Letters to the Editor
-
"please feel free to stop reading Salon"
Great advice. I know that I quit paying for it during your reign, and I also know that I'm not alone. And given the truly idiotic opinion pieces that have been here this week, I think I might quit visiting Salon entirely. Maybe Slate has gotten smarter over the last couple of years. Time to find out.
-
it's not because she a woman that I don't like her...
It's because she's a Clinton. I have nothing against a capable woman or man being president, it's just that she's got more baggage than a cruise ship, and we really need to move on from her era and her type.
Playing the 'they pick on her because she's a girl' game is more sexist than just admitting that a lot of folks have very good reasons for not liking the Clintons.
-
There was a website a while back..
Mediawhoresonline
No, it wasn't talking only about the bubble headed bleach blond that comes on at five.
The idea is that those who sell themselves for money or power and knowingly tell lies are whores.
As opposed to honest prostitutes, who give value for money when they rent themselves.
Personally I would rather live next to an honest prostitute than a dishonest political or media whore, no matter how much money or status they might have.
But then I'm really strange, you can ask anyone that knows me, especially my family.
-
calling politicians hos
All i can tell you is that a few years ago, I was skiing with friends at Aspen and encountered former Florida Secretary of Stae Katherine Harris sipping a glass of wine with a female pal and a couple of grey haired sleazeballs. My friend identified Harris' female pal as a "well known coke whore." Does that entitle me to call katherine Harris a fucking whore (whoredom by association)?
Also, would it be OK to call Mark Penn a whore?
-
What a silly choice
Ms. Walsh set up a terrible false choice at the end of her column- either agree with her, or support the calling of Senator Clinton such things.
I disagree with Ms. Walsh on the relative level of sexism and racism in this campaign. But I certainly do not agree with anyone that would stoop to the low level of calling Senator Clinton those kinds of names.
This sort of false choice smells like something Limbaugh would set up. Why would anyone want it to appear in salon?
-
Yo! Hillary!
You may one day wear the big pants as prez, but you better believe, recognize, and realize, that I am not your nigga, not now, not never.
-
Time scale
Males have dominated females for a million years or so. Sexism has been around for a very long time. Racism, meaning about Black people has been around for a few hundred years.
We all tend to measure time in our lifetime so anything more than a hundred years ago is way back in the past.
This is why learning about history is so important. Sexism has had far longer to get imbeded into our senses. Hence, Racism is more easily overcome.
There are also real physical reasons. Employees are more valuable to many companies if they remain for a long time to become more experienced. Since a woman may quit to become a mother, the odds favor a man. Also, a man is usually physically stronger.
Fair? No, but it is reality.
The current politics go on about experience but male or female, they are all politicians. Click on my name.
-
meanwhile, over at NYT...
Ignoring the whole 'agree with me or don't read my newspaper' vibe this article (almost certainly unintentionally, and rather unfortunately) gives out...
I thought the timing of the results of this poll went along rather nicely with a different (yet similar) article making it into the top ten over at NYTimes called "our racist sexist selves" (link: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/06/opinion/06kristof.html?em&ex=1207713600&en=cee1db633094044e&ei=5087%0A).
Its a pretty interesting read without getting into hysterics about who SHOULD be the democratic primary candidate (rather it looks at why it might be easier for many people to conceive of a black rather than female president).
Personally I don't support Hillary, however I think calling any woman a whore, bitch, or c*nt has NO PLACE in any discourse. It amazes me the number of people who would NEVER EVER call an African American a n*gger, but who think calling a woman a "f*cking whore" is totally ok.
Some readers here might not like Hillary's policies or personality, but there is no need to offend and put down an entire gender because of their personal issues with a presidential candidate. It offends me, and should offend any woman reading the Salon.
-
You're in good company.
You and Rush , who'd of thunk!
If you think all the critical comments regarding your post on race and gender towards Hillary is about sexism shows how delusional you really are. Try telling that to my five sisters , not a one supports Hillary any longer.
So now we are to believe having Rush back you up is supposed to give credence to your skewered theory. Duh.
-
more thoughts on Limbaugh transcript
It's very easy to imagine a McCain supporter refering to Obama with the "N" word, and Sen. McNasty laughing at it. Please review his record on racial issues, the MLK holiday, etc.
I have heard black friends refer to Obama with the "N" word, by the way, and I (being white) didn't feel compelled to chide them.
Similarly, it seems to me relevant that the comedienne who referred to Ferraro & Clinton with the "W" word was a woman, as was the crone who called Hillary a bitch.
Most to the point is Limbaugh's campaign to encourage right wing wignuts to vote for Hillary in the primaries, since he and the rest of the pro-McCain media whores know she can't win in the fall.
One reason for that is that she is indeed not likeable, and it has nothing to do with her gender.
Another is that she lied for years about her husband's infidelity and perjury, she has lived a lie all of her married life, and she continues to lie, almost compulsively. And lying by a politician is the voters' business, no matter what Chelsea says.