PURE FUCKING EVIL

http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2008/05/hillary-sexism-watch-part-ninety_7943.html

Oh, Christ, not this shit again.

Apparently, Wil Wheaton saying that he despises Hillary Clinton because she's 1.) dragging the race out and 2.) about to pull a dozen or so dirty tricks has made somebody state that Wil Wheaton is being sexist.

Which is stupid. Wil himself never says anything sexist; he makes the case for Hillary not having a case. That's it.

He even goes on to tell people not to accuse him of sexism, because that's retarded.

It is.

Anyway, Shakesville makes this case:

"Oliver Willis and Michael D. at Balloon Juice also thought this was high-larious and linked approvingly. She's just deluded, after all. She can't win. Nobody really likes her. She's crazy with ambition. Who cares that no other candidate has ever been subject to this kind of pressure to get out when there's still a chance to get the nomination, SHE'S DESTROYING THE PARTY!!!


What kind of chance is it? As far as I know, the only way she could do this is if she made the superdelegates vote her in. A lot of people don't like that shit, and would enjoy a popular vote selecting the candidate.

And, yes, she is destroying the party. She's the weaker of the two candidates, and she's trying to say that she's the strongest. She's not. For one thing, people REALLY don't like her, and for two, the mud-slinging bullshit slapfight she started with Barack Obama may turn people off to the Democratic Party and that would be good for McCain.

In-fighting while you're running a race or trying to accomplish anything gives the other side an advantage, in real life and even in videogames. It's a fact. If you want to argue differently, could you point me to some statistics and/or information that states she's winning, because it doesn't look like she is.


"Women, of course, are not allowed to be ambitious. And they're supposed to know their place, and step aside when they're not wanted anymore. The boys are allowed to finish the game even if there's no way they can win, but the girl has to forfeit when she's told to. Otherwise, she just can't see reality, and she's a crazy stalker ex who just can't let go, even though she wasn't really wanted in the first place -- no, we really wanted to hang out with Bill. Why is she still tagging along?"

Nobody cares that you have a vagina. Stop thinking this. If Barack Obama was pulling this stupid shit, I for one would yelling at his ass for it, too. I don't mind that she's a woman-- hell, I even overlooked the fact that she's probably gonna fuck up my gaming with censorship. I don't care about her censoring things, even things I like. What I'm looking for is a person that can play fair. Obama's been playing pretty fair, and Hillary's just been pulling every trick she could think of.

You might notice that when the other candidates-- all of whom were male-- were losing, they got their asses kicked out of the thing quite quickly. So, where exactly is this precedent you're talking about? No, she doesn't HAVE to forfeit, but it doesn't look like she's a good match to fight McCain.

And while she's not crazy, she IS acting like that. And no, we didn't really want her.

We liked her husband. I didn't have any opinion of her until she started trying to censor videogames and television. Then I didn't like her slightly.

I was actually happy that a woman got to be Senator. America's still fucked up and sexist, so it was good to see she got the job, as she was qualified for it.


"Message received, gentlemen: This club is for men only. No gurlz allowed!"

You're engaging in a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you keep yelling at men like this, you're going to meet a lot of them who are going to say, "Yeah, well, fuck women!", because you assumed that they're sexist. Quit doing this shit.


"The kicker? The motto for Wheaton's blog is:

Wil Wheaton says, "Don't be a dick!""

Nice motto, isn't it?


"Might want to follow your own advice there, pumpkin."

Oh, how nice; you're being condescending.

Actually, during this entire segment you've been condescending to men. Why the hell is this? What's with the reverse sexism? If you were about true equality you'd be treating me like a human being rather than a monstrous penis beast.


"The next one is rather more disturbing, because it's not just a bunch of bloggers (even one who's FAMOUS) snarking about psycho ex-girlfriends. No, this one is a US Congressman, Steve Cohen, D-TN:"

Throw it at me.


"Memphis Commercial Appeal's Blake Fontenay: According to U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Memphis, she may be starting to more closely resemble another famous movie character: The psycho lady played by Glenn Close in "Fatal Attraction."

When asked about whether Clinton should drop out of the race on Fox 13's "Good Morning Memphis" program today, Cohen said: "Glenn Close should have stayed in that tub."

Man, they really do eat their own.

UPDATE: Here's the video of the Cohen interview. His Clinton remark is about two-thirds of the way in.

UPDATE II: Hmmmmmm. Chris Rock last month: ("It's going to be hard for Barack to be president. . . . Hillary's not going to give up. She's like Glenn Close in 'Fatal Attraction.' ") (Via comments)"

She does resemble Glenn Close, but yes, that's a sexist comment.

Also, your skin appears to be fairly thin. The man made a stupid analogy that he thinks is clever and won't stop spouting it. Feel sorry for him, because he is a pathetic dipshit.


"In his post on the Cohen comments, Jake Tapper linked to the Pauline Kael review of "Fatal Attraction," written when it came out in 1987. And Tapper gets why this is misogynist, as well as why it's a big potential problem for Obama:

I'm getting sick of hearing about Fatal Attraction.


"The "Glenn Close in 'Fatal Attraction'" analogy brings with it a whole carousel's worth of baggage given the meme at the time of the release of "Fatal Attraction" that, as the late great Pauline Kael wrote in The New Yorker at the time, the "film is about men seeing feminists as witches."

