Sexism at the Democratic Underground and Daily Kos?
This is from a post at ECHIDNE OF THE SNAKES.
The heated conversation between those who support Barack Obama and those who support Hillary Clinton produces some rather nasty discussion threads. I’d like to draw your attention to two I came across on Saturday night, within fifteen minutes: One from the Democratic Underground and one from Daily Kos, both places which are very firmly in the Obama camp. These threads were front-paged and recommended, respectively, which means that they were well liked.
Now notice the way in which the terms “sexist” or “sexism” are being used in the posts. Then replace those terms in your mind with similar terms which might apply to racial or ethnic categories. How do the stories read now?
My point is not whether some Clinton-supporters have cried wolf about sexism or not, as a way to prop up their candidate. My point is about the great ease and comfort with which two very liberal sites can make fun of the very idea of sexism.
This explains why the editors at the Washington Post didn’t see anything wrong with Charlotte Allen penning a story about the dimness of women. It wasn’t worth an apology, just another opportunity for Allen to tell the reading public how much she loathes women. It’s kewl to ridicule the very idea that women might not always be treated fairly.
CHECK OUT THE MANY COMMENTS TO THIS POST HERE
**Also See: Women Are Not Dumb or Fickle
————
This is from Highly Dubious Rants – This year, Democrats face a big decision: who do they hate more – white ladies or black guys?
Comments
Comment from Frederika
Time: March 11, 2008, 10:27 pm
The sexism in this campaign is disappointing and sad. Women have fought for equality for many years and now in the year 2008 we are still suffering sexism. Women are our own worst enemy. Why do women hate Hilary ? She is smart, compassionate and a darn good senator. I disagree with her on some issues but one knows where she stands. The obvious sexism in reporting – making a big fuss over her crying which lasted all of a few seconds, her wearing a lower cut top – boy that really has a lot to do with her qualifications for being a President and it goes on and on. Saturday Night Live had it right on point about how the media has treated Hilary. I have to agree with Geraldine Ferraro about Obama -what has he ever really done to qualify him for President. By the way I really liked John Edwards he is really in touch with the problems of this country but the Press really disshed him too. I am glad the corporate press is choosing our next President.
Comment from Bud White
Time: March 13, 2008, 5:48 pm
Great article. Please see my site on sexism in the MSM.
Comment from gorgonica
Time: March 14, 2008, 5:08 am
There is such an incredible double standard about Hillary Clinton it is infuriating.
Hillary’s not so low cut blouse is slammed but not Michelle Obama’s slit almost up to the crotch black dress. If Hillary had worn that during Bill Clinton’s campaign she would have been called a whore.
Obama explains Pastor Wright’s inflammatory comments as “he’s like an old uncle I disagree with.” Perhaps Hillary should have said about Ferraro’s comments…”She’s been a mentor, like an old aunt who makes comments I sometimes disagree with. It would be hard to say that Ferraro’s comments were more incendiary than Wrights.
Why is it Obama keeps touching Clinton? It reminds me of Bush laying hands on the German PM. Its not just Obama, any male Presidential candidate would look odd laying hands on a female candidate. It sends the subtle signal that he is physically over her and emphasizes her as a female candidate. He wouldn’t touch Joe Biden in that way. I could go on and on.
Comment from Dr. A. Zide
Time: March 26, 2008, 6:45 pm
The mostly male press and male contingent (black and white) of the Dems just don’t get it. It is ok for Obama’s cult supporters to cry “racism” (and the guilty white guys like Teddy Kennedy to jump on board every timeto avoid being called the ‘R’ word — hey!, doesn’t anyone else remember his sweating face on the judiciary committee as he skewered Anita Hill so as not to get labeled by that paragon, Clarence T.? …) at every turn, but tell us all that Clinton is playing the ‘gender card” every time real sexism is involved. [It's apparently ok to call her everything from a "b**ch" to a 'monster. ok to tell her to pull out of the race so Obama-man can win. ok to call her "Mrs." Clinton rather than Senator . ok to call her weak, and "hysterical" [!] for choking up for a few seconds when she was exhausted, (and ok to say it must have been a ploy). ok to call her a ‘ball breaker and scary and …… weak’ Ok to be damn her if she does, and ok to damn her if she doesn’t ….
But Obama can get away with 20 yrs. of listening to a black-racist preacher, or having supporters that are frighteningly reminiscent of 1938 , or a charismatic cult following a preacher who can do no wrong…. (where’s the kool-aid?
How about replacing the Hillary ‘nut’crackers’ on sale at airports [!] with a voodoo or stepinfetchit doll with Barack’s face on it? [ Oooh, they're just horrified at the 'racism' ... but is the blatant sexism of the nutcracker not equally horrifying? ]
Double standard. Again.
Sexism affects 52% of the population ( with some percentage of low self-esteem dummies willing to placate the males in their lives by joining in the sexist ‘fun’]
Racism affects around 20% …… Why is misogyny less horrific than racism?
Comment from struck_dumb
Time: April 10, 2008, 2:53 pm
Democratic Underground are a little looney, it’s true. I kept getting called a Republican, and told to post at Free Republic. Oh and one of them is sure I have psychiatric problems. The usual internet rubbish, but trying to be a representative sample of the other half of Democrats who don’t want anyone but Hillary as a candidate is very difficult there. I wholeheartedly gave out the same amount of rubbish regarding their candidate as they did re: Hill and I got banned, I think. I have emailed them to see for sure, but I have a feeling I was too mouthy a woman and got banned!!! God help us if Himself manages to make it into the White House.
Comment from Alisha
Time: May 21, 2008, 7:17 pm
I think that sexism probably does exist in this campaign. However, to be realistic, Hillary’s low cut shirt and her crying have ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with why I am not voting for her. Also, I never hear any of the pundits talk about her blouse when they discuss why she won’t be the next democratic nominee. I think that it is offensive to think that I as a women would discriminate against her because of something so petty. I don’t like her because I feel that she is arrogant and corrupt. I have never once thought that she wasn’t acting feminine enough or tough enough.
Comment from No Blood for Hubris
Time: May 21, 2008, 11:25 pm
Ooh, Alisha, WAY to try to get away with a comment just chock full of sexist stereotypes, sweetie.
Did you think no one would notice, dear?
Comment from No Blood for Hubris
Time: March 11, 2008, 9:50 pm
Great catch from Highly Dubious Rants — I will link it ASAP. (That will be in the morning).
“My point is about the great ease and comfort with which two very liberal sites can make fun of the very idea of sexism.”
Yeah, and my point is that sexist sites are ipso facto — not liberal.
But are merely part of the great knee-jerk shrieky Faux-Liberal Naderite Manichaeans. And, you know, dude, what up with that?
You know, it’s not like they’re treating Obama’s timid centrist health care plan as being more liberal than Senator Clinton actual liberal universal health care plan just because they assume all blacks are inherently liberal and Clinton’s inherently the new black.
It’s something like that, but way worse.