I was, like, so totally going to support Obama in the primary, you know, but like now that it is uncool to support him and now that I found out he didn’t write that “I have a dream” stuff and the fact his wife hates Amerikka, I might just have to vote for Hillary.
/moron
That, folks, is Hillary’s campaign message to you in the 48 hours. A real winner, no?
Discuss.
Quiddity
Isn’t it supposed to be Amerikkka? (3 Ks)
Ned Raggett
Am I ever glad the primaries are behind us in California.
dnA
I just want to say I don’t know why the Taylor Marsh/Michelle Malkin parallel didn’t occur to me before.
Taylor Marsh truly is Ultimate/Earth 2 Michelle Malkin.
And yes, if you’re referncing Ice Cube, it’s Amerikkka.
dnA
I suck at typing/life.
bootlegger
Shit-slinging and stomping the straw man is all Blondie has left in her arsenal. And her supporters, pretty much down to ad hominen attacks of BHO supporters.
If I didn’t know how successful such tactics are, as the Republicans have proven again and again, I’d say it was a sign that Obama is going to win.
I want my leaders to come up with something new, these “tactics” make me sick.
Ned Raggett
Come now, clearly he was referencing KK Downing of Judas Priest.
cmoreNC
It’s worth watching Gov.Duval Patrick politely manhandle ABC News reporter Diane Sawyer’s best efforts to stir this tempest in a teapot by trying (without any success whatever) to corner Patrick into giving any slight validation to the Clinton “plagarism” meme.
Obama would do well to recruit Patrick to be a high-visibility surrogate campaigning in his behalf – Patrick is nearly as terrific as Obama himself!
HERE’S THE CLIP OF THE SAWYER – PATRICK INTERVIEW:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4309803
ThymeZone
That, folks, is CNN’s message to you in the last 48 hours.
That, and a Lou Dobbs show pundit asking whether, in dangerous times like these, voters can feel like trusting a fellow who repeats someone else’s speeches.
When you are sitting around wondering how this country got where it is today, look no further than this incident.
This is how. This is how the bad people fuck over the good people. Right in front of you, in plain view.
Billy K
Meh. Glen Tipton FTW!
Zifnab
Can we get them side-by-side in cheerleader outfits? That might dispel any lingering doubts.
Billy K
Since I haven’t had my quota of MUPping about today, and this IS an open thread, I just wanted to mention they announced today Obama is making an appearance at The American Airlines Center here in Dallas (it’s where the Mavericks and Stars play).
I very much want to go, but that area of town is a complete mess already. I can’t imagine the pandemonium the MUP will bring. I think I’m gonna have to stay home.
Any Dallasites or Austinites going?
Ned Raggett
YOU’VE GOT ANOTHER THING COMING!
Actually they both rule.
Jen
If Taylor puts on a cheerleader outfit, I don’t see any choice other than blinding myself with a Sharpie. First I will kill Zif for publishing that thought, though.
TheFountainHead
I’ve run out of people who will stay in a room with me for long. This primary needs to end soon.
GSD
The Rightwing is taking credit for the fact that Fidel Castro can’t live forever.
America has become a mental asylum.
-GSD
Billy K
QFT. The original twin guitar attack!
chopper
yeah, she was trying all right. she seemed so surprised when she asked him if the situation was the same the other way, would he be pissed at clinton and he said ‘no’.
like if he and clinton were friends and he helped her campaign and gave her permission to use some of his speech bits, he’d be pissed that she used em? why would he?
to be honest, this whole “barack cribs his speeches” line of attack reeks of karl ‘attack their strengths’ rove. i guess the clintons learned a few things from the bush gang after all.
rawshark
‘Al Gore invented the internet’ worked right?
Sojourner
Then watch MSNBC. Anti-Hillary all the time.
demimondian
You know, John, I’m thinking that Hillaryis44.org needs to go in the “blogs we mock…” section of the blogroll.
demimondian
Chris Matthews is a shame, up there with Lou Dobbs and working up to O’Reilly levels.
Pb
…I see you haven’t met Dan Abrams:
Sojourner
He’s just doing his part to split the Dem party. It’s weird because he’s supposed to be a Dem but his man crushes tend to be for Repubs.
Punchy
Whaddyou, Ice Cube?
TheFountainHead
For every crazy-ass pro Obama thing Tweety says, Abrams has him matched pound for pound, though Abrams strikes me as the kind of guy who’s doing it simply because it makes him stand out a bit on the network. KO has been pretty fair to both of them, though he’s had to call Clinton on her hit a lot lately.
