When Will Moral Busybodies Condemn Rush?

Right Wing Watch makes an important argument about the lack of response from religious right groups that are forever condemning anything that smacks of sexual immorality in the media. Yet they’ve stayed completely silent as Rush has called a woman a slut and a prostitute and demanded that she make videos of herself having sex for him to masturbate to.

The Media Research Center criticized everyone from Perez Hilton and Gossip Girl to the cast of Jersey Shore for using the word “slut,” but after right-wing talk show host tagged law student and women’s rights advocate Sandra Fluke as a “slut” and a “prostitute,” the group that claims to stand up for “people and institutions that hold traditional values” has repeatedly come to Limbaugh’s defense. MRC’s Scott Whitlock said NBC’s depiction of Limbaugh’s sexist remarks as “ugly” represented “a left-wing attack” and Brent Baker dubbed coverage of Limbaugh’s rant a “left-wing effort to impugn and silence Rush Limbaugh.” The American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer and Liberty Counsel’s Matt Barber even tweeted in defense of Limbaugh, Barber even saying that Limbaugh “showed class.” …

Concerned Women for America, which describes itself as committed to promoting “decency” in the media, has been completely silent about Limbaugh’s tirade. But the group is happy to post a statement regarding the talk show host’s praise for CWA, along with claims about the supposedly sexist treatment of Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin by the media.

Focus on the Family considers the word “slut” a profanity and blamed “hip-hop/rap culture” for making it “become acceptable and even in vogue to be called a ‘slut,’” and urged people to stop buying music with words like “slut” that “objectify women.” But the organization still hasn’t commented on Limbaugh’s misogynist rants.

So why haven’t they condemned Rush for his masturbatory fantasies? Because he’s on their side, of course, so that makes it all okay.

"Another fling, another miss. It's really tough on you to be exposed as a loser, ..."

LDS President: You’re Poor Because You ..."
"You are a greater fool who thinks races are interchangeable and race doesn't matter."

Spencer: US Military Should Have Enslaved ..."
"Everything has missed. A triple fling and a triple miss!!!"

LDS President: You’re Poor Because You ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • frankboyd

    Oooh, oooh! I know this one! Right about the same time you lot condemn the misogyny that is relentlessly directed at conservative women!

    I.e.: Never.

  • dmcclean

    False equivalence, much?

    We do condemn that. I condemn it. I’m certain Ed condemns it.

    What we might not do is assume that because *some* criticism of Sarah Palin is motivated by or exemplary of misogyny that therefore *all* criticism of her is to be ignored.

  • eric

    Not to state the obvious, but these groups put tribalism first and issues second. Unless you’re Mormon.

  • coragyps

    “showed class.”

    Well, it is possible to show very low class………

  • raven

    Right about the same time you lot condemn the misogyny that is relentlessly directed at conservative women!

    When it comes into existence, we will condemn it.

    In other words, never.

  • frankb

    Frankboyd Said,

    Right about the same time you lot condemn the misogyny that is relentlessly directed at conservative women!

    I know for a fact that women commentors on Pharyngula will attack any misogynist comment about Bachmann or Palin. I believe it happens on other freethought blogs as well. Frankboyd, you don’t know what you are talking about.

  • Chiroptera

    frankboyd, #1: …the misogyny that is relentlessly directed at conservative women!

    Who is relentlessly directing misogyny toward conservative women? Especially among the well-known (at least in left-wing circles) left leaning punits?

    I seem to recall an odd comment showing up here and there in the comment sections of the blogs I frequent, but other people seem to be quick to call them out.

  • frankb

    My bad, Men commentors will attack misogynist comments too.

  • Who Knows?

    The reason they do not call out Limbaugh’s comments is they agree with the ideas behind it. That’s why Limbaugh only had to apologize for using those two words, leaving the statements calling her a raging sex addict who spends nearly every waking hour having sex intact.

    That’s just what these people think about us.

  • keithb

    frankboyd:

    Everytime PZ writes something about Ann Coulter, he adds a caveat that there will be no discussion of transgender or looks. Commenters still do it, but that is not PZ’s problem.

