Indiana Jonesing
315 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 … 13 Newer→ Last
-
FFS, stop the misogyny.
As long as you remember Judith Collins isn't a real woman, so it's OK to call her a nasty bitch to your heart's content.
-
*FFS, stop the mysogeny*?
How dare you take the name of human propogation in vain - that's err sexist.
Language - as you've shown - is subjective, and at its best at its most coloured.
-
A few interesting things.
Nets have called NC for Obama.
CNN has exits saying 50% of Hillary voters wouldnt vote for Obama.
Exits have Obama winning independents.
-
BTW - AP is calling North Carolina for Obama, presumably from exit polls alone as actual vote counting has yet to be posted.
Indiana still skullfully cyrstalizing...
-
CNN exit polls have half of Clinton voters in Indiana and more than half in NC saying they won't vote for Obama if he's the candidate in November.
When Obama gets the nomination, she'd better make one hell of a speech pointing them his way.
-
As long as you remember Judith Collins isn't a real woman, so it's OK to call her a nasty bitch to your heart's content.
Actually, Metro has her on its roster of "tough bastards" this month ...
-
David, "witch' is a term loaded with pejorative overtones, in a way that bastard is not.
Have a look at this catalogue of sexism directed at Hillary Clinton - it's incredible.
The sensible thing for you to do now is to admit that you used a misognyst term, stop trying to defend it by some half-arsed remark about using 'warlock' or 'bastard', and then look for some of the many sensible and valid criticisms of Clinton that can be made, instead of criticising her for daring to be a woman.
Saying sorry would be nice too.
-
Preach it, Deborah. Countdown to the 'lighten up, girls/can't you take a joke/you feminists are so humourless' comments... three... two... one...
-
The problem with a word loaded with perjoratives is that people can interpret them in a way that is unintended.
Is it right for me to then apologise for an interpretation that wasn't my aim?
If you think it is then I apologise for causing offence.
-
Interesting that they're comfortable calling NC this early in - suggests a hell of a victory for Obama which could be significant in such a comparatively large state.
-
There you go, Danielle. Not the 'can't you take a joke' defence, but the 'lanugge is subjective anyway' and the ' it's all your fault for taking offence' answers, followed by the non-apology.
Textbook stuff, really.
-
Have a look at this catalogue of sexism directed at Hillary Clinton - it's incredible.
Agreed. Why all this recourse from men-who-should-know-better to the language of sex and sexuality?
I can be amply offended by the nature of her campaign without going there.
But ... and we've been here before ... the Hillary blog commentary brigade isn't shy about raising Obama's race either.
-
Could we perhaps agree on some non-sexist epithets for Hillary then?
;-)
-
Just so, Russell.
However, racism against Obama doesn't justify sexism against Clinton, and sexism against Clinton doesn't justify racism against Obama. Both are reprehensible.
-
Interesting that they're comfortable calling NC this early in - suggests a hell of a victory for Obama which could be significant in such a comparatively large state.
What they'll be looking for from that is a big bump in the popular vote lead.
-
So I apologise for the complete de-railing of this thread about my sexism towards Hillary.
I shall henceforth refer to her as "Hillary"
"Can Barack finally kill off Hillary's Presidential campaign?"
Sorry.
-
The problem with a word loaded with perjoratives is that people can interpret them in a way that is unintended.
then maybe you shouldn't use it, and save yourself and us a lot of trouble. it's a nasty, sexist word and unnecessary. whatever your aim might be, your choice of words is intended to convey meaning to others. we don't know what's in your mind when you say "witch", but we do know the overtones the words carry, we know what meaning people will take from it. i just don't think it's acceptable.
-
Just so, Russell.
However, racism against Obama doesn't justify sexism against Clinton, and sexism against Clinton doesn't justify racism against Obama. Both are reprehensible
OTOH, it can't be denied that gender and race are shaping the contest.
Hillary's support amongs black voters has collapsed, but she's killing Obama amongst older women voters -- who do vote.
I'm sure if I was a fiftysomething female registered Democrat, I'd feel driven to to Hillary by some of the crap I was reading about her.
-
Indiana's been rock steady Clinton 57%, Obama 43% through 12 to 32% of the vote counted - in earlier states such consistancy would've seen the wire services calling it for the leading candidate...
-
the complete de-railing of this thread
And of course, Deborah, not only was our offence our own, subjective fault, but it was also irrelevant to the larger discussion and must therefore be dismissed.
And... scene.
-
Textbook stuff, really.
Well, Deborah, I don't mean to threadjack but do you refer to gays and lesbians as 'queers'? Some folks consider using that term is an act reclamation that de-stigmatises a previously perjorative term that has all kinds of connotations of abnormality, dishonesty etc.
Personally, I think that's post-modern bullshit and find being called a 'queer' every bit as offensive as being described as a half-breed nigger.
If anything, I think witches deserve an apology for the gross libel of being compared to a politician who has run a campaign whose banality is only exceeded by its grotesque and dishonest appeals to racism and class prejudice.
-
"And of course, Deborah, not only was our offence our own, subjective fault, but it was also irrelevant to the larger discussion and must therefore be dismissed. "
Ok prepared to accept the part about being upset by Witch - I can see your point and Iv'e apologised for it.
However, now you're being ridiculous. I apologised for the fact I derailed the thread and you jump down my throat about it.
And you're right Craig, I apologise to witches everywhere for comparing them with Hillary. It was unfair.
-
Deborah, Danielle (and other PAS women participants) I tautoko the kaupapa of what you are saying. Just because our sexist heritage enables wide variety of abusive terms for women does not mean we need to use any of them.
The problem with a word loaded with perjoratives is that people can interpret them in a way that is unintended.
I really hate the use of "witch" as term of abuse. It derives from wicca which means "wise". I have known practicing wiccans and they are all very nice people, and nothing like the vile nature supposed by your use of "witch".
Could we perhaps agree on some non-sexist epithets for Hillary then?
IMO, her campaign is marked by an outstanding degree of desperation. So how about The Desperate One ?
-
What is the deal with referring to "Obama" (surname) but "Hillary" (first name)? That strikes me as highly suss too.
-
How about we just knock off the shitty name-calling, sexist or no? 'Witch' is hardly a detailed policy analysis, is it?
I'm tired of the pandering from both sides - Hilary knocking back the shots was right down there with Obama going bowling. Remember the episode of the West Wing that deals with whether or not the Hispanic Dem candidate should do the huntin' shootin' photo op? It just seems to be required in US politics. Pandering is expected, genuineness is not.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.