The patriarchy enablers
April 9, 2009
by Violet Socks, Editor
|
Tina Fey promoted sexist stereotypes with her parody of Sarah
Palin last year, depicting the Alaska Governor as a brainless bimbo.
As we all know, patriarchy bestows its smiles and kisses on the women who do its bidding, especially those women who take on the front-line enforcer jobs of shredding other women to bits. Last year a whole bunch of women signed up for duty on the Sarah Palin Evisceration Squad, none more prominently than Tina Fey. And the rewards for her efforts keep pouring in. She’s been on magazine covers, photographed by Annie Liebovitz for Vogue, and voted Entertainer of the Year by the Associated Press. Now “Saturday Night Live” has won a Peabody Award for political satire, largely on the strength of Fey’s ridicule of Sarah Palin. According to the Peabody Awards committee, “The late-night legend stole the election-year thunder from its satirical competition on cable and may have swayed the race itself.” Ya think? Having a Vice-Presidential candidate slandered and misrepresented week after week on national TV might have swayed the race? Gee, I never would have guessed.
The LA Times oozes that Fey’s impersonation of Palin was “spot-on” and “dead-on,” but it wasn’t. Physical resemblance, yes. Vocal resemblance, yes. But the rest of it was pure propaganda. Sarah Palin never said “I can see Russia from my house” — Tina Fey said that in a skit. But the jibe stuck, and millions of Americans believe the words were Palin’s. Sarah Palin’s real debate performance was impressive, but in the SNL debate skit, Fey-as-Palin refused to answer questions and instead announced that she would “demonstrate some pageant walking.” The audience roared.
The sad thing is that modern American feminism has become so anemic that Tina Fey probably thinks what she was doing was somehow compatible with women’s rights. And why wouldn’t she? The largest feminist organization in this country joined in the Palin-bashing too. Last fall NOW featured a suggested Sarah Palin Halloween costume, replete with pageant sash, “lots of hairspray,” and “a wardrobe that didn’t cost $150,000.” It’s incredible. If you had told me 30 years ago that NOW would be engaging in that kind of sexist mockery of a female politician, I wouldn’t have believed you. But that was then; NOW is different. If you follow the link on that costume page to learn “so much more” about the “horror” of Sarah Palin, it’ll take you to a Kim Gandy editorial that is full of bald-faced lies — lies that came straight from the Obama campaign. The rape kit smear, for example: a particularly ugly piece of disinformation spread by the Obama team expressly to discredit Palin among women voters. By helping to spread that lie — and others — NOW wasn’t doing anything remotely resembling feminism. It was functioning purely as an auxiliary of the Obama campaign, and using any means at hand to destroy the enemy. Patriarchy enablers.
As I wrote last year in “Stone Her”:
The other day I was talking to a young woman, a self-described feminist, who could not understand why defending Sarah Palin from sexist attacks was a feminist act. She really, truly could not understand that. Her argument was that because Sarah Palin is a Republican (a “bad” woman), the correct feminist response is to use any means necessary to destroy her. Why not stone the bitch? Why not call her a c**t? Why not make jokes about raping her? She’s one of those bad women! Bad!
I also wrote at the end of that post that I hoped it wasn’t too late to salvage the women’s movement. I wrote that I hoped we could “start feminism all over again.”
Well, we’re doing it. Look around.
Oddly enough, I read that Obama co-sponsored a bill that attempts to bill rape victim’s insurance for the cost of rape test kits. Somehow the mainstream media didn’t jump on this. I wonder why?
http://www.ilga.gov/legislatio.....atment+Act.
See Sec. 7. Charges and reimbursement
mamabroad,
I don’t think anyone really cares about the rape kit. If people were really concerned about rape, they would be appalled with much more, like the case of Marie that Sheryl wrote about the other day.
In regard to Obama, people will explain this away because they like Obama. With Palin they will eat up all their worst fantasies because they do not like Palin – because she is a Republican. Because she is a woman.
