Interesting discussion at PeaceBang’s about whether the GOP’s blame-gaming of Sarah Palin is sexist or not. (Parenthetical note: Is it wrong that I get ticked off when men tell me that attacks on a woman are not sexist? It feels patronizing even when that is (presumably) not intended. But as I mentioned below, I am feeling just the SLIGHTEST BIT TOUCHY.)
-
-
Blogroll
- Beyond Just Mom
- Cake Wrecks
- Chuck Currie
- Concept 53
- Dinosaur Comics
- Don’t Eat Alone
- Father T. Listens to the World
- Get Fuzzy
- Group News Blog
- I Can Has Cheezburger?
- Ministrare
- New in Wonderland
- Paper Bridges
- PeaceBang
- PostSecret
- Prayers - Poems - Wonderings
- Progressive Revival (on Beliefnet)
- Real Live Preacher
- Reverend Mommy’s Random Thoughts
- Rogue Angel
- Savage Chickens
- Seedlings in Stone (LL Barkat)
- Slacktivist
- Street Prophets
- The Almond Branch
- The Odyssey of Samwise Gamgee
Archives
-
Meta
Categories
-
Recent Comments
-
Pages
Believe what you want, but in the politics, they/we would attack a butterfly, a bunny or the polished gold holy reliquary if it it had a chance to move the audience toward our delusions…. of course sex differentiates some attacks, so one can easily classify certain arguments as sexists. I recall a couple women folks who certainly during this election has some things to say about testosterone levels, in the white house and in candidates.
? Does she need to be thrown under the bus to avoid a future issue? Is it good for the party, the nation, or just a cat kicking reaction.
les
November 7th, 2008
LOL about the polished gold holy reliquary!
Someone on Daily Kos, I think, argued that the attacks on Palin are more classist than sexist, that the true Old Money Power Republicans want to pre-emptively disenfranchise the workin’-class Repubs with whom Palin supposedly connects. ::: shrug :::
Satchel
November 8th, 2008