Category: sexism

Drip, Drip, Drip

Thinking about how we wouldn’t need an Andrew Cuomo reckoning if prestige media and elite pundits just reported on him accurately in the first place

— Ross Barkan (@RossBarkan) February 27, 2021

A lesson for the press

One of the things about serial harassers and abusers is that it almost never happens just once. Once someone comes out to the press, people start coming out of the woodwork.*  

This means, you guessed it, we now have a second aide who has accused Andrew Cuomo of sexual harassment.

The reason that this happens is because typically harassment victims feel isolated, and are terrified of going out on a limb and being there alone.

Once someone else makes an allegation, they realize that they are NOT alone, and come forward as well, and so now we have Charlotte Bennett, former:

A second former aide to Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo is accusing him of sexual harassment, saying that he asked her questions about her sex life, whether she was monogamous in her relationships and if she had ever had sex with older men.

The aide, Charlotte Bennett, who was an executive assistant and health policy adviser in the Cuomo administration until she left in November, told The New York Times that the governor had harassed her late last spring, during the height of the state’s fight against the coronavirus.

Ms. Bennett, 25, said the most unsettling episode occurred on June 5, when she was alone with Mr. Cuomo in his State Capitol office. In a series of interviews this week, she said the governor had asked her numerous questions about her personal life, including whether she thought age made a difference in romantic relationships, and had said that he was open to relationships with women in their 20s — comments she interpreted as clear overtures to a sexual relationship.

………

Ms. Bennett said that during the June encounter, the governor, 63, also complained to her about being lonely during the pandemic, mentioning that he “can’t even hug anyone,” before turning the focus to Ms. Bennett. She said that Mr. Cuomo asked her, “Who did I last hug?”

Ms. Bennett said she had tried to dodge the question by responding that she missed hugging her parents. “And he was, like, ‘No, I mean like really hugged somebody?’” she said.

Mr. Cuomo never tried to touch her, Ms. Bennett said, but the message of the entire episode was unmistakable to her.

“I understood that the governor wanted to sleep with me, and felt horribly uncomfortable and scared,” Ms. Bennett said. “And was wondering how I was going to get out of it and assumed it was the end of my job.”

………

Ms. Bennett said she had disclosed the interaction with Mr. Cuomo to his chief of staff, Jill DesRosiers, less than a week later and was transferred to another job, as a health policy adviser, with an office on the opposite side of the Capitol, soon after that. Ms. Bennett said she had also given a lengthy statement to a special counsel to the governor, Judith Mogul, toward the end of June.

Ms. Bennett said she ultimately decided not to insist on an investigation because she was happy in her new job and “wanted to move on.” No action was taken against the governor.

It never happens just once.

I’m expecting to see a few more.

The only question is whether people still fear Cuomo the way that they used to.  

If not, he is toast.

*This statement is offered only in the context of the current story regarding Andrew Cuomo, and not on the allegations involving Woody Allen, which I have not, and probabably never will, have a public opinion on.

What is Wrong with the Clinton Wing of the Democratic Party Succinctly Stated

I am not at all surprised that it is a Brit who notes that aggressive identity politics has pushed economic justice out of the political spotlight.

I would argue that some political factions, most notably the Clinton political machine, have done so deliberately, because it allows them to check the “right” boxes while still aligning themselves with what Theodore Roosevelt called the “Malefactors of Wealth”.

People like Wal-Mart (Hillary was a member of its board for years) and Goldman Sachs (Hillary’s speeches, and they funded her son-in-law’s hedge fund) are Hillary’s peeps, because they all agree that focusing on identity politics, as opposed to the the increasingly ferocious war on the average American worker or the financialization of our economy, is a good thing:

The rise of identity politics means that the personal is commonly understood to be political. Being a radical today relates as much to who you are as to what you think. Class struggle, at one time the raison d’être of the socialist movement, has been usurped on the left by the personal grievances of women, gays and ethnic minorities.