So these responses are not about the issues. At all. Not much was mentioned in regard to McCain’s abstinence-only position. But much said about Palin. Only thing is – Palin supports comprehensive sex education and not abstinence-only.
But then, if they went after McCain instead of Palin, what would they do with these t-shirts? And how would they make fun of the mother of a pregnant teen?
http://www.thisnext.com/item/E.....Abstinence
Again, no one was really concerned with “abstinence-only.” They were only interested in attacking women.
As we all go about our lives from this moment on, we need to develop the courage to always speak up against this brand of sexism. It is our starting point. The problem of these Tina Fey patriarchy enablers is so huge that for many the first instinct is that we shut down since we can’t possibly change such an enormous problem. At this moment, I’m not sure what other concrete steps we can take beyond that. Here at The New Agenda we will be that voice, and you can always count on us for that.
I keep going back to the sentiment that yes, I am only one person, but I can speak the truth to one other, and then to one other after that. I can create a ripple effect. Maybe the person to whom I have spoken with will see my truth and then pass it along, and etc. and so on.
How do we speak the truth that Violet Socks writes about in the above posting to the people we know, many of whom enrage us?
Try this method:
1) Listen to them—–get them to spew out all of the venom against Palin, in this instance, but other instances as well. Palin is not the only example, just the most visible. Keep asking leading questions so that they have spoken their mind. Bite your tongue until they have finished. This is hard to do, but remember we are on a mission—-a mission to help people see light instead of being venomous. They will be unable to hear anything until they have emptied their brain of its contents on this subject.
2) Say these words, “I understand the way you feel, and I know that alot of people have felt that way, but you know, I did some looking around, and I discovered that __________(insert the truth).
3) Finally, say, “You know, I heard so many lies over and over again that I have come to see that so much of it is sexist, misogynist bashing. I decided that I wasn’t going to take part in criticizing another woman until I had the facts. It is bad for the girls growing up in a country that treats its women leaders this way. We don’t need to join in with the people who are being vile just because we disagree.”
It’s alot of words to memorize, but take a minute and try it out and practice it a few times. Print it out and carry it around with you. Read it off a page if you must. You can explain to others that you get so upset when the subject comes up that you wanted to make sure from now on that you expressed yourself the way you wanted to. People will get that and it might even make the point you are making that much more powerful.
I keep thinking of two sayings: I am only one, but I am one. I can do something. The other is by Moses Maimonides—If not me, who? If not now, when?
We must stick together and get this message out or our country will rot from its sexism and misogyny.
Apparently now, too, Couric will receive a “prestigious” award for what she did to Palin.
On tax day, no less.
What better time to fling the mud in our faces:
http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews......in_couric/
You made many good points in this post, but Palin’s performance at the debate was not impressive, except in its evasiveness. Palin was explicit about the fact that she was ignoring the moderator’s questions in order to focus on her own talking points. Either she doesn’t know the meaning of a debate or she was blatantly ignoring the rules of it.
I hope you’ve made screen shots of those incriminating NOW pages. Because when they start getting hundreds of new hits, they may decide to take them down.
Oh I like to look for an inspirational quote from a woman: “Get the job done and let them howl: Nellie McClung, leader of the action to have women declared persons. Prior to that success, we were not, did you know?
“Get the job done and let them howl”
I got an email from John Zieglar about the Katie Couric award. It is just disgraceful. Walter Cronkite must be turning over in his grave. John is planning on being at the awards ceremony (outside, he couldn’t get in) handing out copies of his film, Media Malpractice.
How could they award her for an interview in which the responses were so heavily edited that the meaning was changed? I am so disgusted.
I really feel the New Agenda needs to speak up for Sarah Palin again. The sexism and misogyny is totally out of control.
Amy and Cynthia, are you planning on any type of public statement?
