down to it, B0’s mother got ‘knocked up’ with him when she was 17 but you would never hear one of the liberal media say that.” He further said, “Also, David Letterman ‘knocked up’ little Harry’s mother and only married her last year.”
I don’t like repeating such disrespectful terms toward women, but I couldn’t help but think “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander”.
Fran is the winner of the Extra Credit! That’s right – she was 17.
And yes – I agree abt the terms, too.
As for NOW, well, I wouldn’t exactly say they are for either women’s OR lesbians’ rights at this time, but that’s just me…If they were, they NEVER could have endorsed Obama. Never.
Rabble….Great post!
Obambi was never for gay rights. He just used it as bait. Now, his back against the wall, losing fundraisers in the gay community, he’s decided to give gay fed employees a half-hearted benefit package that does not include Health Care! And to think he’s the first affirmative action bisexual prez–as much as he would deny it, of course. Just like he denied going to church and listening to Rev. Jeremiah without knowing what he was preachin’…
The man is self-loathing misogynist homophobic deceptive….I can go on. Hutchinson at Dissenting Justice has a good piece on Obama’s deception of the gay community–to get Votes, of course. Now under the bus like grandma, uncle J., and the Big Change. Gotta go and watch A.Jones’ “The Obama Deception” on Youtube for the second time…
Ah, I forgot the creep-in-chief is also an Ageist, firing Walpin so Proud Mechelle can give job to buddy. Slandering Mr. Walpin with “confusion”–who? The PUNCHDRUNK homophobic, misogynist, ageist Clueless Commander…
Mary, great rant.
Thank you RRR AMY!!!
Great video! Finally women in the media making a stand – with clear and convincing arguments. Hurrah! And Thomasson was right on the money. Point after point. And how awesome to learn of your own history with women’s equality.
Yeah Dave – what Amy said!
From one of the quotes in the post: “To her credit, Palin ignored the assault on her own person, realizing her political ambitions have made her fair game.”
I agree that Palin didn’t focus on the sexist attacks against her, just focused on those against her daughter, and certainly would have been slammed if she had said people were being sexist towards her (because feminism really is a dirty word anymore).
But I disagree with the end of this statement. Being out in the public makes you “game”, but sexist attacks aren’t “fair game”. They’re UNFAIR game. Criticisms of policy are fair, irrelevant/incorrect low blows are unfair. So, I think we need to be more attention when someone uses the phrase “fair game” – we’re so used to hearing it, and we have to call out the distinction between fair (relevant) and unfair “game”….
Your absolutely right lorac!
Good point, Iorac, well said – no doubt we have become desensitized to sexism in our society, but maybe it is occasions just like this that help to awaken us to that fact.
And thanks, Linda!
I appreciate it!
Right, lorac, especially when you are not degrading and deriding men with the same vile crap daily. That misogynist poison does get under the skin and into the psyche and does influence voters.
After claiming ignorance as to which daughter attended the game with Gov Palin, Letterman still delivered a half-a#$%!d apology (I’ve emphasized the offending words in the following excerpt):
Letterman: “It’s the perception rather than the intent.’ It doesn’t make any difference what my intent was, it’s the perception. And, as they say about jokes, if you have to explain the joke, it’s not a very good joke. [....] Well, my responsibility – I take full blame for that. I told a bad joke. I told a joke that was beyond flawed, and my intent is completely meaningless compared to the perception. And since it was a joke I told, I feel that I need to do the right thing here and apologize for having told that joke. It’s not your fault that it was misunderstood, it’s my fault. That it was misunderstood.”
Blah, blah, blah, what a blithering idiot he is!
What’s to misunderstand about promoting statutory rape?
Hope n Change, Letterman edition.
If you think David Letterman is bad please check this guy out….http://www.theflyingpinto.com/….”Bring the Stewardesses back”
and others of his ilk, who demean, belittle,castigate, and sexualize us, and our children….
How do I get my daughter to realize, if a guy calls you these things to say, “F*&K U and adios ??
How do we teach young girls to break this cycle of accepting sub human treatment?
I am in no way attempting to shift responsibilities to the female gender ’cause I am getting good at reminding my daughters that many boys /men ARE ass****’s and very insecure.
Rev Amy ??
*Deer caught in the headlights look* Who, me??
Ahem. Seriously, Teak, I think you are already doing good things for your daughter by talking to her about these issues, teaching her what are appropriate/inappropriate comments to make. That being said, I know that when with her peers, things may be different. Still – that voice,that seed, you are planting, will go far.