CNN is pretty much unwatchable for reasons that have nothing to do with the Democratic primary.
Sojourner
Just turn off the TV and come to this blog. Plenty of Hillary bashing to keep the guys all warm and fuzzy inside.
ThymeZone
Alas, I saw them pimping the “plagiarism” story just this morning, two hours ago.
Last night I think I saw the Broderlike David Gergen saying “Well, it’s a mistake, he should have given credit to Patrick.”
Well, according to the ABC story, he was doing just that as far back as December. Any reasonable vetting of the story would have uncovered that fact. Any at all. Including the vetting that should have been done by Clinton’s people in the first place.
ixeian
Re. Taylor Marsh/Michelle Malkin:
Nah, as unhappy (slight understatement) as I am with Taylor Marsh at the moment, she’s nowhere near the awfulness level of The Malkin.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
OH! While this is an open thread…
Let us all take a solemn minute to dutifully mock the Empty Flightsuit, who has boldly predicted that Castro’s resignation should fix everything in Cuba.
/hahahahahahahahahaha you gotta be fucking kidding me hahahaha
//haha. haaa. he’s my president… ha. her ha. herr. um.
///awwwwww ~sob~ kill me now
ThymeZone
Um, do we think that shoving this baloney “plagiarism” story up her butt is “Hillary bashing?”
Just curious.
John Cole
This is the kind of shit from Hillary supporters that I find totally obnoxious. The notion that I am pissed off at her campaign antics because she is a woman. In reality, it is a bunch of sleazy men peddling most of this, but pointing their bullshit out somehow is a sexist attack.
Is there ANYTHING I have said about the Hillary campaign that I would not say about a man? Anything at all? Because if it were Bill Clinton pulling this bullshit, I would be up in his grill too.
All these brave feminists crack me up- brave, that is, until they are treated like an equal. Then they accuse you of being a woman-hater- cuz it “keep(s) the guys fuzzy inside.”
What a load of manure.
ThymeZone
Has nobody here a sense of political campaign history? Do we not know that negative bullshit is released right on the eve of an election so that the victim doesn’t have time to refute the claims?
Is there nobody here who knows that this is how Richard Nixon got himself elected to Congress? That when asked why he spread the lie, by David Frost, his answer was to shrug and say, “Well, you’ve got to win.”
Who will sit on this board and defend Hillary Clinton for pulling this crap? And still pretend that this is what we want for our next president? WTF?
Time to rethink, everyone. Ends Justify Means politics is what you really want?
Sojourner
I am not a Hillary supporter. She lost my vote when she failed to show up for the telecom vote.
But there’s a level of malice in the attacks on Hillary that I have not seen for any of the other Democratic candidates. Or for the Repubs for that matter.
I love it when a guy trots out the old “equal” argument, which is a code word for a woman being expected to gracefully put up with any shit that the guys feel like flinging.
Now THAT’S a load of manure.
John S.
Absolutely. Don’t let the man keep you down.
Billy K
What I don’t understand is, Obama KNEW since he was in first grade he was going to run for President. So why would he marry a woman who HATES America?
P.S. I’m looking forward to the day when all the feminists who so vigorously defend Hillary’s right to fling whatever crap she wants, to stand up for First Lady Michelle Obama. She’s a woman, too, y’know.
ThymeZone
Who is making that argument? In this instance, “the guys” are flinging her own poo back at her. This plagiarism story is manure from the get go. Let her wear the manure proudly, she earned it, and if it doesn’t go with her outfit, then pardon my French, but fuck her very much, and the sleazy dishonest horse she rode in on.
John Cole
Do yourself a favor- go to the side of this page, find the search button, and type in the following words:
Mitt Romney.
Then hit “return” and get back to me. The notion that my reactions to the crap of the past few days has ANYTHING to do with Hillary being a woman is a load of nonsense, and you can kindly shove it up your ass.
TR
If any of the other candidates had been pulling the bullshit that Hillary’s campaign has been doing, then I’m sure we’d all be piling on them too. I know I would.
Whether it’s trying to twist the rules in their favor (the ex post facto lobbying to get FL and MI’s nondelegates seated, the rumors about going after regular delegates, etc.), or pathetically spin away their losses (“All these states don’t matter because they have too many young people, or too many blacks, or too many college educated whites, or it’s a caucus, or it’s too small!”), or the Rovian smear campaigns (“Obama’s a plagiarist! Obama’s a misogynist! Obama hearts Reagan!”), the Clinton campaign has been WAY out front in dirty tactics, attack ads, and general asshattery.
