Must Read: The RW Deliberate, Coordinated Attempt to Feminize Liberal Leaders

"Media Matters"; by Jamison Foser

The Coulter-Matthews-Dowd continuum



The Coulter-Matthews-Dowd continuum










All of which brings us to the first of two reasons why it is actually important that we don't ignore Ann Coulter.

If Coulter's seething hatred was hers alone, she might best be ignored. But that ugly and unthinking hatred isn't unique to Coulter.

Instead, Coulter's anger and venom are illustrative of the modern conservative movement. Her vitriol is embraced and rewarded by right-wing audiences far and wide. Her intellectual and rhetorical peers -- Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck, among others -- are, like Coulter, anything but "marginalized." They unleash vicious tirades against gays, women, minorities, and liberals -- and are paid handsomely for it. And they are paid not only in cash, but in respect: Vice President Dick Cheney, for example, sometimes seems to be auditioning to be Limbaugh's co-host, while President Bush opens the Oval Office to the likes of Neal Boortz and Sean Hannity.

Ann Coulter's bigotry and hostility, her public fantasies about violence against Democrats, progressives, and journalists -- and those of countless others like her -- demand more attention, not less. They illustrate the irrational anger that has long driven and sustained the conservative movement. (Those who insist on believing, against all available evidence, that the left is driven more by anger than the right would do well to remember that, during the 2000 Florida recount fiasco, it was the Republicans who rioted, not the Democrats.) But those who applaud Coulter can't win or hold power on their own -- there just aren't enough angry, hate-filled voters in the country. They need the support of more rational and reasonable people, many of whom would be appalled -- and no longer supportive -- if the media showed them the true nature of the extremists they support.

But the most interesting -- and important -- thing about Coulter's hate speech isn't that it is representative the of attitudes of her ideological fellow travelers.

It is the similarity between what Ann Coulter was trying to do by calling John Edwards a "faggot" and what countless "respectable" members of the "MSM" do every day.

Coulter's comments, of course, weren't about convincing people that John Edwards is gay. They were about trying to strip him of his masculinity, to feminize him -- and in doing so take advantage of the cultural stereotypes that equate strength with men and weakness with women to portray Edwards as "wussy" (her word).

The use of epithets like "faggot" to feminize and weaken seems largely self-evident, but for those who desire or require further discussion of this topic, bloggers such as Digby, Bob Somerby, and Andrew Sullivan have all made excellent points this week; excerpts of their work appear below. Glenn Greenwald, meanwhile, explained a corollary principle: "As critical as it is to them to feminize Democratic and liberal males (and to masculinize the women), even more important is to create false images of masculine power and strength around their authority figures."

Again: this is nothing new for Coulter. She has long made efforts to feminize those with whom she disagrees a cornerstone of her overheated rhetoric:

* On Al Gore: "seemed kind of gay."
* On Al Gore: "total fag."
* On Bill Clinton: "latent homosexual."
* On John Kerry: "Kerry claims he will stand up to powerful interests, but he can't even stand up to his wife. ... Kerry clearly has no experience dealing with problems of typical Americans since he is a cad and a gigolo living in the lap of other men's money. ... This low-born poseur with his threadbare pseudo-Brahmin family bought a political career with one rich woman's money, dumped her, and made off with another heiress to enable him to run for president. If Democrats want to talk about middle-class tax cuts, couldn't they nominate someone who hasn't been a poodle to rich women for the past 33 years?" <1/30/04>
* On John Edwards: "True, Edwards made more money than his father did. I assume strippers make more money than their alcoholic fathers who abandoned them did, too. ... Kerry picks a pretty-boy milquetoast as his running mate, narrowly edging out a puppy for the spot." <7/11/04>
* On John Edwards: "After Dick Cheney had beaten Edwards about the head for a while during the debate, Edwards waved his girlish hands and said: 'There are 60 countries who have members of al-Qaida in them. How many of those countries are we going to invade?'"
* "Fortunately for me, liberals not only argue like liberals, they also throw like girls. Liberals enjoy claiming they are intellectuals, thrilled to engage in a battle of wits." <4/17/05>
* On The New York Times: "Revenge of the queers."