Identity politics was an understandable response to some of the injustices of the twentieth century. Despite the loftiness of much left-wing rhetoric, sexism, racism and homophobia have never successfully been eliminated from socialist politics for the simple reason that these movements reflect the societies in which they were conceived. It was often made apparent to women in particular that the priorities for leftists lay strictly within the class framework.

It would be wrong to imply that today this dynamic has been turned on its head. One can still find sexism, racism and homophobia on the left as easily as one can find it in wider society. In an article for Slate about the US Democratic primaries, Michelle Goldberg wrote in late 2015 about a cultural phenomenon of so-called ‘Bernie Bros’ – male supporters of US presidential candidate Bernie Sanders who ‘seem to believe that their class politics exempt them from taking sexism seriously’.

………

Ultimately, though, the left should seek to move beyond identity politics for the simple reason that it is compatible with neo-liberal economics. Identity politics can co-exist with the corporate boss who makes more money in a week than his cleaner takes home in a year – as long as the chances of being the boss are assigned proportionally among different ethnic groups, sexualities and genders. Individual winners and losers remain as remote from each other as ever; they are simply sorted in direct proportion to their numbers in society. The ultimate aim of identity politics is to ‘tune up’ the elite rather than to abolish it.

………

Class politics must certainly evolve with the times – at the very least it should take account of the legitimate grievances of people who feel marginalised for reasons other than their class. However, liberal identity politics is increasingly a zero-sum game in which white men must invariably lose out so that women, ethnic minorities and LGBT individuals can prosper. With no account for the impact of class, this will simply give rise to another injustice, or at the very least, compound an existing one.

(emphasis mine)

I think that the author, James Bloodworth, undersells the deliberate nature of this transformation.

When one looks at the professional class, doctors, lawyers, and (most significantly) college professors, the top 2-5%, this focus on identity politics benefits them.

While they have not benefited to the degree of the top 1% of 1%, they have benefited, and now it’s easier to for them to find inexpensive domestic help.

Gloria Steinem, How about a Nice Glass of Shut the F%$# Up?

Feminist icon Gloria Steinem has just suggested that young women are supporting Bernie Sanders because they are looking to impress boys:

Feminist activist Gloria Steinem on Friday suggested that young women support Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders over rival Hillary Clinton because they want to meet boys.

On HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher,” Maher asked Steinem why Clinton, who has campaigned on the historic nature of her candidacy, was losing the young female vote.

“I don’t mean to over-generalize … but men tend to get more conservative because they gain power as they age, and women get more radical because they lose power as they age,” Steinem responded.

“So it’s kind of not fair to measure most women by the standard of most men, because they’re going to get more activist as they get older,” she added.

“And when you’re young, you’re thinking, ‘Where are the boys?’ The boys are with Bernie.”

Maher joked that if he had chalked up Bernie’s support among young women to their desire to meet boys, Steinem would have slapped him.

Seriously?

After a lifetime of supporting equality, you blithely dismiss the attitudes of women as some sort of attempt at catching the right man?

She is saying that young women have no agency of their all.

I understand how some people are excited about the possibility of Hillary Clinton being the first woman President, but this is nuts.

The bigger picture is that identity politics is morally bankrupt, but I’m not a big picture kind of guy.

I’ll just call lame beyond belief.

Bullsh%$ Bingo Winner of the Day

There is a mildly amusing parody web site that does a compare and contrast of Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, things like:

  • Bernie: Star Wars is a great series, and I thought that episode 7 is a nice return to the Franchise’s roots,
  • Hillary: [Makes “Live long and prosper” hand signal]

It’s kind of silly, and not too deep, and pokes fun at Hillary Clinton’s perceived lack of authenticity,* but someone at Salon decided to use the meme to attack all Bernie Sanders supporters as male chauvinists, aka Bernie Bros:

………These jabs at Clinton’s imagined sonic preferences reinforce the tired idea that the tastes of non-cis-male cultural consumers—from teenagers on through boomers and beyond—are something to be mocked and disrespected.………

Don’t even bother trying.