  • Shorter frankboyd: Every communication from the right can continue to make misogynistic statements with every breath, because outliers on the left do the same occasionally.

  • Chiroptera

    Focus on the Family considers the word “slut” a profanity and blamed “hip-hop/rap culture” for making it “become acceptable and even in vogue to be called a ‘slut,’” and urged people to stop buying music with words like “slut” that “objectify women.” But the organization still hasn’t commented on Limbaugh’s misogynist rants.

    To be fair to FoF, it it sounds like they merely object to the “rehabilitation” of the word into something benign you can call people.

    Obviously, they’re perfectly fine with the word as long as it’s continued to be use properly: as a term of abuse against uppity wimmins.

  • frankniddy

    I see frankboyd is using the classic “Nuh uh, you!” debate tactic. Save for conservative Internet commenters, I haven’t seen that tactic used since middle school.

  • What about half-assed condemnation? Does that count?

  • valhar2000

    Right about the same time you lot condemn the misogyny that is relentlessly directed at conservative women!

    Relentlessly? Really? When does this happen? And why does no-one tell me about it?

    The only thing I can recall that even looks like this is how the topic of Ann Coulter possibly being a man comes up every now and then, but that is usually called out.

    There is plenty of criticism of Palin and Bachman, yes, but, to paraphrase Bill Maher, “it’s not because they have breasts, but because they are boobs”.

  • valhar2000

    To be fair to FoF, it it sounds like they merely object to the “rehabilitation” of the word into something benign you can call people.

    I’m in favor of rehabilitating the word “slut”, or, rather, “habilitating” it in the first place. It doesn’t look like I’ll succeed, but a man can hope.

  • beezlebubby

    I know the answer to this one! It’s because “Moral busybodies” are in no sense moral. They are the same backward, miserable misogynists that hijacked religion, in like, 1000 BC.

  • unbound

    @frankboyd – Not praising conservative women for everything they do is definitely not the same as relentless misogyny. But, by all means, please link this relentless misogyny you speak of…always willing to learn, and will be happy to support condemnation of it. Of course, by relentless, I am expecting a whole lot of links…

  • “Of course, by relentless, I am expecting a whole lot of links…”

    Hope you weren’t holding your breath. Because that would mean you’re dead by now.

  • parasiteboy

    valhar2000@15 says

    There is plenty of criticism of Palin and Bachman, yes, but, to paraphrase Bill Maher, “it’s not because they have breasts, but because they are boobs”.

    I’m not sure Bill Maher is the best person to quote on this issue, since he did call Sarah Palin a cunt.

    Although one could argue about the differences between the two situations, the lack of comparable media coverage and outrage for the Maher-Palin situation is being used to paint a picture of a double standard.

    http://granitegrok.com/blog/2012/03/selective-liberal-principles-and-outrage

  • Michael Heath

    Sarah Palin used the false equivalence and red herring fallacies to avoid addressing Rush Limbaugh’s behavior in a CNN puff piece interview last evening. Morons can’t help but depend on fallacies, it’s what helps validate they’re morons, as demonstrated @ 1. What’s particularly amusing is that they appear to think they’ve got one over on their opponents while remaining oblivious to the fatal defectiveness of their argument.

  • d cwilson

    Focus on the Family considers the word “slut” a profanity and blamed “hip-hop/rap culture” for making it “become acceptable and even in vogue to be called a ‘slut,’” and urged people to stop buying music with words like “slut” that “objectify women.” But the organization still hasn’t commented on Limbaugh’s misogynist rants.

    So, in other words, they think “slut” is a naughty word, but they’re perfectly fine with Rush’s demand that women using birth control post sex videos online.

  • d cwilson

    I’m not sure Bill Maher is the best person to quote on this issue, since he did call Sarah Palin a cunt.

    When it comes to misogyny, Maher doesn’t have clean hands. But his sentiment was correct. Bachmann and Palin deserve all the criticism they get for being stupid, not because they’re women.

