Monday, April 09, 2007
|
|
MKH and Huff on CNN's 'Reliable Sources'
|
|
Posted by:
Mary Katharine Ham at
1:53 PM
|
|
Well, I was just YouTube-ing this segment when I noticed Allah had it up already. I was on "Reliable Sources" this weekend with Joan Walsh of Salon and Arianna Huffington talking about misogyny on the Internet. Both of them resented my pointing out the lefty blogosphere's tendency toward vile chauvinism and lefty women's tendency to excuse it when directed at conservative women. The truth is that misogyny is not confined to the Left or the Right. I was not suggesting that. What I am suggesting is that I'm not keen on singing Kumbayah with women who think my politics somehow make me an inauthentic woman. Just because a politically neutral figure whom they feel comfortable defending allows them to finally "stand up" for all women doesn't mean I have to smile and play solidarity sister with them just because they're suddenly in the mood. The Left has been more than happy to let Michelle Malkin endure the c-word and call Condi Rice "Brown Sugar" for years with very little concern. They have spent those same years calling people like Michelle and Condi self-loathers and the whole of the Republican party woman-haters. "How can you stand to belong to the party of women's oppression, you self-loathing, Rethuglican woman-hating c**ts," asks the Left without a hint of irony. So, no, I don't feel like aligning with traditional feminists in this fight would necessarily serve me well. Instead, you just suck it up, take the nasty commentary, point it out, take precautions when necessary, and keep on plugging. It's obviously a personal decision for every woman blogger as to how to handle it, but I do think it sends the wrong message to online bullies to stop writing. As a conservative, I don't generally think appeasement works. Instead, it emboldens. I am fortunate that I don't get nearly the volume or vileness that Michelle and other more high-profile conservative figures do. I usually leave most of my nasty comments up on YouTube and this blog because I think it helps illustrate exactly the character of my critics and the ground on which the losers are fighting. For reference, please see the comment about my teeth on the MKH on Paula Zahn post, which was posted while I was taping the segment on misogyny. A troll with timing! Some people erase them, and I wrestle with whether to do the same, but I sometimes feel like I'd be doing the trolls a favor by censoring what they should have known to censor themselves. I'd be imparting my good sense and manners to them that clearly don't deserve.
As for whether there's more on the left or right, isn't it interesting that I'm the only one who gets a nasty sexual comment read to her on the air? Could it be that nasty, sexual comments about me were more readily available than ones for Huffington and Walsh, despite my comparatively low profile? As for Huffington and Walsh, both are undeniably smart, successful women who believe passionately in their work and their politics. They don't deserve the nasty, sexual comments about them (some of which may show up, but I hope don't, on the YouTube of this very segment). I appreciate that this is a problem for most women on the Web, and I hope it doesn't silence any more, as it did Kathy Sierra.
Such comments also serve to marginalize the blogosphere. A ton of great, level-headed analysis can easily be dismissed by the MSM when it finds a thread of "show us your ___, you w****" comments. And, yes, it happens on both sides, but yes, I also think if the Left's part of it suddenly disappeared, you'd be left with a damn sight less than half of the nasty.
At the very least, the Left blogosphere should be disallowed from using the "woman-hater" label for conservatives until the woman-haters on that side learn to heal thyselves, as the saying goes.
Oh, and many thanks to Newsbusters for posting video and kind words. I knew y'all wouldn't forgive me if I didn't ruffle Arianna's feathers just a little.
|
|
"you can't dismiss the premise that liberals make substantially more negative and offensive comments towards women and racial minorities than conservatives in the blogosphere by simply proposing a conspiracy theory with no evidence."
1.) I just asked the question, and didn't mention any conspiracy. In fact, I was kinda wondering if individuals were doing this of their own accord. Thank you for being a typical Foxified conservative, mischaracterizing what I wrote.