I see that MSN in an article lists Sarah as one of the sexiest women over 40 -
http://lifestyle.msn.com/your-.....ageindex=9
The women listed are all celebrity types, actresses, etc. – the article alludes to their talent and accomplishments but the intent is the same – sex/physical attributes, blah blah blah – I wonder why some of these women don’t object, maybe they aren’t aware of this article, who the hell knows any more…….but it fits well with the title of this post, enablers of patriarchy.
Cynthia,
Great points. Thank you for expressing it clearly. The arguments I had were breathtaking in the ignorance shown by my ‘progressive’ friends.
That it is still going on is simply unbelievable
Nice article, Violet.
I like Sarah Palin. It’s ironic, they accused her of banning birth control, well no never, but Harry Reid once voted to ban birth control access to our troops. Then they accused her of being against gays, well no, but Biden himself actually voted for the Defense of Marriage Act. And currently it is Dem Tim Kaine funding pro-life groups. In reality Palin has only done what were alleged to be “progressive” things, increased funding of preschool, childrens’ healthcare, education. Taxing the oil companies and giving a rebate to the people. Creating an energy plan that will make Alaska energy independent.
But I digress, sorry. Anne Coulter is a woman I have political conflicts with, but I have and I will continue to speak out when she is attacked in a sexist way. When someone uses gender to demean, dismiss, or silence a woman, it’s an attack on all women. It’s not about who is being targeted, it’s about all of us.
It’s a real shame, but the highest awards and the biggest payoffs are usually reserved for the women who make their mark attacking other women. In our culture, this is what we reward.
A lot of good points were made in this post–sexist attacks against any woman (especially making rape jokes–not okay about anyone, ever) are unacceptable. But Palin relied almost exclusively on her folksy charm (all the winking and “Joe Six Pack” stuff) and personal appeal to attract people–not really on facts or actual policy discussions. The Couric interviews were not edited to make Palin look more ignorant–the unedited transcript shows that her answers really were as nonsensical and often plain ignorant as they appeared to be.
The sexist attacks on Palin were horrendous–but Tina Fey’s portrayal of her was not one of them. SNL created incredibly exaggerated portraits of all the candidates, and she exaggerated Palin’s lack of knowledge. Palin was not a bimbo, but she did not display much intelligence during the campaign, and Fey accurately satirized that. And no, Palin never said “I can see Russia from my house”–but she did offer the fact that “You can see Russia from Alaska” as evidence of her foreign policy credentials, as did many other McCain campaign officials. The fact that she or those officials could say such a thing with a straight face was amazing.
As someone who supported Hillary, I found Palin’s lack of knowledge embarrassing. Fey was not attacking Palin because she was a woman–she was attacking that lack. Had Palin been a man who made such statements, a male member of SNL would have satirized him in a similar way.
Here is one step real women’s groups can take. You can encourage women to unsubscribe to cable TV. Cable TV is just the Corporate medias choice of channels forced into your home. Most of it is profoundly sexist and most of it could not survive if people were not forced to subsidize it with their basic cable payment. We aren’t going to get the option of cable TV a la carte, but women can cut the cable, download only the content they want to watch for free. Women save money this way and Corporate media can’t reach them as consumers or force their sexist propaganda into homes. It will break the entire economic model of the sexist media. Have you ever ask yourselves why men like the “men’s channels” but women can’t stand and don’t watch the corporate “women’s channels”? Well it is because it is not a free market. If it were channels like the tit and ass for women channel Oxygen could not exist.
I know this is off-topic, but does anyone know if Hiliary has retired her campaign debt? We just got some email asking for a contribbution, and I wonder if she is stil tied up with this and if it is one way to keep her silent?
Palin’s performance at the debate was not impressive, except in its evasiveness. Palin was explicit about the fact that she was ignoring the moderator’s questions in order to focus on her own talking points.
Agreed. Of course Biden was somewhat evasive too and on top of that he flat out lied numerous times. Unfortunately, with perhaps one exception, Palin wasn’t familiar enough with the record/history to effectively call him on those lies.