  • Pingback: Hypocrisy from the Right? Nah, Never. « Foster Disbelief()

  • Aquaria

    d cwilson @ 22

    So, in other words, they think “slut” is a naughty word, but they’re perfectly fine with Rush’s demand that women using birth control post sex videos online.

    They also demonize liberals, women who have lives, gays, atheists, Jews, scientists, or anyone at all who knows what the hell they’re talking about 24/7 but scream like a two year old when anyone remotely criticizes, challenges or disagrees with them.

    They’re the world’s most outrageous 24/7 hypocrites.

  • Doc Bill

    Ed, boopie, Moral Busybodies are only concerned about YOUR poker-playing, hairy, basement blogging, Texas BBQ slurping morals! Srsly, dood.

    Rush is simply an imperfect sinner like the rest of us (you excluded). Rush is forgiven (you excluded).

    Come on, Ed, get real! If Moral Busybodies actually applied their own standards to themselves there would be no fingers left to point. So, they are taking the Big Risk for all our souls (you excluded).

    Oops, look at the time! Must run! Big date with Phyllis tonight!

  • Right about the same time you lot condemn the misogyny that is relentlessly directed at conservative women!

    And what liberal radio host with an audience of millions exists who has directed a vulgar tirade against someone hardly anyone has ever heard of for giving testimony in favor of a position?

    Limbaugh spewed his bile about Sandra Fluke while ignoring the actual testimony she gave. She did not talk about her sex life or give any reason to think that she is sexually promiscuous, but in Limbaugh World, advocating for access to contraception means that she must be banging 20 guys a day 7 days a week.

    If Limbaugh was really interested in truth, he could have just as easily invited Fluke onto his show, asked her to pitch her position, and then try to debate her on it. Instead, he opted for character assassination.

  • “I’m not sure Bill Maher is the best person to quote on this issue, since he did call Sarah Palin a cunt.”

    Well, Rushit was lying.

    And Maher, well, what’s that saying? oh,yeah…”the truth is an absolute defense against libel.”

  • Randomfactor

    And Maher, well, what’s that saying? oh,yeah…”the truth is an absolute defense against libel.”

    And sexist metonymy isn’t.

    Sarah Palin is an ignorant, venal, manifestly evil person. But she is not solely her sexual anatomy.

  • magistramarla

    I’m a woman, and I can think of several choice words that I would like to use for the likes of Palin and Bachmann. Does that make me, a liberal feminist, also a misogynist? My head begins to hurt!

    So guys, send me your comments about these women (I use the term loosely) and I’ll post ’em! Then, they can’t accuse you of being misogynists.

  • Pinkamena, Panic Pony

    I’m a woman, and I can think of several choice words that I would like to use for the likes of Palin and Bachmann. Does that make me, a liberal feminist, also a misogynist?

    Depends on the words.

    frankdouchecanoe @#1: [citation fucking needed]

  • Here were the worst incidents of liberal misogyny Michelle Malkin could dredge up, and she’s one to catalogue them. So, have at condemning them.

  • brianthomas

    @32: Ugh. I just had to peek at the Michelle Malkin piece you linked. Here she is:

    If I had a dollar for every time libs have called me a “Manila whore” and “Subic Bay bar girl,” I’d be able to pay for a ticket to a Hollywood-for-Obama fundraiser.

    Really????

    Yeah Michelle, every “librul” I know talks like that! Suuuuure.

    The irony is: I am willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that that’s precisely the sort of language many of her teabagger friends would use of her in a heart-beat if she were a “librul.” Or even if she were not.

  • maethor

    I’d like to point out that there is a difference between Rush Limbaugh on a syndicated radio program (that I get on Armed Forces Radio while deployed) and Bill Maher doing stand-up comedy and political satire. He doesn’t pick random women to harass and say horrible things to. Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann are rather obvious targets for mockery…

  • Randomfactor:

    “Sarah Palin is an ignorant, venal, manifestly evil person. But she is not solely her sexual anatomy.”