But, as usual, Coulter's outbursts are most interesting for what they demonstrate about others. And Coulter's attempts to feminize progressives may be more vulgar than most, but that only makes them more obvious, not more harmful. Instead, it is likely that the frequent but (slightly) more subtle feminization of progressives by "mainstream" journalists has far greater impact than Coulter's uncontrolled braying.

Take, for example, the steady stream of journalist/pundit comments seizing on specious claims about Al Gore turning to a woman for instruction on how to be an "Alpha Male."

Or the full-court press by Fox News to convince the world that John Kerry -- unlike "most men" -- enjoys an occasional manicure.

Or the description of John Edwards as the "Breck Girl" -- a sneering, feminizing insult that first appeared attributed to an anonymous "Bush associate" in a 2003 New York Times article, but was quickly embraced by journalists and pundits who adopted it as their own.

much much more at:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200703100003

Keep the Internet free! It's our only truthful source out there.

that is taken by cowards. They're really tough when they're talking to their peers or on paper. But they're cowards at heart. When confronted they backtrack, weasel, or out-and-out lie.

It's a shame that right-wingers are afraid of the notion otherwise. Do they maybe love men, too. Secretly, in their own private closets. Is this why they're attracted to 'her' ?

It's almost like she's appealing to a base of men who don't like themselves, because the idea of even the most slight hint of homosexuality scares them beyond comprehension.

I pity them.

I pity these closested homosexuals, but now they make me angry at all closeted homosexuals. Not because they are homosexuals, but because they are compulsive liars and well....closet cases.

Thanks for the thread AnInLa

The more feminization is used as an insult, the more it hurts women.

:nuke: :nuke:

Their idea of "macho men"? Excuse me while I throw up.

not because they are tough guys, but because they lack the 'girlish' qualities of compassion and empathy and shame and integrity. To be manly in their eyes is to be a 'savage', a heartless, bloodthirsty, savage.

Senator Clinton? Will they try to masculinize her, and then call it unfeminine? No, because they want the only masculine figures to be on the Right. It's not effective to call a woman a wuss...altho I think they tried to suggest she was a lesbian at some point, didn't they? That must be a riddle for them, how to either feminize or masculinize her.

I think this is why we see such "forgiveness" of their RW heroes when it comes to sex-capades, divorce, girlfriends, cheating....those kinds of things have, historically, been seen as masculine. So, as long as their heroes seem masculine, they don't really give a damn about his ethics/character.

is that it's impossible to rebut, and attempts to do so often make the situation worse. Even though Kerry is a long-time hunter, photo ops of him in gear with a rifle were dismissed a posing. (Which of course they were, but only in the sense that every photo op is political posing.)

The other insidious advantage for Republicans is that is these charges often lead Democrats into adopting hawkish or neocon positions to appear tough. (Edwards in particular seems to be an example.) So even when the accusations don't stick, the right has gained support for its platform.

being the "daddy party."

and I see nothing to counter it....any suggestions?

but foul language. Make it seem like an accident, a slip of the tongue, then don't back away from it. Compound on it. Expand on it. Explain in detail why some Republican cronie is the piece of trash that he is. As bluntly as possible. And most importantly never apologize for it. Mention that politics isn't for children, it is the dirtiest nastiest business there is. If not for this, what are we saving these words for?

People equate vulgarity with honesty, and anger with strength. But also a lack of self-control, and crudeness. A double-edged sword like I said. I don't know if it'd be a good option, but it is a possible counter.

for everything said is ridiculous. Explain your remarks if necessary, but never back down, and never say you're sorry, and be aggressive about it. (Well, I don't know what to do about Hillary, but....)

Looking "weak" is the biggest sin in politics.

. . . should be kept barefoot, pregnant, and in permament service to men. Even their women think this, which I find baffling, but I guess they consider it gives them financial and emotional security.

Abortion? Can't have it, because it kills their sacred seed. That's why they are all against contraception as well, because it implies that a woman can make her own choices, and she might choose not to gestate his sacred seed.

Equal pay for equal work? Nope, a man deserves more because he's raising a family. Besides, if women have well-paying jobs, they might decide they have something better to do than "put another log on the fire" for him.