That’s just not true. Palin said at one point in the debate, “I may not answer this question the way you (the moderator) want me to, but I’m going to…” and then something about how she was going to make the point she wanted to make.
Which, in fact, is what every skilled political debater does. EVERY SINGLE ONE. In fact, Palin racked up major points with the play-by-play commenters for turning the debate to her turf, which is what every good candidate does. (Obama, in contrast, is a hopelessly inept debater who can’t make a point, or even wind up a sentence, to save his life.)
The way Palin’s debate performance was misrepresented as a “refusal” to answer questions, unlike anything we’d ever seen before in debates, was classic sexism. Classic double standard. I’ve been watching political debates since 1972. Palin did everything right, and everything male candidates do.
“SNL created incredibly exaggerated portraits of all the candidates”
Where was the one on Obama? I must have missed it.
What I saw when I read the transcripts was a) an intelligent political candidate, and b) proof that Katie Couric and her producers are yellow journalists.
As for folksy charm, American politicians have been dealing in that commodity for 200 years. Only with Sarah Palin did it somehow become reprehensible. Might want to think about that. Something about a double standard.
No, she didn’t. In response to a question about Alaska’s relationship with Russia, she began by commenting on what close neighbors they are. Really close — “you can actually see Russia from parts of Alaska.” It was nothing but a geographical commentary, and one probably news to most 48-staters who can’t find North America on a map, much less the Bering Strait.
Joe Biden has made so many staggeringly inane comments, I have often wondered in all seriousness if he’s on drugs. Never saw a SNL skit satirizing his endless gaffes, which were (and are) far more embarrassing than anything that came out of Sarah Palin’s mouth. FDR on TV?
Ann Coulter also supports revoking women’s right to vote…seriously, no out-of-context remarks here, so im hard pressed to ask you- do you still support her in political office? She does oppose Obama on everything, however, which puts her in pretty good standing on this website
Sorry, Alex, your comment is indecipherable. Do we support Ann Coulter in office? Ann Coulter is a pundit, not an elected official. No woman should be subjected to sexist or misogynistic attacks, including Ann Coulter. But Coulter herself is quite a misogynist who espouses extremist views, so I doubt if you’ll find anyone at TNA who agrees with her.
Does anyone know if SNL goofed on the Biden “Gird your loins, I guarantee an international disaster if you elect us…”? I thought that would make for a really funny skit, but I never watched to see if they ran with it. If they didn’t, that really demonstrates their bias.
It’s a truism I think most outsiders don’t get (an outsider being what northerners call anyone who hasn’t lived north of 60 most of their life): We really have very little in common with you outsiders. When we think of the world, we think Circumpolar. Our frame of reference, our imagination, our other family members: other northerners, the weather. How’s the weather on the coast? No. Sorry we didn’t mean Atlantic City, or San Francisco, or Vancouver. We meant the Arctic coast.
Alex is never going to get that.
[...] patriarchy enablers Originally posted at The New Agenda. Yes, I AM still pissed off about what happened last year. Why do you ask? Tina Fey promoted sexist [...]
Violet: I don’t like it when politicians use folksiness to hide their lack of knowledge, period–whether they are male or female.
I don’t mind politicians such as, for example, Bill Clinton, being folksy when they are also clearly brilliant. I hated it when Bush used folksiness to blind people to the fact that he had no great understanding of the issues, and I didn’t like it when Palin used it to do the same (although I think she probably understood the issues better than Bush, at least some of the time). Incidentally, the resemblance to Bush was sealed when she starting talking about real America vs. fake America (not to mention palling around with terrorists).
You really don’t have to like Obama or Biden or any other Democrat, but I don’t see how anyone looking at Palin’s answers could see anything less than incoherence. I’ve seen transcripts. Nothing in the editing made her look more foolish than her answers made her look. What, exactly, did Katie Couric do that you object to?
I do not think Palin is stupid–she is probably perfectly bright. But she appeared intellectually incurious and lacking in knowledge in a way that seemed very Bush-like.