    I did not say she was; Bill Maher did not say she was, either (although it sounds as if he did).

    I used to use that word a lot more, in referring to both men and women, as an insult. I never got a picture, in my head, of a vagina, when I used it–I doubt that anyone else did. Out of deference, at first, I found other, less objectionable words for objectionable people–the fucking fuckers.

    MagistraMarla:

    “I’m a woman, and I can think of several choice words that I would like to use for the likes of Palin and Bachmann. Does that make me, a liberal feminist, also a misogynist?”

    To some, I’m sure it would (I’m not thinking of anyone who’s currently commenting).

  • Re Malkin’s list: Ed Schultz and Keith Olbermann took a lot of heat for their remarks. I haven’t heard of any of the other people who said anything actually misogynistic. She seems to be classifying mean things said about women as misogynistic regardless of content.

  • StevoR

    Overly vague question.

    Which moral busybodies? There’s no shortage of the blighters.

    FWIW Rush Limbagh is a piece of worm ridden filth, may the fleas of athousand camels infest his armpits and a swarm of genital lice devour him alive on public TV.

  • Akira MacKenzie

    And right out of the gates we get the standard conservative defense for their hate: “Yeah? Well… THE LIBERALS DO IT TOO!!!”

    Typical.

  • And right out of the gates we get the standard conservative defense for their hate: “Yeah? Well… THE LIBERALS DO IT TOO!!!”

    Mencius has a story for you

  • dingojack

    Hmmm… except not.

    a) The author (Malkin) claims she got hate mail, but provides no evidence of this.

    b) claims that Steinem called someone ‘a female impersonator’* without evidence.

    Seems there’s a pattern emerging. Hmmm…

    Dingo

    —–

    * This is interesting. One wonders why she s so offended here. Could it be that she thinks ‘female impersonators’ are lesser, inferior persons somehow? Is that they are men pretending to be women (and by implication, being lesser) that worries her, or that that a women is being impersonated and that, somehow, denigrates women? Or it the ambiguity that truly frightens her?

    It seems that her sexism, and perhaps fear, is showing.

    PS: The Macquarie dictionary defines ‘cunt’ as a low or despicable person (note without being one sex or the other), seems to fit Palin like a glove. Those that wish to be offended will.

  • d cwilson

    Re: Ed Schultz calling Laura Ingram a “slut”. MSNBC suspended him for a week without pay for that remark and he read a sincere apology (Not one that blamed being possessed by the other or one that continued to spread lies about the person he was apologizing to) on the air.

    Now let’s compare that to the actions Rush Limbaugh’s employer, Clear Channel, did to discipline him for repeatedly calling a woman a “slut” and a “prostitute” and for demanding that she post sex videos online . . .

    Oh wait, that’s right. Clear Channel hasn’t done anything to punish Rush.

  • d cwilson

    The irony is: I am willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that that’s precisely the sort of language many of her teabagger friends would use of her in a heart-beat if she were a “librul.” Or even if she were not.

    No, the real irony is that this is a woman routinely hurls vile insults at other people and even stalks them in their homes, and yet she’s clutching the pearls because sometimes, she gets some of her own medicine.

  • What d cwilson said.

    David Neiwert, who was acquainted with Malkin years ago before she became well known, described her as the crazy person who runs around the town square poking people with a stick and then purports to be shocked when they get upset with her. Not an exact quote, but I think I captured the spirit of it.

    As someone who is married to a Filipina, I have to admit I do blanche at some of the language that is hurled towards Malkin’s (Maglalang’s) way. However, the vitriol directed at her is in response to what she does, not who she is. She savages people who she does not personally know just because they have the temerity to publicly advocate for positions with which she disagrees.

    While not to condone it, there’s a difference between people e-mailing her or posting comments in a blog in a fit of anger calling her a “Manila whore” or other derogatory comments and her having a platform in the media to spew her bile without anyone calling her on it to the face. That’s why she rarely ever ventures outside of her Fox News bubble, especially after her infamous on Hardball with Chris Matthews.