Again, Hillary Clinton and her asshole band of (male) staffers are the ones slinging the shit. And they’ve shown themselves to be anything but “graceful” in this regard.
Can you seriously say that any other Democratic campaign has even remotely neared the level of crass insanity coming out of Clinton’s camp?
Sojourner
John Cole’s response back to me:
Sojourner
What a big man you are.
Wilfred
Is an anagram for – U Hear a Fat Old Woman?
Dracula
Somebody floated something about her pantsuits and tata’s awhile back. Not sure who, but commenters are a stupid breed.
Face
TZ translation — isn’t everyone here just as freaking old as me? :)
The Other Steve
I used to defend Clinton, but lately I have not so much. I’ve been admittedly piling on, although not from a right-wing point of view.
I have to say the reason is, that by and large she’s run a terrible campaign, and rather than acknowledge her mistakes, her campaign repeats talking points which are obnoxious. She’s reinforcing every negative stereotype I’ve had of Democrats for like my entire lifetime. The thing is, while in the past I might have jumped on the bandwagon, instead I’m seeing that we have a different candidate. Someone who talks about politics the way I want to. Someone who acknowledges mistakes.
And he’s winning the nomination battle. Hillary can’t see that, because she’s living in this bubble. Another failing of her campaign.
As such, I’m just exhausted. I want Hillary to just go away. I’ve long tired of defending her, and the staff she has around her is just pissing me off.
I’m convinced now that her staff, once she drops out, is all going to go work for John McCain and I have to say good riddance.
Zifnab
*checks for sagging man-boobs or grizzled sun-burnt raisin face*
Nope.
Zifnab
Fixed.
Seriously, if Mark Penn were to run off and join the McCain campaign, I’d just order my “Elect Obama’s VP in ’16” bumper sticker now.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
That’s what happens when power mongers have to face the public again. Their attempts at forcefully consolidating support get a big hit from Ol’ Karma.
What everybody fails to pick up on is that concept that it takes an infinite amount of time for this system to resolve perfectly. Everyone has something against them; and that’s what usually makes life fun (assuming the something isn’t abhorrent like rape or abuse).
I haven’t seen anybody taking her off the ballot because she’s a woman.
I haven’t seen anybody complaining that she’s going to turn rape into a social-abuse issue.
I haven’t seen anybody accusing her of not taking care of Chelsea when she was First Lady.
The level of sexist/prejudice attacks have topped off at *VERBAL*. Everyone in this country should be SO LUCKY to have their external abused limited to verbal heckling.
If you can’t handle the current playing field just because some jerks are heckling you, then you’re definitely not even close to the best this country has to offer. Give me a fucking break already.
Some little girls in Africa have their clitorises shredded off by a sharp rock. Clinton DOES NOT HAVE IT HARD.
Sojourner
Wow, that’s your standard for how we should treat each other?
I hear the same arguments for why waterboarding is not a big deal. At least we’re not cutting their heads off.
Sorry, I will continue to insist on a higher level of discourse.
Punchy
/jaw drops, face contorts, massive confusion sets in
demimondian
You know, Soj, I’m torn. Hillary and Bill are family friends — both of my parents worked with each of them, and, of the two, liked Bill, but adored Hillary.
I’d very much like to support her. I can’t — not because she’s not got what it takes, but because the people with whom she’s surrounded herself are disasters. I’ve got to hold the Prince (or, in this case, Princess) accountable for her advisers, and that means voting against her.
Pb
Given your inexplicable response to my original comment, and the fun that it subsequently ensued… I’ll look forward to seeing it.
TR
Great. You could start with yourself.
You complained that all this shit was being thrown at Hillary and she was being asked to gracefully put up with it. I provided a partial list of all the shit Hillary has thrown herself, and asked you to provide evidence for your implicit claim that Hillary has been taking more heat than she’s been giving.
Feel free to answer any time now.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
No, that’s my reasoning for why American should STOP FUCKING COMPLAINING.
You can hope for a higher level of discourse. But if you drop everything waiting for it to come around, nobody is going to look to you as a leader.
FACT FACING TIME!
Clinton is running for Democratic Candidate for President
Clinton has some verbal sexist attacks launched against her.
Clinton has a limited amount of time to complete her task
The sexist attacks will not go away within the limited amount of time
Clinton’s addressing of these attacks are taking her off-message.
