September 15, 2006

Let's take a closer look at those breasts.

NOTICE: You are about to read a post that has been widely linked and discussed on various blogs, and I suspect that you are not inclined to read this post carefully or with any sympathy toward what I intended. So, I'm adding this note to make it more likely that you will understand what I am trying to say. First, I am writing from a feminist perspective, even though I am criticizing a feminist. Second, the "breasts" referred to in the heading are the drawings and photographs of breasts that a feminist blogger sees fit to decorate her blog with. I don't like that. Third, the real target of this post is Bill Clinton. I think Clinton betrayed feminism (and I hate the way many feminists have given him a pass). Fourth, this post is written in a humorous, cutting style. It's meant to hurt, but I am attacking public figures about an important issue.

What follows after the asterisks is the original post.

***

I wanted to elevate a discussion from the comments section of a post from Wednesday, you know the one with the photo of the Daou-wrangled bloggers posing in front of Bill Clinton? The first commenter, Goesh, picks up on my prompt -- "Let's just array these bloggers... randomly" -- and wisecracks: "Who is the Intern directly in front of him with the black hair?"

Eventually, Jessica from a blog called Feministing, shows up and says: "The, um, 'intern' is me. It's so nice to see women being judged by more than their looks. Oh, wait..."

Snarky but somewhat conciliatory, I say: "Well, Jessica, you do appear to be 'posing.' Maybe it's just an accident."

Jessica Feministing returns and says:
It's a picture; people pose. And I'm not sure I understand your logic anyway. If I "pose" for a picture (as opposed to sulking and hunching over?) then I deserve to be judged for my looks? I don't see anyone talking shit about the other bloggers smiling pretty for the camera.
Provoked, I decide to actually give her a small dose of the kind of judgment for brains she seems to demanding:
Jessica: I'm not judging you by your looks. (Don't flatter yourself.) I'm judging you by your apparent behavior. It's not about the smiling, but the three-quarter pose and related posturing, the sort of thing people razz Katherine Harris about. I really don't know why people who care about feminism don't have any edge against Clinton for the harm he did to the cause of taking sexual harrassment seriously, and posing in front of him like that irks me, as a feminist. So don't assume you're the one representing feminist values here. Whatever you call your blog....
Making this colloquy into this new blog post, I actually click over to Jessica's blog, and what the hell? The banner displays silhouettes of women with big breasts (the kind that Thelma and Louise get pissed off at when they're seen on truck mudflaps). She's got an ad in the sidebar for one of her own products, which is a tank top with the same breasty silhouette, stretched over the breasts of a model. And one of the top posts is a big closeup on breasts.

Sooooo... apparently, Jessica writes one of those blogs that are all about using breasts for extra attention. Then, when she goes to meet Clinton, she wears a tight knit top that draws attention to her breasts and stands right in front of him and positions herself to make her breasts as obvious as possible?

Well, I'm going to assume Jessica's contributions to my comments are an attempt at a comic performance, as was her attendence at the luncheon dressed in the guise of Monica Lewinsky. Lord knows we need more comical feminists.

Or are you going to say she's some kind of Karl Rove plant? Alternatives: She's a clueless fool. She's in it for the money. (And you know the blog money is all in the T-shirts.)

UPDATE: You know what? If you breastblog and someone calls you on it, just laugh. If you try to deny it, people will laugh at you. Case in point? The big comments thread herein. I'm not saying you should read all the stuff in there, even though some of it's funny (and it could be useful as raw material for a Women's Studies master's thesis), but really, denial is some serious quicksand. And thanks to Glenn for linking. Quoting the title of this post unleashed some serious Instalanche action. (I knew it would.) The most ever, actually. And late on a Friday! What are you going to do? Guys love breasts. I think Jessica knows that quite well. And I think for all her gasping outrage, she's thoroughly pleased to get this attention. And as for you chumps who spent the afternoon defending her... well, you're chumps. So am I for giving her the publicity.... but what the hell? It's Friday.

ANOTHER UPDATE: This post has gotten a lot of links from folks who profess "puzzlement." I think a lot of this puzzlement is willful blindness to the criticism of Clinton.

501 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   401 – 501 of 501
JodyTresidder said...

"If you breastblog and someone calls you on it, just laugh. If you try to deny it, people will laugh at you>'

Ann,
This is my sticking point.
When you ventriloquized the 'good sport' reaction Jessica was required to give you.

I still have such a vivid memory of serial male office sexist twerps discovering my youthful need for a robust sense of humor after the fact.

Surgical Solution said...

There's no right way to stand when you got big knockers. They stick out any way you stand. The only effective way to hide them is beneath a large burqua.

Ann, maybe you should start a breast reduction fund for women whose big knockers offend you.

If you don't like their knockers, then at least help them afford the surgery necessary to cut them off.

Doug said...

Any woman who doesn't condemn Clinton can't be a feminist because he got a blow job from a willing partner? Last I looked he wasn't accused of rape, he was accused of accepting a simple act of fellatio and lying to his wife about it

Actually, you would be wrong, he was accused of raping Juanita Broaddrick. He was accused of feeling up Kathleen Wiley, and that lead one of the icons of feminism, Gloria Steinem to conclude that Slick Willie should get one free grope before getting into trouble. Many feminists seemed to be of the mindset that sexually obnoxious behavior is ok if you are a Democrat committed to keeping Roe the law of the land.

I do have to hand it to Bill Clinton, he is the master. It is very difficult to hear much good about him or his wife on many of these liberal blogs. They will on occasion do so in the context of ripping on Bush, but mostly they hate his triangulation, that he moved the party to the right of Nixon. But then he meets up with these people(or at least the white ones) , charms the pants ( and possibly the shirts) off of some of them, and they buy it.

Mark Warner had to spend big bucks to bribe bloggers at YearlyKOS to back his corporatist, DLC candidacy. Yet Clinton just has to sit with these dupes for a small amount of time, take a few pictures and the crowd is infatuated with him like a 70's teen girl would be after seeing David Cassidy.

Alan said...

I want to know if the form fitting sweater over the nice rack worked--did the President call her back for a private conference over pizza?

If it didn't work I bet a second or even third chance will come around since Bill's job is to charm the lefty bloggers into Hillary's camp.

If not, next time I suggest a tight dress with the obligatory thong snap. Make sure you let him know he's dress worthy.

Ann Althouse said...

Somefeller: I totally call bullshit on your comment. You've been chiding me in exactly the same manner repeatedly in other posts. Hah!

Virginia-Liberal said...

John Aravosis from America Blog has a 3/4 profile pose, too. What do you make of it?

Ann Althouse said...

I_am: I was never against Monica Lewinsky, and I don't like the way she was vilified. I don't like the way Paula Jones was treated either. A lot of that was sexist, portraying women as nutty and slutty (as had been done to Anita Hill before). I had a problem with Clinton and what he was doing to the progress that had been made about sexual harassment (though I signed the lawprof letter against impeachment). And I subsequently had a problem with feminists who explained away the problem. Suddenly, everything people "got" back at the time of Anita Hill and the Thomas confirmation was forgotten, and the political bias built into feminism became glaringly apparent. This is something I'm going to keep holding people accountable for, even if they try to vilify me. And those who won't face up to this problem and prefer instead to call me names are phony feminists in my book. So, yeah, I side with Monica.