Biden said strange things sometimes, yes. But Biden is known in Congress, by both Democrats and Republicans, as an expert on many matters of foreign and domestic policy. A couple of factually wrong statements (his general foot-in-mouth thing is another matter) do not counteract his well-known intelligence and expertise. Palin, on the other hand, does not have such a record, so she had to prove her intelligence (as do all candidates when they start out as unknowns) and knowledge. She failed to do that. Had she made only a couple of foolish statements, she probably would have done just fine. But her lack of knowledge was on constant display.
As for the comments about Russia: yes, as you say, she said that you can see Russia from Alaska. She and McCain’s officials tried to use that proximity as evidence of foreign policy experience. It was laughable. Of course, they also tried to use the fact that she was the commander in chief of the Alaska National Guard as evidence of foreign policy experience, which is even sillier–but then again, they were desperate.
There’s a lot to admire in Palin, but she simply doesn’t seem extremely intelligent or knowledgeable.
Great work Violet. In light of the fact that Katie Couric, another “Patriarch Enabler” wil be receiving the Walter Conkrite award for affecting the outcome of the 2008 presidential election, as if that is the job of the media, SHEEESH; perhaps The New Agenda should creat their own Patriarch Enabler award for the worst kind of misogynists-women misogynyist. I would like to nominate :
Katie Couric, Tina Fey, Cambell Brown, Rachel Maddow, Maureen O’Donald, Soledad O’Brian, Maureen Dowd, Gloria Steinam, and o Oprah Winfry and Michele Obama.
“(Palin) simply doesn’t seem extremely intelligent or knowledgeable.:
As opposed to you Jillian, who somehow managed, in a few posts down from the correctly quoted comment, morph it back into what you wanted it to be.
That’s your opinion, then. It is my opinion that Barack Obama’s extemporaneous remarks verge on gibberish, and that Palin is not noticeably less glib than your average politician.
Jillian, it’s clear that you’re heavily invested in remaining blind to the double standard. Not really sure what else I can say to you, but obviously you have your bone to chew on.
Palin is not from the east coast and she did not go to one of the approved east coast schools for politicians as elitists see it. That makes her different from you it does not make her stupid. I am sick of ethnocentric attitude from people like Jillian. Palin is not like you, she doesn’t need to be, to be intelligent. Saying she can see Russia from Alaska means she is very aware it is there and used to dealing with the fact. Taking it out of context and imposing your meaning on it makes the people who do it look ridiculous.
Violet, we can definitely agree to (politely) disagree, but I am not blind to any double standard. There were sexist attacks made against Palin, and we should be, and are, outraged about that. But no double standard was responsible for Palin’s incoherence and displays of general ignorance. The double standard, as I see it, lies in the fact that 8 years ago the media treated Bush’s ignorance as charming and folksy instead of exposing it as they did Palin’s.
As a Hillary supporter, it saddens me to see so many women allow their desire to see a woman in high office blind themselves to this particular candidate’s obvious deficiencies. And while Palin is not quite as socially conservative as some people believe (GOPers like Huckabee and Jindal are far more frightening on that front), it is odd to watch some of you try to convince yourselves that she is somehow a progressive. Can those of you who supported Hillary for her policies honestly say that you would want someone so conservative in office?
Sis: what exactly was the great difference between what I said and what Violet said? We both said that Palin mentioned that you can see Russia from (parts of) Alaska. She cited that proximity as evidence of her foreign policy experience, but neither she nor the McCain campaign was ever able to produce any good example of how, exactly, that proximity led to foreign policy experience.
Bes: To start with, I am not from the East Coast. I do not think that Palin is stupid, merely incurious. My evidence for that lies in her interviews and debate performances, not in any perceived differences between us. Saying that any criticism of her is based on xenophobia is just as infantile as saying that any criticism of Obama must stem from racism.