    To borrow from Hyman Roth in The Godfather Part 2, this is the life she chose for herself.

  • parasiteboy

    dingojack@40 says:

    PS: The Macquarie dictionary defines ‘cunt’ as a low or despicable person (note without being one sex or the other), seems to fit Palin like a glove. Those that wish to be offended will.

    If Maher was Australian or even from the UK your point could be valid, but since he is from the US, I would assume he is using the Merriam-Webster definition of 1. usually obscene : the female genital organs; also : sexual intercourse with a woman. 2. usually disparaging & obscene

  • dingojack

    In fact such a usage probably stretches back into Middle English (c1200 to c1600). So it seems you’re using only a Victorian neologism.

    Dingo

  • Chris from Europe

    @dingojack

    It’s pretty doubtful that Palin was called “cunt” as in your usage. We shouldn’t be disingenuous about it: When a woman (and sometimes a man) in the US is called a cunt, it’s usually meant as a sexual insult.

  • Chris from europe:

    I can only speak for myself, but if I use the “c” word in referring to someone like St. Sarah, you may rest assured that it has nothing to do with sex. And, yes, I have referred to a fair number of men using the same term. Calling them “pricks”, which some have said is not as insulting a term, usually does not make them amenable. Sorry.

  • dingojack

    Be that as it may, I find idea that using ‘female impersonator’ is an insult is far more interesing (and telling)…

    Dingo

  • parasiteboy

    Not quite “CUNTO” but dingojack, democommie and magistramarla are getting us close.

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/blaghag/2012/02/the-justifications-for-saying-cunt-bingo-card/#comment-75040

    Click on the link in Jen’s EDIT 2 to see a summary of why these justifications would be considered wrong by some people.

    The whole post and discussion is worth reading whether or not you feel the use of the word is justifiable.

  • Pieter B, FCD

    Apparently Bill Maher thinks that Limbaugh’s apology was adequate.

    From Twitter:

    Bill Maher ‏ @billmaher

    Hate to defend #RushLimbaugh but he apologized, liberals looking bad not accepting. Also hate intimidation by sponsor pullout

    As we used to say on alt.folklore.urban, “Fuck him. Throw him to the wolves.”

  • parasiteboy

    Pieter B, FCD@50 says

    “Fuck him. Throw him to the wolves.”

    That’s pretty much what I have thought about Bill Maher ever since I learned about his various anti-science opinions in medicine (http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/07/bill_maher_and_anti-science.php)

  • Pieter B, FCD

    @parasiteboy

    Because of that crap I certainly don’t think as highly of him as some seem to (*cough Richard Dawkins Award *cough), but he’s occasionally on the right side of issues we care about here.

    I was surprised to see that no one had mentioned his tweet here, actually.

    Prepare the bedding, summon the wolves.

  • frankboyd

    Go figure. Conservative women aren’t really human in this community.

    I’ve noticed this before, round about the time of Palin’s bids. It is one thing to dismiss her for being a fool, a demagogue and a liar. It is quite another to portray her and her daughters as objects of sexual disgust, make gang rape jokes and all the rest of it.

    And no, this wasn’t a few marginal people, but mainstream commentators, senators etc.

    I notice the democommie is fine with that sort of thing.

    I guess it isn’t anything really important, like an offer of coffee…

    Pathetic. Pathetic and contemptible.

  • frankboyd

    frankb, notice your commentators promptly decided to give lie to your comments.

    I read that link David Finkle posted, and it’s disgusting stuff. And it lead on to another link:

    http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/

    Hmm. Calling for domestic abuse. Calling for a pre-emptive abortion. Calling for frickin’ gang rape.

    Yeah. Sure. Not a problem.

    But some damn fool scribbles a stupid line on a flier somewhere – that’s a problem?

    I’m not a conservative. You’d think that posting links to The Internationale and quoting Trotsky might have given that away. Yet, I do not think that this sort of thing is okay.

    Call me old fashioned, if you will.

  • dingojack

    Cranky – Citation(s) required.

