Comments on: Cringe-of-the-day

By: Laughingrat

Laughingrat — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 00:55:35 +0000

All the other power-balance stuff aside–and it was all pretty perceptive and good reading–I have to wonder if these little huggy moments between Obama and Sotomayor aren’t a different kind of marketing entirely, designed to make Sotomayor, an intelligent, driven, competent female professional, palatable in the eyes of a gynophobic public.

Already we’re seeing nasty remarks about Sotomayor in the various news media outlets (that “woman vs. jurist” one, for example). Over the weekend, the AP wasted an entire article on whether or not Sotomayor was too “tough” and “intense” to be a good Justice. Did you know that Sotomayor is persistent when she asks questions of attorneys in her courtroom? That she makes eye contact? That she sometimes sounds “annoyed”?

Would the news media give a shit about these characteristics if she was male? Hell no, they’d say, “Gosh, what a driven, determined judge this Sotomayor is. He’d make a fine Justice.” IBTP.

By: Pally

Pally — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 06:05:26 +0000

Nope, this makes me cringe too.

By: Biscuitnapper

Biscuitnapper — Sun, 31 May 2009 16:34:25 +0000

And thus Twisty has earned my everlasting(!) devotion. Obama has his good points, but this? It’s patronising. Personally I find it icky. I can’t think why anyone in the political sphere would like to be hugged in public over something that should be a matter of policy.

By: thebewilderness

thebewilderness — Sun, 31 May 2009 03:35:44 +0000

One of the most delightful white male bobblehead objections to Judge Sotomayor is that she is too, too, too, judgmental to be a judge.

By: procrastinatrix

procrastinatrix — Sun, 31 May 2009 01:59:37 +0000

Ha! Good point, Gayle. Moderate Dood?

By: Gayle

Gayle — Sat, 30 May 2009 00:20:50 +0000

Who are you calling liberal?

By: procrastinatrix

procrastinatrix — Fri, 29 May 2009 17:35:35 +0000

My verdict on the Obama Presidency so far (I know everyone here is gasping for it): Hail to the Liberal Dood in Chief!

And I like the guy-I’m susceptible to certain kinds of LD charm.

By: Jezebella

Jezebella — Fri, 29 May 2009 14:38:27 +0000

“as a jurist or as a woman”. Wow. Just, wow. That’s so telling, so clear that they just don’t think it’s possible for a woman to be anything else, not a jurist, or a doctor, or a journalist, and that the only real jurists are men. Wow.

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Fri, 29 May 2009 14:32:22 +0000

Here’s another cringeworthy piece on Sotomayor, courtesy of NPR.

Neither the left nor the right can say with any certainty whether Sotomayor will turn out to be an anti-abortionist godbag, but Charmaine Yoest of ‘Americans United for Life’ did manage to phrase the question in the most misogynist way possible: “as to whether or not she’s going to approach a decision like Roe v. Wade as a jurist or as a woman.”

Leave it to the anti’s to turn the word “woman” into an epithet against justice. Vicious self-hating tools of a godbag.

By: speedbudget

speedbudget — Thu, 28 May 2009 11:30:54 +0000

Hattie and human bean: The difference between to relatively equal social counterparts hugging upon seeing each other and the Most Powerful Man in the World foisting a hug upon an inferior social counterpart (due to position, not gender) is huge.

The difference between a man foisting an unwanted hug on a female counterpart in a social situation and two relatively equal social counterparts hugging upon seeing each other is huge.

In both cases, one person is using their privilege to act out their domination upon the other. In the first case, Sotomayor has no choice but to suck it up and take it lest she be chided by society, the press, and probably White House staff.

In the second case, you can always tell a man to kindly go fuck himself.