# Is this Newsweek cover of Palin sexist? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 17, 2009, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941 "2009-11-17T18:59:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/21 "2009-11-17T20:11:30Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > I think it’s sexist. All other things being equal, I don’t think they would have done this with a male politician. Click my link in post #10. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/22 "2009-11-17T20:12:12Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I said she’s chosen to sexualize her image, and she has. By winking, right? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/23 "2009-11-17T20:15:13Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > No, it isn’t. She was wearing modest running attire, and posed for the photos for an article about running. What she wears when she exercises has nothing to do with how serious a thinker she is. Using the photos for a negative political article is clearly an attempt to make her looks ‘fair game’. If they can make it appear like she gets by on her looks, than suddenly it’s ‘OK’ to call her a bimbo, or what ever sexist term you prefer. Is the Obama cover sexist? Palin posed for this shit, specifically to sex up her image. It was her choice. The attempt to claim that it’s somehow relevant that she originally took the photo for a running magazine is disingenuous at best. She did the running magaizin cover to sex up her image. It’s the stupid winking and flirting that makes her look like an un-serious candidate for office – well, that and every idiotic word that comes out of her mouth. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/24 "2009-11-17T20:18:09Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > By winking, right? Absolutely. It worked too. It had millions of fat, middle-aged rednecks wanking away in their camouflage pants. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/25 "2009-11-17T20:25:01Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Palin posed for this shit, specifically to sex up her image. It was her choice. The attempt to claim that it’s somehow relevant that she originally took the photo for a running magazine is disingenuous at best. She did the running magaizin cover to sex up her image. And you’re basing this on what? You’ve read her diary? You have telepathy? You’ve been bugging her strategy sessions or something? ---
**Author:** ![DianaG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ab992/32.png) [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/26 "2009-11-17T20:25:37Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > What she wears when she exercises has nothing to do with how serious a thinker she is. What she wears to photo shoots does. That ensemble was… not smart, inasmuch as it’s not flattering, to either her brains or her body. That said, anyone claiming that this is NOT a sexist cover is full of crap. I don’t care how much you hate her (believe me, you don’t hate her more than I do), that cover is not okay. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/27 "2009-11-17T20:29:56Z")
It’s added publicity for her. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/28 "2009-11-17T20:30:57Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Absolutely. It worked too. It had millions of fat, middle-aged rednecks wanking away in their camouflage pants. Rather like the millions of yuppie bimbos wetting their panties over Obama in '08. ---
**Author:** ![MeanOldLady](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/meanoldlady/32/10737_2.png) [@MeanOldLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MeanOldLady)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/29 "2009-11-17T20:31:29Z")
> [@ratatoskK](#): > > A beauty pageant contestant is complaining about sexism?:rolleyes: Right. She’s the one strutting around in hot pants. She sexualizes herself on purpose, but gets huffy when she’s called on it. She’s full of shit. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/30 "2009-11-17T20:34:01Z")
It may or may not be sexist but it’s wording is a perfect illustration of propagandistic media bias. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/31 "2009-11-17T20:36:03Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > And you’re basing this on what? You’ve read her diary? You have telepathy? You’ve been bugging her strategy sessions or something? On her skin pictures and her behavior. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/32 "2009-11-17T20:37:03Z")
> [@DianaG](#): > > What she wears to photo shoots does. That ensemble was… not smart, inasmuch as it’s not flattering, to either her brains or her body. > > That said, anyone claiming that this is NOT a sexist cover is full of crap. I don’t care how much you hate her (believe me, you don’t hate her more than I do), that cover is not okay. She’s the one who chose to pose for it. Is the Obama cover sexist? Just because an image is sexualized doesn’t mean it’s sexist. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/33 "2009-11-17T20:44:27Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > On her skin pictures and her behavior. Just out of curiousity, how do you think a woman should behave and dress to ensure she isn’t ‘sexualizing her image’? Winking is obviously out. Running attire is as well, so no exercising in public. I suppose it’s out of the question to absently fiddle with her hair, so maybe she should cover it up with something to avoid the temptation… ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/34 "2009-11-17T20:45:53Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > On her skin pictures and her behavior. :rolleyes: And you, of course, are a fair and impartial judge. I’ve never seen any picture of Palin that could reasonably be considered a “skin picture,” and winking hardly constitutes tarting it up in front of the cameras. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/35 "2009-11-17T20:46:58Z")