2.) When explaining my question to Patrick I even explained it from the conservative perspective of a lib play-acting like a foaming at the mouth conservative, so between my question and my explanation of my question, that would seem to suggest that I am wondering about individuals from both extremes.
3.) Hillary! And that is how I can easily "dismiss the premise that liberals make substantially more negative and offensive comments towards women."
Oh, and both parties hate true American Liberalism.
I'm an American, not a member of a political party.
One last thing, since 911, it has been both parties that have overseen the dismantling of our Liberal institutions, however only the Republicans had the power to stop it. The real fascists today are the ones that approve of torture, approve of warrantless searches, approve of unprovoked war, and approve of giving the president dictatorial powers.
Real American Patriots are for returning America back to its traditional roots of Liberalism, not those that have been destroying our Liberal American Heritage!
The true enemy of America today, isn't the terrorists from without. It's from the fascists within our own country.
Oh, and you are either with us true American Patriots, or you are for American Fascism. ;-) |
|
Kurttrail.....
Yes, the founders were liberals but not in any way like modern democrats are liberals. The founders were liberals who believed in limited government, a government only charged with the job of protecting people's natural rights (life, liberty, property so simply put by Locke).
The modern liberal is as far from being a classical liberal as George W. Bush is from being a real Goldwater or Reagan conservative (which is pretty damn far). As I warn my high school students, words mean things and the meaning of words (especially labels) are not static.
There have been numerous studies showing how modern democrats have more in common with the fascists of the 30's than modern republicans--especially where economic policies and social policy is concerned.
And finally, you can't dismiss the premise that liberals make substantially more negative and offensive comments towards women and racial minorities than conservatives in the blogosphere by simply proposing a conspiracy theory with no evidence. You might as well just say Karl Rove said all those things about Michelle, MKH, and so on.
Personally, when I read Rosie or Huffs blogs I'm usually laughing to hard to post a reply. I mean, they're all joking, right? No one really thinks like that outside of Nancy Pelosi's district, do they?
|
|
It seems MKH is making some sweeping assumptions as to the numbers of "lefties" who are offensive. The nature of the blogosphere is that anonymity can be used to do pretty much whatever one wants.On the surface I want to agree with her but in the back of my mind I just can't accept as whole cloth or truth that which cannot be proved any better than it has.
The rightie blogs I have seen are just as offensive about some of the women who are Democrats as well as condescending about the women who are Republicans. Pick any thread that MKH, Malkin, KP, Coulter, et al begins and you will see at least a couple of comments about "how hot, lovely, exquisite" they are or "volunteers to test out the veracity of the over the top smear someone said about MKH". But the funny thing is no one calls them out for this.
This extends to both political sides -- not enough self policing of those who are of the same views. In the old days it was called mentoring and people were receptive to it. In the day and age of "I blog therefore I am and my view just HAS to be right" that mentoring cannot be accomplished without great effort. |
|
"You claiming they're some sort of Moby?"
No, because I don't know what a "Moby" is, unless you are referring to a big white whale that is really hard to kill, and he was a real Dick! :)
I was just asking a question, because I've seen many suspicious things, and since the Internets are filled with the anonymous, what is to stop a lib acting like a fascist to make conservatives look bad, or vice versa.
On the internets ain't like Imus calling the Rutger's Womens Basketball team, "nappy-headed ho's." Who knows who is really writing some of the sick sh*t out their. I'm a skeptic in real life, on the internets, I rarely take anything at face value, especially anonymous comments. |
|
MKH - you get major kudos for being on the front lines, and taking that which most people cannot handle. I stepped back from the political scene when I decided that it wasn't going to be career; frankly, I just couldn't handle the personal attacks and the fear that some nutjob would take things to the next level.
Those who stand up for Republicans/conservatives deserve our gratitude, because stepping beyond the anonymity of the internet not only requires a sharp intellect backed up by impeccable facts, but also an impenetrable emotional barrier. |
|
Mary Katherine:
You rock! (as usual) I agree with your supporters who want you to join "The View". You could really put Rosie in her place.
