Sarah Palin Sexism Watch: Perez Hilton: Bristol Palin is a whore and slut

Tuesday, September 2, 2008

Perez Hilton: Bristol Palin is a whore and slut

Yes, he's just a celebrity blogger. But he's routinely given jobs by traditional media corporations. In other words, he's taken seriously. Post here.

20 comments:

Anonymous said...: Wow - I think I need a shower after reading the excrement that this guy wrote. What a sef-rightous, pompous ass! We should all innundate his email with some choice words telling hime exactly where he can stick his blog!; September 2, 2008 at 7:21 AM
CJ said...: Perez Hilton is a trash culture gossip site.

And it's NOT taken seriously.
Anyone that does needs a dose of reality, really.; September 2, 2008 at 7:37 AM
Anonymous said...: Where are the feminists? At a minimum, could they step up and defend the barage of complaints about Gov. Palin "working while mothering"?

How about the unfair attacks on Bristol Palin? I thought feminists were in favor of sexual freedom for women.

I guess there's an obvious double standard at work. The feminists will support any Democratic woman but ignore attacks on any Republcan woman. Who can defend this kind of hypocrisy?

I sometimes wonder if Democrats hate Republicans more than they hate Al Qaeda. But don't get me started!; September 2, 2008 at 8:13 AM
Anonymous said...: I thought feminists were in favor of sexual freedom for women.

Nah, they (well, the third wave at least) are in favour of sexual slavery through abortion and chronic Sex and the City style singledom. They also prefer to ignore all the women around the world who are abused and murdered in the name of "honour". All they seem to care about it their "right" to kill their own babies before they have to look at them.; September 2, 2008 at 8:48 AM
Anonymous_1 said...: To The Owner of this Blog: This blog is an excellent idea. I've been trying to keep up with all of these attacks, but it's alot of work. This compendium is a great resource. Thanks.; September 2, 2008 at 8:53 AM
Anonymous said...: I posted as "Anoymous" earlier, which was a mistake. It was my first post anywhere.

Eleanor has cleared up my question. Thank you, Eleanor. I thought I was going mad, but now I'm just getting mad. As Rush just said, this is just like the case of Clarence Thomas. Only liberal African-Amercicans and liberal women are welcome.; September 2, 2008 at 9:27 AM
Anonymous said...: Have people forgotten that Barack Obama's mother was an unwed teen when she got pregnant? Using Democrats logic, shouldn't we question whether she was qualified to raise someone who could become President?; September 2, 2008 at 10:46 AM
Anonymous said...: The hate and misogyny directed at Sarah gives the lie to 'liberal compassion'. They only have 'compassion' for people who think and act in total lockstep with their liberal agenda.

ANNOY the media- elect Sarah VP!; September 2, 2008 at 10:46 AM
Anonymous said...: It seems to me that Perez Hilton (who?) is running scared. Did he refer to Britney Spears' younger sister as a "whore" and a "slut" when she got pregnant? I don't think so, but then, a woman who hasn't imbibed in the Odopey Kool-Aid is automatically vilified in the Liberal world. Pathetic.; September 2, 2008 at 10:56 AM
Anonymous said...: as stupid and bad as this is, is it fundamentally different from right-wing shock jocks without strict Republican Party affiliations?; September 2, 2008 at 11:09 AM
Anonymous said...: No one cares what any celebrities think, much less their groupies like Perez Hilton. Which doesn't excuse him, just puts it into perspective.

I'd also like to congratulate you on this blog. The MSM has completely gone beserk over Palin. I am seeing things I never thought I'd see in the twenty-first century. I have already bookmarked this blog. Thank you.; September 2, 2008 at 11:13 AM
Anonymous said...: anonymous at 11:09:
No, it isn't.; September 2, 2008 at 11:15 AM
Jadis said...: I think it's very telling that the feminists are quiet on this matter. Sarah doesn't dance to their tune, so they'll leave her to hang.