Ann Althouse said...

Surgical lady: I'm really not interested in the size of your boobs, but "thanks for sharing." I will say this. Look closely at that picture and try to adopt the posture Jessica's in. I did. It's not natural, and it's not just a matter of standing upright. I challenge you to take this test. Then apologize to me for your foolish accusations.

Ti-Guy said...

What an exceedingly vapid and childish person this Ann Althouse is.

Honestly...law professor?

somefeller said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Have Skunk said...

So ya know what? Jessica has boobs. And she's cute. Everybody needs to stop conflating sexuality, politics and feminism.

Boob is boobs and people like them. being cute doesn't hurt, either. The Israeli army uses women to train their troops because young men listen more intently to female authority figures. Get over it, jealous ones.

somefeller said...

At the risk of coming back as often as the Who on a "final tour", here goes.

Ann, if the best you can come up with for my comment is " I totally call bullshit on your comment. You've been chiding me in exactly the same manner repeatedly in other posts. Hah!", then you've really lost it. The only place where I've made a comment close to this one as your per tone and rhetoric is the Michael Moore / hipster thread. Since I'm not in the habit of memorizing what I've posted on comment threads, I did a quick five-minute Google search (somefeller site:althouse.blogspot.com) to confirm that. I haven't repeatedly chided you as per such tone and rhetoric (and frankly, hypocrisy -- haven't seen that criticism of those calling Valenti unattractive yet), so either you're confused or deliberately mischaracterizing my comments. Anyway, not impressive. And this is adios.

JJ Daddy-O said...

This is a "law blog"? I thought I had stumbled into Perez Hilton by mistake. Actually, it's more like Krystle and Alexis in the big mud fight.

Great American said...

Snarky but somewhat conciliatory, I say: "Well, Jessica, you do appear to be 'posing.' Maybe it's just an accident."

Yes... quite conciliatory. Let me try.

Ann, you're a rude, arrogant, bitter, ugly woman. Maybe it's just an accident.

Wow... that was easy.

Sleeping Sleeper said...

How very tiresome.

This is the sort of thing that always happens when the dumpy folk who think themselves clever don't get invited to the big party. Especially when they see that other dumpy girls and boys get invited, and not just the pretty/handsome ones.

At least we have learned two things.

Firstly - baggy, shapeless clothing is now de rigueur for those who want consideration as a woman with any signs of intellect.

Secondly, breasts are autonomous. It is apparently fine to devote posts to someone's breasts. But to suggest that you have made a comment about their looks? Heaven forbid.

Surgical Solution said...

Ann, there's NO pose that would hide a set of big knockers from nasty women like you.

They stick out. They just stick out.

Trying to make them NOT stick out damaged my neck.

Thank God I had them cut down to a size where the judgmental women of the world would finally LEAVE ME THE HELL ALONE.

Women like you inflict even more trauma on big breasted women than men inflict.

I hate you I hate you I hate you

Thank GOD for surgery so I don't have to deal with your kind any more.

peter hoh said...

If only one of the male bloggers at the lunch had been wearing shorts.

peter hoh said...

Surgical Solution: And if Ann quit blogging she wouldn't have to deal with judgmental women like you.

I'm inclined to be sympathetic to your story, but when you infuse it with an attack on someone you hardly know, well, that takes the power out of your point of view.

reader_iam said...

"Feminism died in 1998 when Hillary allowed henchlings and Democrats to demonize Monica as an unbalanced stalker, and when Gloria Steinem defended Mr. Clinton against Kathleen Willey and Paula Jones by saying he had merely made clumsy passes, then accepted rejection, so there was no sexual harassment involved. As to his dallying with an emotionally immature 21-year-old, Ms. Steinem noted, ‘Welcome sexual behavior is about as relevant to sexual harassment as borrowing a car is to stealing one.’"
--Maureen Dowd, NYT column, 10/4/2003

Ahem.

(Thanks to Instapundit who inadvertently helped me out with the time frame so I could go back and figure when the heck Dowd had said something dead-on perfect along the lines of the point that I, and others, obviously, have been trying to make about the unholy brew that results when you try to mix the movement known as Feminism with party politics.)

Patriarch Verlch said...

She is pretty and has perky breasts...also young...so naturally a good target...if she only looked more constipated...asnd yes the fact that she is wearing a tee-shirt instead of a dress or a big old jacket is why her breasts show...but pointing that out might be too logical for Ann to grasp with both brain cells...

Patriarch Verlch said...

"Somefeller: I totally call bullshit on your comment. You've been chiding me in exactly the same manner repeatedly in other posts. Hah!"


I think its the "hah" that really makes this seem to be a comment from an adult...don't you all? Maybe a nay-nay boo boo at the end would have cinched it...

Mr. Snitch said...

400+ comments says it all. When men stop looking at breasts, mankind goes on the endangered species list.

Men looking at breasts and other physical female attributes isn't the problem, never was. It's what they're willing to do for that (and more than that) that's the problem. Clinton having a fantasy about an intern wasn't the problem. But yielding to it, being a man in the situation he was in (US President, married) caused all kinds of problems, and not just for him.

Women like Jessica, who pose as 'feminists' while offering plenty of cheesecake and then ciriticizing men who take the bait, are all too common. Recognize them for the predaory hypocrites they are, and move on to better women.

I mean, there's a VERY attractive blonde two doors over, who might be warm and supportive and quite flattered if you told her she was beautiful. (Hmm.... for that matter, the redheaded woman between them might have more going for her than a photo can convey, and might also be open to attention.) Why would anyone knock on Jessica's vain, unhealthy door with such possibilities right nearby?

Oh, wait. Look closer: The slightly heavy redhead's married. Someone has figured her out for the prize she is. And hey - Jessica's NOT married. Huh. Maybe men aren't as dumb as she claims.

NoAcuteDistress said...

"Any woman who doesn't condemn Clinton can't be a feminist because he got a blow job from a willing partner? Last I looked he wasn't accused of rape, he was accused of accepting a simple act of fellatio and lying to his wife about it. Is there really anybody on this thread who believes that Clinton is the only politician who ever had extramartial sex?"

Libby, Libby, Libby..where does one start. To the left "It was just about sex," not about abuse of power, not about character assasination, not about the Juanita Broderick rape charges, the Paula Jones harrassment charges, the Jennifer Flowers charges, etc., etc etc. It was just about getting a BJ from a willing partner. Yup. It wasn't about the shameless support for this sexual predator by the left and by the feminist establishment in particular. After all , let's look at all the GOOD this man has done! Apologists for abusive, power mongers never change through the ages do they? Mussolini got the trains running on time, HItler in introduced the Autobahn and the Volkswagen ("People's Car," after all).