Still, so much is societal – I was thinking that sports, drama, whatever outlet is right for each child, is a good way to build self-esteem and self-worth, but even in sports, when I hear women talking abt MEN on the field when there are only WOMEN on the field, it makes me cringe. I have written a TON of letters to ESPN and other sports channels when their female commentators say stuff like that, but the women themselves are screaming, “Man on!” – Whaaaa??? Where? But that’s what they are being taught – they are ALMOST the same as men…
I think this is important because language shapes our reality. It isn’t just the taunts abt which one has to worry, it is everyday discourse in which girls/women are put second. All of that is CUMULATIVE. People often make fun of the issue of inclusive language, but let me tell yuo, having gone to a seminary in which inclusive language was REQUIRED for all classroom discussions, chapel services, and papers, it makes a WORLD of difference…It’s not just a start – it is that, but it ends up having a bigger impact…
And there’s lots more, Teak – I am sure you can tell ME better than I can you…
Thanks Rev. Amy.
LOL. Sorry about the headlights.
I must confess I just chewed my daughter’s male friend a new one for some verbal abuse towards my daughter. I can not abide in such behavior. The only reason I let him in the house is that his mother made some Indian deserts… Perhaps as in apology from his mom, I sure she was embarrassed by her son.
His parents are very neat people and I asked him if he was raised to think what he did was OK. So he says no and apologized.
It hit a nerve because the father of my granddaughter is the IS A FIRST CLASS prick and we are having to deal with the threats of violence from him.
I agree it is Cumulative and systemic. Drives me nuts that my daughter tolerates any out it given recent events. But she is not alone in this as women and girls get exposed to this cultural poison every second of every day.
Bothers me greatly that the Fox anchor and her guest complain that if the target had been Hillary, the left would be outraged. Um, hello – …. ????
NOW they say misogyny’s a women’s issue, not a political issue.
I’ll help them in this fight, no problem. But the short memories are kinda hard to believe.
I saw an online ad for the Litterman Show — it said “watch and see what all the controversy is about.”
Thes freak is actually trying to use the uproar to boost his ratings.
— which is why we need to keep writing to the sponsors. Olive Garden got the message. Next?
Mars i hope.the dominoes are falling
Great post Amy!!
Letterman mocks the protestors:
http://tinyurl.com/m299p7
Megin KELLY should not have used HILLARY as an example of what the “Left” avoids bashing…where was Megen Kelly during primary? Doesn’t she watch her own station?
No other woman was as persistently slandered, vilified, bashed and kicked around than HIllary Clinton–by her own unDemocratic Party! Of course in the 90’s it was the conservatives who were doing the bashing.
If anything comes out of this sordid mess with Lettercrapper, let’s hope that misogyny directed to BOTH Conservative and Liberal women is stopped! At last, both groups are uniting to fight the common enemy of Misogyny so deeply entrenched that we fail to recognize it unless it hits us in the face as Lettercrap’s way way out of line strongly misogynist comments about Sarah Palin and her daughters. ENOUGH!
Actually, FOX News was better toward Hillary than any other “news” station during the Campaign. They actually treated her with respect, and had her on a good bit. Greta Van Susteren did a number of interviews with her, and was FANTASTIC with Hillary (of course, Greta’s husband was a big Hillary supporter). But overall, Fox was MUCH better with her than anyone else.
I agree, though – I hope and pray for the day when this is no longer an issue at all…
I thought Bill O’Reilly’s interview with Hillary was very good, too.
I agree, TexasMirth, that O’Reilly’s interview with Hillary was a good one and very spirited. In fact he told her at the end it was the best interview he had ever had. He said that a couple of times later as well.
I had the feeling Bill was very surprised about that. But, you know, Hillary can talk with anyone and it is always great – filled with little golden nuggets of one description or another.
This is the point many of us were trying to make during the election. Putting down any accomplished, honest, hard-working woman puts down ALL women. When NOW and others attacked Palin on issues other than her politics, they gave people like Letterman permission to continue to be sexists. I supported HRC and Palin, because of their records–not because they were women. They should have be evaluated on their actions, not their appearances. And the families of both should be OFF limits….
I wrote a letter to The Olive Garden the other day so it made me very happy to read their statement about withdrawing advertizing. No doubt the last Littleman apology was made under duress — his sponsors must’ve taken him or CBS out to the woodshed.
My thanks to any and all of you here at NQ who provided links, etc., so we could easily communicate with advertizers.