You can either lose points by dawdling or you can win _and_ get extra credit by winning against the odds.
But I’m not going to give sympathy credits to Clinton because she’s facing sexist attacks. We’re not going to apply Affirmative Action to presidential candidates. This country is better than that.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
Medicine for the confusion (SFW)
Sojourner
Huh? WTF do you think Obama is all about? Why are people wetting their pants all over him?
It’s because of his vision, not because of what he has actually accomplished or suggested.
In reality, he and I are on the same page. Expecting more from this country than what we’re currently seeing.
Billy K
It’s not quite a wetsuit, but…
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
Um, what? Where has Obama dropped everything to complain about anti-Black sentiment?
Maybe you misunderstood me: I expect my leaders to not address verbal attacks made against them. It’s pathetic. It’s beneath them. Hillary disproves the silly attacks impugning her ability to lead by not getting distracted, staying on message, and fighting a good fight.
It might be dirty, but when a man accuses a woman of being emotional, and then the woman gets emotional, the man’s point was proven correct, no matter how sexist it may be.
The same mechanism works for “Angry Black Man”.
Hillary could have won my vote plenty easy. Stay on message, prove she’s ready for a crappy war, prove she’s got fiscal plans that are comprehensive, ESPECIALLY say that TORTURE IS ALWAYS WRONG (christ that’s so fucking easy). Keep off-loading wonkish details that drown out the Pony’s dance routine.
But Obama is getting MORE specific these days, and Clinton is off-message. And her supporters, instead of being surrogate and helping push her message, are instead complaining about superficial nits that are beneath Hillary.
I’m out of reasons to keep waiting for a campaign that’s not going anywhere, and Obama is getting better.
ThymeZone
I this afternoon’s breakout sessions, commenters will take the time to explain what the fuck they are actually arguing about, and with whom.
In reality, we expected more from Shrillery than we are seeing. She is busy living up to everyone’s worst expectations of her, and even has her husband out there living up to everyone’s worst expectations of him. And then when they get based for it, we have commenters acting with straight faces like it has something to do with the fact that she’s a …. you know …. double-u oh emm ay enn.
The Clinton campaign has managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory harder and faster than almost anything I have ever seen in politics. And the result is “Why are people wetting their pants all over (her opponent)?”
Pathetic.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
But, but, but, don’t you understand???
Hillary is the best we’re going to get! When Reagan rewrote the Constitution in 1981 to exclude most Democrats from running for office, Hillary was one of the few exceptions. She’s the limit of our aspirations (because Reagan also engraved our aspirations)!!
So, won’t you _please_ _*please*_ stop the sexist attacks against Hillary?? She can’t think clearly when there are meanie boys around! And our destinies are bound to her and her alone!
So, please, do it for all of us. We just can’t afford to expect any better of her. It’s not her fault she’s the best we’ve got.
Come on! Hillary: yes she can.
Billy K
Yes She Can! Yes She Can! Yes SHE CAN!
I don’t understand WHY people are responding to this Osama guy!
ThymeZone
Yeah, that’s right, I said SNATCH DEFEAT.
Go ahead, make something of it.
Fwiffo
More “professionalism” by the po-lice.
Next time you encounter a cop, will it be one of the good ones or one of the bad ones? If you guess wrong, will you be able to act in your own self defense?
Sojourner
I never said that. In fact, I said she lost my vote. But she lost it for policy reasons not because she’s “Shrillery” or because her husband cheated on her or she’s being too ambitious in seeking the WH, or the other BS I hear about her.
You and I differ fundamentally on this. I don’t want someone who can compete with the boys. I don’t think that the boys are a particularly good standard. I want a different tone, a different standard for our leaders. And I’m not saying that Hillary does (or does not) meet that standard. I’m saying that I’m tired of listening to the bashing. I can hear it from the guys who sit a couple rows down from me as I type this.
I hear this crap at work, the argument that the girls have to be tougher, to take whatever shit the boys choose to throw at them.
I will not settle for being one of the boys. I will not settle for living in a world where the boys define what is acceptable. Any more than Obama feels the need to define himself in accordance with current categories (he’s a Dem, therefore…, he’s black, therefore…).
Honey, if you want to be one of the boys, have at it. Been there, done that. It’s a new century, I won’t settle for 20th century thinking.
ThymeZone
Meh. I think that it’s more likely that with a nomination, Clinton would be the Womens’ Suffrage candidate (I am woman, hear me roar!) than it is that Barack would be the Black Candidate (Power to the People!).