And to answer what this other fool poses as a rhetorical question: "Just how much penance does that guy have to do before he's a worthy human being in front of your sacrificial altar?" Perhaps some of you more versed in the law can give us the sentencing range for rape. After he gets out of the big house, then I'll be ready to listen to all the accolades for Bill's good works on behalf of the planet.

Let's put "feminism" aside for a moment: How can any self-respecting woman hang out with this miscreant? How can any man who claims he respects women (and I'm thinking specifically of my own wife and daughter) hang out with this guy?

Patriarch Verlch said...

"Let's take a closer look at those breasts"

Let's leave your lesbian tendencies out of this...just because you long to wrap your cold shriveled lips around her nice, pink nipples...

JJ Daddy-O said...

As my Mother (the Feminist) used to tell me : "Men are judged by what they do, women are judged by how they look". (this was a rant, not instructions)
Looks like all the years of feminist advances have gotten us is the ability for women to behave like the men they profess to want to change.

NoAcuteDistress said...

"Any woman who doesn't condemn Clinton can't be a feminist because he got a blow job from a willing partner? Last I looked he wasn't accused of rape, he was accused of accepting a simple act of fellatio and lying to his wife about it. Is there really anybody on this thread who believes that Clinton is the only politician who ever had extramartial sex?"

Libby, Libby, Libby..where does one start. To the left "It was just about sex," not about abuse of power, not about character assasination, not about the Juanita Broderick rape charges, the Paula Jones harrassment charges, the Jennifer Flowers charges, etc., etc etc. It was just about getting a BJ from a willing partner. Yup. It wasn't about the shameless support for this sexual predator by the left and by the feminist establishment in particular. After all , let's look at all the GOOD this man has done! Apologists for abusive, power mongers never change through the ages do they? Mussolini got the trains running on time, HItler in introduced the Autobahn and the Volkswagen ("People's Car," after all).

And to answer what this other fool poses as a rhetorical question: "Just how much penance does that guy have to do before he's a worthy human being in front of your sacrificial altar?" Perhaps some of you more versed in the law can give us the sentencing range for rape. After he gets out of the big house, then I'll be ready to listen to all the accolades for Bill's good works on behalf of the planet.

Let's put "feminism" aside for a moment: How can any self-respecting woman hang out with this miscreant? How can any man who claims he respects women (and I'm thinking specifically of my own wife and daughter) hang out with this guy?

Surgical Solution said...

Peter Ho, I didn't come here to seek YOUR sympathy. I just came here to let Ann know that there are real human consequences to her kind of BS.

Big breasted women out there -- I know deep down inside some of you are wondering what it's like to be treated like a normal person.

It's really nice. It's like whole the world changed overnight.

Raging Moderate said...

The way this Jessica woman was dressed was disgraceful.

I'm surprised that she wasn't raped on the way home from the meeting with Clinton (and she would have deserved it for being dressed like such a whore).

Congrats Ann for telling it like it is.

Fenrisulven said...

"lesbian tendencies...pink nipples"

Wow. 400+ posts and the Feminist Fisting crew is still flogging their Strawman.

Its not about her breasts. Its not about her looks. Its not about how she chooses to dress.

Its about the hypocrisy of feminism - wear a tight blouse and arch your chest out when dining with a known sexual predator. Odds are he'll notice your endowments and promote you to run Hillary's internet campaign, ahead of more qualified and capable women. But be sure to put some ice on that first.

Libby Spencer said...

I can't believe I keep coming to this thread. For the record, I'm no fan of Clinton for my own reasons. What he did to ramp up the war on some drugs was the real crime. But it's ridiculous to blame him for the death of feminism based on allegations of impropriety, for which he was not convicted -- surely even here in the lofty academic circles of the brainy blogs you're aware that public figures are sometimes wrongly accused of misdeeds. It's a bogus argument when in truth you just don't like the guy.

And whoever mentioned Islamo fascists -- by definition there is no such thing and even if there were, yes I'm more concerned about our own homegrown religious zealots. Last I looked they were the ones attempting to take over our government in order to legislate morality. Do you deny that the US religious zealots are a greater threat to feminism than Clinton could ever dream of being?

Fenrisulven said...

Raging Moderate Sockpuppet: I'm surprised that she wasn't raped on the way home from the meeting with Clinton (and she would have deserved it for being dressed like such a whore). Congrats Ann for telling it like it is.

Uh-huh. You Feministing Folks are so clever.

Fenrisulven said...

And whoever mentioned Islamo fascists -- by definition there is no such thing and even if there were, yes I'm more concerned about our own homegrown religious zealots. Last I looked they were the ones attempting to take over our government in order to legislate morality. Do you deny that the US religious zealots are a greater threat to feminism than Cinton [Islam] could ever dream of being,?

Fess up - you're part of the Rove Group, crafting parody to disgrace the Left?

beth said...

I don't have anything to say that hasn't been said yet, so I'll just say the one thing that bears repeating:

Jessica, you're awesome. And you totally have the right to wear your breasts in public, regardless of what these assholes think.

I and millions (billions!) of other women will be wearing our breasts in public today too, as a show of solidarity.

dave said...

Speaking of slutty whores sticking their tits out...

dave said...

And speaking of whores sticking their tits into married men's faces...

reader_iam said...

Maureen Dowd was not blaming Bill Clinton for the death of feminism.

Read her quote again.

Allegations of "impropriety."

Wow. I'm assuming you come here as a follower (in the sense of regular, not of the other meaning, so don't go there) of feminist blogs, which often involve posts about the subleties of gender bias, sexual harassment, exploitation, patterns of behavior on the part of men toward women, etc. etc. etc.

Tell me, do you actually READ those posts?

Please, please tell me you're not an academic, or aspiring academic. I don't expect adults to agree with me. I do expect that, if they're going to engage in debates online on big issues, that they're capable of reading--and I don't just mean sounding out the words using some sort of phonetic code.

If they're academics, I expect them to read well. Then disagree as vehemently as they like.

djangone said...

I don't think I've ever read anything so insipid in my life. Is this really something you spend time thinking about, Ann? Think about this in a week's time. You just made a fool of yourself in ways that nobody will ever forget.

tiny said...

Get a life. Get an issue.
You people would shred lady liberty if he posed with her.

Meanwhile, our current president is raping the constitution, our public coffers, and the (trying to) middle easts oil.

Pathetic.

reader_iam said...

By big issues, I don't mean tits. Jessica's or anyone else's. (Worn proudly, or not, in solidarity, nor not. For my part, they just sorta go wherever go. I don't assign them any grander role than any other part I'm forced to drag along by virtue of species and gender.)

jpe said...

Ms. Althouse could've saved considerable time by just writing what she meant: "Look! Boobies!"

George said...

The clenis AGAIN?????????

Of greater import is your publically displayed fear of thunder while on the web -- Following that shown propensity of yours, (in order to explore the question and NOT to demean your character)let us don a thread looking into the general cowardly soul of the right as evidenced by your craven display shown in a recent videoblog.....

That inquiry line has as much sense as the remarks you and yours showed in this thread...