Annie Zaleski has won the bullsh%$ bingo game for this month, and possibly for the entire f%$#ing presidential campaign.

She has her head so far up her ass that she resembles a Klein bottle.

*Not her fault.   Bill Clinton does authenticity so well that if he were sharing a bill with Pope Frank, the Pontiff would look like the Andy Kaufman character Tony Clifton.

Props to Bernie

On Face the Nation, Bernie Sanders said that much of the criticism of Hillary Clinton is motivated by sexism:

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) said on Sunday that some of the criticism directed at his Democratic primary rival Hillary Clinton is motivated by sexism.

“I can’t think of many personalities who have been attacked for more reasons than Hillary Clinton,” Sanders told John Dickerson on “Face the Nation.”

“And by the way, let me be frank – and I’m running against her – some of it is sexist. I don’t know that a man would be treated the same way that Hillary is,” Sanders added.

Sanders remarks came in response to a question about whether Clinton’s use of a private server while secretary of state has hurt her trustworthiness in the eyes of some Americans. Sanders refused to comment on the scandal or Clinton’s honesty, and went on to emphasize that his concerns with her as the Democratic nominee are about her policies, not personality.

That’s actually pretty classy, particularly in the context of the 2016 campaign.

I Wish that I Were This Good a Jew

Baci Weiler, a woman in New York City with a buzz cut and wearing baggy trowsers and t-shirt, was was approached by a Chabad Lubovich representative and lent her Tefillin* so that she could pray.

In Orthodox Judaism, Tefillin are only to be worn by men, so Ms. Weiler posted the picture of this (Since deleted) to Facebook:

This happened last friday at a chabad table. Apparently, buzzed hair + baggy t-shirt + charedi lack of any concept of fluidity in gender expression = egalitarianism. Tefillin with a bracha [blessing], administered by a chabadnik! bimheira beyameinu [Hebrew for “it should come speedily in our time].

It should not have been a big deal, and no one but her FB friends should have seen it, but at this point, through the vagaries of the Internet, it ends up getting some mainstream coverage. (The Jerusalem Post picked it up.)

Well. Baci Weler was horrified at the idea that the Chabadnik who offered her Tefillin was being subjected to mocking, and she offered the most sincere and spiritual that I have ever read:

Two days ago, I posted a couple of photos of myself…

Two days ago, I posted a couple of photos of myself putting on tefillin at a Chabad stand in Union Square. Watching these photos spread, I’ve had time to reflect on their implications. These thoughts are still not fully formed, but I hope both my critics and supporters read them carefully and charitably.

The encounter itself was brief, shocking, and personally significant. I did not plan or initiate this interaction. I was approached and misgendered. Being seen as a man, despite being a woman, was paradoxically validating: for just a minute, I was no longer an Other – the mechitza that has frustrated me for years dissolved. As he carefully wrapped the tefillin shel yad around my arm, I felt connected – to him, to God, to tradition, to the Jewish people. It was a powerful moment, but also painful and wrong – because it was under false pretenses. Though his mistaken assumptions – products of the harmfully rigid gender roles with which he grew up – instigated the encounter, I let it continue without correcting him. Though I didn’t force him to do something wrong, I allowed him to do something he presumably would have been uncomfortable doing given complete knowledge of the situation. Despite our ideological differences, I owed him this basic level of respect as a fellow Jew and as a human. For that I am sorry.

Beyond this, my post was interpreted as personally mocking him, and for that I am also sorry. This was not my intention. The post is a separate entity from the encounter itself, and its goal was dual: on one level, I was knowingly making a sharp, ironic political statement – a criticism of a religious ideology with which I fundamentally disagree. It transcended the human interaction and presented us as caricatures of our respective religious identities. I am not retracting this criticism, but I don’t want to be lauded for encouraging that kind of dehumanization. On another level, and more importantly, the photo – also separate from the encounter itself – is powerful because it depicts an instance of accidental pluralism and of shared joy in the mitzvah of hanachat tefillin. It is a serendipitous glimpse of the world I wish I lived in: a world where both he, a bearded chabadnik guy, and I, a buzz-cut egalitarian girl, could be “frum”, regardless of gender or labels, equally bound by mitzvot. I’ll end as I did before: Bimheira Beyameinu.