> [@Belrix](#): > > Very few people wouldn’t say, IMO, that one of Palin’s marketable attributes to the GOP was her attractiveness. She banks on it when it suits her and I think the Newsweek cover might be a comment on this. Well, here’s someone who would disagree. [QUOTE=Sinaijon] She was wearing modest running attire, and posed for the photos for an article about running. What she wears when she exercises has nothing to do with how serious a thinker she is. Using the photos for a negative political article is clearly an attempt to make her looks ‘fair game’. If they can make it appear like she gets by on her looks, than suddenly it’s ‘OK’ to call her a bimbo, or what ever sexist term you prefer. [/QUOTE] I think this is a good representation of the disjunction with respect to SP. I strongly disagree with the vast majority of what I understand to be her political positions. But, **as a separate matter,** I strongly believe she has exceptionally little going for her besides her looks. I could disagree with a Buckley, a Kristol, whoever - but at least I would acknowledge that they appeared informed and intelligent. I can imagine people agreeing with her political positions. But it truly amazes me that thinking individuals would honestly consider her to be anything more than a pretty face. Yeah - Obama was sexed up in the media. But I’d be surprised if the most diehard conservative would deny that at least he was a smart guy. Palin - at best - shows the intelligence of the opportunist. But I’m not trying to convince anyone of my position. It seems this is one of those issues where there is precious little middle ground. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/36 "2009-11-17T20:47:33Z")
> [@MeanOldLady](#): > > Right. She’s the one strutting around in hot pants. She sexualizes herself on purpose, but gets huffy when she’s called on it. She’s full of shit. You are aware that according to the CNN article that photo was lifted from a _Runner’s World_ photo shoot, correct? Which brings to mind another little bit of journalistic dishonesty on _Newsweek’s_ part: i.e., people are going to think she posed that way for publication in a serious national news magazine. It’s all part of traditional liberal media bias, which in this case is aimed at making her look superficial. This kind of thing has been going on to one degree or another for decades throughout virtually all of America’s news and entertainment media, and it’s a perfect illustration of the kind of coverage and media treatment of the right whose pervasiveness has led to the rise of Limbaugh, Hannity, et. al. ---
**Author:** ![lieu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c2a13f/32.png) [@lieu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lieu)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/37 "2009-11-17T20:47:35Z")
While the Washingtonian picture of a shirtless Obama would likely play well within the confines of its relatively limited distribution area, I wonder how pleased his camp would be were that picture to be on the cover of nationally distributed Newsweek. Where does Newsweek acknowledge that the cover is not one supplied by Palin, not one shot by Newsweek or even that it was lifted from another magazine, one dedicated to physical fitness? Somewhere inside in small print, I imagine. I see nothing on the cover. Sexist or not it does seem disingenuous of them. Newsweek and Palin are trying to sell some print and from what I can tell both are approaching it in pretty much the same manner. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/38 "2009-11-17T20:51:43Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > She’s the one who chose to pose for it. > > Is the Obama cover sexist? > > Just because an image is sexualized doesn’t mean it’s sexist. That picture is hardly cheesecake. It’s a photo of a modestly dressed moderately attractive woman, that’s all. We’re not talking about a foldout in “Hustler” here. And, yeah, I’d say the Obama cover was sexist. Millions of liberal bimbos were swooning over Obama at the time, and the magazine was trying to exploit his likeness to sell magazines. ETA: Of course, I’m cynical enough to believe that both Palin and “Newsweek” are exploiting the flap to get some attention from the media. ---
**Author:** ![DianaG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ab992/32.png) [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/39 "2009-11-17T20:53:29Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > She’s the one who chose to pose for it. > > Is the Obama cover sexist? > > Just because an image is sexualized doesn’t mean it’s sexist. You’re absolutely correct. The picture of Obama is not sexist, and the picture of Palin wasn’t sexist when it ran in whatever running magazine it was taken for. The picture \*is \*sexist _in this context_, where it is clearly meant to convey “bimbo”. She is being dismissed on the basis of her legs, rather than her ideas. Which is awfully silly in addition to being insulting, given that her ideas are a much better reason for dismissing her. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2009, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/40 "2009-11-17T21:01:38Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > Rather like the millions of yuppie bimbos wetting their panties over Obama in '08. Right. Women, too. Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941.md?page=3)