Tag Archives: Sexism

What can Hillary Clinton expect as America’s first woman President?

A Woman  Washington Post reporter games it it out….

Both the 2016 campaign trail and the Obama presidency itself have offered previews of what might await America’s first female president during her time in office.

Ugly sentiments have cropped up on both sides of the campaign trail this season. Donald Trump, never one to adhere to the rules that govern a gentleman’s behavior in any context, has complained about Fiorina’s looks, implied that Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly’s tough line of questioning at a debate was inspired by her menstrual cycle and ultimately skipped a debate rather than face her again. Chris Christie, outflanked by Trump in the crassness contest, managed to fantasize about spanking Clinton before exiting the campaign to spend more time with his New Jersey-based grudges.

Some Bernie Sanders supporters have adopted language and stances so aggressive and so tinged by gender that the candidate himself disavowed them, declaring “we don’t want them. I don’t want that.” Yesterday, the rapper and Sanders surrogate Killer Mike came under fire for quoting a woman who told him that “a uterus doesn’t qualify you to be president” — he might have noted that, the historical record notwithstanding, possession of male genitalia seems incidental, if not downright detrimental, to the duties of the presidency.

The idea that such sentiments would dissipate once Clinton, or any other woman, took the oath of office is both sweet and utterly risible…..

More….

image…cnn.com

Glenn Greenwald on Hillary ….Obama and Sexism and Racism…

Glenn Greenwald’s blind spot on racism and sexism

by Armando @ Daily Koss…..

I’ve been a fan of Glenn Greenwald’s work (NOTE: Greenwald replies to my post here ) since I first became aware of it during the first NSA scandal of recent years, the Bush Era warrantless wiretapping, when Glenn was a leader in the analysis of the abuses of the Bush Administration. His latest book regarding the Snowden NSA story, No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State, is a must-read for me. While I often disagree with Greenwald, I never fail to respect his work.
Given some of the attacks aimed at him, I can imagine he is hypersensitive to some charges, including claims of racism and sexism in his work. I certainly disagree with these criticisms.

However, in an interview with GQ, Greenwald made a statement that bothered me a great deal and revealed, at least in my view, a blind spot that Greenwald has with regard to the manifestations of racism and sexism in our society. Greenwald said:

Hillary is banal, corrupted, drained of vibrancy and passion. I mean, she’s been around forever, the Clinton circle. She’s a fucking hawk and like a neocon, practically. She’s surrounded by all these sleazy money types who are just corrupting everything everywhere. But she’s going to be the first female president, and women in America are going to be completely invested in her candidacy. Opposition to her is going to be depicted as misogynistic, like opposition to Obama has been depicted as racist. It’s going to be this completely symbolic messaging that’s going to overshadow the fact that she’ll do nothing but continue everything in pursuit of her own power. They’ll probably have a gay person after Hillary who’s just going to do the same thing. [Emphasis supplied.]
Greenwald’s critique of Hillary Clinton here is neither sexist nor misogynist (which is not to say it is accurate). However, his statement about women’s support for Clinton and his implication that any identification of sexism and misogyny directed at Clinton (and racism directed at President Obama) is merely a deflection of substantive critiques is so off the mark that it jarred and troubled me.
Of course, not all criticism of Hillary Clinton and President Obama is sexist or racist, but some of it surely is. Surely an intelligent person like Greenwald can understand that these two thoughts—that there are legitimate criticisms of Clinton and Obama AND Clinton and Obama are often treated in sexist and racist manners—are not mutually exclusive.

Greenwald’s expressions here are reminiscent of Jonathan Chait’s strawman arguments that “racial liberals” see all criticisms of President Obama as racial or racist. Not only is it wrong, it is a pernicious view that would sweep under the rug the very real problems of racism and sexism that still permeate every level of our society…..

For the whole post....Here…

Backlash developing against Christie throwing Bridget Kelly under the bus…

The media has begun damning for sexism the Jersey Governor and Lawyer Randy Mastro for pointing to Bridget Kelly as a woman scorned in their Bridge-Gate Scandal report….

