R-E-S-P-E-C-T

-->
entertainment and popular culture, Women's Issues

Recently there’s been a substantial swing of women voters toward the Democratic Party. Gee, I wonder why that happened?

In other entertainment news, I see that comedian Louis C.K. was invited and then dis-invited to appear at the Radio and TV Congressional Correspondents’ Dinner, because a couple of years ago he tweeted some naughty things about Sarah Palin.

Now, this is no where in the same ball park as what Rushbo did to Sarah Sandra Fluke. But I’m not sorry some rightie “correspondents” like Greta Van Susteren complained about Louis C.K. It really is not OK to use sexual “jokes” to slam any woman, no matter how much you don’t like her. It’s as bad as using the “n” word to insult, say, Michael Steele. Sexually aggressive language puts down all women, because it suggests there is something substandard about being a women. And truly, Palin’s gender is probably the least objectionable thing about her.

So call Palin a twit, but not a tw*t, please.

Update: Some newspapers pulling next week’s Doonesbury.

Update: A Louis C.K. video that’s kind of on topic.

Share
13 Comments

12 Comments

  1. c u n d gulag  •  Mar 10, 2012 @11:27 am

    I’m all for R-E-S-P-E-C-T.

    But I don’t think the right will think this applies to them – despite the ‘judgement to Rush.’
    I believe we’re about to see the ugliest Presidential campaign in history.
    With presumptive nominee Mitt’s lack of appeal, an unenthusiastic base, and 100′s of millions, if not billions, of CU dollars ready to be spent to fire them up to help ‘get that N*gger outta office!’, it’s going to make 1800, 2004 and 2008 look like they were church picnics.

    And Sarah, “The Whore of Babblin’ On” (sorry…) Palin, ok – “SUPER TWIT,” will be right there with them, dog-whistling so loud, that even the fleas will come running.

  2. Swami  •  Mar 10, 2012 @11:47 am

    What about the word Bimbo? That’s a word that pops into my mind as an accurate descriptor of Palin.

  3. Lynne  •  Mar 10, 2012 @12:50 pm

    OK. I detest Palin’s apparent desire to expose her every non-thought for public scrutiny, but do you actually know she’s a Bimbo?

  4. Amanda  •  Mar 10, 2012 @1:13 pm

    Michael Ian Black wrote about how we have different reactions to language like this based on WHO says what. And also that Louis CK was attacking Sarah Palin the person, while Rush claims he wasn’t attacking Fluke, which means he was attacking all women who use birth control.

  5. Tom b  •  Mar 10, 2012 @1:20 pm

    “Recently there’s been a substantial swing of women voters toward the Democratic Party” Woman are still allowed to vote? They haven’t repealed that yet?

  6. maha  •  Mar 10, 2012 @1:31 pm

    They haven’t repealed that yet?

    We have to present three IDs, a permission slip from our closest male relative, and a signed affidavit swearing we won’t get an abortion.

  7. Pat  •  Mar 10, 2012 @1:43 pm

    Here’s a matching bookend to Louis CK’s vid (which I’d seen before and had to laugh at) that I referred to in your last post which explores the seamy underbelly of whiteness and what happens when being white is no picnic. It’s a cancer that will affect all of us if it spreads though it is apparently acceptable collateral damage to convservatives in the course of controlling a system of convenient rules for the purpose of maintaining their riches.

  8. c u n d gulag  •  Mar 10, 2012 @1:43 pm

    Actually, in the future, women will still be allowed to vote – as long as their male husband or father fills out the ballot, or pulls the lever, for them. Like God intended…

    I’m surprised that Conservatives didn’t try this first.

    They could have tried to pass “The Freeing the Little Ladies Minds And Time Act,” requiring what I said above – THEN gone after contraception and abortion.
    That would have put the ‘suffer’ back in the “Suffragette’s” – making it into a ‘Sufferagette Movement.’

  9. Pat  •  Mar 10, 2012 @1:50 pm

    Spot on Amanda. Humor that elicits guffaws equally from Obama supporters and ostensibly racist tea partiers despite each group embracing an entirely different meaning gives me a queasy feeling of ambivalence. There is high and low humor as well as satire but also questions of sensitivity and responsibility. It’s readily apparent where Louis sits on the matter. Still it’s edgy and for the same reason we don’t like impressionaable 11 year olds watching Saw III it helps that he slips in some cues that let all but the densest in the audience know what’s going on. Still, it’s the extreme dense fringe that concerns me. There are going to be Gabrielle Giffords…

    There are always literalists among us on whom the satire and irony are lost.

  10. c u n d gulag  •  Mar 10, 2012 @2:27 pm

    Pat,
    It’s a well known fact that Conservatives don’t “get” satire, or other forms of humor – it’s because they suffer from an ‘irony deficiency.’

  11. Swami  •  Mar 10, 2012 @3:17 pm

    Lynne.. I’m asking in sincerity whether calling Palin a Bimbo is out of bounds. According to my understanding of the term it’s nothing more than a dumb female who is easily manipulated by men,which in my opinion fits Palin. I know there’s a very faint sexual implication( aside from ascribing gender) attached by those who choose to interpret that word as such, but that would not be in accord with my understanding or usage of that word.

    I question the usage of the word bimbo because the repug camp has counter-charged Bill Maher for calling Palin that term to somehow negate Rush limbaugh’s calling Sandra Fluke a slut. Not equal terms in my lexicon.

  12. erinyes  •  Mar 11, 2012 @6:40 am

    I’ve long refered to Ms. Palin as a “screech owl”.
    Although she has great cheek bones, her voice and habit of babbling on are “severely” annoying to me.

1 Trackback



    About this blog



    About Maha
    Comment Policy

    Vintage Mahablog
    Email Me


















    Support This Site







    eXTReMe Tracker













      Technorati Profile