Blogging On The Bus: What About The Sexism?
Eric Boehlert's book,"bloggers on the bus: How the Internet Changed Politics and the Press", is a tour de force about the rise of activist political blogging that deftly describes the rise of political blogging in the Bush Era. It takes the issue of political blogging and its effect on politics and journalism seriously and provides many first person accounts of how it came about. As part of the story, Boehlert reports on the period of the 2008 Democratic primary. That portion of the book will anger many in the blogosphere. Perhaps it should. But perhaps they should also consider whether the book portrays the episode accurately. I believe it does.
In this post, I will be discussing Chapter 9 of the book - the issue of sexism and how it was covered and REFLECTED in the blogosphere. The most startling quote on the subject in the book comes from Chris Bowers during the 2008 Presidential primary - "[Was sexism] somehow pervasive throughout the entire blogosphere? I certainly have not seen that." (Emphasis supplied.) Chris is a good man. But please. This is like a Right Wing blogger complaining that there is not "pervasive racial coding throughout the entire Republican Party." Define "pervasive" Chris. More . . .
Others disagreed with Chris' assessment. I would hope that this disagreement would give him pause now. Not just from me. After all, I am just an a-hole. No need to listen to me.
But how about Susie Madrak - "It's disgusting and repellant. It's a real sustained problem that's out of control. I think there are a lot of Democratic women that are very very angry with the Netroots right now."
How about Digby - "When people assumed I was a man they reacted to me in a certain way. the minute it became known I was a middle aged woman, -- Oh God the worst of possibilities! -- people reacted to it differently. I'm not an idiot. I can tell."
How about Melissa McEwan? Boehlert describes her reaction:
McEwan became increasingly unnerved by what she saw of the sexist coverage of Clinton, and how the progressive blogosphere, having embraced Obama, let so much of it pass without comment. . . . Worse was the fact that over time, she couldn't shake the feeling that portions of the netroots were actually pushing the sexist stuff.
How about Jane Hamsher's rationalization for this behavior? "I think there might be a lack of sensitivity to sexist coverage. . . . I think that if you are a man you just do not see it that fast." What does it mean if you do not see it at all Jane?
The most ironic reaction Boehlert recounts comes from Booman (with whom I was quite friendly at one time), who, according to Boehlert, admitted that
[H]e was so "pissed off" [at Clinton] . . . that he lowered his outrage threshold in terms of defending Clinton against sexist broadsides."
How do you lower your threshold below zero, Booman?
What makes Booman's confession ironic is how he first built up his site - by taking advantage of the original "pie fight" - the battle over Daily Kos' (I was a front page poster at Daily Kos at the time) running of an ad for a new Gilligan's Island television program that featured a pie fight between the new Ginger and Maryanne. When Markos made the blatantly sexist remark about the "sanctimonious women's studies set" (a remark roundly and rightly blasted by many, including Daily Kos front pagers like myself and Meteor Blades. Markos later apologized for the remark), Booman made a big show of trashing Markos for it and offering his site as a welcoming haven for feminists. Booman had his own history of rather sexist comments so his newly found awareness of the importance of fighting sexism was quite, um, convenient.
Of all the episodes of the 2008 primary wars, to my mind, the pervavsive acceptance, even encouragement, of sexism and misogyny remains the most shameful and the one that must be remembered. Progressives abandoned one of the most basic tents of progressivism - all due to their love of one politician and their loathing of another politician. It should never have happened. And it is a wound that has not been addressed forthrightly.
Boehlert's book provides us another chance to heal this wound. Perhaps it will be addressed now. Not likely I know. But we are all for hope and change now no?
Speaking for me only
| < Saturday Night Open Thread | Pot, Prisons and the Elephant in the Room > |
