Men can shout, but women can't ... Clinton changing that

[packrat]

So just call trump a dick and let's just get on with our day.

 

[AGBF]

I'd like to know where all this care & concern about misogyny and treatment of women was when it was Sarah Palin & her daughter being drug through the mud.

The issue isn't whether a woman is being dragged through the mud. The issue is whether a woman is being targeted in ways that men have always targeted women, for example by saying that she is a witch. Then dunking her in a pond where she either dies of drowning (proving her innocence) or lives (to be burned at the stake since she is a witch). Don't tell me that isn't a Catch 22, Jenn, old pal.

Deb

 

[diamondseeker2006]

So it's okay for people to call Trump Hitler but they can't say Clinton sounds like a witch? I am scratching my head over that one. I can't stand either one of them. But to say that if she is criticized, it is misogyny, that is totally absurd.

I judge people by their character mainly, and I could care less what their sex is. And I cannot stand men or women shouting. Needless to say, I'll be writing in someone this year.

 

[AGBF]

So it's okay for people to call Trump Hitler but they can't say Clinton sounds like a witch? I am scratching my head over that one. I can't stand either one of them. But to say that if she is criticized, it is misogyny, that is totally absurd.

I think I was pretty darned nice to say I'd lay my life on the line in order to protect Donald Trump's First Amendment right to freedom of speech. Calling him a fascist pig should, now, be my right under the First Amendment!

It would be absurd to say it was misogyny simply because Secretary Clinton was criticized, but that was not the case. Those of us who mentioned the misogyny we saw were referring to how the Secretary was instantly labelled "a witch" and criticized for her shrill laugh and raised voice, whereas a man would never have been. It was the old double standard at work. All one has to do is to call a woman a b*tch or a w*tch and a man can get her back into line more easily. What woman wants to carry a nasty label like that? We're all supposed to be sweetness and light, after all. We all want to be 10's for Donald Trump. We all want to win his beauty pageants. No one wants to be the ugly witch from our childhood story books. Well, as kenny implied, the times should have been a changin! (Sorry to take your name in vain, kenny. I know you don't like me to think I know what you think.)

Deb

 

[liaerfbv]

This excerpt says it much better than I could:

"Naomi Wolf: Julia Gillard used the word accurately
I object to more heightened words being appropriated carelessly to make political points: sexism is not in fact misogyny; someone can like women quite a lot in person but be very happy to support systematic discrimination against them (sexism) or to use gender stereotypes against them (sexism). So I am sorry to see the dictionary conflating the terms. Sexism is to misogyny what antisemitism is to Jew-hating. Neither is ever acceptable, but we need precise language to understand and fight injustice effectively.

Having said that, Julia Gillard used "misogyny' perfectly accurately. She said that Tony Abbott described abortion as "the easy way out" and cited his political campaign against Gillard involving posters asking voters to "ditch the witch". The latter, especially, is a time-honoured tradition of true misogyny – stirring up atavistic hatred of the feminine – that goes back to witch-hunts against powerful women in the New World. Her critics, for their part, are asking us to water down our awareness of real woman-hating and accept it as normal in political discourse.

"Misogyny" often surfaces in political struggles over women's role, and you can tell because the control of women becomes personalised, intrusive and often sexualised. Misogyny has the amygdala involved – the part of the brain involved in processing emotional responses – there is contempt and violence in it. A public figure who tolerates the systemic under-prosecuting of rape is guilty of serious and unforgivable sexism; making rape jokes or explaining away the damage of rape in public as Congressman Todd Akin did recently in the US, or legislating, as over a dozen US states are now doing, transvaginal probes that are medically unnecessary, simply to sexually punish women for choosing abortion – well, that is misogyny."

 

[monarch64]

It is misogyny to call a female a witch, period. Same with other terms Missy noted on the previous page. As far as double standards and hypocrisy, sure I'll go along with that. But here's the deal: you can choose to use those terms or you can choose to get your point across with other words that do not contribute to the misogynistic culture we live in. In other words, use your intelligence and vocabulary to say what you feel instead of resorting to dehumanizing people. At least Hitler was a human (in terms of genetics only, obviously), not a made-up figure known for eating children, something to be feared, hated, and drowned or burned at the stake. Idk what's so difficult to understand about the points Missy made (and Deb reinforced.)

Hate speech creeps into our everyday vernacular in so many aspects of life. Yes it is easy to pooh-pooh it and say Oh, it's just a word, don't get offended, everyone says it, blah blah blah. But when people start questioning why we use the words we use and discover that they're saying things that might seem like no big deal to them but make others feel excluded or hated, we have an opportunity to learn something and change our speech so that it does not continue to denigrate others.