Final query: When it thunders while you are lecturing -- do you have a bed handy underwhich you crawl to escape the big, bad noise??

peter said...

Tits and progressive bloggers. What could be better?

Count me in !

waterboardkingbush said...

It really all comes down to this:

Jessica = HOT

Ann = NOT

Jen said...

Good lord, are you really serious? I saw that picture last week on AmericaBlog and didn't think anything of it. Should women start wrapping our breasts to dispel any hint of femininity? Or wearing baggy clothing? Oh wait, why don't we all just start wearing burqas to hide those distracting bulges? Have you actually read "Feministing?" It's not about breasts. Although yes, there are pictures of breasts on the web page, especially the ads for shirts because... well, women have breasts.

All I can say is... Wow. Your attitude is insulting to all independent-minded women.

JackGoff said...

Just to say, the only one who has spun any of this is Ann. IT'S A FUCKING PICTURE, FER CRYING OUT LOUD! Get your head out of your ass.

David Manus said...

I seriously doubt the "feminists" and other Clenis apologists really believe that fiction that he "was just getting a blow job from a willing participant"- what he did is the very essence of sexual harassment- he used his high position, in fact directly in line to help advance to hurt Monica's career, to either tacitly, passively or directly get sex from her.

On government time. On government property. With a government employee. Now, I'm not saying he said "blow me or you don't get Vernon Jordan finding you a job at Revlon-", no, what he was tacitly saying is all you interns who DON'T give me a blow job DON'T get Vernon Jordan finding you jobs.

He's using the fact he has power to exploit an underling (no pun intended) and using his power to reward her for being his sex toy- and screwing all those other employees, male and female, who didn't have sex with him and didn't get the perks she did.

That's exactly why feminists are correct about calling attention to the fact that anytime a boss becomes involved sexually, especially ON THE JOB DURING WORK HOURS with an employee, its sexual harassment and abuse- and not just of the person in volved, but in anyone else working there that is negatively effected (as in not getting raises, promotions etc.) by the cocksucker getting perks and they, by not giving head, losing out on perks.

Feminists know this. They knew it while they were arguing the entire "consenting adults private matter" trope. They basically betrayed everything they'd gotten society to agree with them about male dominance in the workplace and the abuse of that power to gain sexual favors. And they flushed it all away because Clinton was pro-abortion, or because they hate the Republicans worse.

And this episode just serves to remind us all of that.

Plus the girl does have a nice rack on her. I predict that photo will be highly Photoshopped in the weeks to come.

pacoyogi said...

Dear Ms. Althouse:

In my opinion, you are sexually harassing Jessica. Plain and simple.

Like many people who sexually harass their victims, “sex” is not the goal of the abuser.

The goal is to intimidate, silence, hurt or gain power, through the use of sexualized imagery, suggestion, innuendo, and sometimes, outright violence. Here, on this thread, you suggested that "Jessica should have worn a beret. Blue dress would have been good too."

In my opinion, you have used Jessica’s body as a prop to gain attention and publicity in a attempt to intimidate Jessica and punish her for being something that you are obviously jealous of: she is a pretty, educated, well-respected blogger who has enough clout attend such a luncheon.

In my opinion, what is happening is that Ann Althouse is sexually harassing Jessica Valenti. She has encouraged other bloggers and commenters to join in the harassment in a attempt to devalue and silence Ms. Valenti.

Ms. Althouse, when a woman of a certain age attacks a younger, attractive woman with the cheap tricks you have resorted to, the older woman loses any claim to dignity that she might have once had. See Peggy Noonan.

amba said...

Surgical Solution is a man. No woman could ever talk about her own breasts that violently.

Other than that: O - V - E - R - K - I - L - L ! !

Sirkowski said...

Ann, is there sand in your vagina?

angryblackconservative said...

Wow, making all these assumptions based off a Photograph where pictures were taken from several different angles.

Well, based on your picture Professor Althouse, you look like divorced white trash who got too much sun exposure in the past, and your husband probably left you because he realized that after middle age hit, and whatever looks you had in the youth faded, you were a useless career oriented feminist who couldn't take care of home, and now you probably have a son is gay because he had no male role model.

Damn, I'm good

NoAcuteDistress said...

Nice going Dave. You post pictures of a respectable man's wife (Dr Helen Smith, Glenn Reynolds resp.) and call her a slutty whore. This is the level of discourse characteristic of the rabid left.

And Libby, how come one of the reasons you dislike Bill Clinton isn't that he disrespected women in general and made a laughingstock of establishment feminists in particular? That's ACTUALLY what this discussion thread is about, not about Who's tits are perkier/who's younger/prettier/sexier/cooler.

No one on the left has answered the fundamental question posed by knoxgirl so far back in this voluminous thread. It keeps getting posted over and over again in different interations. No replies are forthcoming-except of course to bring up Chimpy McBushitler, insult respectable adult feminist women (Dr. Helen, Prof Althouse), rant on about how "This is the last time I post on this blog %$$&(%$*&$*!!! you, and the horse you rode in on!!," silly gratuitous insults, and the most absurd of all, some lunatic screaming at how she had to get her breasts reduced because of women like Prof Althouse (and presumably those of us in the vast phallocracy). WIll rabid leftists never cease in their whine about how things are always someone ELSE'S fault?

And there's no such thing as Islamofascists. No, just misunderstood devout Muslims who go about treating their women like breeding cattle, (though even cows don't have to wear burkas) sawing off people's heads, blowing up innocent grannies and children in pizza parlors, burning cars, effiigies and anything remotely flammable they can get their hands on at the merest pretext of "insult" to thier religion of peace. Yeah, The Southern Baptists make these guys look like the Boy Scouts.

How about developing a sense of proportion? Oh yeah, I forgot. You lefties have already co-opted that "Proportionality" gig; as in, Hezbollah can fire Katushya rockets at will at Tel Aviv, but Israelis responding in a defensive manner are WAYY out of line when they take out several hundred Hezbollah fighters, oops I mean "civilians."

Just like the refrain over the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal when leftists could do nothing but bleat "It's just about sex,!!" you folk can't come up with a better retort to the queston of the prrpriety of a self-professeed feminist breaking bread with a sexual predator than "It's just about tits!"

melior said...

Guys love breasts.

Oh... now I see what this is really about.

Poor Ann. Envy is as close to the Green Party as you ever get, eh?

Maybe if you do something nice for him your hubby will by you some nice implants for your birthday.

NoAcuteDistress said...

I hate you. I hate you I HATE you.

In the final analysis our surgically salvaged friend has summarized the Left's retort to the post - 5 year old's temper tantrum.

Karl Rove must be working overtime this week.

OhioAnne said...

Count me among those who broke with feminist groups during the Clinton years. My belief in feminism didn't change, but my belief in feminist groups certainly did.

What Knoxgirl said already and the one who commented on the job interviews being arranged by Vernon Jordan are the primary reasons, but there is one more ...

Not only did those groups sell their souls for Clinton, but they sold them cheaply.

What did they get from their support of his behavior that wouldn't have probaly occurred anyway?