Gay rights? Actually, I can't figure out why they're against that one. Mostly the haters seem to focus on gay *men*, and you'd think that heterosexual men would be in favor of anything that takes competitors out of the market for women. But as my husband points out, anyone who thinks homosexuality is a choice is inherently bisexual.

In both the progressive and conservative world views, weakness has no value. And, while progressives are tolerant of weakness -- striving even to help those who are most vulnerable, conservatives are unforgivably intolerant of weakness -- finding it immoral... even evil.

http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001126.php

I sure wish Kerry would have said, "Go to hell," instead of trying over and over to explain his "botched" joke. He should have said ONCE, in firm terms what he meant, and then become very aggressive with it. I would like to see a candidate become aggressive for once instead of trying to appease everyone on the whole spectrum, it can't be done.

stronger than men when it come to moral issues and having the courage of their convictions, which is the kind of strength that matters in political leaders. any woman (or man) who allows this "female weakness" slur to stand is no friend of america or the democratic party.

THANK YOU HardRocker05!

Well said!

are the most important character traits in political leaders.

Look at what happened to Kerry: The flipflopper frame and the Swiftboater's made him look weak without gender slurs. Gender slurs are just a subset of the "weakness" frame that Republicans employ against Democrats.

"Breck Girl" makes Edwards look weak, whereas there's no way Republicans would call Edwards "Wonder Woman" because that's a stong female frame.

Here's a Republican comment about Edwards I found. There isn't one female gender slur in it. But it's full of "weakness" frames about Edwards and Democrats. That's what my post was about. :hi:


Edwards has a line he has been using for 5 yrs !! “about a little girl going to bed hungry” (isn’t see 13 by now) Edwards will not eradicate poverty in the USA! he is using that line to tug on your bleeding hearts !! what is he going to do about bad parents who squander the food stamps the government gives them to buy their children food ???? No children starve to death in the USA !! when one does? its all over the news all day long on FOX and CNN and i think the last one to die of malnutrition in the USA was like 3 yrs ago in Jersey cause the parents locked the kids in the basement and smoked crack for weeks strait !!! Edwards says that line cause you guys get all emotional and then go out and vote for him, hes playing you !!! just like bill Clinton’s “i feel your pain” line its all just emotional marketing and you libs suck it up !!! Edwards is a sycophant he is pandering to your bleeding heart !! he is a snake-oil salesman he cares squat about poverty, he only cares about his own promotion !! watch for the disingenuous tongue wag he has !!and the look on his face that says “I’m so special” the fake smile, he flip-flops and will say what ever he thinks you wish to here !!! what did Kerry Say “i pick John as my running mate cause he has nice hair” that was no lie !! its all show for you guys to eat up !! Edwards is a perfect example of a democrat politician talking to his base: the naive, bleeding heart, sucker libs !!

we didn't live in a woman-hating society. If it were a COMPLIMENT to be compared to a woman, or merely neutral, then they'd have to find other ways to demonize John Edwards and everyone else, and there'd be no more homophobia either.

And yet, I see DUers routinely, DAILY, promoting the very sexism and misogyny that fuels all this. What a damn shame.

I can't stand it when people use vulgar words for vagina and call men by those names. Or apply them to women. It bugs me.

Or they use that combination of wimp and p-word, "wussy".

their use in every area of society, speaks to exactly the kind of widespread woman-hatred/contempt that you spoke of.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Both are ways of ridiculing people because of real or imagined differences from cultural gender norms. People shouldn't be made to feel ashamed of androgyny.

It gets misinterpreted. Just a suggestion. Thank you very much.

are Republican.

the point of the article. It doesn't seem that they are subscribing to the idea of woman=weakness as the pubs do, but rather calling out the practice as a warning. There is a very strong gender focus running through the commentary of Coulter in particular. She believes in the concept of 'real' men and all that that entails. I don't know if she would accept the idea of staying home and pumping out kids whether she wants to or not though, not to mention keeping her mouth shut-both of which 'real' men advocate.

Like any good Verbal Abusers, the rightwingnuts and their mouthpieces project all sorts of false imagery onto their opponents, then criticize them based on that imagery. Their criticism and commentary has naught to do with reality or who their Progressive/liberal opponents really are or what they're about. It has MORE to do with what the wingnuts are and what THEY are about, instead.

