iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Barbara & Shannon Kelley

GET UPDATES FROM Barbara & Shannon Kelley
 

Dear Rush Limbaugh: I Know You Are But What Am I?

Posted: 03/ 6/2012 3:50 pm

When 30 year-old Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke tried to testify in favor of health insurance-covered contraception at a Congressional hearing (and, after being blocked by Rep. Darrell Issa R-CA, then had to issue her extremely articulate testimony via YouTube), Rush Limbaugh had this to say in return:

[She] goes before a Congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex, what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We're the pimps. The johns.

Maureen Dowd -- herself a past target of Limbaugh's name-calling -- took him down in the New York Times Sunday Review, point by point, starting with the fact that he implies that birth control is a "welfare entitlement," when, of course, it's not: employers and insurance companies would cover contraception, not tax dollars. And Mother Jones pointed out that Rush, a Viagra fan, might be confusing the little blue pill and birth control, since "when and how much sex you have is unrelated to the amount of birth control you need."

But let's assume he wasn't confusing the two little pills. Let's assume he was well aware that his "welfare entitlement" remark was factually inaccurate. Let's assume he knew exactly how wrong he was. No, wait! Let's assume he really believed he was right -- and still, rather than laying out a rational argument -- he instead took the desperate-for-attention, cowardly bully's way out. Slut! Neener neener.

Pretty much every single time we write about feminism on the HuffingtonPost, at least one or two commenters will appear, calling us ugly. Fat. Man-hating. Feminazis. Yet rarely do these haters bother to address the issue at hand, whatever we happened to be writing about on that particular day. That's because it's not about the issues. Tossing Pee-Wee Herman-caliber barbs is easy. Ridiculous as they may be, taking them is a little harder. I mean, I don't think I'm ugly (calling all haters, here's your chance to disagree!), but that doesn't really matter. It still stings. And Limbaugh and Internet commenters and schoolyard bullies and others like them count on that: if a woman knows that standing up for, say insurance-covered birth control will have her publicly labeled a slut, she's probably that much more likely to keep mum (and to continue shelling out for it, out of her own pocket).

It all reminds me of something I wrote about a while back, about a conversation I'd come across between journalists Joan Walsh and Gail Collins, ahead of the release of Collins' book "When Everything Changed: The Amazing Journey of American Women From 1960 to the Present."

I was struck by some of what Collins said in the final clip, when Walsh asked her about Billy Jean King, who Collins frames in the book as a real-life feminist hero. Talking about the much-hyped "Battle of the Sexes," in which King wiped the court with a not-at-the-top-of-his-game Bobby Riggs (who, even when he was at the top of his game, wasn't all that threatening), Collins said the following:
The importance of it to me was that women who fought for women's rights in the 60s and 70s did not get hosed down, or attacked by snarling dogs, or thrown in jail; they got laughed at. And humiliation and embarrassment was the great huge club that people used to keep women in line.


How much has really changed?

Some of Rush's advertisers have dropped off, and President Obama himself gave Fluke a call, telling her that her parents should be proud. The Senate (barely) voted down a bill that would allow insurers and employers to deny contraception coverage based on any "religious or moral" objection. Rush "apologized." So, that's progress.

There are those who say Limbaugh's whole schtick is to be outrageous. It's about ratings, they argue. So I guess real progress will happen when grown-ups no longer choose to listen to grown men behaving like children, or defend grown men behaving like children on the grounds that it's "entertaining."

It's not entertaining. It's pathetic. And to those who may disagree, I'd love to hear it. And to those who may disagree but will instead insult me, I say: I know you are, but what am I?

 
 
 

Follow Barbara & Shannon Kelley on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@undecidedbook

When 30 year-old Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke tried to testify in favor of health insurance-covered contraception at a Congressional hearing (and, after being blocked by Rep. Darrell Issa R-C...
When 30 year-old Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke tried to testify in favor of health insurance-covered contraception at a Congressional hearing (and, after being blocked by Rep. Darrell Issa R-C...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 4
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
01:37 PM on 03/09/2012
Sandra Fluke is just a regular gal. She is not a politician but Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman are politicians so comparing Sandra Fluke to Sarah Palin or Michelle Bachman is comparing apples to oranges. Politicians are engaged in a blood sport. That’s the nature of politics in America. Politicians like Palin and Bachman know this when they enter the political arena. Sandra Fluke is a regular-gal, college student, and a one-time congressional witness is all. She should be accorded civility in the political arena because she is not a politician. On the other hand, Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman are longtime, seasoned-pro politicians who have have a long history of insulting and demeaning their own political enemies so they are in no position to complain about being insulted. Also when Rush Limbaugh insulted Sandra Fluke he chose to also insult tens of millions of other women, who weren't even involved in the debate, just because they also take contraception. On the other hand Bill Mayer did NOT insult tens of millions of women. Bill Mayer insulted ONLY two women – Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman. All women may feel offended by Bill Mayer’s comments about Sarah Palin but that does not change one iota the fact that Bill Mayer addressed his insults ONLY to Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman. On the other hand, Rush Limbaugh intentionally insulted tens of millions of "regular gal" women when he insulted Sandra Fluke.
RealistBC
Micro-bios must pass muster.
04:19 PM on 03/07/2012
A lot of progress had been made between the time King defeated Riggs on national television, but was quickly lost in the social issue wars waged by radical religious traditionalists. Thus, this is not a linear issue as the article tends to present it. It is a very dynamic and fluid situation, and can change rapidly now that certain gains were made.

But it is up to the women to again take up the leading effort. The ERA went down because too many women believed the lies about unisex bathrooms (see how many public places now have nothing else, so rationality won in the end). and man-hating lesbians seeking to convert all of the hetero women. If you women can organize again around rescuing your sexuality from the likes of Rick Santorum and his medieval attitudes, you will find lots of men willing to support your effort this time - far more than your mothers enjoyed during the attempt to ratify ERA.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
shortguy54
Short, balding, brilliant... (well, maybe not so)
08:53 AM on 03/07/2012
I know many women don't believe it, and I read about it every day when I read HuffPo Women, but women really have made enormous leaps in the last 40 years. I am currently re-reading "The Maginificent Wylf", a mildly satirical science fiction novel by Stephen Donaldson from the 1970's. It's truly jarring how role perceptions have changed. In Donaldson's novel the female protagonist (the "wylf") is despite all of skills, knowledge and acumen is still, basically, June Cleaver. Her husband, a loving and supportive man, is still very much representative of the 1950's in outlook. I was considering writing a film script from the book, but then I began noticing how much I would have to change it to bring it halfway up to date!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Howard Sternner
Bababooooey
05:41 PM on 03/06/2012
Sadly Limbaughs mom didn't use Birth Control