I feel I owe a debt of gratitude to Sarah Palin for holding Littleman’s feet to the fire and forcing this issue She took some criticism for it but the bottom line is WE WON AND THEY LOST. I wondered how Margaret Carlson and her ilk felt when Dave was forced to apologize yet again, and more earnestly?
BTW, I wish I could remember the article, but just the other day I read a piece written by a woman about Hillary and she described what she was wearing! It wasn’t a negative piece by any measure but still, why must a woman’s appearance be part of the story?
To try to offer a slightly different take on this:
There’s a huge amount of interest all over the world in Hillary as SOS — what she’s doing, thinking — and yes, what she’s wearing. I really don’t have a problem with this. I know that Hillary has been looking very good in her post as SOS and I am sure she puts a lot of thought and time into her appearance. So, if people notice her outfits or hairstyles that she has gone to some effort to make attractive, that can only be for the good, IMO.
If you read blogs devoted to Hillary, many of the comments will center on her pantsuits, her hair (which she changes frequently), her jewelry (much of which Bill buys for her, apparently). But does anyone doubt that these bloggers take Mme. Secretary seriously? She is not a “cupcake”, by any means. But people do appreciate an attractive, strong woman, and they are respectful of her position while admiring her style.
I have a problem with people attacking Hillary for her appearance — as has happened so often in the past, and I have a problem with them not taking her seriously as a world leader. But if we like her new hairstyle, I think it’s fine to say so. JMO.
“A belief in equal opportunity is not just the cause of feminists. It’s the creed of our country.”
-Sarah Palin
There is no equal opportunity when women are demeaned in the media or ridiculed for entertainment. Newt Gingrich never stepped onto the playing field already behind because he was perceived as a whore, stupid, etc. He doesn’t have to campaign having his sexuality constantly ridiculed, his intelligence mocked with endless skits. But women are and it is irrelevant what their politics are. When women start dismissing this nastiness because of who they perceive the victim to be, we’re cooking our own goose. It’s no wonder we have so few women in politics.
spot on yytik…. I could have never said it better!!
I drive my prius with a Sarah Palin bumpersticker ever so proudly. I may be a driving contradiction so to speak but I love my Sarah Palin bumper sticker. I get many waves from other Palin supporters on the road which in my opinion equates to supporters of equal rights!!
Abuse of one woman is abuse of all women.
While there is no doubt that misogyny is the name of the game, there is also a heavy dose of classism and/or regionalism. Do we see attacks like this on those perceived to be upper class and urban. Not often if ever is this seen. Women who are perceived to be less educated (this includes public university educated rather than Ivy league), rural or from certain regions especially the south, fundamentalist in religion, and of modest means or upbringing are especially targeted.
This is about class and intimidating those who challenge the status quo of the elites. They do it to certain men also such as President Clinton who was portrayed as a hillbilly man slut who couldn’t help himself because of his low class southern background even though he was a Rhodes scholar and about average in promiscuity (sarcasm sort of). NOW only defends women in their own social class not those who they consider their “inferiors” even if they are technically children. It is about the female lawyer that said to me when Palin was nominated “Who does she think she is”. And it is done by other women and hirelings like Letterman for their masters.
EXCELLENT point, Elliott. You are spot on – classism plays a role in this, too. But there is no doubt the root of Letterman’s (or Littleman’s, as Ptience calls him) abuse was sexism.
In general, though, I think you are absolutely right. I often wonder how people in Alaska feel when their entire STATE is dismissed as irrelevant, and as a bunch of yahoos who can’t work their way out of a wet paper bag.
Being from the South, I know all too well the regional disdain heaped upon us. When I went to Union, people assumed I was racist because I grew up down South. Yet, I grew up with African Americans, went to church in a predominantly AA congregation, and many of them had never even SEEN a person of color until they went to COLLEGE. And, not for nothing, but parts of Boston, NY, and Chicago (I lived in each of those big cities) had some of the most racist neighborhoods I had ever seen – many of my friends would not even go into them for fear of their lives – seriously.
And yes, there is the presumption that we Southerners are just a bunch of ignorant, backwards, racist, Confederate flag-waving moonshine drinking, barefoot, rag-wearing, corncob pipe smoking hillbillies. Never mind that we have the oldest public universities in the COUNTRY down here (Go, Tar Heels! Okay, and Hoos, too, but we all know UNC was first!
).
It is all part and parcel, but then throw in a woman who “doesn’t know her place,” and all hell breaks lose. We saw that with both Hillary AND Sarah. And it sounds a very clear, loud message to our young women, and men, abt what is an acceptable role for women.
