If you vote for Obama, this is what you’re voting for (Reminder #1):
“Terry Tate” expresses his support for Obama in typical Obamabot fashion:
The Obama movement is notorious for its misogyny, from the “iron my shirt” attacks on Hillary to the actual violence perpetrated against female McCain-Palin supporters. It’s the most vicious and sustained bout of public woman-bashing I’ve ever seen in this country. I’m going to be reminding you of that every day between now and the election.
(By the way, if I were Gov. Palin I wouldn’t have been able to hold my temper nearly as well as she did with the infuriatingly condescending Katie Couric. “So, can you name any newspapers you’ve read?” I would have walked off.)
48 Responses to “If you vote for Obama, this is what you’re voting for (Reminder #1):”
-
Kiuku says:
The video is not comedy. It’s, at the least a misogynist spoof on the similar comedy videos which depict the tackling as a funny but no one actually gets hurt for real scenario with suspension of disbelief. There is no suspension of disbelief here. This video is about punishing a bad woman and rewarding the good, behaving woman. Real pain, real result, and real punishment is depicted, and the men, the democrats express their approval for that reason. They say they like to see her get what is coming, they like to see her expression of pain, and they wish it happened for real.
I think that he went on, in other vids, a series or something to say, making it clear that the intent of the video is to degrade women and mock women’s rights, that he was a “equal opportunity tackler.”
Most women will experience violence directed at them by men for being women. 1 in 4 will be raped.
October 20th, 2008 at 1:43 am EST -
Kiuku says:
meanwhile, nothing new here, but the democratic underground seems to think that because they have women among their ranks who approve of this video and “aren’t offended in the least” that it isn’t misogynist, or violent. We can kindly remind them that women throw stones at buried up to the neck “adulterers” in the Patriarchy too. Men.
-
Foxx says:
My goddess it gets worse and worse doesn’t it?
And it will keep getting worse until we put ourselves on the line to stop it.
So where is this video linked to, who is promoting it?
-
Briar says:
If only women would put themselves on the line to stop it. But instead “feminists” on lists I belong to are sending this video to one another and chortling with glee at it. As they swoon with admiring lust at the size of Obama’s rallies and send one another pictures of the “beautiful” scenes. There are all sorts of reasons for this, but the essential fact is that it is happening. Standing up for Palin is not cool and gets you attacked too - because these sexy, cool ladies really can’t stand losers, perhaps, and women, or the poor for that matter, because this is a class thing too, are doomed to be losers in any universe where might equals right.
-
Violet says:
The founders of the The New Agenda are thinking about what would be appropriate action to take on this. There’s also discussion of that in the thread over at Riverdaughter’s, towards the bottom. What do people think?
I know that the Terry Tate thing was originally for Reebok, but it’s not clear to me that they are behind this current video. Is the dude playing Terry Tate just doing this on his own? Are the Get Out The Vote people behind it?
-
Cyn says:
OMG, I literally jumped out of my chair. I was fixated on Couric’s “got you” moment and the condescending look on Katy’s face.
This sickens me. I can’t believe it took a presidential campaign to expose the belly of the beast.
-
goesh says:
How about a few more columns directed at McCain? He prided himself on taking a stand against interrogation methods used in the theatres of war, he prides himself on being a POW who survived brutal, degrading treatment, yet he can’t speak out when his selected VP is repeatedly and viciously assaulted in a most vile, sexist manner? Hey! I thought he was a self-proclaimed champion of human rights?? Tell McCain if he wants more votes he has to start taking steps to show that he is at least capable of addressing human rights abuse here in America. Wouldn’t it be good if some Directors and staffers at domestic violenc shelters started speaking out - the shelters are filled with women who have been slammed.Liberal women in the Obama camp are mutely standing behind their man - behind the man is the operative word here, isn’t it? Sure is, I’ve lived in several 3rd world countries and been at meals where the boys get more of the better quality of food - same principle at play here. I always thought courage was not a gender issue, a non-genetic/biology thing, but I’m starting to really wonder about that.