Violet, I ask this with genuine curiosity: can you explain to me what exactly was done to the Couric interviews that you found so objectionable? I’ve seen the transcripts–they don’t make Palin’s answers appear any more intelligent to me, and many of her answers weren’t particularly edited at all, so could you please your views on this matter?
Sorry, that should be “could you please explain your views on this matter?”
Didn’t Obama claim living overseas as a toddler as foreign policy experience? This is exactly what we’re talking about–not that Palin is the greatest thing ever, but the gross double standard between she and Obama that doesn’t seem to be explained by anything but sexism. She’s a bimbo because she claims foreign policy experience based on being head of the National Guard, but his breathtakingly stupid statements we should just ignore, because despite them he’s obviously qualified automatically–well, just because. He’ll have people like Biden to handle that stuff, the President doesn’t have to know it, just the VP. Care to imagine what kind of ridicule Palin would have been subjected to if she claimed living overseas as a 3 year old as foreign policy experience?
And Biden, his constant stream of idiotic statements we should just ignore because he has a reputation for brilliance. Hmmm, I wonder how he got that reputation? Maybe it’s deserved, or maybe it just comes from showing up male and getting the benefit of the doubt and never having to prove yourself. I can’t say. Either way, good thing he doesn’t have to prove himself and nor does Obama. Most female bosses I’ve ever had seemed to perform their jobs well, yet the water cooler gossip said they were bimbos and affirmative action hires who slept their way to the top, so that must be true.
“But she appeared intellectually incurious and lacking in knowledge in a way that seemed very Bush-like.”
Fine, but the same could be said of Obama. So why does only she get slammed for it? Why is it wrong for her to be “folksy,” to appeal for votes when he’s going around brushing Hillary Clinton off his shoulder, that’s not folksy in its own way (what, anything that appeals to upper class white boys isn’t can’t be folksy?)? That’s contributing to understandng of the issues? She ran against Obama, ran for a significanly less important office, and you’re slamming HER for relying on charm and personality cult rather than facs or policy? Why did experience and knowledge and intelligence and debating ability not matter at all before she came into the race?
The point is, if you’re correct about palin’s shortcomings, she’s basically Obama (who is also Bush), and no, he was not attacked in the same way by SNL or anyone else–why?
I thought it highly significant that the campaign spared McCain but went after Palin so viciously. But of course McCain would be spared: he is a warrior hero. That fortuitous discovery of footage of him after his release from POW camp made him more or less untouchable. Palin had no such protection and offered a great many more targets. Crucially, she is a woman, and a working class woman as well, and that decided the tone and content of the attacks. Proof, in my opinion, that the English speaking part of the West is so casually and instinctively patriarchal it doesn’t even recognise it. It expresses itself in many ways, but primarily in the cult of violence. We worship violence and the violent – whether it is cops and soldiers in uniform, serial killers like Dexter, agents like Jack Bauer or detectives like the “martian” Gene Hunt. Though women, especially those in uniform, may be licensed to kill (but not animals) and so share in the patriarchal limelight, we much prefer them in their traditional roles, where they are expected to be either sexually attractive or invisible. One of the saddest aspects of this is the fact that feminists themselves sometimes attempt to promote feminism with the patriarchy’s tools. The shredding of Palin by opportunistic mercenaries like Fey was an act of character assassination no different from those engaged in by the thuggish right when they went after liberal politicians – or by anti-feminists when they go after women. I was left with a sense of a moral vacuum: neither side seemed to get that the means are not justified by the end, and that there are better ways of relating to one another than by all-out force – either of words or arms. The possibility that women, or rather values dismissed by both male and female supporters of the patriarchy as “feminine” or “effeminate”, might represent just such a hope of real change in the way we do things seems to have been totally lost.
For some reason, defending Palin in any way, shape or form, really irritates people. Interesting.
I guess Sarah was just an outsider to presidential politics in so many ways: young beautiful female, mother, working class, non-ivy league educated, from Alaska…I guess it was asking too much of some. And it helped the whites justify it to themselves and allow themselves to go further because they felt self-righteous about liking and wanting to vote for a darker skinned man. That excused all other bigotry.
