Blog Roundup: Misogyny and Truth Edition

Well, we’ll start with the sexism/misogyny bits, as there’s soooooo much of that. Picking up from our Palin Sexism and Misogyny Watch (had to clean up a troll mess from CJMB in that post last night, since a certain cowardly misogynist left his yellowish spoo all over it), we find Not Your Sweetie reporting on the MILP, including this picture:

Why, oh why do Americans hate women? My husband said it best this morning, upon seeing that very picture: There’s something so Oedipal about all of this. The resentment toward women present in the culture right now is out of control, and absolutely unchecked. Will you check it on November 4? It’s really up to you. You can take it, or you can fight it. I just hope you don’t vote for it.They’ll be more empowered than ever if they think you’ll just take it.

Next up we have RKMK over at Adoxography, reporting on double standards:

Infuriated that Hendon had embarrassed her publicly on the Senate floor, Clinton walked over to her rival’s seat, witnesses said.

“She leaned over, put her arm on my shoulder real nice and then threatened to kick my ass,” Hendon said.

The two women walked out of the chamber into a back room and shoved each other a few times before colleagues broke them apart, Hendon and other witnesses said. Clinton and Hendon never talked about the incident with each other again, but they reached an awkward understanding. Hendon stopped teasing Clinton; Clinton started voting with Hendon more regularly. Hendon now supports Hillary Clinton for president.

That’s just to stoke your curiosity, of course, and isn’t even remotely the whole story, but admit it, you wanna look now, don’t you? You’re thinking, wtf? Clinton in a catfight? Go and see for yourself. You’ll be surprised. I was.

Ace of Spades reports on an AP reporters’ obsession with Palin’s legs, sharing this pic:

I just want to comment here that this is typical. It’s something I’ve been talking about in real life for a while. As long as men dominate the camera, and let’s face it, they do, we will be getting this kind of bullshit. Watch any sporting event on TV. The game itself is played be men, generally to a crowd that is disproportionately male. But watch who the camera comes back to time and time again during the down times. Women with big tits and slender waists, often dressed provocatively. The camera almost never lingers over the aged grandma, who’s most likely been a season ticket holder for a decade or more, or some ugly guy with a uni-brow. No, at almost every single televised event I’ve ever seen, the camera linger on women the camera guy would like to fuck. And that’s the way it will be, cameras and media feeding male privilege and fantasy to the masses, as long as we continue to take it. Are you gonna take it this November?

Alright, last up is an extraordinary post over at Acid Test. This is the truth portion of the blog roundup. Go read the whole thing. I know a lot of my readers, and I include myself here, have doubts about voting against Obama in a meaningful way (by which I mean your vote counting) because of what George W. Bush and his cronies have done to this country for the last 8 years, and, quite rightly, because of what Reagan and Bush I did. Just because you can’t vote for the Democrat this year does not mean you have to abandon what you know about those forces of evil in this world.

Once upon a time I was filled with sick horror at the thought of a McCain Presidency. Now? Not so much. He hasn’t changed.  He does have a new running mate, but she doesn’t scare me.  After Dubya, it feels petty to pretend that inexperience is some kind of showstopper.  What’s changed for me is the growing sick horror with which I view an Obama Presidency.

Okay, so the 30% Solution is not enough for you, fine. (It is for me.) But have you considered this:

The other reason, the even bigger reason, is that I think Obama could do more damage to the country than McCain. People pretty much know what McCain stands for and whether they’re for it or against it. Good-looking governors make it a warmer ticket, but don’t change the fundamental equation. Obama, on the other hand, does one thing, says another, and enough people are so desperate to believe in him that they lie to themselves so that they can keep doing it. Look at the reaction on the left when he started promoting faith-based government. Suddenly the left, the left, was trying to find reasons why it wasn’t such a bad idea after all. The ability to make people believe night was day was Reagan’s talent. He succeeded in making selfishness respectable, and then even admirable. He could make people forget which way was up. It’s very hard to climb out of a morass if you can’t even see that.

Obama, judging by the evidence so far, has the same talent. Based on what he’s done rather than what he’s said, he’s a Republican. Maybe Republican-lite, but that’s not the important part. What scares me is the large majority who, a year ago, finally understood that they don’t want that crap.  But he can make them think they do.

McCain can’t.

That’s why I think Obama may be a bigger disaster for the country than McCain.

