Posted by: ST on June 10, 2010 at 6:13 pm
Just a few days ago, I wrote a post about the “concern” amongst some liberals that “hot” conservative women were being objectified by conservative males based solely on their looks. It’s a bogus charge, for reasons I explained in that post, but – and I know this will shock you – did you know that in the same week GOP women were kicking bootie across the country in primary elections, some far left wingers were/are obsessing over whether or not Sarah Palin … had breast implants done?
See Tigerhawk’s post for a small sampling of the various links out there where this “issue” has been discussed. He also makes some excellent points about the rampant left wing idiocy and hypocrisy on display:
First, does the left enhance — and I use the word advisedly — its appeal among the electorate by suggesting that we ought to ridicule women for getting breast implants? The boobery need no further reminder that the left disdains their sense of aesthetic, but if liberals want to beat them over the head with it, fine. This may, in the end, be Palin’s greatest contribution to conservative political fortunes: She suckers the chattering left in to reminding everybody that they are, well, snots.
Second, we note that privacy in medical matters is the legal foundation of the Constitutional right to abortion, per Roe v. Wade. This right to privacy is apparently so sacred that (so says the left) it is reasonable to sacrifice fetuses to defend it. One would think that the left, therefore, would be reluctant to intrude on even Sarah Palin’s medical privacy. Of course, that would require some measure of intellectual honesty, which is apparently beyond the capacity of many liberals when Sarah Palin is involved.
Yes, including Andrew Sullivan, who has been obsessed with Sarah Palin’s uterus for going on two years now, popular liberal sites like TPM Muckraker which featured a story about Sarah Palin owning a tanning bed, and the HuffPo, which published a story inquiring as to whether or not Palin had had lipliner tattooed on. Let’s also not forget the 2008 attacks launched by liberals – including high profile liberal Alan Colmes – suggesting that Palin had posed for nude photos when she was younger, that she had her first son Track out of wedlock, and that she named her children after witches. Then there was the alleged photo of her in a red, white, and blue “patriotic bikini” with a rifle in her hand – an image that was Photoshopped. Also, remember the moonbat in Chicago who painted a nude picture of Sarah Palin … using his daughter as the model?
I could go on and on, but the point has been made: They say it’s conservative males who judge conservative women solely on the basis of the way that they look, but from my vantage point it ain’t conservative men putting conservative women in a box based on their looks and bodies, but instead rabid lefties. Since she doesn’t toe the “females are victims” line, far leftists clearly they think she has nothing to offer in the political arena – so they judge her based on her looks.
The very definition of “objectifying.”
Where’s the widespread “feminist” outrage? I won’t hold my breath.
Update – 7:47 PM: Take a look at this nonsense:
Former New Yorker editor Tina Brown appeared on Thursday’s Good Morning America to deride the mostly Republican women who won primaries on Tuesday as “wingnuts” and to sneer that they represent a “blow to feminism.”
GMA’s “Morning Mix” segment featured Brown and journalist Catherine Crier, part of a panel that usually includes reporters agreeing with each other over liberal talking points. After Stephanopoulos recited the numerous women who won nominations on June 8, the current Daily Beast editor dismissed, “…The only trouble with this one is, it almost feels as if all these women winning are kind of a blow to feminism.” [Audio available here.]
She then added, “Women, too, can be wing nuts, is the point.” Crier offered the developing liberal line that Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorini’s business experience could now be a liability: “I think it’s quite interesting that the whole CEO movement out there in California. Because, here we are with all the Wall Street consternation and, yet, they’re touting their credentials as major CEOs as qualifications.”
[...]
TINA BROWN: Yeah, I mean, it was. I mean, in some ways, it’s, again, representation that people are looking for otherness. You know, they’re so disgusted with incumbents, they’re looking for something completely different. And, as it happens, of course, women usually are seen as, you know, an alternative because many more men are in there. But, actually, the only trouble with this one is, it almost feels as if all these women winning are kind of a blow to feminism. Because, each one of them, really, most of them, are, you know, very much, uh, uh, you know, against so many of things that women have fought for such a long time.
Got it? You stray off the rad liberal “feminism” reservation, then you’re not a real woman.
If I had a dime for every time I’ve heard that …
It just gives us more to mock the Left about!
Race card!!! Gay card!!! Boob card!!! What-a-card!!!!
what a bunch of macaroons those “gals” are.
In homage of the comic strip B.C.: CLAMS GOT LEGS!!!
I think Tina Brown needs to learn how to read a teleprompter, a la Obama. She sounds worse than he does off the TOTUS!
However, in her defense, nothing she says makes any less sense than anything Duh-1 says.
“They are real, and they are spectaular!” – Jackie Chiles, attorney for Kosmo Kramer.
