You can thank Rush Limbaugh for the sexism revolution this spring.
His diatribe last week was the watershed. Insipid slurs meant to diminish and demean a Georgetown Law student for this offense: being a woman. More loathsome drivel on the airwaves -- a veritable war of words waged against women in our country. Yet, were his words novel or unique? Absolutely not!
Poor Rush (well, not really) and his inopportune timing. He was just being his outrageous, obtuse self; oblivious to the fault lines created by a series of cataclysmic events for women. Congressman Issa's all-male panel discussing women's reproductive rights, which, the next day was analyzed and sanctimoniously criticized for excluding women by -- you guessed it -- an all-male panel on MSNBC's Morning Joe. We got to ponder whether aspirin between the knees was an effective form of birth control, before observing the three-ringed circus in Virginia, where, as the legislature mulled ultrasound probes, Del. Albo bemoaned that the discussions were hurting his sex life.
Egad, all this left women to wonder: are we back in the 1950s? Women felt under siege -- as if standing on tenuous ground. So when Rush uttered another in his long string of sexist slurs -- 'slut' -- this time, it become a battle cry for activism. Ironically, when the bombastic Ed Schultz used the same word on MSNBC just nine months prior, our country could barely muster a yawn.
Something has changed. Women, and like-minded men, have finally had it. And it's not only Rush feeling the tremors -- a myriad of misogynistic rats including Bill Maher and Louis C.K. are being forced out of the darkness to face the light of humanity. As President Obama said in a press conference this week: "All decent folks can agree that the remarks that were made don't have any place in the public discourse." And we all, in the end, want to be decent. Don't we?
President Obama gets it by the way. For the first time in his presidency, he boldly spoke out about the war of words on women. Am I thrilled that it took three years for Obama to address sexism, not really. But am I grateful that he did it, absolutely!
Obama's message goes straight to the heart of the matter: the other victims in the war of words are our daughters. The media and popular culture have a direct impact on our girls' hopes, dreams, ambitions and even safety. Every vitriolic word, every sexualized and violent image, gets mixed into a caustic brew which shapes the ever present messaging in our girls' lives. The war of words scares our daughters away from running for office -- tells them not to lead or seem over-zealous. The war of words frames our girls as sexual objects, valued by their appearance. The war of words decries women and girls deserving of controlling behaviors and violence. Do we wonder why women are moving backward in leadership measures, and increasingly becoming victims of violence at ever younger ages? It's the messaging.
Take for example Bill Maher, who smugly thumbed his nose at us last Friday night: 'I don't have sponsors' like Rush. We weren't amused. By Tuesday, Maher changed course to defend Rush and move onward. We aren't willing to. For all those saying Rush's comments are different because Sandra Fluke is not a public figure, you haven't been watching Maher very closely. His war on words extends not only to women of both parties, but also to private citizens. And while Maher gleefully demeans women with words like 'c*nt,' 'twat' and 'bimbo,' these words are hardly his most heinous offense. He also employs violent imagery like 'choked this b*tch' and 'splayed out on the hood of a car.' Is this the decency President Obama was referring to?
President Obama spoke out and did his part. Now we must demand a national conversation about the war of words and its impact on women and girls. It's not the president's responsibility to police the airwaves -- that's our job. And as I've read over the president's remarks, I still can't find the section where he gives a free pass for sexism to liberal men. Nor can I find a section where he says it's OK to target conservative women.
In 2009, when I first wrote here at HuffPost that Sexism Against Conservative Women Is Still Sexism, it was a groundbreaking notion. Not any longer. Last night, Louis C.K. who tweeted sexist obscenities about a conservative woman, dropped out of hosting the Radio and Television Correspondents Association dinner. Thank you Greta Van Susteren for standing up for women and girls.
It's time we the people finally hold our media accountable for the war of words. Men like Rush Limbaugh and Bill Maher should be taken off the air. Argue free speech, fine. Let them foam at the mouth with misogynistic drivel in their lives as private citizens. But not on the airwaves!
Finally, there's an old adage: when you roll with dogs, you get fleas. David Axelrod may consider taking his boss' lead before going on Maher's Real Time. This spring, finally, enough is enough.
Follow Amy Siskind on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AmyTheNewAgenda
Danielle Tumminio: Is Birth Control Coverage Motivated by Religious Freedom or Religious Bullying?
I hate what Rush did. But it's the 1st amendment. And to be honest, it didn't hurt anyone. Words are merely what they are, words. If you use poor words, it reflects the person that said them - not yourself.
