Listening to NPR’s Talk of the Nation today they were discussing this topic: “Do Feminists feel they have a duty to vote for Senator Clinton”
Neal Conan of NPR said, [paraphrase] …“in one of Clinton’s campaign stops someone shouted ‘iron my shirt’ and there were actually some giggles from the commentators, however when racist comments are made about Obama somehow people are truly taken aback”. I thought this was interesting. It would appear the last remaining socailly acceptable attack would be sexist comments, whereas racial ones are somehow more offensive. Which of course to me is a crock of sh*t, racial comments are just as offensive as sexist ones… However, I will admit that I have seen sexist comments go unaccounted for where racial ones get dragged across the train tracks.
Representatives from NARL and from Emily’s List both appeared on the show and discussed the matter at length. Some callers said we need to drop the sexism and stand behind the democratic candidate, some said they would never vote Obama, others said it was contingent on who his VP was, and still others said they will vote for him now that he looks like the nominee.
Back to the remarks: There was a cite by Neal Conan [I don’t have it] where women are seeking many very high positions down ballot this coming fall, and one senate race in particular - I can’t remember which, the male incumbant said on national television of his female rival, “she’s just another pretty face”
Well had I heard that on the news or radio that would certainly chap my ass. I’d have to hold my wife back from from yelling at the TV…How rampant is this phenomenon? Are sexist comments somehow not as offensive as racial ones to some people? Why do recoil in horror when a black man is called a porch monkey, but somehow saying a woman is a “bitch” or “just another pretty face” is acceptable?
If Don Imus taught us anything it’s that you can refer to a group of women as hos but heaven forbid you refer to their nappy hair while doing so. I’m going to vote for misogyny as being more acceptable than racism.
I don’t have any stats on this but I suspect that true, bitter hate of women is far less common than same for people of another race, considering half of us are women and the other half have generally lived with at least one and interact with them on a daily basis.
Taking that into consideration, I think sexist jokes are far more acceptable, but real, hurtful sexism is roughly equal, though rarer. I’ve met a few people who seem to hold some general resentment towards women, but never anyone who just flat-out hated them. Racists, on the other hand - it seems like I meet one every week.
Just my outsider’s opinion on the matter, not making a judgment call on which is worse.
That there are differences between the sexes is a pretty universally accepted idea. That there are differences between ethnicities- not so much.
How often have you heard parents describe their children as acting like a boy or a girl? How often do you hear parents saying their children are acting Caucasian?
>That there are differences between the sexes is a pretty universally accepted idea. That there are differences between ethnicities- not so much.
I agree. This certainly does not excuse being cruel or rude, and does not justify many of the common stereotypes and slights. However, it’s plausible that it contributes to a shift in the degree of inappropriateness we assign them.
But gender per se isn’t the worst abuse on a demographic basis. I think mistreatment of people who are gay is worse. In popular culture, gays certainly seem targeted by more jokes of a nastier nature and defended by fewer people hearing those jokes.
I think you are right about attitudes toward homosexuality. I also think that sexism, and homophobia are more common than racism because sexuality and gender are universal traits.
Having ethnicity is universal but being an African American or Chinese is not.
I also think there are historical things which influence attitudes toward ethnic groups and gender/sexuality.
I listened to that show too. I was surprised at the outrage. I haven’t heard any sexist comments, from Obama, his campaign, or from the media. Maybe that’s because I get my news from NPR – I don’t watch the TV pundits. That’s not saying that people aren’t making fun of Hillary. I’ve heard people joke about her laugh, her big eyes, her sometimes shrill voice – but I don’t see that as sexist. Candidates will be made fun of. It’s part of the process.
I don’t think sexist remarks are any more acceptable than racist remarks, but sexist remarks (like the Iron My Shirt sign) have a touch of humor in them, and racist remarks don’t. There’s hate behind the racism, and just plain ignorance behind the sexism.
Why shouldn’t they be? We’re not dealing with equivalent problems here. Sexism is more universal – every human culture from neolithic times to at least the 20th Century has been expressly based on it – but, in a democratic society, it is ultimately self-correcting. Any time all the women agree they want something, they will get it; they slightly outnumber the men. But racism is one of America’s besetting sins, and not self-correcting.
True. Women have historically been marginalized, dismissed, abused, mistreated, discriminated against, etc. but not to that degree. There’s a big difference between women not being allowed to own property and manage their own affairs, and women being property.
In many cultures women were indeed de facto property – but not in the English-speaking cultures. And women in the U.S. have, at most historical periods, enjoyed more freedom and status than women in most other countries. (If you excoriate the Founding Fathers for failing to provide women the vote, consider that women had never had the vote in any republic in human history to that time, with the arguable exception of the Iroquois League, where only men could be chiefs but only women could vote for chiefs.)
This is the crux of the entire matter. And in the Fork thread I mentioned something to that effect. I think the hate is what will keep some folks in places like appalachia away from a brown candidate. Politically speaking I would be very surprised if Obama picks someone who isn’t white for his veep. And that’s a sad state of affairs when we still have to worry about skin tone in this country. I think the world laughs at us sometimes because we are so “behind the times” in terms of actual racism in the US.
You can find all sorts of books about the witch trails in Europe between roughly 1450 and 1750 CE and they use the phrase “women’s holocaust” seriously. I don’t particularly agree with that assessment but it does exist.
This serves as an example of how women are marginalized automatically. Women did go through two centuries of slavery in this country. Who gave birth to the second generation of slaves? (Oh yeah, there were women slaves too.)
Discrimination against women is so normal in our culture that we don’t see it when it happens. I see comments at the Dope all the time that I believe are unintentional marginalizations. I’m not talking about blatant things like calling a woman a bitch. And I’m not talking about the sexually discriminating but based on truth snide remarks that I’ve seen from Diogenes the Cynic: “…throws like a girl.” It’s the way that a debate topic is sometimes addressed to “Gentlemen.” Or the way that women are talked about as if they are slabs of meat. It’s the way that a poster can talk about a twenty year old female with a guitar and how he just can’t think of her as a “woman” – only as a “girl.”
I am a feminist who is not voting for Clinton. Why should I? I am not a one issue person. I like Obama better.
General McPeak said this: “Obama doesn’t go on television and have crying fits; he isn’t discovering his voice at the age of 60.” The most generous interpretation of Clinton’s moment in New Hampshire was that her eyes misted. Sexism? I think there’s a hint of it here.
In February, Obama made this comment at Tulane: “You challenge the status quo and suddenly the claws come out.” I’ve never heard this type of imagery invoked unless it referred to a woman.
That same month, Obama also said, “I understand that Senator Clinton periodically, when she’s feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal.” I don’t think this choice of words was random.
I fully expect someone to come in and explain away these comments, and that’s fine. I also think it’s possible to think that these comments have no sexist intent. I just happen to disagree.
I have to say that I don’t get this parsing. When someone makes an attack because of some aspect of one’s identity, especially when that identity is not dominant in a society, I think it represents both hate and ignorance.
I’ve never been called a sexist name (I’m a guy), but I’ve been called racial slurs. I have also heard men refer to women using sexist terms, and the intent and condescension sounded awfully similar to me. I wouldn’t want to say one is worst than the other.