 

[the_mother_thing]

It would be absurd to say it was misogyny simply because Secretary Clinton was criticized, but that was not the case. Those of us who mentioned the misogyny we saw were referring to how the Secretary was instantly labelled "a witch" and criticized for her shrill laugh and raised voice, whereas a man would never have been. It was the old double standard at work. All one has to do is to call a woman a b*tch or a w*tch and a man can get her back into line more easily. What woman wants to carry a nasty label like that? We're all supposed to be sweetness and light, after all. We all want to be 10's for Donald Trump. We all want to win his beauty pageants. No one wants to be the ugly witch from our childhood story books. Well, as kenny implied, the times should have been a changin! (Sorry to take your name in vain, kenny. I know you don't like me to think I know what you think.)

Deb

But Deb, IMO it's still no different than to call Trump names because he has a fake-bake orange tan, or to make fun of his hair, or Rubio making reference to his "small hands" (as if ANYONE didn't know what he meant by that comment), or for me even to mock his name by calling him 'Chump'. Let's face it (and guys, chime in here to correct me if I'm wrong) - two things men are VERY sensitive about that hit them hard when it comes to criticism are: 1) their hair (especially if they're losing it); and 2) their penis size. He's not crying about it; he rolls with the punches and throws them back.

I think we're really just splitting hairs in how we mock the candidates, or make jokes/metaphors, and creating gray areas depending on the circumstances, gender, types of comments, etc. So either it's ALL okay, or it's all NOT okay since gray areas create more divisiveness, it seems.

We cannot control the actions of the candidates or what they say, their choice of words, their preferred target, but we CAN let them know how we feel about their behavior with peaceful and respectful protests, and letting our voices be heard via our votes. But to label men a misogynist for likening Hillary to a witch is no better really than what they are doing by calling her such. A label is a label ... is it not? Two wrongs and all ...

 

[AGBF]

But Deb, IMO it's still no different than to call Trump names because he has a fake-bake orange tan, or to make fun of his hair, or Rubio making reference to his "small hands" (as if ANYONE didn't know what he meant by that comment), or for me even to mock his name by calling him 'Chump'. Let's face it (and guys, chime in here to correct me if I'm wrong) - two things men are VERY sensitive about that hit them hard when it comes to criticism are: 1) their hair (especially if they're losing it); and 2) their penis size. He's not crying about it; he rolls with the punches and throws them back.

Jenn- It's not the same. Men have not been the underdogs for millennia. Men are also impervious to insults about their looks. They may wish to be taller (it's good for their jobs as well as good for them socially). They may wish for bigger equipment. But just being male gives them an advantage. The way being white in the United States gives us white people an advantage (see "white skin privilege"). I have to go drive my daughter to school (where, tonight, she has an Italian class). See you later.

Deb

 

[missy]

It is misogyny to call a female a witch, period. Same with other terms Missy noted on the previous page. As far as double standards and hypocrisy, sure I'll go along with that. But here's the deal: you can choose to use those terms or you can choose to get your point across with other words that do not contribute to the misogynistic culture we live in. In other words, use your intelligence and vocabulary to say what you feel instead of resorting to dehumanizing people. At least Hitler was a human (in terms of genetics only, obviously), not a made-up figure known for eating children, something to be feared, hated, and drowned or burned at the stake. Idk what's so difficult to understand about the points Missy made (and Deb reinforced.)

Hate speech creeps into our everyday vernacular in so many aspects of life. Yes it is easy to pooh-pooh it and say Oh, it's just a word, don't get offended, everyone says it, blah blah blah. But when people start questioning why we use the words we use and discover that they're saying things that might seem like no big deal to them but make others feel excluded or hated, we have an opportunity to learn something and change our speech so that it does not continue to denigrate others.

This is exactly what I was trying (but I guess unsuccessfully for some) trying to convey. Thank you Monnie (and Deb) for making it more clear.

 

[momhappy]

I understand what you're saying, missy. I think I've engaged too much into political debates lately (I try not to, so doing so has made me uncomfortable) and I need to just let it go. I appreciate your thoughtful post as always

 

[missy]

I understand what you're saying, missy. I think I've engaged too much into political debates lately (I try not to, so doing so has made me uncomfortable) and I need to just let it go. I appreciate your thoughtful post as always

Thanks momhappy and yes same for me. Personally I have difficulty articulating my thoughts well so I should just stay out of the political chats here but sometimes I can't help it lol. I appreciate your polite posts and even if we disagree it's A-OK. We are PSers and always share the love of bling.