    (If you can manage it, if not get an adult to help you).

    Dingo

  • frankboyd

    Citations in link. Can’t be bothered to read, now can you?

    It was a work of moments to find the following article:

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/04/rush-limbaugh-s-apology-liberal-men-need-to-follow-suit.html

    But, yeah. Conservative women = not fully human. To people like you. Contemptible.

  • frankboyd

    Turns out that, same way that a big, steaming slice of the “American atheist community” is nothing more than a moderate tool of the Democratic party, so is a big, steaming slice of its supposed feminist community.

    Here’s a real leftist on the subject:

    http://www.spectator.co.uk/nickcohen/7457633/a-regiment-of-women-monsterers.thtml

  • dingojack

    This link has been disscussed earlier – do try and keep up Cranky.

    Dingo

  • frankboyd

    No it was not. Except to say that it’s A-OK to call palin a “cunt” and that conservative women should just take it.

    Waiting for you to justify the gang-rape comment.

    I added several more.

    Here’s another article:

    http://reason.com/blog/2012/03/06/its-like-totally-different-when-a-libera

  • Maher and Matthews are not liberals. Olbermann and Schultz did apologize and they were far more sincere than Limbaugh. They also got some repercussions. It’s not a double standard to expect a real apology out of Limbaugh. I’ll grant Taibi, but he’s hardly a high-profile figure. There’s also the issue that they were taking pot shots at politicians and pundits, not spendign several days hammering at a civilian.

  • frankboyd

    Maher and Matthews are not liberals.

    Suuuuuuuuurrrree they’re not. And Maher is a very prominent atheist, and while he gets hammered here for his anti-vaxxism – or for straying off the reservation and attacking Islam – is he attacked for this sort of stuff?

    Nah.

    Olbermann and Schultz did apologize and they were far more sincere than Limbaugh

    Not according to the people insulted:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/08/michelle-malkin-and-s-e-cupp-to-keith-olbermann-we-dont-buy-your-belated-fake-apology/

    There’s also the issue that they were taking pot shots at politicians and pundits

    Right. So if Limbaugh had said it’d be good for a bunch of white rednecks to gangrape Michelle Obama, that’d be okay, right?

    Do you even read what you’re writing?

  • dingojack

    Ye, as I meantioned before I’d be happy to describe Palin as ‘a low and dispicable person’.

    Dingo

  • frankboyd

    And here’s another article from comrade Cohen, a real and principled lefty:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/07/uselections2008.republicans2008

  • frankboyd

    Here’s the relevant section from Cohen:

    On the one hand, the media treated her as a sex object. The New York Times led the way in painting Palin as a glamour-puss in go-go boots you were more likely to find in an Anchorage lap-dancing club than the Alaska governor’s office.

    On the other, liberal journalists turned her family into an object of sexual disgust: inbred rednecks who had stumbled out of Deliverance. Palin was meant to be pretending that a handicapped baby girl was her child when really it was her wanton teenage daughter’s. When that turned out to be a lie, the media replaced it with prurient coverage of her teenage daughter, who was, after all, pregnant, even though her mother was not going to do a quick handover at the maternity ward and act as if the child was hers.

    So that fools like dj are spared the bother of reading the whole thing.

  • frankboyd
  • Maher’s a Libertarian. Matthews voted for Bush. How are they liberals? Liberal doesn’t mean everyone who isn’t a party-line Republican.

    Right. So if Limbaugh had said it’d be good for a bunch of white rednecks to gangrape Michelle Obama, that’d be okay, right?

    Did I miss the part where Olbermann and Schultz were making gang rape jokes? That was a rather deliberate miscontruing of a Letterman joke. Letterman is not a political figure and the joke, while sexist, was not about rape.

  • I notice Cohen doesn’t cite any prominent liberals actually making lapdance references. This is just Cohen’s rather dubious interpretation.

  • dingojack

    Well Cranky you’d do a lot better with links that actually work.

    The Guardian article is an opinion piece, not evidence.

    Next!

    Dingo

  • frankboyd

    Right. Guy donates $ 1 million to the “liberal” Galahad – not a “liberal”. And sure, hard left commentator in Britain’s number one left wing newspaper makes “dubious interpretation”. I’ll go with comrade Cohen over the contemptible farce that is the American “left”.

    Go back and look at the raw stuff linked at back at #54.

    And this hogwash about “minor actors” – that is firstly incorrect, and secondly, this community has endless pity-parties about the most miniscule of insults by literal anonymities directed towards its female members. So skip the “it doesn’t really count” act.

    dj is now showing he’s a liar.

  • TCC

    But, yeah. Conservative women = not fully human. To people like you. Contemptible.

    Rule of thumb: When you make an accusation about a group of people, you need actual evidence to support it. Saying that commenters here think that conservative women are not fully human is quite the accusation, so please show us where anyone here has stated or even implied that conservative women are not fully human (as opposed to some conservative women being odious human beings).

    For the record (although I don’t self-identify as liberal, so it may not be me you’re pointing the finger at), I fully condemn the kind of misogynistic comments that have been aimed at Malkin, Palin, Sandra Fluke, or any woman, frankly, whether for political or polemical effect or not.

    By the way, frankboyd, what do you think of the claim made by some conservatives that liberal women are unattractive and conservative women are attractive (and whether that in fact means jack shit)? We’re all eager to hear your response.

  • Obama is the liberal Galahad now? Bill Maher isn’t so much a Democrat as a guy who really hates Republicans unless they are attractive women he thinks he has a shot with.

  • frankboyd

    And I went back and reread the piece that David Fincke posted. It’s enough to make anyone with an ounce of principle throw up.

    This stuff is really, really easy to find. So it must be that you deliberately hide the evidence from yourself.

  • frankboyd

    TCC, my evidence? This entire thread has been devoted to minimising, wishing away, denying, or just plain saying this sort of thing is okay.

    TCC, I think I should have made it clear by now: that sort of thing is not acceptable. But I find it interesting that you find a some anonymous idiots online with comments by fully mainstream people. I told you – I’m not a conservative, so I do not see how that was supposed to face me.

  • See my 39.

    Sexism and misogyny is a problem on both sides of the aisle, but it’s a poor excuse saying that because the Dems are doing it, it’s A-OK for the Republicans. I mean do theists now get to excuse their misogyny by pointing to EG?

    On Pharyngula misogynistic stuff has been called out for a long time, at times PZ has been as well. See also the recent discussion about calling Rush Limbaugh fat along similar lines on Almost Diamonds.

    While it is true that many condemn Bill Maher more for his anti-vaxxism, many here also do not fail to mention his misogyny. This is also why I don’t follow people like Maher or Olbermann too much.

  • frankboyd

    Sexism and misogyny is a problem on both sides of the aisle, but it’s a poor excuse saying that because the Dems are doing it, it’s A-OK for the Republicans.

    Who said anything about that? I’m happy to see Limbaugh fall. I never listen to the guy – the hell do I care about one American shock jock?

    What I am interested in, however, is matters of class. And I have long smelt the rancid stink of class hatred here.

  • you have spamming the thread if one or two posts would have been sufficient.

    We got your point, most of us already were aware of it, so STFU.

  • Who had said that anything you cited is OK? I’ve only heard they weren’t as bad as Limbaugh and not said by people with a position of power comparable to Limbaugh’s, so you were making a false equivalency. Also, I’m wondering where these claims of classism are coming from. I thought you were worried about sexism.

  • insert been as needed.

  • dingojack

    Nope Cranky you’re just digging your hole deeper. Opinion peices, criticism and ‘disappearing’ photo that someone claims to have seen at some stage aren’t evidence and certainly aren’t very compelling.

    Try again.

    Dingo

  • Also phrases like Obama being the liberal Galahad again show that you don’t know anything at all about American politics…

  • frankboyd

    Ace,

    The two are connected; it’s obvious that Palin is championed, despite her ludicrousness, because she is identified strongly with the working class, and that the attacks on her take classic forms of class hatred.

    The rest of your argument is simply unprovable; I can say Maher is way more powerful than Limbaugh, or equally, or whatever. It’s not something one can assess. And it is therefore utterly meaningless; in the same way I could say that the shock-jock is irrelevant, but Maher is a serious power. There’s no way to decide these things.

    Shorter pelanum. Can’t answer. Don’t have facts. Don’t have logic. Don’t bother me.

  • I see you still can’t get my nym spelt right.

    I’m not the one spamming this thread. You really are a waste of time for everyone on this thread.

  • frankboyd

    Shorter dingo if the Party demands it, then black is white. Don’t bother me with facts, don’t bother me.

  • frankboyd

    Anyway, Cohen is a hard leftist of the old school. Whereas the American “left” is – I don’t know what. It seems to have been leached of all principles that made the left worthwhile with none of the codes that made the right honourable.

  • OK, tell us then, because you won’t shut up

    what’s your fucking point? You’ve pointed out there’s sexism on the left. You have given references, some of them dubious, some of them valid. Nothing new to most of us.

    So what’s your fucking point?

    You even agree that people on the leftist saying misogynistic things don’t make it right for people on the right doing so. So the premise of this post still stands. Will moral busybodies on the right condemn Limbaugh or not.

    Stop derailing the thread.

  • dingojack

    Nope – shorter Dingo ‘Show me the actual evidence of equivalence’.

    Dingo

    —–

    PS: Ol’ Rupert is a big contributor to the Labor Party so he’s an evul socialist lefty, right Cranky? (He also donates to the Liberal Coalition too. He likes to have winning side beholden to him. What a surprise!)

  • frankboyd

    pelamun,

    So you now have conceded that I have the facts on my side. Thank you.

    My point is that this is the purest hypocrisy, and you might just want to think about correcting that. Else: Limbaugh certainly deserves to pay a price for this, but don’t kid yourselves that you are anything other than the useful attack poodles of your political bosses. Please don’t pretend to principle, it doesn’t become you.

  • this is where you suck at reading comprehension. I’ve been saying all along that there are misogynists on the left. And many people across the atheist blogosphere have been saying the same thing.

    You waltz in here and tell this to us as though no-one knew or would acknowledge it.

    And you wonder why no-one takes you seriously?

  • you might just want to think about correcting that.

    Again your ignorance is showing. Many commenters here consistently call out people on the left for misogyny, myself included.

    Are you living under a rock that you missed the the gigantic debacle that followed EG? Those misogynystic MRAs that came flooding the gates were not theists, but atheists.

    Many Pharyngulites have striven to make Pharyngula a place in the internet where misogyny has no place.

  • I see crankboyd just keeps on repeating the same demonstrably false allegations that were already debunked right after his first comment here. Oblivious troll is oblivious.

    Like most other Republicans, this crank is just desperate to avoid, by any means available, confronting the awful truth of what a colossal epic fail their party, mindset, and ideology really are.

  • left0ver1under

    The reason the right wing concern trolls are quiet can be explained with an old saying:

    A drunken man’s words are a sober man’s thoughts.

    Limbaugh is – aptly – the drunk who is saying aloud what they other right wingnuts are thinking. They hate women as much as Limbaugh does, they’re just more hesitant to display it because they’re afraid of blowback.

  • frankniddy

    Cranky is ignoring one very simple fact. Very few, possibly none, of the conservative pundits that are now so offended by misogyny cared even one iota about it before their golden boy Limbaugh was criticized for his misogynistic rant.

  • “The two are connected; it’s obvious that Palin is championed, despite her ludicrousness, because she is identified strongly with the working class, and that the attacks on her take classic forms of class hatred.”

    Fuckboy:

    You’re a cunt, she’s a moron. The labels are completely interchangeable, assholedouchenozzle.

  • Pingback: Grab More Laptop Coupon()

  • ElRay

    It’s OK for “their” people, because they can repent and be forgiven. It’s not OK for everybody else, because they won’t repent.