Thanks for starting this. I think it's going to be quite interesting to see the left choke on their hypocrisy.; September 2, 2008 at 11:47 AM
Anonymous said...: Very good work.

I'm circulating your site to all of the disaffected Hillary supporters that I know.

Bridget; September 2, 2008 at 12:17 PM
Anonymous said...: It's not just bloggers. Obama's surrogate (posing this time as commentator) Donna Brazile said Bristol Palin is "fair game"
see update here
http://edgeoforever.wordpress.com/2008/09/01/obama-offended-by-palin-rumors/; September 2, 2008 at 12:33 PM
VSO said...: I thought Obama said that family is off limits? Is this really a shock in this day and age? Isn't this what liberals have been encouraging for the last 40 years? If they want to stone pregnant teens, start with Obama's mother.

Yeah she shouldn't have been doing it. But what has this have to do with the election? What president's kids haven't done bad things?; September 2, 2008 at 12:43 PM
Anonymous said...: Thank you so much for this blog. I am dumbstruck by the left's reaction to this woman and her family. I have been told by several prominent liberals that her daughter getting pregnant constitutes hypocrisy on Gov. Palin's part b/c she supports abstinence education. This means that every politician supporting anti-drug education is a hypocrite if their child smokes a joint - that's not hypocrisy! The attacks are CLEARLY directed at her womanhood and motherhood and in their rabid sexism, the DEFINITION of hypocrisy itself. I am so relieved to see the posts of reasonable and thoughtful Americans today! Thank you again!!!; September 2, 2008 at 2:59 PM
Anonymous said...: stlmom said...
'It seems to me that Perez Hilton (who?) is running scared. Did he refer to Britney Spears' younger sister as a "whore" and a "slut" when she got pregnant? I don't think so'

Here he refers to her as "slutty and stupid": http://perezhilton.com/2007-12-18-more-on-jamie-lynns-shocker

Here he alters a photo of her so that it appears that semen is coming out of her mouth: http://perezhilton.com/2007-12-19-their-words-come-back-to-haunt-them

Etc.; September 2, 2008 at 4:00 PM
Anonymous said...: I don't understand why you think that feminists are silent on this subject, anonymous. There are women all over the blogs that are defending Sarah Palin and her daughter. The truth is that the media doesn't want to hear from feminists. Fox News is probably the only organization that will have Geraldine Ferraro on anymore. No one will give Gloria Steinem airtime. We're out here standing up against misogyny. The Obamabots and the Media keep telling us to shut up and get over it.; September 2, 2008 at 8:59 PM
Anonymous said...: Are you sure you aren't a reincarnation of a village witness to Hester Prynne in the Scarlett Letter? After seeing what Bristol's boyfriend looks like (and she's pretty cute, too) I can sort of understand how the two of them got carried away. I'm a senior citizen and have more understanding of young love than you obviously do. They have chosen to do the right thing and who needs jerks like you making judgements about them? Is this 2008 or some earlier age?....maybe we should stone them, ya think? Ever hear the story of Mary, the prostitue, who broke the expensive perfume over Jesus' feet? He never condemned her, just told her to get her life together, which she did. And people think Sarah Palin is a hypocrite? Oh brother!; September 7, 2008 at 9:43 PM

Post a Comment

What is sexism?

All criticisms of Sarah Palin are not sexist. It would be sexist to expect that she would receive no criticism, or that she SHOULD receive no criticism, because she is a woman. I admit that some of the criticism of Palin may really be the result of ideological bias, or simply sloppy reporting, not sexism. Some of the questions are fair game in isolation (yes, of course, it's fair to talk about Palin's experience in general; it's that she's held to a higher standard than males in the race that's the issue).

The Palin piling on is a complex cultural stew. In some cases, I suspect ideological and gender bias are working together. A reader has challenged me to define what I consider to be sexism. Broadly, I would define sexism in the political sphere as the following: When the woman is held to a higher and different standard than a similarly situated male, especially but not limited to issues that have no relevance to the race and that tend to diminish the woman's professional accomplishments by playing into gender stereotypes.