What I don’t get is,
Why was John Edwards’,
populist folksydownhomesonofamillworkerdeepfriedcornpone
so okay early in the primary and Sarah Palin’s so offensive?
Perhaps just as pleasegos said ‘ showing up male’.
Thank you for this post Amy. I agree with you all the way. I found
Fey’s ridicule of Palin absolutely tasteless. I’m a feminist, from democrat party. My political position is pro-choice, etc. But after the dem party turned into the hideous unethical parody of itself that it did, I voted M/P. I didn’t mind anyone criticizing or disagreeing with Palin (or anyone else) on the basis of their stance on political issues. There were feminists who did so graciously and ethically. Then there were people and organizations who were supposed to care for women’s rights who went after Palin by attacking her and parodying her with every sexist stereotype they could find. And, I swear, it seemed like every person who engaged in this disgusting behavior patted themselves on the back for being cute and clever. There is intelligent, funny political satire to be done. The crap that was directed at Palin– under the guise of political satire– was not witty or revealing of her in any way. Basically, it was a non stop smear campaign.
Jillian
You seem to base you remarks on the belief that all women are progressive and repelled by conservatism. While that most likely is a comfortable assumption for you, it is plainly a false assumption.
Thank you John, I was just about to point that out myself.
Jillian,
Your argument is very familiar to me since I do in fact live in the Northeast. And your viewpoints and language are very popular speak here.
So I just have to ask…. since you likely live in an area of the country where it is/was very popular to bash Palin, often on highly sexist/ violent/ slandering terms… did you speak out about this with much passion? Did you say to your friends and family – this is wrong and it’s an assault against women? Or was it always with the caveat “but”. “But she’s an idiot”, “But she’s a Republican” etc. etc.
Not interested in Kate Couric discussion since I have neither the time or the inclination to engage in this. Very, very tiring….. But. But, I would like to know how a person like yourself who does acknowledge (on some level) the tremendous sexism that Palin received – how did/ do you respond?
Jillian, either you have a blind spot about this or you are simply refusing to see it, but there is a difference between saying “I can see Russia from my house” and “We can see Russia from some parts of Alaska”. You seem to be defending the portrayal of (b) as (a) by claiming it is fair because Palin was allegedly using it as an example of foreign policy experience, which is again false. You simply have to read the unedited version to know that. (The part where she goes on to detail her policy interactions with Russia were cut out). So, instead of educating yourself, you are perpetuating media’s sexist myths. Then you are practicing the classic double standard by minimizing the stupidity of Biden’s statements as “foot in mouth” statements of an allegedly intelligent man, ignoring the stupid statements made by Obama, and focusing on the statements made by Palin that are twisted by the media to look stupid as a justification to deride her. That is classic “tool” behaviour. Just my opinion. It is sad to see women jumping so eagerly on the band wagon to deride other women.
The day after Palin was selected for VP, my local (left-leaning) newspaper ran a long article about Palin’s background. This is before the Palin bashing hit full speed. Her dad was quoted as saying that from a very young age (8?) she read the newspaper from beginning to end every single day.
If the media chose to focus on this fact from her background, would she still seem intellectually incurious? A large part of the media bias is not what they say, but how much “air time” they give to different things. Some things are buried (like Obama’s 57 states gaffe) and others are played ad nauseum (like Palin’s less than stellar answer to Couric’s newspaper question). This type of bias has a huge influence on public perception.
I did not support Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin because I wanted to see a woman in office. I supported them because they were the best candidates.
It’s so disheartening to see TNA inundated by comments clinging to, and disseminating, sexist lies about Palin.
Anyone with a modicum of insight can see that Palin is very bright… and Obama can’t construct a sentence without a teleprompter.
I’m with Bes, I’m sick and tired of narrow-minded people saying that Sarah Palin is uninformed. Either they just aren’t paying attention or they are way too comfortable with sexist standards.