-
votermom says:
That almost made me throw up.
-
Gayle says:
“The founders of the The New Agenda are thinking about what would be appropriate action to take on this.”
Demand Obama and the Democratic Party repudiate it– and the Cunt t-shirts, too. Where’s Howard “the sexism stops now” Dean been lately?
Is there a way to link this to email? I think an email/ petition campaign might be in order.
-
delineGBL says:
Send this video to Colin Powell’s office and let a media source know TNA has asked for his comment. You know that he would does not stand behind such political tactics, in light of his comments yesterday.
-
Kiuku says:
Female McCain supporter beaten with stick by enraged Obama supporter:
-
kenoshaMarge says:
No woman with any claim to compassion, decency, integrity or intelligence would be “all right” with the sight of a big burly man attacking a woman.
These sell-outs to their own womanhood are as disgusting as the men they seek to emulate in their hatred of women.
Any woman that finds this “funny” or “all right” is not a woman I want in my corner if I am ever in trouble.
An attack on this woman is an attack on all women. Unless and until they see that, they are just silly hens cackling for the approval of the nearest rooster.
-
Kiuku says:
Actually I’m reporting like a newscaster. I should say “man beats woman with stick over pro- McCain sign. “
-
Foxx says:
I’m wondering if some of women’s participation in this gynocidal hatred is about their anger at all the women, like our mothers, who have abused us. So we pass it on.
-
propertius says:
The thread about this on DU was absolutely revolting. The last time I looked, exactly *one* of those self-proclaimed “progressives” noted that violence against women isn’t a joke. Said person was, of course, roundly dismissed as lacking a “sense of humor”.
I can only imagine the howls of racism that would’ve been raised there if some wingnut had produced a video in which a mock “Obama” was subjected to similar treatment.
-
Kiuku says:
Foxx I have no doubt. The lack of Patriarchal analysis leaves some women, actually the majority in the dark when a man treats them kindly, or rewards them for perceived obedience while punishing another women. The dynamic of rewarding one woman by punishing another is a familiar operation of the Patriarchy.
Meanwhile reasons for the misogyny aside, it is misogyny and women are not exceptions to misogyny because it is instilled into us via our oppression by many dynamics of the Patriarchy not simply the above.
Women are the subject of abuse by women throughout their lives, at times by their own mothers even. Failing to recognize that abuse of women is perpetrated by men and carried out by women is the failure of Feminism.
-
Kiuku says:
I mean mothers aren’t just incarnated into flesh miraculously. Mothers are not the beginning, of anything. They grew up in the Patriarchy. They grew up in oppression. They were taught to hate themselves and to hate women. They were daughters before they were mothers.
Without Patriarchal analysis, Feminism fails to liberate the minds and hearts of women.
-
Kiuku says:
Propertius, yea, the double standard is boggling and hurtful. Democrats believe in freedom of speech as long as it only harms women. They would never stand for racism. It says that Democrats do not consider women human at all.
It’s not surprising. We’ve been calling out misogyny in the left for a long time. It’s just that it is exposed out in the open now. Before they would refuse that their particular brand of women-hating is not misogyny; that only the conservatives were capable of misogyny. Yet, now they are parading around their misogyny for everyone to see and only the right is standing up to it.
-
creeper says:
KATV Little Rock news anchor Anne Pressly was found this morning in her apartment, beaaten and stabbed. She clings to life in a Little Rock hospital.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,441321,00.html
Pressly recently played a small role in “W.”, Oliver Stone’s new movie about George W. Bush. She appears briefly as a conservative commentator who speaks favorably of President Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” speech.
A highly visible female anchor who plays a role supportive of Republicans is brutally attacked. Her purse is missing, so we are being told that the motive was robbery. How many robbers attempt to kill their victims?
This story makes my blood run cold.
