Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

What Dr. Socks said

Comments

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

on Andy Sullivan's Palin obsession, here. Unfortunately, Sullivan is not alone because what underlies it is what underlies so many other things as Silber explains:

You need to understand one very simple foundational point: Women are evil. More than that, women are the ultimate source of all evil in the world.

Almost no one will admit the belief in this form, but this is what most people in the West believe, to one degree or another. Western culture is saturated with this perspective; it directs and finds expression in our films and television, in books, in our relationships, in business -- and in our politics. Whatever one may think of their political convictions (and I myself would never vote for either of them), Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin both represent historic candidacies. It is the belief that women are evil that underlies the blindingly intense hatred directed at them.

madamab's picture
Submitted by madamab on

In my post on the war against women at The Widdershins.

The belief that all women are evil is only part of the answer, but it is a very big part. And sadly, the fundiegelicals whom Sarah Palin loves so much are the source of it. It's all about the snake in the Garden of Eden, at least in America.

Submitted by lambert on

I don't see the fundiegelicals being the drivers of "creative class" misogyny at all. Or am I missing a distinction, here?

madamab's picture
Submitted by madamab on

And misogyny against Palin (from men in her own Party, as she wrote, not just the Obama Fan Boyz like Sullivan) are the same thing. That is the point of Violet's post.

All misogyny has its root in just a few basic factors, one of which Silbur correctly identified as a belief in the inherent evil of women. That belief is held by all fundies, no matter if they're Christian, Jewish or Muslim.

I don't think you missed anything; you just narrowed your focus on one portion of Violet's argument.

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

Christianity has a very strong and long history of misogyny and patriarchy going back hundreds of years. The influence of the Christian churches on western culture is very great and that includes "creative class" folks because they grew up in this culture.

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

of his piece about Augustine's important role in the development of Christianity's woman problem, specifically the rewriting of Genesis, in a comment thread at reclusive leftist.

Submitted by lambert on

... thus:

The campaign to limit or even eliminate abortion is not about pregnancy or the fetus at all: it is about controlling the body, and controlling pleasure, especially sexual pleasure.

Which, come to think about it, is what the health care insurance debate is about as well. The body, as a "human resource," is there to be harvested for profit by the health insurance industry. Ditto the food industry. Ditto ditto ditto.

Aeryl's picture
Submitted by Aeryl on

At Cannonfire the other day, as his "Plan A, Plan B" post.

Yea, it would be a good compromise, but the other side ain't interested in compromise. It's about control. I think he's willing to give anti-choicers too much credit for the motives behind their stance.

Davidson's picture
Submitted by Davidson on

It's not only a norm for us all, including so-called "progressive" or "enlightened" types, but also deeply sacred, in the sense that is a central basis of our morality. Organized religion has exploited that innate trait of morality to infuse it with violent misogynistic bigotry. Every major religion has hijacked the most powerful forces of life--love, sex, and morality--to justify and glorify violent anti-female extremism. However, we shouldn't just limit our focus to modern religions. The Greeks, with their profound misogyny, are the architects of our modern culture.

It's so deeply ingrained that our very language is gender segregated, in that we have to constantly mark whether someone is male or female by gender pronouns (Imagine constantly referring to the color of someone's skin due to a color-based pronoun) and the basis of our species is considered distinctly male (e.g., he/she, man/woman, mankind). How we define maleness itself is misogynistic: to be a man is to be the antithesis of a woman. The most explosive weapon, I fear, is the exploitation of sex to sell violent hate.

Davidson's picture
Submitted by Davidson on

Huckabee, to me, was way more outrageous than Palin ever was, "joking" about Obama ducking a shooter, releasing a rapist who went on to kill and rape a woman just to get back at Bill Clinton, and even had a son who horribly tortured an innocent dog to death, which I think trumps an unwed pregnant daughter, and yet he was seen as an awshucks kind of guy by the media, not the spawn of Satan. If Huckabee had been a woman, he would have been torn to shreds.

madamab's picture
Submitted by madamab on

Imagine if Palin actually had done something really WRONG, like Huckabee and his family have done. Or, let's be real, if she had been a member of Rev. Wright's church or associated closely with domestic terrorists.

The mind reels.