Simply, he is cool, and by that I mean, literally, cool to that kind of thinking, whereas she is still talking about Glass Ceilings. She reminds me of what men refer to as Little Guy Syndrome, always trying to prove how tough she is. How scrappy she can be.
Actually she reminds me of McCain, and he is the oldest guy who ever ran for the job.
There’s a difference between wanting to be new and different, as opposed to being “new and different because I’m a woman.” I see her as not new and not different, just a woman.
None of this reflects on you, I don’t know you, but if it’s about whether Hillary can be president? Then to me it’s about going backward, because that’s what she brings to me. Old ways of looking at problems.
If you want an idea of what she could be, listen to Susan Jacoby, who I think is the most brilliant thinker on our public affairs today. Listen to her talk about the massive failure of the Clinton adiminstration to get us healthcare reform, and why Hillary would probably repeat the failure.
Another link.
Billy K
You should hang out less with knuckle-draggers. I have never heard any arguments like this in serious conversation. Just WHO is saying stuff like this? I know you wouldn’t be busy making straw men…
Sojourner
I don’t disagree – at all. I’m not arguing for Hillary to win the election. I’m simply stating that I AM tired of hearing the misogynist bashing.
For those who accuse me of straw men: check out Media Matters. Today’s post is from Cavuoto: Clinton “trying to run away from this tough, kind of bitchy image”. I hear the word bitch used in two contexts: among my gay friends and against women, usually in an attempt to put her in her place. It is NOT a word that is acceptable in a professional environment and is indefensible as a description of a presidential candidate.
And it’s not just Fox news. Chris Matthews is equally bad.
dnA
I think if there’s a candidate who is not adhering to the standard (gendered) rules of presidential behavior, it’s Barack Obama, not Hillary Clinton.
There’s no trying to out McCain McCain, the way Hillary tried to do by shoring up her “Hawkish” credentials as though being a Hawk was an apropriate substitute for being right.
Obama will have to run against that perception, because it’s the only way he can win. But Hillary? She ceded that argument long ago to the Republicans.
Sure, someone in this election is playing by a different standard than “the boys” and in doing so, trying to change the game. But it’s not Hillary.
dnA
Sojurner,
I agree with you that the coverage of Hillary has been awful, and that there’s no excuse for people on news networks to refer to her as a “bitch”.
But that doesn’t make me like her.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
I never said this was about you. I was summing up the locked-in attitude of people given every reason to evacuate Chez Clinton.
/groan/
This is why I never felt beholden to defending women’s rights as I do gay rights… This is a picture-perfect illustration of how near to complete women’s rights are. That, apparently, they are in such good shape that they can sit back and wait for the situation to be favorable to them.
I always thought that if husbands still beat their wives, there was still work to be done, but apparently women can retire safely knowing that they couldn’t progress further anyways.
Sojourner, womenkind will not make it to the next stage of secure rights until they accept a couple rules of the mechanics:
1.) The people in control are *the people in control*. Nobody gives up power. They have it taken away from them. Whine all you want, that’s not changing.
2.) The people in control are the people that write rules. Most of the time, those rules stick. Rarely, however, do minority parties get to write rules in conflict with the ruling party.
3.) Appeals to fairness are only that. They are barely attached to the reasonable determinations of what is actually fair, because “fair” is still a relative construct. If the appeals were implemented, than the definition of “fair” would change and the appeals would be devalued.
Therefore, because of limited options for progress,
4.) Women must now play, and win, a couple of games using the Men’s rules before they get to start rewriting.
Previous progress for women’s rights only did enough to let women compete. Most of the barriers to financial, political, and educational resources were knocked down, but there’s still more. Women have to prove:
a.) That women can play their own games, but more importantly
b.) Women can play someone else’s games
Success on difficulty
(b)would prove that women DO NOT need to have reality conform around them to succeed; they do NOT need to be coddled. It’s been OK to give women an extra step up, so that they can quickly (sort of, 80 years) train and catch up to the playing field they’ve been denied access to.Now look at where you are: You have an honest, valid, reasonable woman candidate for the head of state. In fact, she’s so valid, that all of her screw-ups are _independent_ of her gender i.e. She’s not a bad senator because she was busy being a mother.
The Presidency is for real. Hillary is out of the training ring.
And “us men” aren’t going to soften the rules because she’s a woman. First of all, that would be rigging the game to have her let women down as per
(b). It’s just as bad an idea as making the rules harder for her. She gets the same rules as men. No exceptions.And second of all, we have no empirical reasoning to believe that your concocted rules are any better than the ones we have in place.