We’ve got to think smart. We’ve got to think in terms of strategy. So the bail out threw you for a loop. It threw a bunch of us for a loop. Don’t let this weaken your resolve. Remember, we were right. The bail out didn’t help, because nothing can help this global-sized shell game they’re fighting about.

Obama will not help you economically–he will hurt you. McCain might hurt you too, but at least he offers women something more than the Progressive Dude Nation and Obama (see above for what they’re offering). And he won’t do near as much damage if elected as Obama for this simple reason: The best we can hope for, considering the whole fucking playing field is an insiders club for corrupt morons, is to divide the jokers and make them fight each other for the next few years, instead of unifying them so they can do even more damage. Imagine what Obama will do with a perfectly acquiescent Democratic Congress. Is that what you want? Or will you fight? Will you throw that electoral punch? Will your punch count, or will you throw it into the empty air with a third party vote?

Your vote is your own, of course. I respect that. I won’t judge you if you do vote third party, but I want you to consider what you’re doing, and I want you to consider it outside the box you have traditionally been in. We’re down to brass tacks, now. It’s time to figure it out, to flesh out how you really feel and think, and what your goals are. You’ve got roughly 3.5 weeks.


19 comments on “Blog Roundup: Misogyny and Truth Edition

  1. CognitiveDissonance says:

    I’m with you, Anna Belle. I’ve always known I couldn’t vote for Obama. But after watching the sham at the convention, I realized I was going to vote for McCain. I would never be able to look at myself in the mirror again if I didn’t do everything I could to insure the demise of Obama’s candidacy and the far-left takeover of the party.

    I agree that Obama will do far more damage than McCain will do. In some ways, I think McCain may actually do some good. His plan for people facing foreclosure is basically Hillary’s plan. While he isn’t proposing universal health care, we all know that Obama will never get that pushed through. McCain’s plan will definitely help. I’ve struggled the past few years to pay for my health insurance. McCain’s tax credit will pay most of it for me. That’s not as good as Hillary’s plan, but it is far better than what we’ve had in the past, so it’s a good start. If McCain manages to do these 2 things, plus get a real energy policy, I think we’ll be okay. With Obama, I fear for what our country will become.

  2. catsarepeopletoo says:

    I decided to vote for McCain in March after I was called a racist for voting for Hillary. McCain is a moderate and loves this country. A third-party vote means BHO has one vote to make up. A McCain vote means BHO has two votes to make up. Obama is so frightening, everyone should vote McCain to counteract the voter fraud of BHO’s Chicago machine.

    I may vote Repub down-ticket, too, to further reduce the power of the leftist wackos in the House and Senate. It’s so sad what the Democratic party has become.

  3. Jeffrey says:

    After,the Convention I signed up for the McCain campaign.I,was a Hillary Delegate,but screw this unity crap.The Obama supporters are hateful(just like with Hillary)and to a point like a cult.

  4. Patti says:

    Right after the primary I wasn’t going to vote for President(maybe Nader). I have since changed my mind realizing that not voting (or voting for Nader) is not an effective way to keep Obama out of the White House. McCain/Palin it is.

  5. Cher says:

    As a photographer, I can’t help but notice in the photo of Palin’s legs, that the photographer has focused NOT on her legs but on the faces of the 2 people on the front row, so I don’t think that her legs were the main issue of that photo. I think the rapt attention of the front row folks is what this photographer was after. Just sayin’ is all.


  6. Anna Belle says:

    Cher, google it. The same guy is all over her legs for the entire time. And does he need a point of view shot from between her legs to make the point about the fellas? Or don’t you think it sensationalizes it further?

  7. Pumpkinlove says:

    Great post. I have been leaning McCain since it became clear that Obama would be the nominee. When Obama and his gang couldn’t be bothered to give Hillary a full roll call, I decided I was voting McCain.

    Screw Obama ’08

  8. Cher says:

    All I’m saying is that as a photographer, if I were photographing her legs, that’s not a photo I would have kept. It would have been discarded.

    I will google it, however, to see what else he has taken. As for a POV shot from between her legs, he wouldn’t need it nope, but then I’m not LOOKING for shots like that either. About the sensationalizing, I think she’s pretty smart for capitalizing on a pair of great looking legs. She is wearing a skirt that hits her knees with a pair of heels that accentuate well-muscled calves. I ask this in all seriousness just who’s playing who? Is it okay to play up what might be considered an asset and then call foul play against them who enjoy it? It seems so very circular to me.