Specifically, here is a list of what I consider to be sexist behavior:

Coverage of a female politician that fixates on her physical appearance, pro or con. I admit that male politicians sometimes face this (Obama walking shirtless out of the Hawaiian surf got a lot of attention, and there was a lot of attention about John Edwards' shiny hair). And I think that some women have mixed feelings about this. After all, who doesn't want to be considered good looking? But, for many women, when they are in a professional setting, and supposedly professional media commentators place the focus back on their physical appearance, as a positive or a negative, it feels diminishing of their professional accomplishments. This works both ways, of course. Hillary Clinton has been viciously attacked by some on the right for supposedly not being good looking. That, too, is sexist, especially since unattractive male politicians are generally not held to this standard. If you think about it, good-looking male politicians also find their appearance the topic of discussion in many cases, but that's not true of unattractive male politicians. It's true in both cases for women. Simply put, appearance is not relevant to competence, so why are we talking about Palin's hair and looks?
Sexual-related comments about a female politician.
Blatant belittling of one's intelligence without evidence and in a manner not accorded to male opponents (i.e. saying the woman is stupid, needs a teleprompter, needs a lot of coaching, etc.)
Implying that the woman must not really believe her positions or must be under the intellectual sway of a more powerful male. (This happens in racism too. Consider how opponents argue that Clarence Thomas is a tool of intellectual white men like Antonin Scalia).
Double standards relating to motherhood; i.e., the female politician is asked questions about motherhood that her male counterparts aren't asked about fatherhood. (Why doesn't Palin stay home to take care of the kids? Hillary, why don't you want to stay home to bake cookies and hold teas?) The reverse is also true. It's also wrong for people to demean females who CHOOSE to stay home and raise their families. I personally believe that whether a woman chooses to be a housewife, a career woman, or, like Palin, a mixture of both, is her personal decision and debate about it really isn't relevant in a presidential election.
Slurs that are typically used to demean women but aren't applied to similarly aggressive men; i.e. when attributes that would be praised in a man are reduced to a negative in the woman (b-tch, nag, etc.). The Martha Stewart phenomenon. The tough woman is a b-tch, but the overly emotional woman is too weak to lead (women can't win sometimes!)
The woman is held to higher standards for intelligence/professional qualifications than a male opponent. (Palin is utterly unqualified, but Obama is then not?)
Diminishing of traditional female roles as being silly (the PTA, chortle, chortle, chortle. She was a housewife once, how pathetic, etc.). I don't know about you, but right now I am thinking about the woman, a housewife, who ran my child's Catholic Bible school this summer, and she was quite a force to be reckoned with. I'd love to pit her against Putin.
Emphasis on female roles traditionally seen as silly when discussing an accomplished, professional woman (she was a beauty queen 24 years ago!!!!!!)
Assuming incompetence. (she's a woman, so she won't be a strong leader, etc.)
The woman becomes defined by a single gender-related issue in a manner that males do not (consider how the abortion question is defining Palin, but doesn't define Obama or even McCain.)
Issues that aren't used against male opponents are magnified out of proportion against the woman. (Bristol-mania. I admit this one might be ideological bias more than sexism, but I do think it's caught up in Palin's cultural role as a "mother")
Invasion of the personal sphere and personalization/lifestyle focus of/on the candidate. In other words, covering the woman through the gauze of personality and lifestyle issues, rather than professional accomplishment. (Why are we talking about Palin's prenatal care and amniotic fluid again? It's creepy. Do we talk about Biden's sperm count? I admit that's a really creepy thought, and I do admit that Palin invited some of this by talking about her breastfeeding to People magazine. But still.)

Sarah Palin Sexism Watch

Tuesday, September 2, 2008

Perez Hilton: Bristol Palin is a whore and slut

20 comments:

About Me

Sexism Wall of Shame

What is sexism?

Blog Archive