There is no sexism in our society. And if there is, it is because of the media and how it portrays or what it demands of women. So what? They do that with every single human being? Who isn't impacted by the media these days?
You want to end sexism - End Kim Kardashian. End rap music. End every magazine on the bookshelves that portrays what a perfect woman should look like. End victoria secret. End all those tv shows about weddings. End Disney.
We are turning into culture of materialism and sex. But no one forced it on anyone. You have accepted it yourself. That is your equality. Before women in the 1950's women were treated as humble, simple, prestine, homemakers/caregivers...Now they have become like men. Well, men and women both enjoy materialism and sex now. You wanted to make money, here ya go. You wanted more responsibility. there it is. This is exactly what you wanted. Now just accept it and quit whining.
Equality is the 1st amendment. What you want is called inequality. That is when you don't like something, so you want your group, race, class, ethnicity, to receive special treatment at the expense of everyone else..
"But this is for all people" - Yeah, but you wanted it. No one else did. That;s like saying because 10 people wanted vegetarian to eat and 90 people wanted steak. When you demand everyone eat the vegetarian dish - we are all supposed to be happy because there was something to eat.
Your equality comes to you, from your amendments, from your individual liberties. Government doesn't give you rights, it can only take them away. What you are asking for, will only create greater inequality.
Just don't watch rush or maher, I don't. And move on with your life, focusing on real issues that women need support with.
From its beginnings three decades ago, the domestic violence industry has been plagued by a cabal of pinkshirts who will do almost anything to advance their agenda.
Erin Pizzey, founder of the first domestic violence shelter in England, let the cat out of the bag when she revealed many of the women in her shelter were as abusive as the men they had left. In retaliation, feminists issued death threats and eventually forced her to flee the country.
In the United States, Dr. Suzanne Steinmetz' research on the Battered Husband Syndrome triggered a whispering campaign designed to torpedo her impending promotion, as well as a bomb threat at her daughter's wedding.
Who is the decider about what is "correct speech"? No, if you don't agree with what Rush or Bill have to say, boycott their programs. Write to their sponsers (Yes, that includes HBO) and tell them you won't use their products. If enough people agree with you, they will be taken off the air.
To paraphrase a famous quote, "Sir, I disagree vehemently with what you say but I will defend to the de.ath your right to say it."
Preserving the 1st Amendment should be the first priority, at all times, it is the thing from which all other freedoms flow.
Other studies reveal more about female violence against children: * Women hit their male children more frequently and more severely than they hit their female children. * Women commit 55% of child murders and 64% of their victims are male children. * Eighty two percent of the general population had their first experience of violence at the hands of women, usually their mother.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
"Ed Schultz used the same word on MSNBC just nine months prior, our country could barely muster a yawn."
Ed did use the slur, on his radio show and later apologised on his MSNBC show, on same day. There was lot of backlash and firestorm then about Ed and he was off air for one week.
His unqualified apology was later accepted.
No longer a country where speech and thought and opinions are protected as long as we follow the rule of law...
now, if speech is insulting, we immediately "tie" it to some kind of abuse or violence and try to ban it ...
we're going to have the "S" word and the "B" word and we'll be a better society ... that no free person will want to live in.
and the hate speech does lead to physical violence sometimes
instead of boycotting advertisers FIGHT against an ugly idea with a good one ... in the end the good idea WILL win.
Hate speech - any speech - does NOT and CANNOT lead to violence - once you somehow link "ideas" and "words" to violence, you're on a slippery path to banning any speech that somehow, directly or indirectly "causes" or "influence" or "leads to" some possible "action" (including but limited to "violence")
let speech not just "words" but other "expressions" of speech remain free ....
We're going to need freedom of speech one day (like today) but it's not going to be there because too many of us don't like what others have to say. I CERTAINLY don't dig what either of these guys spew on their respective shows, but I just don't watch them. Both of themn play to a very narrow audience; the general public doesn't like them.
As of now, numerous subjects can no longer be discussed in public. More and more topics are considered taboo, and dissenters are punished for simply speaking their minds. It's not a good development. We DO need more civility, but not censorship.
As much as I dislike Rush's filth, I prefer that it be out in the open, as a reminder to those who have forgotten what he is really all about
And for those, who don't yet know, and need to be educated.
BUT I ALSO AGREE WITH THOSE who are trying to dissuade his sponsors from continuing to financially support his hated, lies, and filth.
THAT'S FREE SPEECH TOO ! ! !
As well, Axelrod, Debbie Wasserman-Shultz and Gloria Steinem would do well to stay off Maher's show.
There's a difference....
QUIT....ELECTING....REPUBLICANS!