-
Kiuku says:
HOLY SH(T. The way they have run their campaign..the hatred they are fueling for women. The cries for stoning, the beating simulations, the jokes about rape..
is it any wonder a woman McCain supporter is beaten, at the option of attacking any of the men with her.
And now a conservative anchor is found fatally stabbed? It could be any man..but I wouldn’t be surprised if the hate hasn’t escalated into permission for all out violence against women.
This is sick. If the Obots think they can brutalize women, that this election gives them an excuse to maim and kill women for their “cathartic release”, they have another thing coming.
It may be time for a most violent Revolution.
-
votermom says:
A second Tate video, similar thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-NKZbBHQ7A -
Kiuku says:
On the topic of mothers..I want to say something about my own mother really quick, again in response to imbedded misogyny.
My mom was a daughter. When my mom was a daughter she was molested and sexually assaulted by her father routinely. She was beaten and whipped with rods. She was a virtual slave to her brothers, having to clean after them and cook for them. Her own mother stood by this man until he died.
-
TheOtherDelphyne says:
votermom - that is sickening. Did you hear the woman say, “It hurts” or something like that and that sicko keeps yelling? I can’t go back and review it without fearing I’ll be ill.
It seems Sarah Palin is fair game in the way that Hillary was fair game - and the rest of us women are fair game under the insanity of patriarchy. At least I am aware of it - I feel sorry for the women who think that they’re “special” and that that sort of treatment would NEVER happen to them.
-
octogalore says:
That tape is sickening.
I’ve seen a few posts on the license plate photo: “she’s not a woman. She’s a Republican.”
OK, so it’s totally fair to disagree with Repubs. But to allow something like that strip away not only ones identified feminism, but gender itself? Note how nobody is claiming men can’t identify their belief systems or gender based on their political party. And most often, it’s other women policing ourselves. With friends like these…
-
Violet says:
And everywhere this video is posted, all the commenters think it’s wonderful. Hilarious! They cheer on the beating of the bitch. They want it to happen in real life! Woo hoo!
-
Kiuku says:
Yea truly the most sickening part and most revealing is the reactions. They want it to happen in real life! They hope that “someone has the balls to do this for real”. It’s a cathartic release! She’s getting what’s coming to her! Woohoo. It ceases to be comedy when people appreciate it, and publicly reveal that they appreciate it for the simulated pain.
Of course, they want us to buy that it is comedy, like they want us to buy that they only hate her because she is Republican.
-
Kat says:
TheOtherDelphyne says: Did you hear the woman say, “It hurts” or something like that and that sicko keeps yelling? I can’t go back and review it without fearing I’ll be ill.
Yeah. I think I heard that, too.
-
julia says:
Kiuku, that is terrible, what happened to your mother.
-
Foxx says:
Well I just called Obama headquarters, spoke to this nice woman voluteer who was shocked, shocked to hear of this. I demanded that Obama speak out forcefully against it. But as soon as I mentioned that it had happened to Hillary I could hear her discount me.
But if they got a hundred calls . . .
But then why do I care what he thinks or does anyway?
-
Foxx says:
I also wrote NOW and Robin Morgan and told them to do something about it. And that I was angry at them for their support of Obama, especially when they haven’t gotten anything for it. If I could find Gloria’s email I would write her too.
-
TheOtherDelphyne says:
Kiuku, I am sorry that your mother experienced such horror in her life.
-
cellocat says:
Yeah, and some moms blame their daughters’ abuse by the husband/father on the daughter. We all have these threads of violence and capitulation in us, imo, but some of us, with work & the willingness to address them head on, are able to move beyond them and make better choices. The women who are cheering all this misogyny on are making bad karma for themselves, and setting themselves (as well as us) back.
-
votermom says:
I actually watched the 2nd one on mute because I the 1st one so disturbing, so I didn’t hear the “it hurts”.
Really disturbing how in both videos there is a shot of someone dressed as Palin lying on the ground in pain.
It’s not enough to tackle her so that she goes off-screen — Tate has to show his victim in pain. That’s sadism. -
Annie Oakley says:
The impact was so sudden it gave a physical sensation of being Palin being hit. Dear Sister Sarah, that is so not funny. I was hit, too.