I don’t think that I would ever achieve this level of Kavanah.

Ms. Weiler might want to consider the Rabbinate as a career.

H/T Failed Messiah.

*Boxes that contain scripture, and are placed on the non-dominant arm and head in order to conduct certain prayers.
The spiritual focus and awareness required for prayer to “take”.

If You Are a Guy and You Refuse to Go on Your Rescuing-Supermodels Adventure Because Charlize Theron Is Coming with You, You Really Need to Reconsider Your Commitment to Heterosexuality.


Virginia Hey, “Warrior Woman”, Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (1981)


Charlize Theron, Furiosa, Mad Max: Fury Road (2015)

You may be aware that Australian director George Miller has done a reboot of his seminal 1979 film Mad Max.

What you may not be aware of is the fact that various members of the really small penis brigade, aka “Men’s Rights Advocates”, have called for a boycott of the film.

Over at Unfogged, a guest poster notes:

The new Mad Max movie may be the most guy movie ever made. The plot is literally Tom Hardy (Mad Max) and Charlize Theron (Furiosa) rescue scantily-clad supermodels. If you asked me when I was 15 to list movie ideas, the list would have gone something like: scantily-clad supermodels, 18 wheelers, guys getting shot, guys getting blown up, fist-fights on top of an 18 wheeler, guys with chainsaws, guys getting run over by 18 wheelers, guys with guitars that shoot fire, and cars crashing into 18 wheelers and blowing up. This list is basically the script for Mad Max: Fury Road. The only thing missing is a helicoper piloted by velociraptors crashing into an 18 wheeler. But there’s always the chance of a sequel.

He further notes that the this shows just how toxic the “Mens Rights” Movement is. Not only are they demandin “guy films”, they are demanding the exclusion of any strong women from the movie, even though the director, George Miller, has a long history of woman warriors in his films.

His closing statement says it all, “If you are a guy and you refuse to go on your rescuing-supermodels adventure because Charlize Theron is coming with you, you really need to reconsider your commitment to heterosexuality.”

That’s gonna leave a mark.

H/t Brad DeLong

It Looks Like I Wasn’t the Only One Who Thought That Obama’s Attitude toward Elizabeth Warren Was Sexist

It turns out that the distinguished gentleman from Ohio, Senator Sherrod Brown, found Obama’s statements about Warren and the TPP dismissive in a way that he never would be to male members of congress:

Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown threw a grenade into the ongoing war of words between Sen. Elizabeth Warren and President Barack Obama, a war that reached new heights with Tuesday’s dramatic setback of Obama’s trade agenda in the Senate.

Brown, one of the top Democratic leaders of the uprising against Obama’s trade push, criticized the president for what the senator saw as “disrespectful” comments toward Warren and suggested that Warren’s gender may have played a role.

When asked how Obama was being disrespectful of the Massachusetts Democrat, Brown replied: “I think by just calling her ‘another politician.’” He continued, “I’m not going to get into more details. I think referring to her as first name, when he might not have done that for a male senator, perhaps? I’ve said enough.”

Particularly when juxtaposed with a former staffer saying of the Obama White House that, “It actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women,” and his “Sweetie” comment to a female reporter, I think that the burden of proof must be on the President, and not Mr. Brown.

And now Obama, though his proxy White House press secretary Josh Earnest, is not just asking for an apology from Senator Brown, but is insisting that it inevitable that he will eventually apologize.

The word, “Whiny Bitch,” is completely inadequate to describe this.

