Skip to main content

the real slut problem

rush limbaugh, bill maher [not exactly as pictured]
i was watching cnn earlier tonight and saw erin burnett giving her response to being called out on rival network msnbc over backing republicans who equated comments made by comedian and obama super pac donor bill maher with those made by radio talk show host rush limbaugh. predictably, burnett was defensive, repeating that to her, there was no meaningful difference between comments maher has made about conservative politicians like sarah palin and michele bachmann and those made by law student and women's health advocate sandra fluke.

the aftermath of "slut-gate" generally has had me a bit at odds with myself. my knee-jerk reaction is to assume that those who are sounding off about maher, burnett included, are doing so purely out of political interest and wouldn't care if the democrats sacrificed a woman as the climax of their convention. [maybe if she was a virgin, but i digress.] my other knee-jerk reaction is to think that there is a peculiar nastiness in comments directed towards women in the political sphere that i don't necessarily see directed at men- as if it's predicated on a belief that they don't really belong.

so i'm kind of stuck, both knees jerking uncontrollably, trying to figure things out.

i see the point that democrats, liberals and those from the proverbial left in america have when they say that maher is a comedian and that his comments are presumed to be outrageous/ unrealistic by virtue of this, whereas limbaugh purports to speak seriously about issues. you can go back and forth on that alone for quite some time: maher's status as a comedian would probably not have saved him if he'd used the n-word to describe tea party congressman tim scott and limbaugh would likely concede that he exaggerates for effect, even if his listeners don't get that.

and you could argue that claiming that africa is a country or that vaccinations make people retarded does make you stupid, while testifying before congress that women should have access through their employer's health care insurance plan to oral contraceptives for a variety of health issues does not make you a slut.

i even get the republican point [yes, you read that correctly] that there is a certain hypocrisy when you only cry foul over derogatory terms in the mouths of your political opponents. i felt the same sense of unease when feminists were falling over themselves to talk about how wonderful bill clinton was, rather than saying what most of us felt to be the truth: he was a shitty individual to his wife and to a degree to the women he was cheating on her with, but that isn't a political issue. end of story.

that sort of clarity is what's needed in this situation and although i doubt it's going any further than you and me, here it is:

bill maher's brand of comedy is scathing and he can say some things that most people are going to find harsh. the fact that he's a comedian doesn't make what he says insincere, because his fans and viewers all know that he believes what he says and is trying to get his audience motivated in much the same way as limbaugh does. he isn't giving a million bucks to re-elect obama as a set up for a big punchline.

and you know what? i could even be persuaded to think that he's a misogynist. i don't, but if someone who knew him wanted to tell me he was, i wouldn't immediately write them off as a republican operative. it would mean that i would always view bill maher as a sexist jerk, but i'm not trying to date him and, since i'm in my thirties and not a model, he's not trying to date me, and that would be the end of it.

and therein lies the difference between maher and limbaugh.

no one, least of all the republicans who are crying foul over maher, think that his statements are reflective of a larger anti-women agenda within the democratic party. many, many people think that limbaugh's statements are precisely that- the crest of the g.o.p. iceberg. you can play word-for-word match games between maher and limbaugh from now until november and none of that will change the fact that republicans have been moving backwards on women's rights since they pushed through the 19th amendment in 1919. [seriously. look it up.]

limbaugh's been saying insulting, erroneous, batshit crazy stuff for years without this scale of reaction, but when there are so many examples of republican-driven legislation that seems backward, condescending or flat-out hostile, it ties into a larger story.

so it's not just about the "slut" tirade. it's about what those statements reveal about how a lot of republicans think about women to begin with.

Comments

as long as you're here, why not read more?

fun-raising

no, i am not dead, nor have i been lying incapacitated in a ditch somewhere. i've mostly been preparing for our imminent, epic move, which is actually not so terribly epic, because we found a place quite close to where we are now. in addition, i've been the beneficiary of an inordinately large amount of paying work, which does, sadly, take precedence over blogging, even though you know i'd always rather be with you.

indeed, with moving expenses and medical expenses looming on the horizon, more than can be accounted for even with the deepest cuts in the lipstick budget, dom and i recently did something that we've not done before: we asked for help. last week, we launched a fundraising campaign on go fund me. it can be difficult to admit that you need a helping hand, but what's been overwhelming for both of us is how quick to respond so many people we know have been once we asked. it's also shocking to see how quickly things added up.

most of all, though, the ex…

losers?

just a short time ago, i waxed prosaic about trump supporters who felt betrayed by their candidate pursuing in office the exact things that he said he would. short version: i have no sympathy.

today is a bit different. in the wake of america's bombing of a syrian air strip, in response to a chemical weapons attack by the syrian government, my facebook and twitter feeds were peppered with plaintive shades of "we believed you". these are the people who heard trump say that he wanted the united states to step back and focus on defending its own. indeed, trump did say such things, over and over; america cannot be the policeman of the world. even arch-liberal cynics like me had to admit that this was a refreshing argument to hear from someone outside the paul family, and, could easily have been turned into trump's greatest argument against hillary clinton. [he chose to go another way, which also worked.]

trump also said, repeatedly, that america needed to invest heavily …

long division

after the united states election last year, there were the usual calls for the country to unite behind the new president. that never happens anymore, because, since george w. bush scored a victory in 2004, having launched the country into a war in iraq for no reason, the people on the losing side of a presidential election have been pretty bloody angry about it. democrats hated bush 43. republicans really hated obama. democrats really hate trump.

it didn't help that trump didn't make the typical conciliatory gestures like including a couple of members of the opposite party in his cabinet, or encouraging his party to proceed slowly with contentious legislation. barack obama arguably wasted at least two and as many as six years of his tenure as president trying to play peacemaker before he felt sufficiently safe to just say "screw you guys" and start governing around the ridiculous congress he was forced to deal with. not-giving-a-shit obama was the best president in …