Justthisguy said...

I mind the episode in a Keith Laumer novel in which one of the Groaci lizard-men whispers to the cute human secretary in the embassy, "Don't flaunt those udders at me, you disgusting mammal!"

Being a mammal myself, though a boy, I think it's okay to display mammalian qualities, if done in a prudent and good-tastefull manner.

Libby Spencer said...

Excuse me Acute, how exactly did Bill accepting the proffered favors of a willing intern disrespect establishment feminists? Were you even born when Monicagate happened?

As I recall he got caught because she was bragging about bagging a president to her girlfriend. And he was impeached for lying about getting it, not for forcing her or intimidating her into providing favors. Do you really think that young women don't offer their heros sex willingly?

Jeez, talk about living in ivory towers. There's a lot reasons not to like Clinton. Monica is not one of them. Get over it.

Liberaltopia said...

Is this a slow news day or what? So the woman wore a sweater that accentuated her figure. Who cares?

It's not like she was dressed like Anna Nichole Simpson in a low-cut blouse.

But you have to ask yourself -- if Bill Clinton hadn't been there, would you have even devoted three words on this subject?

You see, this isn't about breasts, feminism, or even fashion. It is about Bill Clinton and the imagined effects that this woman might have had on him.

Clue: Bill is a man. Most men like good looking women -- especially if they dress nicely. Most men might even fantasize about sleeping with a nicely-dressed, good-looking woman. It is hard-wired into them.

Did Jessica "pose" for the picture? Probably for the same reason women spend hours in front of a mirror or at a beauty parlor --to look good.

Thirza said...

I'm not sure why you hate Jessica's breasts so much. Women have them, get over it. Yes they are sexualized in our society, but most of the time they just hang around. As for Feministing being "all about boobs" consider some of the other great third wave feminist journals like, oh, Bust? This woman bashing is just sad, why don't you focus more on the problematics of Bill Clinton instead of remarking on Jessica looking like she's asking for sexual harrassment. Besides that, lots of younger feminists are very much involved in creating sex positive culture, but I dunno, maybe some women are still stuck on Dworkin. Either way, judging someones feminist credentials based on the fact that she has (horrors) breasts is low down and dirty. I'm not sure how you can call yourself a feminist if you're so invested in how other women look over what they think.

Freeman Hunt said...

But you have to ask yourself -- if Bill Clinton hadn't been there, would you have even devoted three words on this subject?

That's the whole point. No! This is about Bill Clinton. Most specifically, why are "feminists" supporting him and proud to be standing by his side?

Surgical Solution said...

I think I can relate to why women who get breast implants are more likely to commit suicide than are women who don't get them. I think they should give psychological counseling to women who are getting breast implants, to prepare them realistically for how much negative intrusive attention from both women and men breasts draw in our culture.

Some women are going to like the attention, but it's not for everyone. Not everyone can withstand the stress from the unrelenting invasion of privacy they're going to experience after surgery.

Sue123 said...

It's funny,Ann -

John Edwards invited a plastic sunflower to interview him instead of you at another bloggers-only meet.

http://www.myleftnutmeg.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2902

Ouch.

David Manus said...

Libby Spencer said...

"Excuse me Acute, how exactly did Bill accepting the proffered favors of a willing intern disrespect establishment feminists?"


As I said in my comment, the reason he disrespect ALL women (not just establishment feminists) is because he gave favors to the woman he had sex with- and by omission all the interns who DIDN'T give him head did NOT get job offers by Vernon Jordan- this is passive extortion. This is the soul of abuse of power and position to cull sexual favors in return for jobs, financial incentives, raises, opportunities that a less attractive, less promiscuous rival does not get, not to mention all the male interns. This is why feminists were correct to say that any on the job sexual contact, consensual or not, between an executive manager and an underling is wrong and abusive- he has favors to give, and gives them to those who have sex with him, this is de facto coercion for ALL interns to compete by giving sexual favors- this IS wrong, and the feminists were right to point this out and convince the American public and politicians to condemn it and pass laws against it- then they gave it all away because their hero was implicated- this is beyond all the accusations of rape and physical abuse by other women- he admittedly gave Monica preference for sex, and in doing so screwed all the other employees who didn't give him head.

Now do you get it?

twcollier said...

Oh, come on. You were somehow offended by this woman's "three-quarter pose and related posturing?"
But the four other people to her right in the first row were also in a three-quarter pose, as was the guy on the end of that row on her left. It's a group shot -- frequently in that situation people turn their bodies to allow more people in the shot.
This is obviously about something else than the way everyone lined up for a picture. I presume it has something to do with Clinton hatred causing a serious loss of perspective.

New American Patriot said...

Ann:

Just because nobody's interested in YOUR tits is no reason to be pissed at the world.

Stace said...

Well how silly. Jessica looks perfectly nice and entirely unremarkable in that picture. She's neither posed nor dressed provocatively. This seems awfully pointless and mean-spirited.

Stacey

Fenrisulven said...

Thirza: I'm not sure why you hate Jessica's breasts so much

And the devolution continues. Criticism of a photo that symbolizes the hypocrisy of feminism means...you must hate Jessica's breasts.

Are people on the Left really this stupid? Please make it stop. You don't need to demonstrate your inability to comprehend written English for another 400 comments. We get it.

Hujo said...

Feminists love bill Clintons politics, it’s no shock that they still, all these years later, can't get past hating his penis. LOL at the state of feminism.

“You're an anti-feminist for the overuse of your breasts around the evil horny man” “No you are an anti fem for noticing my breasts and claiming I was exhibiting them on purpose, as if that’s wrong!” “It is wrong, you capitalize with them there breasts!” “You’re just jealous because you're ugly and no one likes your breasts and you cant capitalize on them” “ Don’t flatter your self, you’re ugly despite them breasts” “well you’re sexist” “no you are” “no You!” “harasment harasment harasment.”

No doubt feministing is silly but althouse is new to me, I seriously do wonder about what Ann thinks of Monica’s capitalizing on her “victimhood”? Making tv appearances, her designer hand bag line, fake marriages to tom green ect ect ect.?

How can you condemn Jessica’s money making iron bra and at the same time ignore Monica’s capitalization?

tmkane said...

I'm knew to this sort of discussion. But I think the real problem here has to do with.... power....(ta, da).

The problem is, aethetics has power, sex has power, and good sexual aesthetics has power. This isn't a problem for the powerful, its a problem for the powerless, or those that perceive themselves powerless.

I believe Churchill once said, something to the effect of,

JackGoff said...

Your blog does seem to bring in the disgusting misogynists, Ann. I wonder why.

busz said...

Ann, I saw at least three people in the comments thread who said that they would restate the question you were supposedly always asking, restated it in fact, and then answered it. I vainly searched the rest of your comments for your response. Do you care to respond or should we assume the point conceded?

tmkane said...

I'm new to this sort of discussion. But I think the real problem here has to do with.... power....(ta, da).