I agree that Letterman is primarily about misogyny. He is also a crude ass. But many of the worst haters of Palin and Clinton would use crude misogynistic language, get called on it, then turn around and use a elitist, classist, regionalist, or religiously bigoted epithets as if that were acceptable also. Much of it is all mixed up, and anyone prone to misogyny is prone to all of the other forms of bigotry and abuse. It is a way to control people and the elites are experts at using these tactics.
Just another thought is that Obama was the candidate for the elites. He was Ivy league, male, elite profession, urban, acceptable region, and a minority so that supporters could make themselves feel good about their own political narcissism. Any criticism or inquiry of their candidate was immediately given a social stigma which is a common method of controlling groups especially women and girls who are socially conditioned to respond to it. Hence Letterman’s choice of language.
the BAS@#DS!
How do you like my usage? hehee!
The Ones that OWN the ONE have WON!
(but ONE is the loneliest number)
especially when it’s flying over the cuckoo nest!
as the ONE FLEW (who knew?)
“Notable mainstream brands like the Miss USA Organization, “The Late Show” and Playboy magazine have all lost their sense of humor and their sense of decency by allowing conservative women to become a punching bag — and a punch line — for the left.”
I wasn’t aware that a magazine whose purpose is to portray women as pieces of meat for male consumption had a sense of humor, much less decency.
also, plz stop with the attacks on the “left”: this is a y chromosome problem not a left-right problem; I assure you left and right both read porno.
Nom, but you have to admit that feminist causes used to be one of the bedrocks of the Left. The 2008 primaries revealed that in actuality, women have been cogs in a patriarchal game between the Left and the Right. It appears that elections have always been about masculinity and its construction. I guess this time around the Dems wanted to shed their “Mommy Party” characterization (given to them by the Right all these years), and to do this they found the most misogynist and sexist candidate ever to run for POTUS. What was fascinating to watch was how Hillary handled the masculinity issue, at one point being the candidate most Americans trusted with foreign affairs and the war, while being a fierce mother figure (Pat Buchanan even characterized her as the Virgin Mary, at one point). It was no accident that over 30 generals supported HRC whereas very few showed public support for Obama.
Both Hillary and Sarah confused the masculinity issue in the election, and therefore threatened the status quo: the former being a brainy and tough leader/mother who commands respect, and the latter being a frontier woman, leader/mother, and beauty queen to boot.
In other words they both broke the mold, and thus put a certain type of masculinity on notice. Misogyny and sexism are the ways to put women back in their place (e.g. Michelle and Laura Bush).
agree they both suck re- women, that’s all I meant: it’s hardly just the left that sucks.
This is one of your best posts, Rev Amy.
I left a comment earlier regarding “hate sex” that hasn’t posted yet. Lost in the spam filter?
Amy,
Excellent post. We are certainly deteriorating as a country by letting this kind of behavior go unpunished. And it is very true that we do lose our moral authority, telling other countries to treat women better when we do this — and so many women are still on the receiving end of violence.
Further, Letterman’s behavior is typical of the type of man (and some women) who hate confrontation and don’t ever want to be called on the carpet — they cannot ever admit they are wrong so it’s always about some schoolboy sheepish crap that they were “misunderstood”. He is 62. Grow up, Dave.
He expected Hillary and Sarah and their families to take the endless filth that he dished out without comment and now he can’t even take his own lumps like a grown-up. Unbelievable.
If any one of these neanderthals like him, Maher, Matthews, Olbermann, Leno and the like had ever been on the receiving end of this firestorm of disrespect, vitriol and crass put downs, they would alternately be crying foul at the top of their lungs, and curled up in a corner in the fetal position.
Letterman is a big baby — with all that he has in his life, he cannot even find the humility to admit he was wrong.
As we discuss this very important issue of sexism against women of ALL political stripes, let’s keep reminding ourselves that the “fun” has only just begun. Palin will undoubtedly run again in 2012 — she’s already got her PAC in place and has filed candidacy papers with the FEC, I have heard. And she will have a fight on her hands once again with the MSM PLUS the “good ol’ boys” in her own party who want to shoot her down. They have already started the sniping.
I do not support Palin’s politics — I am not a conservative. But I will certainly back her up as a woman battling sexism and misogyny. And classicism, as a previous poster noted earlier in this thread.
That last line should read:
“And classism, as a previous poster noted earlier in this thread.”
I am not really against the “classics”.
The root of the problem is that there no longer exists a sense of common courtesy and decency. Call me old-fashioned, but civility is no longer in vogue and is lost to an entire generation and perhaps beyond. Shock and awe are the order of the day–if it offends, their motto is “do it”.