Interesting.


""Fatal Attraction," Kael wrote, "parrots the aggressively angry, self-righteous statements that have become commonplaces of feminist fiction, and they're so inappropriate to the circumstances that they're proof she's loco. They're also the director Adrian Lyne's and the screenwriter James Dearden's hostile version of feminism."

That's weird and I'm not sure I understand it.


"No matter how you slice it, Alex Forrest was the movie's villain, like Jason Voorhees or Michael Myers. I'd posit at the very least that it's not keeping with Obama's lofty campaign rhetoric to compare Clinton's tenacity to psychosis. And it will indubitably further alienate women voters whom Obama needs to bring to his side once the Democratic race concludes."

Probably not, seeing as you idiots don't seem to realize you don't matter.

Yes, we're bloggers. Yes, occasionally we get recognized by the media. No, we do not matter.

We matter less than the news media does simply because no one is really going to hear us. Don't assume you're so far-reaching that you're going to have a national impact.

You won't.

Not even if you go on Boing Boing or the Drudge Report.

Actually, MAYBE Drudge Report. But do female democrats read that shit?


"Ironically, Cohen is known as a progressive who has been effective on women's issues. He has offered some apologies: Tapper notes that his office issued an apology, and Cohen (or someone from his office) showed up in comments at Tennessee Guerrilla Women, and also responded to an email from Big Tent Democrat at TalkLeft. In all three cases, the apology offered was the same:

I sincerely apologize for the comments I made about Senator Clinton's campaign. I have great respect for Senator Clinton as a US Senator. She has waged an historic campaign which has done much to break the glass ceiling. My comments obviously do not reflect the sentiments of Senator Obama or the Obama campaign. Nor do they reflect my opinion of Senator Clinton whom I have known for years and admire. My hope is that our party will come together to work to defeat John McCain."

BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT

He isn't sorry.

And what the hell is the apology going to do? I don't care if the man's screaming "NIGGERS!" at people during church, him apologizing for it afterward does nothing.


"Egalia at TGW and several commenters at TalkLeft noted that this apology was not going over very well. And as an apology, it's very problematic. The biggest problem is that the comments were not made about Clinton's campaign, but about Clinton herself. She's clearly being cast in the Close role, not her campaign. It's not the campaign in the tub, it's Clinton.

She's clearly? How the hell is she...? Dude, seriously, I hadn't even heard about this shit or your blog until they posted it on Fark.


In addition, if you have so much respect and admiration for her, why on earth did you make these comments in the first place?

Were you born stupid or did you take lessons?

He really feels that way. It is, however, social ettiquette-- not to mention "the only way he's gonna keep his job"-- to apologize.

It's stupid, I know, but that's what these dippy fuckers do.


It's also somewhat surprising that he apologized at all, since most instances of misogyny used against Clinton have simply been ignored or just not taken seriously (one exception: Ken Rudin of NPR eventually apologized for his own "Fatal Attraction" comments last month). I've heard, but have not been able to confirm, that the apology came only after McCain made an issue of the comments.

Woohoo.


It's just ever so slightly problematic that a US Congressman is insulting a US Senator on the basis of her gender and for stepping outside of prescribed female roles. Because if "Fatal Attraction" was about anything, it was about women's roles, as Echidne laid out brilliantly in this post, written in response to Rudin's use of the analogy:"

Why is this problematic?

A lot of people think this way. You're not going to get around it, and hearing it doesn't change the fact that it always existed.

What the hell is the point here? I'd rather have somebody call me a nigger than keep their mouth just, because at least when they call me that, I know how they feel, and I know how to deal with and react to their actions.

What I'm saying is, it's better for somebody to tell you that they want to kill you than for them to sneak up and just kill you. With the first one, you can react. The other one, you probably won't even know what's happening until it happens.


"There are at least two ways of interpreting Rudin's message here. The kinder one (yes, this is the kinder one) is that Hillary Clinton can't be stopped by anything less than being killed by Michelle Obama, that she is an almost unkillable monster.

Look, dude, nobody's gonna stop her.

Isn't that a testament to how strong a woman she is?


"The less kind interpretation has to do with what that particular movie was all about. It was a parable about bad women: working women, uppity, independent, demanding; and about good women: mothers who stay at home and support their husbands through thin and thick. It was a movie about the loathing, fear and hatred of women who don't follow the "good woman" code of behavior, and what happens to those women at the end."

That's nice.

And stupid.


"It could always be the case that Rudin is unaware of that interpretation. And pigs also fly almost every day.

Anne Archer woulda quit, Hillary! What's wrong with you?"

Just to let you in the know, very few sexist macho male pig motherfuckers are well-versed in feminist literature, so you might wanna cut back the literary references.

Waaaaay back.


The bottom line to this? Yeah, the media is screaming "QUIT, HILLARY", and they should keep their fuckin' mouths shut until the game is over. What this person is doing, however, is such that they're looking for sexism where it doesn't exist. As it turns out, you can actually disagree with a woman without being a sexist asshole. Just like men, women can be wrong.

And calling them on the wrong shit that they do is not sexist. It is known better as simply "paying attention".