FDL Late Nite: Whore, n., 1. a prostitute…
[Ed. Note: literally, doubtful. See photo.]
2. A person considered sexually promiscuous
3. A person considered as having compromised principles for personal gain.
AH HA HA HA HA! That’s some mighty fine snark there, Pach! See, she can’t be promiscuous, because you think she’s old/fat/ugly! Boy, I can see why you get to run with the A-listers. Hoo boy.
You know, sometimes I’m an old fashioned sort. I can appreciate tradition. I certainly believe in hard work, and positively adore the craft of genuine professionalism.
In that spirit, I bring you an underappreciated practitioner of the world’s oldest profession, a woman in
congressCongress, Ellen Tauscher. She can slurp the gnarly nub of power with the very best, gamely grinning to the gushing finish: a working girl’s working girl. Howie calls her, “a bribe-taking corporate whore and shit eater who has guaranteed herself a nasty primary in 2008.”
Oh, the funny. It burns. That “congress” strikeout? As in “sexual congress,” winkwink, nudgenudge? Genius! Except, didn’t you just say she was too ugly to fuck?
Oh, those nettlesome principles. Such a shame to have to answer to us dirty fucking hippies with a list on the back of a napkin. Here, Madam Tauscher: use it to wipe your chin.
Comedy gold! She’s a corporate whore, y’see, so she must do real blowjobs! And not only that, she lets her johns cum on her face. Because only dirty whores do that.
Why does she have Miller in her sights? That is to say, why do her clients have Miller in their sights? Let’s read a little further:
Aw, c’mon, Pach. Don’t punk out on us now. If you’re going with prostitute metaphors, go for the gusto. The word is “johns.”
The same media establishment that’s been cattily sniping at Speaker-to-be Pelosi for daring to become a powerful, successful, progressive woman Speaker is targeting her influential allies to protect Lipitor’s Medicare Part D premium and the Great and Powerful McCain/Lieberman War Machine and Pony Farm. Accordingly, as a genuine professional and a faithful working girl, Tongue Twirling Tauscher aims to please. I suspect Sten Hoyer and Rahm Emanuel (D-Tomczak) may be needing new kneepads by Christmas as well. Shop now.
See! He’s really a feminist after all! He only goes into cum-guzzling reveries for women he disagrees with politically! And, and, he mentioned knee pads for men, too! So it’s really the same thing!
Yes. Well. Things got better. Tom Watson did not take kindly to the working-girl imagery, and said so.
I hope Peter Daou is reading this, because his boss may well have to face this kind of sexist attack beginning next year. It’s so bad, so poorly executed, that it really does appear to be a clumsy Republican efforts to pollute a top Democratic blog. These posts are permanent, folks. They give aid and comfort to the other side. They make our side look surly, sexist, hypocritical.
To put is another way: are you stupid? Or just insane?
There’s a better than 50-50 chance that the broad center-left coalition in this country, organized as the Democratic Party, will be running a woman for President in less than 20 months. The leading Democratic elected official in the land is a woman – and we need her.
But in a world where a hero like Mukhtar Mai of Pakistan overcomes court-ordered gang rape and a corrupt regime to help educate the children of her attackers, we kid ourselves that we’re advanced enough, cool enough, hip enough, or evolved enough to throw around this low-brow gender-based garbage and think it won’t stick – to us, to the left, to the Democrats, to our candidates, to our movement.
James Wolcott came out in support of Watson:
For those of Steyn’s persuasion, the truly noble female exemplars are Orianna Fallaci and Margaret Thatcher–one dead, the other prematurely mute. Sexism is second nature to so many on the right, which is why those on the left have to ensure that their antennae are acutely tuned to the misogynistic jibes thrown at Nancy Pelosi from everyone from Maureen Dowd to Dennis Miller. As Tom Watson, provoked by this outburst of projectile vomiting in Firedoglake, points out, such rhetorical rot will only end up eating into our own faces.
Then Watson updated the post to include a link to a post by TRex in which he had, in the original post, called Laura Ingraham a cunt. This was eventually edited out, but TRex hurled the epithet at Tom in comments to Tom’s post for daring to question him:
“UPDATE II: The grown-ups at FDL have been busy. The C-word has been edited out of the post.”
That was my decision, Tom. I decided I would rather refer to Miss Ingraham as a Bitch Troll from Hell.
You, on the other hand, are a miserable little cunt.
As is depressingly common, commenters — most of them progressive men — tripped all over themselves to excuse the use of “cunt” and the rather florid whore imagery as just desserts for Ingraham and Tauscher. Come on, can’t you take a little vulgarity? Hey, they’re right-wing bitches; they deserve it. You’re limiting my vocabulary! Women use it, too, so why can’t men? You have no sense of humor. But “prick” is an insult, too! It’s just a word, it doesn’t mean anything. But FDL’s raised a lot of money for Democrats!
We’ve been down this road before, kids. With Ann Coulter. With Michelle Malkin. With “pussy.” For that matter, with fat jokes. [And, as Lauren reminds me, with blackface.] And those arguments are no more valid now than they were then.
If you can’t attack the positions of a rabid antifeminist commentator or a deep-in-the-pockets-of-Big-Pharma politician without resorting to insults designed to highlight not just their gender, but their relative worth as fucktoys, then you have no business writing what passes for commentary.
It’s easy to reach first for the gender-based insult. And it’s wrong.
And, seriously, how can you sit there and be shocked, shocked, that people you don’t agree with are attacking Nancy Pelosi for her femaleness and not realize that you’re contributing to the problem by portraying a United States Congresswoman as a cumguzzling two-dollar whore? By whining that women are too sensitive because they complain when you call a media figure a cunt?
Remember what I said about the function of this kind of talk the last time we talked about TRex?
Yep, you have just seen a white man tell a woman of color that she needs to just remember her place and stop “assail[ing] your betters.”
Wellllll, he just put Liza in *her* place, didn’t he? He even pulled out the “you’re just jealous” canard, and we’ve never seen THAT used to keep someone in their place, have we? . . .
So, to recap: If you have tits and get invited to a lunch with someone powerful, someone will be along directly to remind you that you didn’t get where you are by being intelligent, and you don’t really belong. If you protest, you will be pegged as angry and hysterical.
If you’re a minority, and you want some answers as to why no minorities attended the lunch with the powerful person, someone will be along directly to remind you not to sass your betters. If you continue to protest, you will be pegged as angry and hysterical.
These insults aren’t meant just for the recipients. They’re meant for everyone else in that group, too. So detailed descriptions of your fantasy that “corporate whore” really means real whore doesn’t just hurt Tauscher, the intended target. It hurts Pelosi, too. And it’s meant to — that’s what insults based on a group characteristic or stereotype are for. They’re meant to convey the message to any member of a non-dominant group that they might be accepted for now, but we all know that they’re really just a cunt and a whore, like those women we don’t like.