Church of England Enters 20th Century

The Church of England has appointed its first female Bishop. The American branch of the church, the Episcopal Church, first did so in 1989:

The Church of England consecrated its first woman bishop on Monday, the culmination of years of efforts by Church modernizers to overcome opposition from traditionalists – one of whom briefly shouted a protest during the service.

More than two decades after the Church allowed women to become priests, 48-year-old mother-of-two the Reverend Libby Lane became Bishop of Stockport in a ceremony at York Minster, a Gothic cathedral in northern England.

The protest came as John Sentamu, Archbishop of York, asked the congregation whether Lane should be consecrated as Bishop.

As the congregation chorused its approval, a lone man’s voice shouted above them: “No, not in the Bible.”

When Sentamu asked the question again, there was no dissent and the ceremony went ahead.

During the service, which ended in applause, Sentamu and other bishops ceremonially laid their hands on Lane and prayed for her.

This is really something that should have happened in the last century, but religious institutions are frequently MANY centuries behind the time, so this ain’t too shabby.

Rush Limbaugh is a Whiny Bitch, Part MMMMMMCMLXIX


Yeah, he’s threatening to sue the DCCC over their use of his quotes in the last campaign:

Rush Limbaugh is hopping mad at the Democratic Party — but this time he’s threatening to do more than just talk about it on the radio.

The conservative pundit is threatening to sue the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee for a series of fundraising e-mails that suggested Limbaugh was condoning campus rape in comments he made on his widely syndicated program on Sept. 15.

In a letter to the Washington-based organization intended for delivery Monday morning, Limbaugh’s lawyer demanded a retraction and a public apology for the fundraising e-mails. The letter indicated Limbaugh will sue for defamation and business “interference” if his demand isn’t met.

DCCC representatives were not available Monday; the organization’s offices are closed for the Veterans Day holiday.

The legal threat is the result of DCCC fundraising appeals sent out in the wake of Limbaugh’s on-air comments about a new policy at Ohio State University that instructs students to get verbal consent before having sex. The DCCC highlighted one particular sentence from his commentary — “How many of you guys . . . have learned that ‘no’ means ‘yes’ if you know how to spot it?” — saying it was tantamount to condoning sexual assault.

………

The legal threat is the result of DCCC fundraising appeals sent out in the wake of Limbaugh’s on-air comments about a new policy at Ohio State University that instructs students to get verbal consent before having sex. The DCCC highlighted one particular sentence from his commentary — “How many of you guys . . . have learned that ‘no’ means ‘yes’ if you know how to spot it?” — saying it was tantamount to condoning sexual assault.

Yeah, well I listened to what he said, and even if he weren’t a public figure, this would be laughed out of court, because, in the United States, the truth is always a defense against accusations of libel and slander.

As a public figure, there is no evidence of malice or a reckless disregard for the truth in this.

Also, considering how the DCCC did no November 4, why the f%$# would Limbaugh, who is Republican to his core want to force the Democratic party to change its strategy?

Seriously Rush, take one for the team, and man up.

Blessed are you, Lord our G-d, King of the Universe, Who has not Made me a Moman.*

You know the reasons.

  • He’s assertive, she’s a bitch.
  • I get paid more for the same work.
  • He’s a playa, she’s a slut.
  • He’s cool, and she’s an ice queen.

Finally, and most importantly, I’ll never have to deal with the mountain of bullsh%$ that has been sliding toward Renee Zellweger.

Seriously.

What the f%$# is wrong with people?

*This is actually part of the traditional morning prayers for Jewish males. The Hebrew is, “בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה יְיָ אֶלֹהֵֽינוּ מֶֽלֶךְ הָעוֹלָם, שֶׁלֹּא עָשַֽׂנִי אִשָּׁה.”

Handmaid’s Tale. It’s their goal. It’s ALWAYS been their goal.*

In Texas (why is it AWAYS Texas), a personal tragedy for a scared young girl is made a full metal jacket exercise of police and Christofascist excess:

Parents in Texas are upset after police reportedly “swarmed” a Texas high school because a girl may have had a miscarriage in one of the bathrooms.