I want my equal women. Nothing turns me on more than a woman who can out-argue me.
And I can tell you that no woman ever let me change her rules because I didn’t like being the one doing the dishes. She just withheld … certain things … until I capitulated. (Damn that turns me on)
Jake
You’re never fully dressed without a helmet.
Aaargh.
dslak
I think there should be more bashing of misogynists, myself.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
Methinks this is where Sojourner is stuck. Maybe (s)he can’t tell that we are just as condescending to men, but (s)he’s just so used to men being pricks to men that acclimation has set in and it flies under the radar.
Sojourner should take those men out for a bite to eat and have them start talking trash about the other candidates. I bet the results would be surprising.
Jess
I’ve noticed that a lot of women think men are picking on them for being female, when in fact the men are treating them pretty much like they treat other men–they’re being obnoxious jerks in other words, pushing buttons and playing dominance games to test limits and sort out the hierarchy. In my dealings with men, I usually end up pretty much on top of the heap because I don’t expect them to act like women or treat me like another woman would. Nor do I act like a man–I act like a bitch and smack’ em around a bit, and they seem to enjoy it as long as I do it with love and affection.
Hillary does that as well at times, which is one reason why she’s been as successful as she’s been in an arena dominated by men. But that’s why the whiny shit pisses me off so much–she’s better than this, and is undermining so much that she’s accomplished. Yeah, it’s insanely tough to walk in her shoes, and I would never have the emotional stamina to do it myself, but hey–that’s why she’ll get the applause at the end if she walks the walk with grace and style. But that’s a big ‘if’ at this point…I’m not holding my breath.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
EVERY single word of that was ON THE MONEY.
– Men don’t despise women, they just pick on them because “why not”. That doesn’t make them evil. Stupid, -maybe- likely.
– It’s tough to be Hillary. That doesn’t mean we should go easy on her, it means it’s tough to be Hillary. End of discussion.
/applause/ for Jess!
Sojourner
Who is sitting back and waiting? Insisting that debates be conducted in a way that is not belitting on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, race, or religion is hardly sitting back and waiting. On the contrary, it’s one way for an average person like me to try to change the tone of the debate. Every time we allow the debate to focus on anything other than policies, we do our country a disservice.
And since when is it “women’s rights” to insist that people be held accountable for their words? It seems to me that this is the foundation of a civil society, which I would hope that everyone would want.
If these claims were true, there would have been little progress on women’s rights, minority rights, and gay rights.
The reality is that things change because enough people put their feet down and say “this is unacceptable.” Gay rights have happened to a large extent because straight people like me find it intolerable for our friends and neighbors to be treated unfairly. Most men want their wives and daughters to be treated respectfully and to have a fair shot at getting ahead. That’s how change occurs.
It’s condescending to say that I’m “whining.” I’m not whining, I’m calling people on the words they use. Why do most people think it’s unacceptable to use words like “fag,” “nigger,” and similar words? It’s because these words became unacceptable in public discourse. Because enough people decided, in their hearts, that this kind of language is detrimental to the well being of the country. I believe that “bitch” should be added to the list.
I once butted heads with the powers that be. I was called a bitch, shrill, you name it. And my position was overriden. It cost the company a LOT of money. Was it smart for company management to have belittled me? Only if you think that wasting seven figures was a good idea. If I had it to do over, I would have politely raised all the red flags, then sat back and watched the situation explode. What a wonderful lesson for any employee to learn. But by your definition, that would have been just fine because the men had all the power. Interesting (and expensive) logic.
I had no idea that being treated respectfully was being “coddled.” If that’s the case, then I will continue to insist that EVERYONE be coddled.
So if you think it’s in the best interests of the country to be misogynistic, have at it. But don’t be surprised that more and more people will call you on it. And remember that the gay rights you find so important came to you because of “whiners” like me.
Sojourner
Talk to me again when McCain is called a bitch because of his temper problem.
Sojourner
End of discussion? Dream on.
Sorry but the boys will be boys argument leaves me cold. It’s been used through the years to explain all sorts of bad behavior.
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
/rubs hands/. oooh I have a lot of typing to do…
You’re being confusing here. First you’re talking about sexism, and now you’re talking about policy. Maybe you’re muddling these two things, but they’re separate. Nuclear weapons do not have gender. Hillary’s vagina does not have a stake in the situation in Chechnya. By extension, nothing said about Hillary having a vagina carries over to policy. If you’re talking about policy, you are not talking about how mean men are.