When the results of the internal Bridgegate investigation, commissioned by New Jersey Governor Chris Christie were released Thursday, it included a curious revelation. Bridget Anne Kelly, Christie’s former Deputy Chief of Staff whom he fired on January 9 after the release of her smoking gun “time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee” email, had been involved in an affair with Bill Stepien, Christie’s former campaign manager.

The report, which cost New Jersey taxpayers $1 million, states that “Kelly and Stepien became personally involved, although, by early August 2013, their personal relationship had cooled, apparently at Stepien’s choice, and they largely stopped speaking.”

State Senator Loretta Weinberg, one of two co-chairs of the joint legislative committee investigating Bridgegate, told The Daily Beast that she believes this was an attempt to assassinate the character of Kelly.

“Maybe that’s what’s making me so angry,” Weinberg said in a phone call Thursday. “They’re talking about ‘a personal relationship’ and they put in the report that Mr. Stepien was the one who ended it—how do they know that? How do they know that? And was that done to add to the credence that this was some crazy woman, some woman who is no longer in control of her emotions?”

When asked why the affair was mentioned at all, Randy Mastro, an attorney at the white shoe firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, which was hired to do the investigation, told the media at a press conference, “the relevance is that it may explain a lack of communication between [Kelly and Stepien].”

Weinberg scoffed at that answer. “And what does that have to do with anything? If there were no emails, there were no emails! Maybe there were [also] no emails between two other people. What does that mean? That they all had relationships and they broke up?”

Even if Mastro could make the case that explaining the lack of communication between Kelly and Stepien was necessary in his report, that does not explain why the report stated that Stepien had broken up with Kelly…..

More…

Note….

People aren’t happy that a million of Jersey money was spent on the report….

photo….nbcphildephia.com

Bill O’Reilly disses the idea of a Woman President…..

This guy is REALLY a certified KNUCKLEHEAD…….

(England, Germany, India and Israel seem to have done alright with Women running the show, eh?)

O’Reilly: ‘There’s gotta be some downside to having a woman president’

by Hunter @ Daily Kos…..

Probably the best part of this Bill O’Reilly clip is the reactions on his guests’ faces as he pipes up with this stuff.

“There’s gotta be some downside to having a woman president, right? Something. Something that may not ‘fit’ with that office. Correct?”

Oh, do go on. This ought to be good.

“There haven’t been that many strong women leaders throughout history. […] But you know, when you’re President of the United States, you have to deal with people like Putin, you have got to deal real ornery mullahs in Iran—look, the mullahs in Iran, they think women are like subspecies.”

Forget Iran, Republican legislatures throughout the various states think of women as a lesser subspecies. Bill O’Reilly has more than a little trouble with it himself from time to time. Being president means you have to deal with blowhards like Bill O’Reilly, and if you can do that without throttling him then you can probably deal with the likes of Vladimir Putin. (For starters, maybe you don’t give him a what-you-think-of-clever nickname like “Put-put”. Gawd.)

There are going to be a lot of people who have a problem with a woman president, whether it happens in two years or in twenty. Most of them, as it turns out, are going to be interviewed on Fox News, a network which we can expect to be asking this same “can a mere delicate woman possibly handle the difficult task of presidentin”” on every show before every election until it finally happens, and for four to eight years after that besides. Anyone who has been, say, a secretary of state probably has the chops to negotiate with foreign leaders; if there are Americans that have problems with the notion, you can’t pin that one on the Iranian mullahs. They’re not the ones piping up on American television with magic-based explanations of how the female body works, or explaining away various once-held rights of American women by explaining that pregnancy demotes them to “host” status.

We know the good people of the Fox Nation are going to have a difficult time reconciling themselves to the notion of a female president. It’s 2014, and they can’t restrain themselves from “asking the question” as it is.

Ted Cruz is making sure Republicans don’t go back to the middle….

Republican ‘outreach efforts’ doomed

by Denise Oliver Velez @ Daily Kos

Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) speaks at the

Ted Cruz, reaching out to offend, as he protests a shutdown he helped make possible.

