In yesterday's post, the first link points to an article by Kirsten Powers calling-out the seeming misogyny of well-known "Leftists" such as Bill Maher, Ed Schultz of MSNBC, and others, stating that Liberals ignore their own when the above have used rough language, names, against women in media and politics with whom they disagree, and are being more than hysterical over Limbaugh's mouth-off.
I agree with the author in her general premise: In my opinion, it makes sense that everyone who was offended and disgusted by Limbaugh's use of "slut" and "prostitute", in addition to suggesting Fluke make a sex tape so we can all vicariously join in on the action since, in his mindless mind, if taxes pay for contraception, then all taxpayers should be able to have a front row seat to watch where the money is going, would be upset by any man slamming a woman in public in such a crass way.
However, the difference between Sandra Fluke and Sarah Palin is vast: one is a public figure, another had been a private citizen who simply had a different view within the contraception debate from most Conservatives. But it goes even deeper than that. Let's look at the entire situation of what men have said about women without wearing our usual tinted glasses of political divisiveness.
Example: I like Bill Maher up to a point. But that "point" has always stopped when he smirks into his obvious misogyny and thinks he's really courageous and edgy by calling Sarah Palin the C word. I don't like Palin, either, but I won't call her anything beyond "stupid" and "opportunistic" and, at least at one time, "dangerous." There was no public outcry against Maher when he used that word because he doesn't slam his enemies every day on a large public platform, nor does he incite hatred. All he incites is laughter or cringing feelings through his smarmy, flippant remarks that sometimes are clever and funny; other times completely OTT. On cable TV once a week, he's basically harmless.
Opposite of Maher is Limbaugh. On the radio 5 days a week, year-after-year, feeding on the fear of Americans who are not in agreement with what is considered to be "Liberal" values and agendas, Limbaugh's continued railings against minorities, et al, has created a slow, yet steady build-up of anger and utter amazement that this guy still has a job. All he had to do to bring things to the current boiling point was precisely what he did last week regarding Fluke. That was it. Enough is enough. It's not all about this one story or person; it's about how demented this man can be in the name of ratings.
If other men in the media who have made snide or rude or vulgar remarks against certain female public figures were angering a large majority of the public on a weekly, if not daily, basis, you can be assured I, as well as many women and evolved men, would turn the TV or radio off and boycott that person's program. Liberal or not. If Ed Schultz had continued to call Laura Ingraham names over a three day period on his TV and radio programs, I would be offended from the point of view of a woman despite how much I dislike Ingraham's beliefs/opinions.
Without turning this post into a dissertation on the current "War Against Women", my purpose here is to be a voice in the wilderness of much miscommunication and misunderstanding over why Limbaugh is getting his arse kicked this time around unlike the general rumblings a few of his antics have produced over the years (ie; mimicking Michael J. Fox's physical moves due to Parkinson's Disease).
Language is potent. Certain words will be triggers for outrage, while others are not. Another example Kirsten Powers brought up in her article was the use of the word "Bimbo" to describe another female public figure. Truth is, "Bimbo" - just like "Air Head" and so on - do not pack that classic offensive punch as "Slut" and other ire-raising words. It's a cultural thing, but it is real.
Men have been called both "Bimbo's" and "Sluts." Our society accepts "Bimbo" for women, up to a point, and as men rule the world and, apparently words, too, most will laugh at being called a "Slut" because there is no true stain left on them from the name-calling (just what remains on their sheets). In fact, most guys laugh and shrug and agree if they believe they "fit" the dig.
Not so with women. There is a great difference between using that word to describe a woman. Period. It's just how it goes in our vernacular these days (and as far back as one can see to when "Whore" was first brought into being as a way in which both men and women belittled and judged a woman who was not considered chaste). And, by Golly Gee Whiz, here we are in 2012 still fielding those damning words against women if they choose to be as sexually active as most men.
Bottom line? Any broadcaster with even a tad of integrity knows that it's really bad policy and practice to go after anyone in such a personal way. That is the reason why we're screaming "Foul!" en masse and advertisers are finally feeling the sting of association with an extremely misguided "entertainer" who just happens to have quite a bit of influence within the GOP, whether they like it or not.
I have used less-than-pristine words to describe several men and women in politics of both parties that some may consider unfair and offensive. As a woman, I have used the word "Bitch" and "Beech." Okay, perhaps a few of you think I went over the line. Maybe. Maybe not. But you will not read any words from me (beyond funny names and the odd "idiot" or "fool") toward a woman or a man in a high profile position from any country on the level of what Limbaugh used, as well as his sleazy sex tape suggestion.
There truly is a line one doesn't cross. And, to me, that is the real reason why the Sandra Fluke issue is so big right now.
And to those who are appalled that President Obama spoke to Sandra Fluke, but did not call Sarah Palin or Bachmann or any other woman in the Republican party following their own take-downs, remember that Fluke went to a government institution overseen by the President of the United States and for that purpose only was treated with such a deep disrespect it was only proper for Obama to reach out. I'm sure George W. Bush would have done the same had a Liberal Flamethrower used the same language and suggestions against a Conservative woman who was preparing to speak before a panel in the House.
Or, if not, at least his father would have done so.
It goes both ways, my friends.
* UPDATE: 33 sponsors have dashed out the door per The Hollywood Reporter - as of 11:57 PST
Image via: http://www.doll-hours.blogspot.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment