All this talk about misogyny on television

[mamadeb]

Is fine - I'm not taking any sides in this, and both sides have decent arguments.

I'm more concerned, right now, about Misogyny in media political coverage.

(This is not a discussion of the candidates, btw. None of them have control over the media.)

Comments

[mamadeb.livejournal.com]

It really is hard to say - they are using the language of misogyny to attack a candidate, but it's hard to know if it's because they truly fear a woman candidate or because the language is available and she's a woman and the pundits, etc are not thinking of the connotations.

I don't think there is actually equivalent language - I think "bastard" is about the closest, or "jerk", but there are nuances there, too.

I personally think it's a combination of all of the above, and the fact that there has long been a genuine dislike of Hillary Clinton, largely fomented by her husband's political opponents.

I've even seen speculation that it is those political opponents who are behind the scenes for some of this - certainly, one of the more egregious things (Citizens United, Not Timid t-shirts) was done by Republicans quite openly.

[smallship1.livejournal.com]

It's tempting, especially with my paranoid head on, to ascribe some or all of it to the political opposition. It would certainly seem to be in their interest to maintain divisions within the party up to and through the convention, so that whichever candidate wins there is a large group of disaffected voters out there who might just go for their guy to spite him/her. (Some of my friends, who have posted saying basically "relax, it's okay not to decide on a candidate till the convention," have I think overlooked this point.)

But then, my paranoid head thinks Monica Lewinsky was an agente provocateuse sent by the other party anyway. So you obviously can't believe everything it tells you.