There’s a popular slogan in Twelve Step programs: “Insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results.” We can apply it easily to the Teapublican Party, with members who persist in thinking that simply selecting people with Latino surnames, black faces, those who have ovaries, or those who ostensibly champion marijuana reform (the perpetual Pauls) will change their “fail” in communities of color, among women and with young people across the United States.

It’s pretty funny when you think about it. But since they persist in thinking that we are terminally stupid and are unable to separate style from substance—and are easily tricked by visuals—I stand to the side laughing, watching further futile efforts on their part to stem their shrinking demographics. Here’s the truth:

It’s your platform—stupid.
It’s your policies—stupid.
It’s your racism, bigotry, misogyny, homophobia and xenophobia—stupid.

And to make it even more clear, I’ll explain below the fold…..

Continue Reading

Should Elizabeth Warren Challange Hillary Clinton from the Left?

Is THIS a copy of the Conservatives vs the Establishment Republicans?……

Warren is the Democrats leftwingnuts new icon…..

The last time Hillary ran the Democratic left help derail her…..

Are they gonna try to do it AGAIN?

Me?

I think The Massachusetts Senator is long on idea’s ….

And we already have a professor as President….

If ya want use her to keep Hillary aware of her parties base, Yea I’m all for it….

But a serious push for Prof Warren for President?

Elizabeth Warren vs. Hillary Clinton in 2016: Great for women, the Democratic Party, and America

by Ian Reifowitz @ Daily Kos…..

Elizabeth Warren and Hillary ClintonOkay, okay, out with it. You read this title and thought: 1) It’s way too early to be talking about 2016. 2) Elizabeth Warren isn’t running for president. 3) It’s really way too early to be talking about 2016. Of course, it is certainly premature to speculate about the horse race of 2016, about who’s in the lead, who’s #2 with a bullet, and that sort of nonsense. You may remember that a Gallup poll showed Joe Lieberman (gulp) leading the Democratic field by six points on the eve of the first nationally televised presidential debates in late April 2003. That’s not what this post is about.

There have been plenty of articles written in recent days about Sen. Warren’s rising electoral prospects thanks to a new Quinnipiac poll showing her as the third “hottest” (based on popularity. What? You thought it was based on something else?) politician in the country, ahead of President Obama and just behind Hillary Clinton, with New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie placing first. If both Warren and Clinton were to run for president it would have a tremendously positive effect on gender equality, on our party, and the country by giving us a race unlike anything America has seen before.

I’m not throwing my support behind Sen. Warren for the nomination here. But I don’t mind saying I’m impressed by her credentials, her policy positions, and her political abilities. In addition to her prior career as a law school professor and expert on bankruptcy, she has accomplished a great deal since coming to Washington in November 2008. First, she chaired the Congressional Oversight Panel set up to watchdog the bank bailout known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program, i.e., TARP. Then Warren served as the driving force behind the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. And Sen. Warren has already shown herself to be an active force on the floor of the Senate since arriving there just this January. During her very first meeting of the Senate Banking Committee this February, her statement lamenting the fact that none of the big banks were taken to trial by the Securities and Exchange Commission after the malfeasance that led to the economic collapse of 2008 went viral:

“I’m really concerned that ‘too big to fail’ has become ‘too big for trial.”

For more about why a Warren versus Clinton race would be a good thing, please follow me beyond the fold.

Continue Reading

The British change throne succession rules to allow women equal access to the throne…

This isn’t a big one I’ll grant you…

But it IS important….

As American accepts it’s first Black President….

And waits for it’s first woman to hold that job…

The Brit’s have voted with in it’s Commonwealth to rid itself of the sexist notion that a 12 year old boy would ascend to the British throne

Before a grown Daughter….

Here….Here!

The British monarch’s first-born child, whether a girl or a boy, will ascend the throne under new succession rules approved Friday by Commonwealth nations, reversing centuries of tradition.

Commonwealth national leaders also agreed at a summit in the western Australian city of Perth to lift a ban on monarchs marrying Roman Catholics, British Prime Minister David Cameron said.

