ZOMFG! Bill O’Reilly believes in a Constitutional right to privacy!
No, it’s true. Well, kinda sorta:
Apparently the Constitution only protects the rights of the rich, the white, the heterosexual, the cisgendered, the faithful and the non-pregnant - and only when they’re in complete agreement with all opinions O’Reilly, natch.
Well done, Jon, well done.
Yesterday, when reporting on the LAPD’s leaking of photos of a battered Rihanna to paparazzi site TMZ, CNN acted honorably and chose not to run the photo(s) in question.
KYRA PHILLIPS: It’s a chilling photo involving a story that’s getting tons of buzz and reflecting a growing crisis. But we’re not going to show it to you. And I’ll tell you why in just a moment. LA police are trying to find out who leaked a picture that apparently shows singer Rihanna bruised and battered after an alleged attack by her boyfriend, the singer Chris Brown. It showed up on a celebrity website and you can choose to see the photo at any time. We’re just choosing not to show it to you. And here’s why.
The face on that photo is one of millions of battered faces. Men and women, all races, all classes, all victims. We can’t show you all their faces, but we can push this story forward and try to help you heal the scars. Let’s get past the headlines and straight to the heart of domestic abuse. At the bottom of the screen we’re showing numbers for the National Domestic Violence Hotline where you can report abuse or get help. Also here to help, our guest, Sheryl Cates, CEO of the National Domestic Violence Hotline which has taken millions of calls. Good to see you, Cheryl.*
Oh, what a difference a day makes! Today, during the 1 o’clock hour,** CNN backtracked and aired the photo - while explaining that law enforcement policy usually precludes releasing the identities of (alleged) victims of domestic violence, let alone releasing photos of their injuries. They go on to speculate that the paparazzi must have bribed someone in the department in order to illegally obtain the photo(s)…as a photo of an obviously bruised Rihanna occupies the top 1/6th of their video screen!
No fucking shame.***
this Matthews/Obama skit from SNL’s Presidential Bash special is GREAT. Seriously, I’ve watched it at least a dozen times now. It’s even better viewed back-to-back with a Hardball segment.
Dare I say it’s even more spot-on than Ben Affleck’s Keith Olbermann impersonation?
Or perhaps she’s more of a Pussycat Doll, what with her sexxxay black knee-highs?
No matter. CNN’s prepubescent headline writers are at it again:
That’s U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, meeting with The Women Leaders’ Working Group in NYC last Thursday.
The headline CNN chose for its coverage?
“GIRL POWER!” With, like, an exclamation point and everything. POW!
As described on the U.S. Department of State’s website,
The Women Leaders’ Working Group was created in 2006 to ensure issues such as women’s political and economic empowerment, education and access to justice are international priorities. The group’s strategic objective is to institutionalize high-level dialogue and action on women’s empowerment activities, highlight U.S. progress on the Working Group’s priorities, and showcase precise ways in which women leaders have actually made a difference. [...]
Participants in the meeting include: President of the Republic of Chile, Michelle Bachelet; President of the Republic of the Philippines, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo; President of the Republic of Liberia, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf; President of the Republic of Finland, Tarja Halonen; United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and U.S. Senior Advisor for Women’s Empowerment, Shrin Tahir-Kheli. Many other women Foreign Ministers will participate, including representatives from: Afghanistan; Iraq; Gabon; Greece; Yemen; and Pakistan.
Bravo, CNN. Way to infantalize and dismiss some the world’s most powerful women, who were in NY to discuss such “trivial” matters as combating the epidemic of violence against women. Nice. Fucking. Job.
And I have to say, anchor Kyra Phillips and correspondent Zain Verjee didn’t do much better than Prepubescent Headline Writer, what with all their chatter about fashion, clothing and cutesy empowerful nicknames such as “diplo-babe.” I doubt that they would have been trading designers had they been covering an all-male or mixed-gender conference. Yeesh.
Transcript after the jump.
Via Media Matters, a new campaign to Change the Debate:
With few exceptions, the media figures who moderated the presidential primary debates focused on campaign gaffes, political tactics, and personal issues and, as a result, critical issues were pushed aside. While the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq raged, the mortgage crisis gathered steam, and nearly 50 million Americans continued to go without health insurance, the debate moderators focused on frivolous and trivial matters, far removed from the issues the public wanted to hear about.
Over the course of 31 debates and 2,300 questions, candidates running to be their party’s nominee for president were asked a total of:
* One question about warrantless wiretapping
* Two questions about declining wages
* Three questions about conservation and renewable energy
* Six questions about the growing crisis in the mortgage industry
* One question about how the candidates would keep the economy going if terrorists attacked our shopping malls
When you sign the petition, Media Matters gives you the opportunity to specify which issues are of particular importance to you.