The misnamed liberal/progressive “feminists” have been dying a slow, ugly and agonizing death in recent decades. From crucifying Clarence Thomas in Congressional hearings for allegedly talking about a pubic hair on a Coke can, to defending Clinton from “trailer trash” after he “did” a young female intern [an act that would have led to the firing of any CEO of an American business], to ignoring the millions of females W liberated, the “progressive” feminists have proven themselves to be the very personification of “hypocrisy”.
Oops, I meant “spectacular”. Don’t want there to be any misunderstanding.
I’m waiting for Andrew Sullivan’s next psychotic break on the subject of Sarah, and the breast-thing will drive him closer to terminal clinical nutjobbery. BTW, there are now bras which enlarge, uplift, and otherwise improve the appearance of young women in t-shirts—my 21-year old model daughter tells me. [She models for an agency, as well as being a great kid.]
Tina Brown’s Feminazi coda to her failed career stateside suggests she should retire back to Blighty for rehab on both mental and physical fronts. The New Yorker staff still snicker at this tart’s wanting to put lipstick on their pig!
Crier has fallen a long way from rational thinking and now evidently believes that success in business is a liability in politics because, apparently, political hack/sluts like Boxer and Pelosi are soooo much better at legislation. What a fall from grace!
Well, what else does the liberal media have to promote their cause? If they had anything they might try using it. As it is, they don’t have clue and they just want the microphone to demean other people based on their demented thought processes. This is the proof.
What Tina Brown is saying is: Since these women don’t fit our liberal feminist template and speak the feminist mantra…well, there has to be something wrong with them, right?
Tigerhawk’s article nailed it! As for Crier and Brown, do they actually listen to the bumbling babble they dispense and believe it? LMAO
I bought that feminism crap back in the 70s and remember vividly having a conversation with my cousin (die hard liberal feminist) at her sister’s house. As we were man bashing, her brother in law was serving us margaritas and snacks while her sister was at work.
Feminism per se, has made me have to work harder. I didn’t realize I was ‘liberated’ all along, but without the hype and hypocrisy.
She seems to have always been a fairly well-endowed woman. If she’s like me, in the past, she de-emphasized her chest, to avoid the common situation of men staring at it. Not a good thing, if you’re in the working world.
However, her family income is now NOT dependent on being treated like a man. In addition, she’s a grandmother – if not by then, when will a woman ever get the right to flaunt what she’s got? She probably decided to do whatever she wanted to – at a certain point, women feel F$%^ it! So I’ve got breasts – deal with it.
Why should we be concerned with what a lefty Brit-twit like Tina Brown thinks of REAL Americans like the Palins?
Perhaps Ms. Palin found a better more supportive bra.
The idiots of the left have always obsessed about her body. The Thanksgiving after President Obama was elected, I was talking to my 2 brothers, my older one who is usually pretty reasonable, but still voted for Barack, and my younger one who is a union automatron, and of course voted for Obama. My younger brother kept ranting about how Sarah was stupid, and then proceeds to tell us how much he wanted to… I just looked at my older brother and told him “see what kind of people your aligned with”. Then walked to my car and left. People are just weird, and the left is full of bozos and idiots. Sadly my family is full of them. – Lorica
Clams got legs, Sarah’s got boobs.
And the left can’t get over the fact Sarah’s got boobs.
It’s easy enough for them to listen to a bunch of empty-headed windbags from Hollyweird that spend more time with their plastic surgeons than with their families, but because Sarah’s a natural? It’s gotta be a conspiracy!
At least now I have something in common with the left to talk about.
As I see it, this is straight out of the Alinsky playbook. What’s the point of obsessing about her looks, or her family? Simple: it’s there to trivialize her, and by extension every candidate she supports, and everyone with similar views. If you hammer on that long enough, you eventually give enough people the idea that she’s not a serious player, and a lightweight. I mean, if all she is is a nice set of breasts, how can you waste time listening to her?
And then you move directly to ridicule. This is where the left comes up with idiotic babbling about seeing Russia from her house.
What is vitally important to the left is to keep the focus off what she is saying. Remember how well her speech at the 2008 convention was received? Almost everyone who listened to it thought it was a great speech that went right to the heart of the issues of the campaign. That was BEFORE the left started their trivialization campaign.
If most people actually start listening to Governor Palin again, the left is in deep trouble, and they know it. Hence their “concern” about her measurements.
I have never looked at Gov. Palin’s breasts, or her beautiful face……or her uh, shapley legs…….um, well those curves……or, oh jeez,that smile…..
But that policy paper she wrote……..
C’mon people. She’s smart, right on the issues, an effective messenger and attractive……so what wrong with that??
It’s the wrong message, Drew. She actually advocates that people take at least SOME responsibility for running their own lives, and not depend on the government to bail them out from every lousy decision they’ve ever made.
How quaint is that?
God help us. We’re either a nation of not so funny comedians, or a nation of very funny serious people.
Keep going Sarah, don’t let the mindless jerks get you down.