Young women worry about rape. Older women, as they become frail, worry about being knocked down, having their purses snatched, or being abused for merely being an easy target. I wonder if the young women who find this funny stop to think that they will be frail some day and depend on society for protection. The current rise of gang mentality is lessening the social norms that protect women and others from physical tyranny. It’s not just Sarah being knocked down.
-
B. Dagger Lee says:
I am voting for Obama, and THAT is not what I am voting for. Please note I voted for Hillary Clinton for Senator, and I voted for her in the NY primary this election cycle.
Catherine MacKinnon has a great op-ed piece in today’s Wall Street Journal (Oct 21)called, “Obama is the Way Forward for Women,” that surveys what she thinks are the two most important issues (abortion rights and equal pay)and why she is supporting Obama. She says it better than I could.
-
Violet says:
I haven’t read the MacKinnon piece, but I’ll look when I have a chance. I’m hoping it isn’t the dishonest disaster we’ve seen from most of the establishment feminists.
B. Dagger Lee, I realize that you don’t intend to vote for misogyny with your vote for Obama. But unfortunately it’s not possible to cast our votes with little notes attached explaining what we mean. Voting for Obama is effectively an endorsement of the year-long anti-woman spree he and his supporters have been running. The clear message is that everything Obama and his supporters have done is fine, or at least not bad enough to keep women from voting for him.
-
TheOtherDelphyne says:
Here is the link to the article that B. Dagger Lee mentions:
-
octogalore says:
MacKinnon doesn’t mention that Ledbetter isn’t the only protection for late-discovered pay differences — the Equal Pay Act operates that way, although has additional procedural requirements. McCain and Obama agree on the Equal Pay Act; McCain’s problem with Ledbetter wasn’t that he doesn’t support equal pay but that there would be many suits filed by trial lawyers (some valid, some invalid) and the legal fees would reduce pay for all employees. He would support some happy-medium statute of limitations. Personally, I disagree with McCain and do support Ledbetter, but the motives for his view are mischaracterized by MacKinnon.
Also, see http://teamsugar.com/group/974220/blog/1751066.
I happen to think that actions speak louder than words. Obama hired less non-intern women than men (31 vs 33) and the women earned 82 cents on the dollar to what the men earned. McCain hired more non-intern women than men (30 vs 16) and the women earned $1.05 on the dollar to what men earned.
I am no fan of McCain and I’m not arguing he’s great for women, but I don’t agree with MacKinnon that Obama is. As she acknowledges in the article, deciding who is “the way forward” (or, “the way least backward”) doesn’t boil down neatly into two little pat categories.
-
octogalore says:
Additionally, re MacKinnon’s quote attributed to Obama of “what kind of America our daughters will grow up in.”
If Obama becomes president, it will be a historic achievement and precedent to be celebrated whether or not we supported his candidacy. However, I feel strongly that this would have been true had Clinton become president, as well. Obama has been up and down in the polls and could not have foreseen, when he chose not to include Clinton among his top VP picks, that his chances would be as good as they look now. As she easily beat Biden and others in the primary, she was arguably his most sensible choice. Yet he did not choose her. I don’t think whether they were best buddies or anything to do with Bill Clinton is a satisfactory explanation why not.
At that point, Obama had a chance to make a historic change in “what kind of America our daughters will grow up in” that would actually help his own candidacy. He chose not to do that.
So forgive me if I don’t buy him in the category of the candidate who will put his money where his mouth is, translating his desire to gain female votors into actually enacting pro-woman policies. He didn’t do that with his female staffers, he didn’t do that with his VP pick.
Why do we think we’re the ones to get lucky?
-
Kali says:
I deeply respect MacKinnon. She is probably the person I respect the most after my parents. But I simply do not agree with her that Obama will help women’s rights. I understand where she is coming from but don’t have the same trust and confidence in Obama, especially when it comes to women.