(I'm new to the topic, I know nothing about feminism, but am helping a feminist write a paper on the topic, so I am trying to work through some of the issues. I do know something about power though)

The problem is, aethetics has power, sex has power, and good sexual aesthetics has power - especially with hetersexual men. This isn't a problem for the powerful, its a problem for the powerless, or those that perceive themselves powerless.

I believe Churchill once said, something to the effect of, "one can't win in insulting a pretty women, the insult has a way of biting back, but the women stays pretty." (very loosely paraphrased from memory).

If you look all the way over to the far left of the picture, there's a women in a light blue top who basically has the mirror opposite of the 3/4 pose. So does the women to her immidiate left. Yet they don't come under criticism. Jessica does.

The problem isn't just Jessica's breast. Its Jessica's gestalt. She's pretty. Real pretty. Look north of the breast and you see a pretty smile. In every way Jessica's demeaner hardly seems immodest. Its the eye of the beholder that is immodest.

Given Churchill's words, Ann has done a commendable job of chastizing some one who just happens to be pretty. But as Churchill seems to suggest, its not an easy job. My recommendation to Ann would be to let it go.

It is no crime for someone to be pretty. It is no crime that a pretty girl combed her hair or brushed her teeth and smiled or that she doesn't put a burka over her head in order to level the playing field either.

The real crime isn't that Jessica is pretty, the real crime is that beauty isn't ubiquitous. But then if it was, it wouldn't be beauty would it? Nor power, I suppose.

ellenbrenna said...

The word provacative apparently has lost all meaning. She is standing up straight and wearing business casual clothing. If this is provacative then every woman I work with is being provacative every day they will be shocked to discover this.

As to Femiisting's content if you read the posts in detail instead of breifly scanning the graphics you will find that the post about You Cum Like a Girl is about a trademark issue and the government offices reactions to the request. It is about how people interpret issues of female sexuality vs. the intent of the maker of those messages.

Feministing is a sexually explicit word if you are looking for it to be. The mud flap girls are a comment on objectification not an example of it. I do not agree with everything said in the posts or on the blog but it is an information clearinghouse on feminist issues in the US and frequently around the world.

Just because you notice something does not mean that was the most important thing to notice. Other bloggers questioned the lack of people of color Ann Althouse went for the arrangement of a posed group photo for for a cheap Clinton joke.

Hujo said...

tmkane
Are you saying beautiful women have privilege? I agree. Front and center in the shot with bill was the pretty Woman.

Mr. Snitch said...

"...so long as you have the blessing of The Ole Perfesser such abstract concepts as "decency" and "honesty" are mere ephemera to you... even as your lips stay puckered around the Knoxville Knob..."

There's the real agenda: The jealous and bitter are piling on because what they really want is to attack Reynolds, and they can't do it on his blog. They can't do it on their own blogs, either, because no one reads them. So, here's their chance to say any indecent thing that comes to mind, in the name of their superior "decency". (Yes, I'm quite sure the irony of her own statement is completely lost on "nurse hatchet".)

"leave your lesbian tendencies out of this...just because you long to wrap your cold shriveled lips around her nice, pink nipples..."

My, this post sure brought the cockroaches out of the woodwork. They'll scurry back where they belong (Kos?) when it's over.

Ann Althouse said...

Ellenbrenna: If you don't think "Feministing" is meant to be sexually explicit, then I don't trust any of your observations, including the one that Jessica is just standing up straight. Take my challenge. Stand up, look at the photo, and try to mirror that position. Are you standing up straight? I'll save you the trouble: No.

tmkane: You think Jessica is pretty. It's a subjective thing. It's something I've been avoiding talking about, other than to note that in her blog portrait, she strongly resembles Paula Jones, whom you presumably find extraordinarily pretty. But, really, are you a feminist if you think the best looking people deserve special power? I'll answer that. No, you're not. You have admitted to a very strong point of anti-feminism. Why didn't you notice that you were doing that? I'll answer that. Because you were so hot to defend your partisan side that you were blinded to the obvious.

Hujo said...

ellenbrenna
"the post about You Cum Like a Girl is about a trademark issue and the government offices reactions to the request. It is about how people interpret issues of female sexuality vs. the intent of the maker of those messages."

You ignore the shirts are offensive to men and woman. There is only one way to take them “Your not a man you girl” wtf? The whole concept of reclaiming language and shaming “oppressors” is nothing but a lame excuse for hate propaganda. Being proud misogynists and misandrists does nothing for feminist image or issues. I really do wonder why that sort of anti people stuff is so desirable. Oh yeah, its glib, its cute, it $ell$.

NoAcuteDistress said...

Libby, excuse me, I thought you'd been reading the entire thread all long like I was. Does docweasel have to give you the Cliff Notes version of feminism 101 AGAIN?? Even us vaginally-challenged, stupid males have gotten that message. Why do you choose to ignore the meat of the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal instead of focusing AGAIN on BJ's by willing participants? Could it be that you typify the unbelievably embarrarsing inabliity of establishment feminists to stare the facts in the eye? That Bill Clinton, The Big He, The Big Dog is untouchable when its Him that's committing the groping, the assault and the rape? Why don't your camp extend the same pass to Bob Packwood or Clarence Thomas, who NOBODY accused of rape or assault? Recall that Clinton's perjury was relevant to the Paula Jones lawsuit, in which she was trying to establish his pattern of behavior, NOT about whether the world gave a good goddamn about his private, consensual sexual affairs.

And since I'm not a woman you can't accuse me of being jealous, of having saggy tits, bad skin, or poor fashion taste. So instead you stoop to impugning my sagacity by alluding to my age. For your information I was born in 1955 and have seen my share of shameless behavior on the part of politicians, thank you very much.

photomercenary said...

I'm serious:
Am I correct in saying that your opinion is that 'true feminists don't pose?'

I'm sarcastic:
We're going under the assumption that what's inside is more important than what's outside, right?

...I'll write that one down next to "cheaters never win" and "a bully will always back down when you stand up to him, (or her)."

PS- Harris? I mean, smoke 'em if ya got em... a vote's a vote. Win anyway you can, if the "means" really matters to you than you're just a younger brother (or sister) trying to live up to the first born in the family.

kc said...

As if your initial posts weren't bad enough, you're really covering yourself in shame in these comments, Ms. Althouse.

This is really rather unseemly of you.

Natalia said...

So... You're basically ticked off that this woman and her politics ot some attention, and you're trying to cover that up with a lame "oh no she has breasts and you can sorta see their outline in this photo, so that means she's a cheapskate skank and an affront to feminism."

In related news, I hear the Taliban are taking applications for a new spokesperson. This could really be your chance at the big-time!

P.S. Automatically assuming that everyone who disagrees with you somehow support the shots levelled at Katherine Harris is just silly. Although overall, I'd take Jon Stewart over your mindless posturing any day.

Ann Althouse said...

Natalia said.."So... You're basically ticked off that this woman and her politics ot some attention, and you're trying to cover that up with a lame "oh no she has breasts and you can sorta see their outline in this photo, so that means she's a cheapskate skank and an affront to feminism.""

