Rant - "the woman candidate"
Aug. 30th, 2008 07:42 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
doc_strangeThose of you expecting a rant against the Republicans on this score, you're about to be disappointed. Nor is it praise for them. Nor anything about the Democrats.
Let's talk a little about Governor Palin. Oh, wait, don't I mean "Sarah Palin?" No, after all, we complained the press weren't calling Senator Clinton by her title while calling her opponents by theirs, as that's demeaning; but Palin, we're gonna never use her title? Strike one. You know who you are. Shame, shame. You can demean her by leaving off her office when you buck the party and fight your way to an office supervising over half a million people and over a half a million square miles.
If she were less comely, I suspect her actual history of 2 years in office might be in discussion rather than her looks. Admittedly, of course that's not a long time in high office - but how about we actually, you know, discuss it? Senator Obama is just as inexperienced and he's at the top of the ticket, and we HAVE discussed it.
Yesterday and today, I've read (all from people I took for social liberals) comments on her being a "bimbo," a "whore," a "walking uterus," "a token," and even some worse. Very interesting. Not a word on her actual 2 years as governor - for example, bucking the party on constitutional issues on the advice of the state attorney general, bucking party line by obeying court orders, renegotiating critical contracts with big oil, and opening up pipeline bids to international takers (Canadian company won), etc. I guess I have to ask if her 2 years as a governor are too little, then why are Obama's as a Senator not? Closet misogyny, that's why. If McCain had picked Liberman, would we be talking about the token Jew, a Kike, a Himey? Would Jindal be a token Indian (and he's really, really young), or called a "baby [ethnic slur here]"?
The obsession of looks->negatives is mostly coming from the general left, and maybe that's slanted because my friends' list is generally very left - but reading this outpouring of misogyny - and it is, you deniers, it is - I can only wonder if the left has more closet misogynists than the right.
During Senator Clinton's campaign, the media - even the left media - did some rather amazingly (closet) misogynistic things. They commented on her clothes and makeup as much as her speeches and positions. They made rude predictions on former President Clinton's role in the White House, and they questioned whether "having a woman in the White House" would affect our miltiary bearing. Rather a surprise for me how entrenched in the core of all US society misogyny is.
Senator Clinton complained about it, and, damned if she wasn't right.
And now we have it - worse, with real acid - for Governor Palin. Rather a disappointment for me, a disappointment in many of my friends. It's like discovering many of them are closet anti-Semites who believe they aren't prejudiced. "Hey, it's OK, I'd vote for a Jew candidate!" Uh, huh.
Why not discuss her as a candidate, rather than by her looks, as a "bimbo" for the right, etc.? Why is she not "the Republican Candidate"?
Remember the Saturday morning PSAs on prejudice?
"Who's Senator Palin, Jimmy?" "She's the Republican's woman candidate." Uh, huh.
Noooo, that's not showing a prejudiced core. No, sure isn't. Uh, huh.
My friends list is being trimmed, permanently. I will not remain "friends" with people whose souls are full of acid but who think they are full of balm. Those of you full of acid and happy to admit it, please stick around. You at least are honest, and sometimes a lot of fun.
Let's talk a little about Governor Palin. Oh, wait, don't I mean "Sarah Palin?" No, after all, we complained the press weren't calling Senator Clinton by her title while calling her opponents by theirs, as that's demeaning; but Palin, we're gonna never use her title? Strike one. You know who you are. Shame, shame. You can demean her by leaving off her office when you buck the party and fight your way to an office supervising over half a million people and over a half a million square miles.
If she were less comely, I suspect her actual history of 2 years in office might be in discussion rather than her looks. Admittedly, of course that's not a long time in high office - but how about we actually, you know, discuss it? Senator Obama is just as inexperienced and he's at the top of the ticket, and we HAVE discussed it.
Yesterday and today, I've read (all from people I took for social liberals) comments on her being a "bimbo," a "whore," a "walking uterus," "a token," and even some worse. Very interesting. Not a word on her actual 2 years as governor - for example, bucking the party on constitutional issues on the advice of the state attorney general, bucking party line by obeying court orders, renegotiating critical contracts with big oil, and opening up pipeline bids to international takers (Canadian company won), etc. I guess I have to ask if her 2 years as a governor are too little, then why are Obama's as a Senator not? Closet misogyny, that's why. If McCain had picked Liberman, would we be talking about the token Jew, a Kike, a Himey? Would Jindal be a token Indian (and he's really, really young), or called a "baby [ethnic slur here]"?
The obsession of looks->negatives is mostly coming from the general left, and maybe that's slanted because my friends' list is generally very left - but reading this outpouring of misogyny - and it is, you deniers, it is - I can only wonder if the left has more closet misogynists than the right.
During Senator Clinton's campaign, the media - even the left media - did some rather amazingly (closet) misogynistic things. They commented on her clothes and makeup as much as her speeches and positions. They made rude predictions on former President Clinton's role in the White House, and they questioned whether "having a woman in the White House" would affect our miltiary bearing. Rather a surprise for me how entrenched in the core of all US society misogyny is.
Senator Clinton complained about it, and, damned if she wasn't right.
And now we have it - worse, with real acid - for Governor Palin. Rather a disappointment for me, a disappointment in many of my friends. It's like discovering many of them are closet anti-Semites who believe they aren't prejudiced. "Hey, it's OK, I'd vote for a Jew candidate!" Uh, huh.
Why not discuss her as a candidate, rather than by her looks, as a "bimbo" for the right, etc.? Why is she not "the Republican Candidate"?
Remember the Saturday morning PSAs on prejudice?
"Who's Senator Palin, Jimmy?" "She's the Republican's woman candidate." Uh, huh.
Noooo, that's not showing a prejudiced core. No, sure isn't. Uh, huh.
My friends list is being trimmed, permanently. I will not remain "friends" with people whose souls are full of acid but who think they are full of balm. Those of you full of acid and happy to admit it, please stick around. You at least are honest, and sometimes a lot of fun.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-08-30 09:48 pm (UTC)Re: creationism - I think the full article rather undermines the interpretation of that one line from one debate. She straightforwardly says she is for open dialog on religion: "I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."
I for one am very much against "creation science" as a curriculum item, but very much for discussion of the differences between science and religion. And no need to disparage either in that discussion. Then again, my schooling involved a state-wide top science program taught within a religious institution. It was impressed upon us that science is a matter of methodology, and religion a matter of faith, each to its own purposes. Mixing the two, it was explained, is best reserved for philosophy classrooms.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-09 07:19 pm (UTC)That's embroidering reality a bit: She's actually been rather uncooperative, and certainly not transparent
(no subject)
Date: 2008-09-09 10:20 pm (UTC)You want to discuss whether Gov Palin has shifted her open position and asked to close the investigation, sure. Sounds like she did. Sounds like she thinks it's now going to get bent politically since she's in the national spotlight, and sounds like she doesn't like what's likely to happen. Maybe she has something to hide; maybe her handlers have told her she doesn't need a circus so close to the election. It's strategic either way, just we don't know if it's got good or bad intent behind it. All in all, I figure there's some dirt (however much or little) in there that they don't want exposed and they're willing to take the lumps of being accused of stonewalling. That's telling and a negative in my book.
But do not you accuse me of embroidering a reality that had not even taken place when I wrote.