I feel bad for Arianna. Did you know her way back when? Is she just a hired gun or a true ex-Republican?
I know David Brock used to be one of my heroes, until the Clintons got a hold of him. Then he became a liberal activist. I remember the first interview he gave as a new "Stepford" liberal. It was in Esquire magazine. he wrote a very long letter of apology to the Clintons for his articles in "The American Spectator". The photos accompanying the article included one of him shirtless, muscles bulging, and tied to a tree. I thought it was kind of symbolic.
Wes
"Reduce, Reuse, Republican"
|
|
"Ever consider that some of the misogynistic comments you see directed toward your fellow conservative women are actually from your fellow conservatives trying to make those dirty hippie "liberals" look bad?"
You claiming they're some sort of Moby?
|
|
Ever hear the little ditty about sticks and stones?
If so, do you understand its meaning? You know, not letting hateful comments affect you?
Ever consider that some of the misogynistic comments you see directed toward your fellow conservative women are actually from your fellow conservatives trying to make those dirty hippie "liberals" look bad?
How soon will it be before ya'll blame Bill Clinton?
Do you really think that the 5 years or so of total Republican control of America has been something to be proud of?
I have no problem with real conservatives. Small Gov't, keeping gov't out of my private life. My problem is with the Neo-Fascists . . . . Oops, I mean Neo-Convicts . . . . er, I mean the so-called Neo-Conservatives, or Bushies for short. They have no honor. The ends justify all means. Lies, torture, unprovoked war, and giving the president the dictatorial power to declare anyone, anywhere an enemy of state, with no proof necessary at all.
Enabling the lies, torture, unprovoked war, and giving the president dictatorial powers, has nothing to do with what sex a neo-conservative is. It has more to do with what kind a human being you are, a really shitty one, a modern day Nazi. And ya'll even have your own concentration camp.
As far as I'm concerned, all Bushies, and enablers of neo-conservatives, no matter what sex they are, are just modern-day fascists, looking to destroy the America created by 18th Century Liberals, you know, the likes of George Washington, Tom Jefferson, & Ben Franklin.
Ya'll do know that the founding fathers were Liberals, don't ya? Or is that another truth you guys try to hide with your fake outrage about misogynist comments? |
|
Jessica, are you deliberately a parody of insanity?
If not, try the following.
Come on, you know left-wing women are just shills for the emasculating lesbian anti-man contingent of the left. You know; the party of unshaven unwashed and unattractive hippies who always believe anyone but their country has to be in the right whilst their country (unless it has their leadership) is always in the wrong.
Sad but true. Either their libido is incapable of being attracted to anyone with an ounce of testosterone, or their brains have been left open too long and turned to mush.
Leftist hippy traitors are indeed a breed apart (if/when they breed).
Before you get too offended at the mysogyny in my post, you might find that I simply flipped your post. Nothing new or itneresting, jsut the other set of stereotypes. Somehow MKH's "if you don't like s***, don't dish out s***" article made you dish out s***.
So here it is recycled into the counter-useless-invective. Obviously you didn't understand the article, maybe with this object lesson it'll be clearer. Your post was equvalent in matter, logic, and value to mine (with the exception of this explanation at the end). In other words, useless. |
|
I seem to remember that Arianna was a very passionate conservative in the days when her conservative then-husband Michael was running for the Senate. I believe Arianna discovered that being in the left-wing of the blogosphere is an easier trek than being on MKH's side.
steve |
|
|
I don't agree about leaving the comments up though. I think you should treat them like graffiti - erase it as soon as you notice it. If they keep coming back, keep erasing. |
|
|
Excellent comments on Reliable Source. Really first rate. |
|
Your point about the MSM glossing over the personal attacks until a non-conservative gets them is spot-on.
Curls look good too. :-) |
|
|
|