They include:
* Abortion
* Afghanistan
* Civil Rights/Torture
* Crime
* Economy
* Education
* Energy
* Environment
* Food Safety
* Health Care
* Infrastructure
* Iraq
* Science/Technology
* Social Security
* Terrorism
* Trade
The one issue that ranks top on my list - animal rights - didn’t make the cut. Nor did a watered-down version, such as “animal welfare” or “animal agriculture.” The closest runner-ups are “food safety” and “environment.” Neither of which get to, ahem, the “meat” of the matter.
Nice try, Media Matters, but no dice. You’d think putting Palin on the ticket would bring animal issues - if not to the forefront - at least into the national consciousness. But I guess you’d be wrong, then.
Sigh.
I would say ::RAGE::, but I fear I’m too tired and cynical to get all that angry over this bullshit anymore.
Updated to add: you can find Media Matters’ report - Change the Debate: How Gaffes, Games, & Gotchas Dominated the 2008 Presidential Primary Debates - here.
———————–
Tagged: animals animal rights animal welfare action alerts 2008 elections media matters msm debates election coverage environment wtf petition
Megan at Jezebel identifies 19 (nine! teen!) misogynist slurs in Cintra Wilson’s piece on Sarah Palin:
1. “fuckable”
2. “Christian Stepford wife”
3. “she is their hardcore pornographic centerfold spread”
4. “Sarah Palin is a bit comical, like one of those cutthroat Texas cheerleader stage moms.”
5. The part where she compares electing Sarah Palin to allowing child-rapist Warren Jeffs to babysit her kids.
6. The part where electing Palin “is akin to ideological brain rape.”
7. “this Republican blowup doll”
8. The part where electing a Republican woman into office equals “women being downgraded to second-class, three-holed chattel.”
9. “the self-abnegating, submissive female Uncle Tommies”
10. “she has done everything but volunteer for her own circumcision.”
11. “She tacitly promises a roll backward into old-fashioned sexual roles” (despite being a breadwinner and the more powerful spouse).
12. “We must regard Sarah Palin as the Carmella Soprano of the GOP — an enabling wife of organized crime”
13. Being a female Republican is performing an “ideological lap dance” for men.
14. “Sarah Palin is the White House [Playboy] bunny.”
15. “Here’s an It Girl vice president who is easy on the eyes.”
16. “She’s like a grown-up version of Mary Ann from ‘Gilligan’s Island.’”
17. “Women, even if they are vice president, can always look pretty, worship their husbands in the fear of God and never, ever resist invasions from unwanted sperm.”
18. “Sarah Palin and her virtual burqa…”
19. “She’s such a power-mad, backwater beauty-pageant casualty…”
Meanwhile, Salon’s Tracy Clark-Flory defends the article as totally not sexist:
Wilson also describes Palin using highly sexualized imagery that’s straight out of the Hustler Hollywood sex shop: blowup dolls, centerfolds, lap dances and Playmates. I can’t speak for Wilson, of course, but what I think she was trying to argue is that Palin is being used as a blowup doll, that for the GOP she activates a reptilian excitement — the same kind of excitement offered by a centerfold. She has been pushed onstage to perform an “ideological lap dance” — in other words, to skillfully pander to baser desires (the least of which are sexual).
Well….perhaps Wilson should have taken more care in articulating her argument, then - especially given that she “describes Palin using highly sexualized imagery.” The onus is on her to make it clear that she’s not a woman-hating asshat.
And I take particular exception to item #6 on Jezebel’s list:
The part where electing Palin “is akin to ideological brain rape.”
There is no excuse for trivializing rape. None.
If I still had a paid subscription to Salon, this is when I’d be firing off an angry cancellation letter, I tell you what.
Oh, and Sarah Palin hates pups. The woman is a pup killer. Literally.
————————–
Tagged: salon cintra wilson 2008 elections sarah palin misogyny sexism sexist rape jezebel
Again with Salon and the sexism:
Pissed about Palin
McCain’s running mate is a Christian Stepford wife in a sexy librarian costume. Women, it’s time to get furious.
Yesterday she was a dominatrix, today she’s a sexxxay librarian. When does she get to be the Republican Vice Presidential candidate, I wonder?
I confess, it was pretty riveting when John McCain trotted out Sarah Palin for the first time. Like many people, I thought, “Damn, a hyperconservative, fuckable, Type A, antiabortion, Christian Stepford wife in a ’sexy librarian’ costume — as a vice president? That’s a brilliant stroke of horrifyingly cynical pandering to the Christian right. Karl Rove must be behind it.” [...]
As a woman who does not believe what Palin believes, the thought of such an opportunistic anti-female in the White House — in the Cheney chair, no less — is akin to ideological brain rape. What this Republican blowup doll does with her own insides in accord with her own faith is her business. But, like the worst and most terrifying of religious extremists, she seems very comfortable with the idea of imposing her own views on everyone else.