-
Kat says:
I don’t do the “Obama will be good for women’s rights” game. It’s a lie. I frequently send out this excellent entry from Violet:
Do feminists for Obama understand what the hell this guy is about?
-
Emily says:
Well, quite a lot of leftie feminists are equally outraged about that video. See http://shakespearessister.blog.....ch-26.html
Unfortunately, there are “liberals” who are liars and don’t actually give a shit for the principles they claim to endorse. That shouldn’t be a surprise to you, there are “states rights” people who only want things left to the state when the state agrees with them….
-
Yanni Znaio says:
Kiuku says:
Yea truly the most sickening part and most revealing is the reactions. They want it to happen in real life! They hope that “someone has the balls to do this for real”. It’s a cathartic release! She’s getting what’s coming to her! Woohoo. It ceases to be comedy when people appreciate it, and publicly reveal that they appreciate it for the simulated pain.
Of course, they want us to buy that it is comedy, like they want us to buy that they only hate her because she is Republican.
October 20th, 2008 at 6:52 pm EST
I agree, it’s revolting.
While I certainly have political differences, say, with Hillary Clinton, I’d *never* think of advocating violence against her or condoning representations of same. (Of course, Libertarians, even the small-l variety, don’t condone the initiation of violence.)
That’s truly sick, and indicative of the level of depravity to which some people have sunk.
-
Heart says:
The thing that bothers me the most about MacKinnon’s endorsement is what you mention, Octogalore: MacKinnon’s belief that Obama’s daughters will move him to make good decisions for women. We already know that’s not true– if it were, he would not be calling adult women “sweetie.” That was not insignficant, it was quite telling. Not to mention, when it comes to women’s issues, all the greats (in other ways) have had feet of clay, doesn’t matter how many daughters they had. It seems like wishful thinking on MacKinnon’s part and kind of out of character for her.
All I can think is, she’s taking a sort of risk evaluation approach and figures the damage Obama is likely to do so far as judicial appointments is probably less than the damage McCain is likely to do, so she’s plugging Obama. Very depressing.
I really appreciate what you’ve done here so far as the election, Dr. Violet Socks (and all the commenters, too).
Heart
-
Violet says:
Hey, nice to see you, Heart. Thanks! I have been too busy these past few months to get around the tubes in my tubemobile. Hope things are good at your place.
-
Carmonn says:
octogalore, imo it’s possible that Clinton was offered the VP spot early and refused. She clearly has a great deal of party loyalty, but considering how Obama treated her, if she ran on his ticket and won she would have nothing to look forward to except being cut out of every decision, publicly patronized, and then scapegoated for every disaster. And it would be almost impossible for her to run in 8 years, even if she could have conuted on establishment support in exchange for her loyalty, which she couldn’t. I wouldn’t run with him either. Knowing Obama, it’s obviously very likely too that he went out of his way to diss her and didn’t offer it, though–we’ll never know. (And frankly, I’m not sure it sets a great prescedent for the woman who won the most votes to take the secondary position to a man who received fewer votes and validate a questionable process, either, but….)
-
Kali says:
MacKinnon’s belief that Obama’s daughters will move him to make good decisions for women. We already know that’s not true
Exactly. Since the dawn of patriarchy, most men have had daughters and it hasn’t prevented them one bit from trying their best to push down women/girls as far as they could.
I agree that Mackinnon is doing a risk evaluation thing and giving Obama the benefit of doubt as the least bad option. I disagree because that benefit of doubt is not well deserved.
-
octogalore says:
Carmonn — you’re right, we’ll never really know. However, Clinton stated that if offered the VP job she’d take it. Also, Obama knew that he lost many Clinton supporters because it appeared he didn’t offer it. If he indeed had, I believe he’d have found a way to make that known. Also, as many in Clinton’s inner circle were still speculating about the possibility of her chosen beyond early days, that seems unlikely if indeed she’d turned it down. So on balance, I’m sticking with my theory.
