Photo by Flickr user AsGood. Used under a Creative Commons license.
Whatsername the Jaded Hippy says, more directly…
For the record, I detest Ann Coulter.
But if I hear one more “liberal” call her “Man Coulter” or talk about “her Adam’s apple” or “man hands” or any other such thing, I might just whip their ass.
USING SEXUAL INSULTS TO DEGRADE SOMEONE BECAUSE YOU DON’T LIKE THEM IS NOT PROGRESSIVE!!
...something I’ve said far more obliquely: Using sexual insults to degrade someone because you don’t like them is not progressive.
See also Amanda Marcotte’s shorter Maureen Dowd
While I’ll be sad not to have Hillary Clinton to kick around anymore, I’ll be fine consoling myself by regurgitating my favorite slur against all male politicians, which is to accuse them repeatedly, week after week, of being women. Barack Obama has a vagina, neener neener neener.
Submitted by 1966 (not verified) on Mon, 2008-02-25 01:25.
Somewhere, I suspect at the end of this post, there is a tag left open. Everything afterwards is in italics.
[Thanks, A. Fixed now. --fl]
Submitted by 1966 (not verified) on Mon, 2008-02-25 08:31.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who is irritated by people using these types of slurs against famous female pundits. Can't people just criticize them by deconstructing their arguments? How come Ann Coulter is always being called a male in drag or a skanky slut, Maureen Dowd is an unlovable spinster who can't get laid, and Hilary Clinton is homely and a ball buster? How come so many guys include a statement about whether or not they'd "do her" as part of their response to any female public figure?
Why do we care so much about whether these women are sexually desirable? If they were more (or less) sexually desirable, would this have anything whatsoever to do with the political arguments they are putting forth?
The other night at the gym, the TV in the locker room was playing one of those late night shows, I think it was that guy who took over from Johnny Carson. He was doing his little current events monologue, and three out of four jokes were in this vein. The audience was eating it up.
This type of sexism is not just alive and kicking, it's 100% socially acceptable. It's considered a normal and proper part of the cultural landscape, and therefore anyone who objects to it is just being humorless.
(BTW, the captcha thing is doing it again. Mine was "dress shots".)
[Hi Elizilla, nicely put! There was a sketch in Monty Python's Meaning of Life where some sort of judicial progress policy allowed a guy chose to be executed by a bunch of topless women on rollerskates. The director's intended irony, of course, being that when it comes to his moment of truth he's a) still terrified and b) still executed. So yeah, how exactly does someone's appearance, gender, or anatomy matter. Unless you're their current or prospective partner it really doesn't. --fl]
Submitted by 1966 (not verified) on Mon, 2008-02-25 08:33.
I'm really glad to see I'm not the only one this occurs to.
[No, not at all, Whatsername. --fl]
Submitted by 1966 (not verified) on Mon, 2008-02-25 22:43.
Beats the heck out of me why people think ad hominem attacks are clever.
I notice a bit of a "two worlds" angle in this, too - sort of "conservatives are from Mars, progressives are from Venus" thinking, and it can be found on both wings. Obama can't be a "real" man; Coulter can't be a "real" woman.
I wasn't sure I was going to comment, until I saw that reCaptcha was offering me this evocation of swaggering machismo: "members bigger". Yep, those dice sure do act loaded.
Sunflower
[It's definitely found in both wings. And it makes sense, in a way, that *if* gender and not just biological sex is so central *then* we'd use it as an insult. In the long-run the way out, though, isn't to stop using those insults but to stop making gender so central. Thanks, Sunflower. --fl]