Britain or any of the 15 former British colonies for which Queen Elizabeth II is monarch could have vetoed the changes to current rules that ensure that a male heir takes the throne ahead of older sisters.

“Attitudes have changed fundamentally over the centuries and some of the outdated rules — like some of the rules of succession — just don’t make sense to us any more,” Cameron told reporters in Perth.

“The idea that a younger son should become monarch instead of an elder daughter simply because he is a man, or that a future monarch can marry someone of any faith except a Catholic — this way of thinking is at odds with the modern countries that we have become,” he added…..

More….

Women In Comics: A Look at DC’s New 52

by TheSolipsisticMeFollow @Daily Kos….

September is over, and all 52 titles of the DC relaunch have been released. Given the furor surrounding the lack of women writers and the lack of visible female characters before the comics were available, how do things actually stack up? The answer is: not very differently than in the old DC universe. After reading 32 of the new titles (including all the titles with female leads) and reading multiple reviews of the remaining 20, the simple truth is that the balance of women in DC’s titles is pretty close to what it was.

While holding the status quo is better than a reduction, DC has really missed an opportunity. One stated purpose behind the New 52 was to make the comics more accessible and appealing to new readers. Given the fact that, despite stereotypes, there are plenty of women and girls who read comics, this was a perfect time to broaden the appeal of DC’s offerings. Instead, they opted to hold steady and, in some ways, reinforce the stereotype of mainstream comics as a boy’s world. Let’s take a look.

First, by the numbers:

  • 29 titles are solo male characters or male duos and groups
  • 11 titles are groups with mixed membership, most of which are predominantly male
  • 7 titles are female leads (including the team book Birds of Prey)
  • 5 are something else altogether, usually supernatural titles

A few of the ostensibly male-dominated comics have pleasant surprises in the supporting cast. Animal Man may feature Buddy Baker as its lead, but his wife, Ellen, is an important character in the story and is actually more thoroughly developed than many of the women who are leads in their own titles. Superboy also features a strong co-lead in the unfortunately unnamed woman who is the scientist overseeing the lab where he is being supervised (he’s a recently grown clone). Mr. Terrific, a mediocre relaunch of one of my favorite DC characters, also features Karen (Power Girl) Starr in a strong supporting turn.

In the team books, it’s a very mixed bag.

  • Justice League and Stormwatch are very male-dominated. The first issue of JL doesn’t even include the one female character (Wonder Woman). The Stormwatch cast is (so far) mostly men and the visible female characters are poorly developed. Green Lantern and the New Guardians has a slightly better ratio at this point, but the final makeup of the team is unclear; the writing is also distressingly macho, with a number of “scream like a girl” lines.
  • Justice League International, Teen Titans, Hawk & Dove, and Justice League Dark are much better balanced. The Wonder Girl in TT is a complex, promising character and Dove is a much more interesting counterpoint to Hawk than the previous version (although she has grown mysteriously more buxom). JLD features a number of strong women, including the very powerful villain and one of my favorites, Zatanna.
  • My longstanding favorite, the Legion of Super-Heroes, has two titles, the latest Legion of Super-Heroes title and Legion Lost. Of the 42 (really!) pre-relaunch Legionnaires,  13 were women. Eleven of the 27 members in the two books so far are women, including an impressive four out of five new members.
  • Suicide Squad and Red Hood & the Outlaws are moderately balanced, but feature some truly bad plot and character decisions that I’ll look at shortly.

And how are those seven books that feature women characters as leads?