Obama and his people counted on the fact that most Americans use media (and I mean tech media not just news) but are completely ignorant of how it actually works. Even one of his own got caught on that; witness writer boy and his Facebook gaffe.
Facebook is a weird way to converse as it is….
I don’t mean converse, I mean, that it is there, indelibly, until forever. Google. archives your underwear.
People, the tech generation, actually believe what is said or printed in the news is fact, true, was said, or done. I’m continually knocked back by this, but especially so with this generation that is so tech savvy. They have no clue the manipulation that is done, that the 20 second edit came from a 40 minutes interview, that you need to see it complete, with out takes, body language, the whole deal, before you have ANYTHING.
This naivete, and the working of it, this is what got Obama in.
Honetly, after several long months of keeping myself in deliberate ignorance (and which will continue for as long as I’m alive) … do you know what my conclusion to this was?
The universe consists of two kinds of people: the ones I share DNA with, and the rest of you slap-fighting monkeys. I’m really serious here. That’s the lesson I learned. I have no intention of being stupid enough to fight for women’s rights, despite being one. I’mm do my best to avoid the crap slung at women as a class, but other than that, not a chance I’m lifting a finger for anyone but me and my mom.
Whoops, what was that you said? I’m just doing what “the patriarchy” wants? I’ve learned one thing from this election cycle: if you try to help women by actually providing them with the junk they’re constantly whining they want — comprehensive sex education, outspoken support of women’s rights as human rights — check your back for a knife in a few years, and it’s one of those people who wanted to help who’ll have put it there.
Is it “the patriarchy?” Is it estrogen? Is it socialization? Who cares? I’m already watching my back for male-thrown knives, and I’ve picked more than a few of them out of my ribcage in my time. But if I open my mouth obviously in favor of women, the barrage of daggers that will fly at me from women just do not make it worth my while. Supporting women is political suicide, because they’ll turn on you in a heartbeat.
Sorry. I’d like to not say it, but that’s the lesson I took away from this. I’ll do for myself, and my mom. the rest of you are on your own.
and now that I’ve realized that these comments are moderated, I’m quite sure that the one I just left isn’t going to show up.
*goes off and gets some coffee and cookies and forgets about the whole thing once more*
Sis, I am just as shocked as you are that the most gullible people are also the people with the best technological know-how to avoid being gullible.
Janis, you’re not the only woman dealing with these issues about womanhood. It’s an issue I have been grappling with ever since I was twelve, and I am still not over it. We all have to find our own ways to cope with it. 2008 has been a very disillusioning year with the emergence of misogynistic women, but it has also been a very inspiring year with the emergence of strongly pro-woman women who are willing to set aside their differences for the common good.
THANK YOU. Seriously, I’m gratified — it’s amazing how stomped on any experssion of utter disgust over anything feminist is, really.
Janis!
Nice to read you again.
And of course you are right, we are our own wost enemies, but isn’t it time to do something about that?
If we take some of these ideas and help the next generation it must get better. It must.
I agree, Tuc. We are all in this together. Until we realize that, things won’t get better. And it isn’t just us we are fighting for. It is the future of our world, so that we don’t have to think about survival, as individuals. To concern ourselves with survival, as women are forced to, is not to have any life at all. And as a species we have to work toward being able to truly reach the pinnacle of human greatness. The men have kept humanity in a social and scientific dark age rife with pain and suffering. They will destroy everything.
But my rights, as a woman in the Patriarchy..my right to work. My right to not be owned by a man. My right to my physical safety, integrity, privacy. All of these rights are women’s rights and I won’t have them without women’s rights. I may not be able to stop sexism in another woman, but I can fight for her rights. In doing so, I fight for my own.
We are all broken, so we need to forgive eachother.
Leave your Response
Supporting women.
Ending sexism.
Finding common ground.
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Blogroll
Find the New Agenda Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...