Uhh.... no. And that's completely incoherent. What the hell are you trying to say? Ever heard of proofreading... and, uh, like, thinking? And that reading thing too. I kinda like you know recommend it.

"P.S. Automatically assuming that everyone who disagrees with you somehow support the shots levelled at Katherine Harris is just silly. Although overall, I'd take Jon Stewart over your mindless posturing any day."

Duh... do you think you could get everything you write backwards? It could be pretty amazing.

johnnyvento said...

Ann Altouse,

You are attacking a woman for no reason, and you fail to see the irony of the situation. Everyone else reading about this story sees it and therefore is laughing at you. The comments about interns and blue dresses and berets are gratuitous and untoward, as well as unsophisticated, condescending, and petulant.

Ann Althouse said...

Sorry, Johnny. I stand by every word I've written. And I can see what you and others are doing. You're setting up a smokescreen and ignoring the real issue. It doesn't matter how many times you try to change the subject, the issue for me is Clinton and the embarrassing fawning of these bloggers. I'm completely unimpressed by everyone who fails to face the issue head on. I've asked you folks to address my concern again and again, and you just keep showing me that you won't, which has come to mean to me that you can't.

JackGoff: "IT'S A FUCKING PICTURE, FER CRYING OUT LOUD."

Sheer genius, Jack. So if something's in a picture, it doesn't exist in any other way? Good thing you put it in caps and added obscenity, cuz that makes it more true. Have another drink and pack it in.

Pete the Streak said...

Good grief. I've never seen so much vitriolic BS in one place before. (Is it obvious I don't read Kos or DU?). It's disheartening to see that so many adult 'visitors' are not only incapable of comprehending a post's basic point, but that they also feel compelled to crudely and profanely verbally vomit all over everything - especially themselves. The silver lining? I'll use this post as a teaching tool for my 2 daughters to illustrate one difference between the right and the left. I'll simply have them read each comment, and identify the commenter's party affiliation. I anticipate near-perfect scores for them both.

johnnyvento said...

You just said it yourself.

The issue for you is Clinton, but you are taking it out on Jessica.

Why?

johnnyvento said...

The problem is, Jessica did nothing wrong, in terms of actual behavior.

You are trying to impugn her by acting as if you know her thoughts and motives, which are of course unknowable. You are making inferences based on a photograph, which is laughable.

That is why you are getting laughed at.

Ann Althouse said...

Johnny: This post was written to address precisely that question. Go back and compare the original post, which focused on my topic. Jessica showed up in the comments and essentially demanded that we focus on her. I then wrote this post to do that. In writing it, I checked out her blog and was floored by the hypocrisy. The whole look at my breasts/don't look at my breasts business is a big laugh in my opinion. When I laughed a lot of people got mad. But I'm still laughing, now not just at her but at all of you folks who participated in this bogus protection of her. She sought attention and she's plainly a hypocrite. I pointed that out. Deal with it. Look at her blog. Come on, man, it's a joke. You have a brain. Don't be a fool.

Mildly said...

Nice rack!

catnip said...

the issue for me is Clinton and the embarrassing fawning of these bloggers

They're not embarassed. Why are you? What you should be embarassed about is the number of your countrymen who support a president who lied them into a war in which tens of thousands of people have died. That's a post I'd read.

And, if this post is really about Clinton then I'll assume from your title, 'Let's take a closer look at those breasts', that we are supposed to be examining his breasts then?

Just keep digging yourself into that hole but don't complain when it's lonely and dark in there.

Norah said...

Jill did not show up in the comments "demanding" attention...she only showed up to defend herself after your commenters began making snarky noises about "the intern" and her cleavage.

Ms. Althouse, I'm not a regular reader of this blog or of Jessica's, but this just sucks. You've taken the low road at every opportunity and you should be ashamed of the way you've acted.

Norah said...

Duh, Jessica, not Jill.

opendna said...

I'm curious if "Let's take a closer look at those breasts" would constitute sexual harassment if said in the workplace.

You are, of course, the "formidable law blogger Ann Althouse", so what is your professional legal opinion?

If a young woman came to you and said her boss had said those words to her, would you suggest she shut up and move on or might there be grounds for harassment? "Harassment requires a pattern of behavior" right? Does "twice" count as a pattern?

These are all leading questions, of course. The last one sounds like "In light of your comments which may or may not border on sexual harassment, do you believe you upholding the ethical standards of your profession?"

Just asking.

Ann Althouse said...

Well, Norah, I stand by everything I've written. I think Jessica sought attention, acted wounded that anyone noticed her breasts, and it was hysterical that her blog turned out to be one of those blogs that is full of closeups and exaggerated depictions of breasts. If you don't see why that is funny and hypocritical, I am guessing you are one of the many political partisans who are perseverating in this thread, trying to keep anyone from talking about the ridiculous fawning over President Clinton. But it's not working. It's obvious what you are doing. Your solicitude for Jessica's feeling is not credible. I mean, seriously. Talk about her blog. How do you like that as a representation of feminism?'

opendna: The breasts I'm talking about are the pictures on Jessica's blog. If those were visible in the workplace, that would create a hostile environment. If Jessica were displaying those images in my workplace, I would object, probably using the word "breasts" to describe the problem. Glad you're concerned about it. I'm also concerned about the way women who claim to be feminists fawn over Clinton. How do you feel about Clinton and sexual harassment? Just asking.

peter hoh said...

So, Ann, read any good books lately?

NoAcuteDistress said...

Gee Johnny, dems vote overwhelmingly to treat fanatical Muslim combatants as regular uniformed troops as per Geneva Convention rules , which of course THEY couldnt' give a fig about, and you wonder why people accuse Dem's of sympathizing with terrorists?

Kalinka said...

Bill Clinton was not an ideal president. I was too young to notice when the Monicagate occurred, but sexual harrassment has always been a serious and close-to-home issue with me. Therefore I can't condone his obvious abuse of power and position since it was fundamentally anti-feminist. I don't believe, however, that Bill Clinton is anti-feminist. Feminism goes beyond fighting sexual harassment, as serious as it is. Clinton's presidency is forever tarnished by his crimes. Yes, shame on him for that (and his leftist apologists). But aren't we too early in forgetting all the progress his presidency brought that in many ways affected both domestic and international economic and political situations? During the Clinton presidency, peace in the Middle East was fathomable and some (not all) genocides were either avoided or stopped.

The anti-feminist crimes of Clinton were serious, but what about the anti-feminist crimes of Bush? If this is the way you treat Clinton, then the only fair way to treat Bush after his presidency would be to pull spitroast him over a fire and stick his head on a pole for everyone to see.

Having said that, I don't find it in any way compromising that Jessica Valenti would meet Clinton. I would not turn down the chance to lunch with George Bush, Osama bin Laden or Hitler himself. Granted, Osama bin Laden and Hitler would probably not agree to a lunch with a liberal black feminist, but my point is that why must everyone assume that Jessica is Clinton's biggest fan, and has nothing against his crimes?