  • Batgirl and Batwoman, both reviewed on TSM earlier, are outstanding. They are complex stories, well told, with strong characters.
  • Birds of Prey continues in its original vein, with strong female leads and promising plot points. Even without the wonderful Gail Simone writing the book, it is one of the more interesting books of the relaunch.
  • Supergirl and Wonder Woman are very interesting new interpretations of very longstanding characters. Supergirl is scripted as a very convincing teenager cast into a confusing situation. Wonder Woman’s world is creepy and mysterious, featuring the Greek deities who populated her previous incarnations; it’s also one of the most strikingly drawn books in the relaunch.
  • Voodoo, a character with whom I was unfamiliar, is an interesting mess. The lead character turns out to be a violent alien (who may not even be female?) and the plot is a bit sluggish. Interestingly, although the bulk of the story takes place in a strip club, the female supporting cast is well written and reasonable free of stereotypes and pointless titillation.
  • Last, but by no means least, there’s Catwoman. In many regards, this title is much like the two Bat-ladies. Selina Kyle is a complex, interesting, powerful woman. The overall story is interesting and well-paced. Unfortunately, the last several pages have become quickly infamous. Batman appears in Catwoman’s room and the two engage in a pointlessly drawn-out sex scene. While the clarification of the love-hate relationship between the two as a physical relationship is fine, the presentation is frankly bizarre. The best overall analysis of this gratuitous plot point is brilliantly provided by Savage Critic.

Catwoman’s soft-core porn (with costumes remaining on) is one of the major disappointments in the treatment of women in the New 52. Another is the treatment of the two female leads in Suicide Squad. Harley Quinn’s jester costume is replaced with a pointless bustier-dominated costume and the character is reduced from intriguing obsessive to stereotypical psychopath. Far more disturbing is the redesign of Amanda Waller. Originally a short, heavyset, African-American woman, Waller has long been a fan favorite for her strength of character, her guile, and her indomitable will. The fact that she did not have a typical super-hero hourglass figure made her an outstanding exception in DC’s cast. Sadly, the new Amanda Waller looks like a busty Halle Berry. What kind of message does that send?

An unfortunate trend in the new books is a superfluity of nude and lingerie scenes. At least six titles feature women in various states of undress. While there are reasonable circumstances (arising from sleep, changing clothes, being strippers) in each case, it is interesting to note that the male characters do not experience the same level of on-panel undress. (Two notable exceptions are Hawkman, who is discretely nude for several panels and Superboy, who spends much of his debut issue floating in a tank wearing a pair of bike shorts.)

Even when not in various states of undress, the female characters also tend to have much skimpier costumes than their male counterparts. In a world where all four of the Robin characters are allowed to wear long pants, it’s curious that the shorts and tank tops are so predominantly female. (Void-Star.net postulated a revised Superboy costume some time ago which underscores this point nicely.) There is nothing wrong with presenting the human body in a comic book (and it can be handled tastefully like the costume changing scene in Batwoman), but the imbalance smacks of objectification at best.SuperboyCostume

That leads us to the very worst moment for female characters in the relaunch. Frankly, it’s one of the worst-written characterizations I have ever seen in a comic. Starfire, a long-standing member of the Teen Titans, has always been a sensual woman comfortable with her body and sexuality. As originally written, however, she was independent, strong-willed, and though a bit naïve (she is from another planet, after all), intelligent and engaging. The new Starfire is nothing more than an animated toy for the male characters. Unable to distinguish between Earthlings and devoid of long-term memory, she pursues sex partners wantonly and without any apparent pleasure. A buxom, energetic, no strings attached sexpot, she is the worst stereotype of a straight teenage boy’s dream character. Readers (even those not long-term fans of the character) are justifiably outraged at this misogyny. Let’s hope the editorial team can find a way to write themselves out of this mess quickly.

The whole relaunch is a mix of the traditional, the unexpected, the sad misstep, and the pleasant surprise. The male-dominated books that I read featured some blunders not unlike those described in this post. The tragic difference is that a handful of badly-written male characters get lost in the very masculine mix. The exploitation and shallow characterization of a significant percentage of the limited female characters, on the other hand, sends a bad message to all readers, both male and female. Let’s hope that as the New DC progresses, the writers will take a lesson from Batgirl, Batwoman, Birds of Prey, and Supergirl and find ways to present strong, varied, interesting female characters. After all, art is supposed to imitate life, isn’t it?

ORIGINALLY POSTED TO THESOLIPSISTICME ON SUN OCT 02, 2011 AT 08:53 AM PDT.

ALSO REPUBLISHED BY TEAM DFHDKOMA, AND COMMUNITY SPOTLIGHT.