I did not think that women being downgraded to second-class, three-holed chattel would be a pressing concern in my lifetime. I thought it was like polio, or witch burning — an inhumane error that had already been corrected. But after eight years of Republican hegemony, and now the potential ascendance of this sheep in ewe’s clothing, I am so mortally offended I feel like it is really time for women to be angry, hardcore and disgusted again. Not just with old white Christian patriarchs and their hopelessly calcified, religiously condoned misogyny, but also with the self-abnegating, submissive female Uncle Tommies whose ambitions and eagerness to please the powerful males of their tribe are so desperate that they would sell out their sovereignty over their own bodies. And yours too.
Ms. Wilson, allow me to introduce you to Ms. Kettle.
And yeah, I’m furious. Not just at misogynist women who want to curtail my right to choose while celebrating their own choices, but at misogynist women who denigrate women they don’t like - and, by extension, womankind as a whole - with sexist slurs. Palin the blowup doll? Really? Listen, you might not like the woman - dog knows, I don’t - but she’s not a feminized piece of plastic, an object, ferchrissakes. Stop calling Palin’s status of “human” into question - and start attacking her on the issues, already.
Or should I just shut my fuckhole and be glad y’all didn’t Photoshop Palin’s face on a Real Doll?
—————-
Tagged: 2008 elections sarah palin salon misogyny sexism msm fauxgressive
The dominatrix
Sarah Palin is trying to seduce independent voters. But she comes across like a whip-wielding mistress who wants to discipline a naughty America.
Seriously? Palin as dominatrix? Sure you don’t want to rethink this one?
Hohum, guess not. I see you’ve already committed yourselves to it, Photoshop graphics and all.
Seriously, tho, listen up. Better yet, look up. There’s Sarah Palin. The first second* viable female VP candidate. On the Republican ticket, to boot!
And there you are, reducing her to a sex object.
Nice to know that no matter how far a woman comes, she’ll still be a sex toy and sperm receptacle to a majority of the population.
(Need I remind y’all that Salon is supposedly a member of the “liberal media” cabal? Ain’t nothing liberal, progressive or otherwise hippie dippy about acting like a misogynist douchebag. “Liberal media” my ass. And if members of the so-called “liberal media” feel no qualms about loudly and publicly displaying their disdain for women…well, just sit back and imagine what the rest of American thinks of us.)
And, hey. In addition to being woman-hating fuckwits, you fauxgressives might also just win McCain the election.
It’s true!
Personally, I think Palin’s a despicable excuse for a human being - but this shit makes me feel more than a little empathy for her. Granted, I’ll never be outraged enough to vote for her (since she’s a misogynist fuckwit herself), but some women might well be. Especially those still stinging over Hillary Clinton’s treatment - by the media, left and right; by Republicans and conservatives; by the Democratic Party; and by our supposedly liberal progressive allies. Hey, the misogyny jerk-fest over Clinton’s pantsuits, shrill voice and cankles almost convinced me to vote for her. Just because.
And Joe Biden and Harry Reid ain’t helping. Just saying.
* Updated to add that I am, in fact, a dolt.
—————-
Tagged: 2008 elections sarah palin salon misogyny sexism harry reid joe biden msm fauxgressive
Just when I start thinking that Larry King couldn’t possibly get any denser…well, just check it:
KING: OK. A strange story.
We begin here in Los Angeles with Davida Kelley, a former member of the Children of God. It’s now called Family International. She was raised in the household of that sect’s now dead leader, David Berg, whom she says sexually abused her.
Also here is Amy Bril, a former member of the Children of God. She was summoned to the household of David Berg as a young child and married to him at age 13. [...]
KING: At what age were you first tampered with?
Yes, “tampered with”. Because the human body is like a Tylenol bottle, and sexual assault is similar to fiddling with the safety packaging on an unopened package of aspirin.
King returns to this clumsy euphemism for “rape” several times throughout the interview:
KING: And Ricky, Davida, he killed, what, the person who was his nanny?
KELLEY: Yes. She was one of many nannies who…
KING: Tampered with him.
KELLEY: Yes, when he was a child.
Remember, we’re talking about child rape and sexual exploitation. “Tampering” doesn’t even begin to describe the horror of what these children (now adults) endured. You “tamper” with a toilet and a roll of Saran Wrap on April Fool’s Day in order to pull a prank on your younger sibling. To refer to ritualized, lifelong sexual abuse and exploitation as “tampering” is to minimize, deny and obscure the realities of what actually took place.
FYI, though King does use the terms “sexual assault” and “sexual abuse” several times throughout the interview, the word “rape” does not appear once - not once! - in the entire, hour-long transcript. Go figure.
———————–
Tagged: larry king cnn rape sex sexual abuse sexual assault msm
Shane pointed me to her latest Daily Show segment on “cougars,” and it was teh awesome:
The Daily Show has three more Kristen Schaal segments up, two of which focus on the 2008 presidential race:
www.flickr.com
|