So men were 100% against women’s rights? So all men are slimy and subconsciously rapists, too? You don’t think there were men, like me, that are bored by submissive women? Don’t think that Women’s rights was started by women entirely. It was started by men getting further educated, the first amendment, and the rights of women to express views on their situation. Men contributed by being less-and-less boneheaded, and Women contributed by proving that, in fact, there is nothing wrong with a woman having free-reign, despite the “common-sense” of the time.
You played that perfectly, then. Did you accuse the men of playing unfairly? Did you look over the balance sheet, point at the red ink, and demand it get a “do-over”, because the men were assholes and it wasn’t a fair try?
You did exactly what you’re supposed to do: you let reality back you up, instead of solipsistically demanding — out of the blue — that the mens’ positions were out of line because you say so. You’re not the judge. Reality is the judge.
If you think this election is being run unfairly, then the same mechanisms have to take place. If you think that, just because you disapprove, that your judgment on what the results should be override the processes laid out in the Constitution (like, impeachment), then you have been woefully mislead regarding priorities. The Constitution, U.S.C., and State statutes are the reigning documents on this election, not your sense of right and wrong.
If you don’t like that, you’ve got a lot of heavy lifting to do to turn your views into law; I’d suggest saving your breath.
It is. Respect is a luxury. I’m sorry if you’ve been taught to expect it.
I was the outcast in high school and before. I waited for it to fall in my lap, because of excellent grades and the smile on my face. Didn’t happen. People didn’t want to like me, and that was their right. Now I’ve learned I have to tear it out of people’s hands, because there’s no mechanism providing for equality. I’m still at work, going on 9 o’clock, and I get paid well for straight-up effort. Respect is peripheral to my paycheck.
OK. But “bitch” isn’t the word we use. “Hothead”, I think, is the one in-fashion. “Temperamental” if we’re trying to look serious. But “bitch” is acceptable. His outrage can be spectacular.
You didn’t catch the essence of my argument on that one.
The “end of discussion” was trying to point out that there is no more processing to be done when “it’s hard to be hillary” comes up. It’s not “Hillary has it harder than others, therefore…”. There is no conclusion that follows. “Hillary has it hard” *is* the conclusion. If there were a solution to be implemented, _it would have been implemented._ Women in tough positions would be getting the same treatment. The thing is, though, that that construct is recursive. “Women have it harder. /fix/ OK, now men have it harder. /fix/ Now women have it harder again” Repeat ad infinitum.
Oh, and if you’re thinking you’re computationally capable of ever getting “equality” implemented… DON’T. It’s a goal, not a possible state of reality. Since equality has 6-billion different contextual definitions, you’ll never be able to match all of them up and get them to agree.
It’s rational to seek equality, as a direction for society’s progress. That doesn’t mean it’s attainable. Tower of Babel, and all that.
Sojourner
Nope. What I said was that the misogynist attacks on Clinton should be replaced by policy debates.
NO, that is not what I said. I said the opposite. You’re the one who claimed that those in power won’t give up that power. I’m the one who said that changes in public opinion pressure those in power towards greater equality. One of the examples I used was men who want their wives and daughters to be treated fairly.
READ WHAT I WROTE.
I never said anything about changing the law. I talked about changing attitudes.
READ WHAT I WROTE.
Wow, that is incredibly naive. You don’t think that what someone is paid is related to how much they are respected?
No shit. So is peace throughout the world. So we should just give up and roll over?
The reality is that during the 25 years I have been working, there has been improvement for women, minorities, and gays. So why give up on future improvements?
Caidence (fmr. Chris)
Here you go. Your opening volley that led to this:
Hell of a policy argument.
I think I dropped this sub-argument on its head trying too hard to save it. I should give that one to you; your counter made more sense than my argument did.
a.) I did. Stop assuming.
b.) Make me.
Policy, now attitudes? What? Where are you? One involves memetics and debates, recorded and over-analyzed by policy wonks, and the other involves millisecond reactions in neuropeptides and hormone floods. Stop confusing the two. Stick to policy. Stop talking about feelings.
Wow, you’ve never been to NYC before, huh? Effort is equivalent to respect here. I’ve seen intolerable people get looked straight in the eye, and lazy, charming people get tossed on their ass.
To answer your question, it doesn’t go
(effort) -> (respect, pay earned), (respect, pay earned) -> (paycheck). It’s(effort) -> (paycheck, respect)Yes, it’s peripheral.