  9. Cher says:

    Okay – so I followed the link and have viewed the complete series of photos and concede that I see what you are blogging about. Can I say something here without getting attacked too hard?

    From a photographer’s POV and a female one at that, I see power in the first shot. I wonder how the photo would have been received if it had been made by a woman? It’s the type of photo that I find ‘artsy’ in it’s own right simply because of the soft, out-of-focus view of her legs OVER the sharpness of the guy’s face. Is it even possible that the group might be a GLB (pink shirts) group that supports McCain & Palin?

    I’d love to be sitting down with you right now discussing this face-to-face rather than back & forth on a blog.

    Here’s a partial answer to my question about her utilizing the beauty of her legs:

    “I wouldn’t mind shots of her very finely crafted calves, except for the obvious intent to demean her as a mere sex object.”

    from the link you provided. It is unfortunate that sexism still abounds no doubt, but bravo to women who do choose to fight it by putting themselves out there in the line of fire. I’m sure she’s aware of both men who slobber over sexy legs and women who damn other women for ‘allowing’ men the chance to slobber.

    Damn, I feel that I’m not communicating my thoughts very well on the subject, but suffice it to say, that I might have shot a photo the very same way because that’s the type of eye I seem to have. I think it’s very artsy, and I like the story it parlays.

    Am I making any sense?

  10. Patti says:


    You think she is trying to capitalize on her legs?! WTF? Yes, it’s her fault photographers focus on her legs. This rings a bell. The nerve of her wearing a dress in public!

  11. Anna Belle says:

    Cher, I’m afraid you’re not making much sense to me, and I do want to understand. I read your comment earlier this evening and decided to think about it before responding to see I could make sense of it. I kinda took the same message as Patti regarding your first attempt, and am glad to see you at least struggle with that.

    Ultimately, I do not think it’s helpful guessing that if it were a woman behind the camera the same picture might have been taken, and no, what you think you’d do personally doesn’t count, especially since I suspect you support Obama, so your photo would show it’s own editorial slant regardless. But the reality is it was taken by a man, in a sleazy attempt at objectification. This is something that has been done to Palin over and over again as a frightened media tries to neutralize her power. It always falls back on her sexual availability as suggested by her reproductive capacity. It was the exact opposite with Clinton–she was a sexless wonder to them, the one who reminded them all of their shrieking wives and whom they want to take out back and shut up. This is how politics works for women in America. At least right now.

  12. okasha skatsi says:

    Cher, your comments don’t make much sense to me, either, and I’m also a photog. The shot AnnaBelle’s referring to, with the POV between Palin’s legs, makes it look as though the guys in the front row are looking up her skirt. Yes, that’s objectification. I’ll agree that it’s “artsy,” but it reminds me more of The Graduate and Mrs. Robinson than it does of what used to be the journalistic standards of political coverage.

  13. Cher says:

    Thanks for giving me the chance to try to verbalize my POV. Okay, so let me back up. I can agree that journalistic objectification is wrong, sick, etc.

    Hadn’t thought of the Mrs. Robinson slant.

    But, I still question what’s wrong with a woman ALSO recognizing her sexual power and then using it? I say more power to women who recognize whatever power they have and using it to fight the stupidiy of the men who objectify them AND the women who secretly want to keep women ‘in their places.’ And there are women out there with that agenda be it due to jealously, low self-esteem, whatever.

    I think that we all agree that a strong/powerful woman is feared by many be it Hillary who has had many a laugh at weak men and just as many tears/anger at their demeaning actions and words as well, or Sarah and her inexperience perceived or otherwise.

    Patti, what would be wrong with Sarah capitalizing on her legs:

    “You think she is trying to capitalize on her legs?! WTF? Yes, it’s her fault photographers focus on her legs. This rings a bell. The nerve of her wearing a dress in public!”

    I don’t recall saying that it’s her fault at all. I was trying to make the point of good on her for wearing the dress and heels.

    Strong women throughout history have capitalized on their sexuality as well as on their brains. I really don’t see anything wrong with that. We could get into a whole other conversation at just when things changed about the roles that gender and sexuality play in our lives. That’s something I don’t want to open up here, but I think Anna knows/understands me well enough to know what I’m talking of.