These are classic verbally abusive tactics - the same as is seen in abusive spouses and partners. In that type of situation, the abuser TELLS (doesn't ASK, - TELLS) his/her victim what (s)he's thinking, how (s)he is (personality-wise), what his/her motives are, what type of mood (s)he's in, etc. Then the abuser proceeds to criticize and insult based on his/her assertion about the victim - however wrong it may be. It's a set-up for abuse. It simply gives them an "excuse" to abuse. It has no basis in reality and is not based on the truth about who the victim (opponent) really is or what (s)he's about.

Same tactics. Interesting...

Very interesting....I see this trait in myself sometime and hope I am not a verbal abuser. I will really have to watch this for myself, and try to notice it in Political Operatives.

Her book, "The Verbally Abusive Relationship," was an eye-opener and my lifeline. I see Repugs using the same abusive techniques all the time.

I see Evans has a new book out, which I just reserved at the library.

That book was a real eye-opener for me too! Repugs DO use the same tactics - one of my favorite sigline graphics here on DU was one that said: "If 'We The People' Were a Woman, She'd Need a Rape Counselor".

It's TRUE. Just look at the parallels in their behavior...

Girly-man

How can 'feminine' males FIGHT A WAR on Terror? Once again, all FRAMING, and I'm glad that someone is poking Holes in it, showing it up for what it is..

And a beautiful, insightful post about abusive relationships and control I might add, wonderful. Most people have no idea that they are living in a Fantasy world, and a lot of what they are angry about, but keep inside are simply concepts that have been Beamed INTO THEM by someone else, INSTALLED.

Get past the delusions and you'll feel much better in this world, the whole Human Race needs a major Epiphany and posts like Triana's are Crucial..

The Corporations have created a Mindset over all these years, a fantasy world in our minds that make us FEAR, and BUY, or NO ONE WILL LIKE US.. we've been Psyop'd to the point where we are like that Meat in "Restaurant at the End of the Galaxy" that's genetically Engineered to WANT TO BE EATEN :)

Here, go watch my hollywood award winning flash, where I tell a story completely based on the use of ONLY International Symbols, NO WORDS, and see if you look at Roadsigns the same way again :)

http://www.symbolman.com

I actually wrote a Book, with No Words, All symbols, 60 pages, virtually anyone on the planet can 'read' it - a publicist once called it "Visual Esperanto", and it's the reason I call myself 'Symbolman' :)

Kick all these assholes out of your brain, they are Trespassing ;)

Pictures do say a thousand words.
They can also leave one speechless.
They can make us laugh.
They can also bring us to tears.
They can inspire great thoughts.
They can also destroy ideas.
They can remind us of the past.
They can also hide truth.
They bring out the best in us
They also reveal the worst.


The images we are imprinted with become the blueprints for the reality we create for ourselves.

He had sex with a woman!

liberals not only argue like liberals, they also throw like girls...."

Fortunately for her, she's never been standing on first after I scooped up a ground ball. I used to carry my glove and ball with me everywhere, just in case anyone ever said anything that stupid around me.

I must admit tho, she looks like she might have been a great first baser when she was a young man.

All that hatred she spews sure seems like self hatred to me. :shrug:

Whoever that is, that's the person we should be equating right-wingers with. Not Archie Bunker, for he is too comical, and not Hitler, because he's too obvious.

It's the overzealous testosterone that is creating the wars and death and the lack of men realizing their own innate femininity and more compassionate, empathetic nature.

Femininity is really about creation and affirming life.

We need for men to appreciate more, and be more comfortable and proud of their femininity, not less!! We all have it. Women also have some testosterone.

Femininity DOESN'T mean simply dressing up like a woman like Giuliani did. J. Edgar Hoover did that as well. That has absolutely nothing to do with being feminine. That has to do pretending, and with playing dress up.

show it for the woman-contempt that it is. make a very clear issue out of the conservative suggestion that woman=weakness; it will gain women's support for the dems, and at the same time make repukes think twice before playing the 'weakness' card.

She should be getting psychiatric help.