As for the "breastlogging" comments. I think only people who are looking for breasts will notice the breasts on the Feministing site. It's not as if there are big round uncovered boobs flashing on every corner. When there's a picture of a woman's T-Shirt, the breasts are going to appear, plain and simple. So the site has a lot of women showing off their T-shirts. Guess the logos should go on the back, or maybe the belly area.

Or maybe they should just print the logos on a placard and hold it over their heads while wearing burqas, so that you have absolutely no clue about the women's apparent femininity.

Rational Biped said...

Surgical Solution is right: women with big boobs get read as slutty regardless of how they stand/dress/speak/act. When I worked as a camp counselor I saw this happen to one of the girls at camp who was 15 years old and a bit of an early bloomer. It was really disgusting how some of the adults read sexuality into everything she said and did, just because of the way her body was shaped.

In a sense I'm glad to hear that breast reduction makes people stop with all that catty shit, but in another sense, I am horrified that anyone has to have *surgery* in order to get the respect due to them.

I doubt this will change the mind of Ann or her supporters, but I hope Surgical Solution reads it. Because she's right, and deserves to be acknowledged.

johnnyvento said...

Gee Johnny, dems vote overwhelmingly to treat fanatical Muslim combatants as regular uniformed troops as per Geneva Convention rules , which of course THEY couldnt' give a fig about, and you wonder why people accuse Dem's of sympathizing with terrorists?

Oh my. The point of my post was to refute the ridiculous claim that vitriol was more endemic to people on the political left as opposed to the right. Lo and behold, you come along and verify everything I was saying.

If you want to continue the debate about Jessica and Clinton, you should. But don't try to claim, as the previous poster did, and you are now, that vitriol is the exclusive domain of the left. Your post is full of it, and, not surprisingly, not full of reason and logic.

If you want to continue this debate that doesn't involve Ann Althouse and her problems with pretty liberal bloggers meeting with Bill Clinton, email me at johnnyvento@gmail.com

Sorry to clog up the thread Ann

Ann Althouse said...

Rational: That wasn't very rational. I'm not against breasts and I certainly don't favor discriminating against women because of what they look like. How you can read that into my comments is beyond me. I think it's perfectly fine for women to dress and stand in a way that flatters their figure. But some judgment is called for in a professional setting about what to wear and so on. Everyone knows that. Don't play dumb. It shows.

tmkane said...

Ann Althouse, you said: You think Jessica is pretty. It's a subjective thing.

Granted. (And perhaps its the picture and not her - like maybe it's her 'good' side or she had a good hair day or whatever, or only in that picture.) But then again, I read scientific reports, probably in places like Time or Newsweek or National Geographic that state that there is also some universally acknowledged ideas about what is considered pretty, across many cultures and races - I think a symetrical face and smile was one. But I really don't know so thats as far as all take it.

Then you said: It's something I've been avoiding talking about, So then, you think she's pretty too?

Then you said: other than to note that in her blog portrait, she strongly resembles Paula Jones,
Paula who? Oh. Paula Jones. Of all the brunette women in the world you compare her with her? Yeck. I don't think so. There are a million pretty brunette girls with pretty looking smiles that she could be compared with, a million. And you pick the most disgusting one? Why?

Then you said: whom you presumably find extraordinarily pretty. I don't think so. Oops, remember, its a subjective thing. Nothing against Paula Jones, per se, but I really never thought of her as pretty. Yeck. I probably hadn't thought of her since I last saw her in a news cast, which would have been many years ago. The fact that you pulled her image as a comparison out of thin air makes me think perhaps you think she's attractive. But thats okay though - its a subjective thing.

Then you said: But, really, are you a feminist if you think the best looking people deserve special power? I never claimed I was a feminist. I merely claimed that I wanted to learn more about it. I really don't understand it, where all of its motives came from, where it stands, where it is going. All philosophies have cores where they are strong and peripheries where they are week (what in economics they call the margins). I wanted to understand some of the nature about all of this concerning feminism. In general though, I am a Democrat (my political philosophy is generally shaped by my watching the movie "It's a wonderful life for the first time round about December 1987. In general I am for empowerment of the individual, regardless of geneder. I don't think it is fair that attractive people should have special power and I don't think that they deserve it. What I was suggesting is that it is a fact of life. If it wasn't a huge percentage of the population wouldn't even bother bathing, wearing clean clothes, combing their hair, picking their clothes out with discretion. If aesthetics had no power, their would be no art museums, no fashions, we might all dress like castro. The fact is most of us bathe every day, comb our hair, brush or teeth, wear deoderant, and wear cloths. A slovernly person has less power then some one who isn't. I see your picture to the left here - your hair is combed, your face is clean, you look neat, clean and attractive and are even sporting a bit of a smile. Now I am wonderin, given your comments, why you would even bother. The other end of this extreme is to come in at the Muslim extremist idea - that all women should be covered in burkas. That completely takes the issue of female aesthetics out of the question. But then why stop there, we can have all men where burkas, but then why stop there, we can everyone where platforms that take their hight up to 7 feet tall, then we'll never be able to prejudice anyone by their relation to their physical attributes.

You said: I'll answer that. No, you're not. You have admitted to a very strong point of anti-feminism. Well, my problem is I really don't know what feminism is. I am here trying to understand it and to appreciate it better. I can say, I will be visiting Jessica's site more often to get a better view of it.

You said: Why didn't you notice that you were doing that? I'll answer that. Because you were so hot to defend your partisan side that you were blinded to the obvious. Well actually I am not sure what partisan side you are talking about that I was so hot to defend. I am a democrat. Now. But I wasn't before Bush was elected. But I was anti bush by August 2001 - it only took him eight months. I never voted for Clinton, but I wish we had his scandals back. That and the movie "its a wonderful life" are what I know about politics. (I distinguish politics from civics and law and economics and such things). I think the issue of feminism is all about womens empowerment - that is as much as I know. But from their it gets confusing because taking sex out of the equation both empowers women by making them less of an object of sex, and disempowers them, by denying them of their sexuality and all the wonders that holds. And actually that quandry is what drives me curiosity. How to deal with that. How does a women become more empowered over all and empowered sexually, while becoming less sexual?

In the future I would appreciate it if you wouldn't answer the question for me. Just ask me, and I'll be glad to tell you. We're all trying to figure out how to deal with the human condition here. And that includes the fact that beauty, however construed, is both scarce, glorious, and fleeting thing. We can't all have it, and those that haven't don't get to hold it for ever. Its like the rest of the human condition - we are all finite entities living in universe filled with scarcity. Thank god for soap, hot water, combs and toothpaste. Live long and prosper!

Ann Althouse said...

Well, it's time to close up the old mail bag. I think it's safe to say what was going to get said has been said by now, with lots of repetition too. I'm tired of the vitriol, and the willingness of you purportedly feminist characters to say all sorts of sexist things has been demonstrated ad nauseam, as has your pathetic lack of humor. Efforts to make us forget about the real topic have failed, and I'm tired of pointing that out. So, that's it for this long, long comment thread.

«Oldest ‹Older   401 – 501 of 501   Newer› Newest»