KDFW reported that a school custodian notified the principal at Woodrow Wilson High School after finding a “possible fetus” in one of the bathroom stalls on Friday.

The principal contacted police, who “swarmed” the school, according to KTVT.

“I seen a helicopter and I was really worried,” one student recalled.

Parent Christine Kerry was outraged that she had not been notified as to why so many police had been deployed to the school.

“I got out of my car and specifically asked, ‘What’s going on, and is it safe for these kids to be out here?’” she said. “And I was told to go away.”

………

Dallas Police Department’s Child Abuse Unit detectives were investigating to find out who may have abandoned the fetus. The person involved was being considered a “suspect.”

“We’re reviewing video, talking to the teachers, trying to determine if anybody has any knowledge of any student that may have had something going on in their life, and pray,” Dallas Police Major John Lawton said.

Alan Elliott of Baby Moses Dallas explained to KDFW that the mother could have avoided any criminal charges if she had taken advantage of Baby Moses laws by carrying the child to term, and then dropping it off at a safe baby site like a fire station.

“And that’s a happy ending when that happens, because the baby is safe, the mother is protected from any sort of prosecution, so it’s a win-win for both of them,” Elliot noted.

However, it was not immediately clear how far along the pregnancy was, and the cause of the possible miscarriage was not known.

And the cops are already treating it as a crime scene, because maybe a poor, scared girl, might have taken RU-486 or some similar drug to terminate a pregnancy.

This is all about punishing some poor, scared, teen because she tried to assert autonomy over her body.

These people just hate fear women, and their sexual power.

Please, can we give Texas back to Mexico?

*H/t DC at the Stellar Parthenon BBS for the title.

Something is Wrong on the Internet

As you are no doubt aware, the film Guardians of the Galaxy opened this weekend.

As the archetypal summer blockbuster, it got a lot of reviews, and one, at the Village Voice, Stephanie Zacharek, was less than charitable, which resulted in a torrent of sexist abuse directed her way:

“She’s just pissed because she lives in the Village full of gay men and no one wants any of her old, dried out pie.”

………

“We live in a world where 1000s of people are being beheaded and murdered throughout the world each and every day and this harlot has the nerve to knock it because it’s too fun?”

Harlot? Seriously?

“She should stick to reviewing chick flicks only.”

What is wrong with these people?

You can castigate a movie critic, or for that matter any critic for being unfair.

In fact the (sometimes delightfully and sometimes tediously) bitchy Rex Reed has made a career out of being this.

But simply posting misogynist rants sucks wet farts from dead pigeons, or, as Guardians of the Galaxy writer* Brian Michael Bendis observes, ” You love Captain America? Well, you know what Captain America would never do? Go online anonymously and sh$# on a girl for having an opinion.” (%$ mine)

H/t xkcd for the top comic.

*To be clear, Bendis writes for the comic book, he did not do the screenplay.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

If Any of General Michael Hayden’s Subordinates Have Stories About His Treatment of Women, I Would Love to Talk to You

Because, in response to the Senate Intelligence Committee’s decision to release their torture report, his response can best be summed up as, “Women be crazy,” which is a whole new level or repulsiveness by senior staff of our state security apparatus:

Former CIA and National Security Agency director Michael Hayden suggested Sunday that Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) might have compromised the objectivity of a report on CIA interrogation techniques because she personally wants to change them.

On “Fox News Sunday,” Hayden cited comments Feinstein made last month in which she said declassifying the report would “ensure that an un-American, brutal program of detention and interrogation will never again be considered or permitted.”

Hayden suggested Feinstein feels too strongly about the issue on an “emotional” level.

“That sentence — that motivation for the report — may show deep, emotional feeling on the part of the senator, but I don’t think it leads you to an objective report,” Hayden said.

(emphasis mine)

Seriously, does anyone anywhere who cannot see this as a blatantly sexist attack?

What was it like for women under his command?  I’m thinking “boss from hell.”