    As for whether or not Sarah is or isn’t capitalizing on her legs … I couldn’t really say … all I can say is that if she is … good on her … afterall many men do it day in and day out with hair transplants, facelifts, buffed nails, soft hands, washboard abs, etc. Seems that’s what the MSM want each and every man, woman and child to believe.

    This is coming from a 51 y/o fat woman who is quite comfortable in her fatness (except for arthritic knees). Do I judge who I am going to vote for on how they look and dress? Sure, as long as they have good hygiene and know how to dress for the occasion. The rest I could care less about be it man or woman …. I don’t need the eye candy. I want someone who will represent me, and my ideals just as the rest of you do.


  14. Cher says:

    One other thing about this specific photographer. I still say that IF he was only after photographing Palin’s legs, then he’s a damn poor photographer as her legs are horribly out of focus in each photograph. This is what leads me to believe that her legs were not what he was after. Perhaps he should have juggled around a bit for a clearer shot of the people he ended up focusing on, or chosen an appropriate lens if her legs, indeed, were his intended target. Just sayin.’


  15. Ciardha says:

    We’re going to disagree about voting third party, but we certainly won’t disagree on our anger at the repulsive sexist attacks on Hillary, Sarah Palin, and yes Cynthia McKinney too, by the Obots.
    (all three have been called the c word by Obots. They are threatened by McKinney too, because she is pulling in the strongly liberal feminists Hillary Dems like me. I think as many Hillary Dems will be voting for the Green Party as for McCain/Palin. That’s a 20% or more net loss for the Dems over 2004. If you are a Dem and you vote anything but Obama it’s a net loss for the Dems. That means my vote as a Green party support also has meaning and impact. I seriously doubt Obama is going to get any Republican votes, especially with the way he and his surrogates are speaking the past couple of weeks.

    You want to know how far Obots will go? A PBS poll on “Is Sarah Palin qualified to be VP” Obots are spreading it around blogs to vote no. I’m sorry, but that’s rather revealing of their sexism. I disagree with Palin’s Reagan worshipping and her follow the Republican party line part of her mindset (and Obama and Biden ditto, their voting record and support of Reaganist things- privatizing Social Security!) but I certainly think she’s qualified. She did a good job as her states governor, and showed she wasn’t totally in lockstep with the Republican party, etc… Here’s the link

  16. Anna Belle says:

    Well, you, C, I know you’re voting McKinney because you actually agree with her, not because you’ve decided you can’t vote for an icky Republican. My rhetoric in that regard is aimed at those who use that argument. I want them to really think about what they are doing, or not doing as the case may be.

    That said, thanks for the tip on the Palin poll. I cast my vote!

  17. FembotsForObama says:

    I think the Palin pic shows more than guys looking up her skirt, she’s on stage in heels, which most of society associates with striptease. It’s more than a comment that she is not qualified, to me the photographer’s repeated use of basically the same shot is an allusion that she is a woman of ill repute. Just sayin’

    I too have been pondering for quite a while as to whether I should vote 3rd party or not. For a couple of months, I’ve been toying with voting McCain/Palin, and trying my thoughts out about this on various postings. And then I read about Obama’s support and campaigning while a US Senator on taxpayer’s dollars for his tribal cousin, Raila Odinga, whom has created massive violent uprisings in Kenya after not winning the last election. And apparently, Odinga had made agreements with Islamic leaders that they can impose Sharia law as long as they support him.

    Such support from Obama to a person who would impose Sharia law to get elected is worse than just meeting leaders (Iran) without preconditions. This would signify a virtual acceptance of any regime that actively seeks to persecute women under the guise of culture.

    Remember in the 1990s when Dems wouldn’t condemn the Taliban’s take-over of Afghanistan because it was a “cultural issue”? Remember how professional women were kicked to the streets, forced to wear burkas, and then complainers were rounded up and killed in the soccer stadium we built for them? Then the Dems retracted and made comments akin to not knowing that there would be such repercussions to these women after NOW and other women’s groups massively campaigned to get them to intercede?

    So, now without a doubt, I’m voting McCain/Palin. Finding this out his support of and campaigning for Odinga (whose interests are actually contrary to our own national interests) was the tipping point for me.

  18. Carla says:

    Wow. kicks ass.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s