That’s EXACTLY WHAT YOU’RE DOING when you come in here trashing people for their Hillary-hatred. When you do that, you help disrupt whatever rational flow there is here. myiq comes out of the wall and starts tearing up our Obama posters. TZ starts (or started today) dragging out over-sexist insults. John starts hitting anyone that tries to be fair to hillary /rubs bruise/. Any what policy discussion have you accomplished, hmm?
All I see is my pitiful fingers trying to make sure attacks on Hillary (Obama, too) are fair, and you’re trolling your ass in here making more accusations and fucking things up.
I’M THE GUY LOOKING FOR POLICY on here. Half the people on here think I’m a troll because I keep pushing for a good discussion. I was trying to knock you off of your “woe are the unequal women” argument. But instead of sucking it up and realizing that there’s a limited amount of time, you decided to tussle.
The Results? I still think Hillary’s platform is made of cardboard. And that evaluation has no concern whatsoever for the results of her last OB/GYN exam.
So, if you wanted to talk policy, you blew it. You decided to argue with me about feelings.
PROTIP: I never thought Hillary was a charmer, but I waited until my primary to choose who to vote for. Obama didn’t talk about his feelings, because I didn’t care about them either.
obama++.Sojourner
Wow. I’m sorry. I didn’t realize you had trouble with comprehension. Debating policy issues = good. Callling women “bitches” and expecting them to take it if they want to be considered equal to men = stupid.
I know – it’s much harder than making shit up.
People gain respect for working their asses off. If they didn’t, they sure as shit wouldn’t get paid for it. Duh.
Rational flow? You’re kidding, right?
Stop whining.
You’re a sick fuck if you’re thinking about OB/GYN exams. I thought you were gay?
Sojourner
Thanks for the debate.
Time for me to go to bed.
Good night.
Jess
Sojourner,
I guessed you won’t get this until tomorrow (maybe), but I just had to reply to your desire to change attitudes and get people (men) to treat others with respect. This is a nice goal, but has some paradoxes at its heart. Generally speaking, men first test one’s mettle, and then grant respect in accordance to how well one stands up to them. To demand that they behave differently is asking for special treatment from that which they met out to other men. So on the one hand, we’re demanding equal rights, but on the other we’re asking to be treated like delicate blossoms. The only way reasonably to demand both is to demand that they treat other men differently as well, i.e, like women (supposedly) treat other women, which seems to be what you’re suggesting if I understand your argument. Maybe they should question how they treat each other, and maybe it would be a healthy thing for men to change male culture. But I don’t see how we as women can demand it. Suggest and encourage, yes. Rant and rave? Not a good plan. In terms of effectiveness, kind of like the church preaching abstinence outside of procreation. And they had the threat of hell to back them up.
Grossly generalized history of gender relations according to yours truly: Men used to treat the delicate “ladies” very respectfully in a chivalrous and IMO extremely sexist and patronizing manner. Then there was a period (ooh that word again!) during the rise of feminism when many men got extremely nasty and openly misogynistic–and you’re right to call out and condemn the holdovers from that phase. But now there are many men, mostly GenXers, who treat women more or less as equals, which in their mind means treating them like other men. So they’re as blunt and rude with women as they are with men, and if a woman can stand up to it, then she earns their respect. But if she flounces off in a hissy fit, then they dismiss her. Women keep demanding that men understand where they’re coming from, but they need to return the favor and recognize the difference between a misogynistic attack, and a more-or-less gender-neutral mosh-pit skirmish.
Anyway, that’s how I see it, after wrestling with the problem for several decades and debating it with a huge range of opponents. But I tend to focus more on practical strategy than high-minded ideals, so no doubt that warps my perspective.
(oh, and thanks for the applause, C!)
dylan
Was there a “make me” somewhere back there?
Wow!
Sojourner
I agree, I have no problem with this, and actually enjoy it. It’s one of the reasons I chose to work in a high-testosterone environment.
What I’m talking about is when this testing involves calling women bitches, making jokes about them being emotional because it’s that time of the month, and other ways of singling women out for “special” treatment.
There’s no need for this, there’s no excuse for it. The guys I work with are very passionate about what they do, have worked with each other for years, and enjoy beating on each other. Over time, I’ve started to be the recipient of some of this as I’ve started to earn their respect. They can dish it out, they can also take it. But so far, I have never been on the receiving end of anything remotely misogynistic.
So I have no interest in changing the basic interaction style of da boyz. The world would be a far duller place without it.