Elton John’s Concert for Hillary Clinton
[Guest post by DRJ]
Last night’s Elton John concert for Hillary Clinton at Radio City Music Hall raised $2.5M:
“Elton John used Hillary Clinton’s $2.5 million fund-raiser at Radio City Music Hall Wednesday night to stand up for women’s rights.
“I never cease to be amazed at the misogynistic attitude of some of the people of this country, and I say to hell with it [*them],” said John, clad in a sequined black dinner jacket, red silk shirt and red sunglasses. “I love you, Hillary, and I’ll be there for you just like all the times you were there for me. Hillary should be the next President of America.”
The concert, billed as “Elton-Hillary: One Night Only” sold out just this week, with 6,000 tickets ranging in price from $125 to $2,300, according to a spokesman for the Clinton campaign.
Apparently they sold out of $125, $250, and $500 tickets but, judging by this Hillary Clinton webpage, they didn’t sell all the $1,000 and $2,300 tickets. Still, $2.5M is a lot for one concert.
Stashiu has more on Elton John’s disdain for misogynistic Americans.
I doubt Elton John supported Margaret Thatcher for Prime Minister. (In Billy Elliot, he wrote a song about her death described as “very offensive.”) Doesn’t that make him a misogynist?
UPDATE: * The correct Elton John quote is “I never cease to be amazed at the misogynistic attitude of some of the people of this country, and I say to hell with them.” Thanks, Stashiu (comment 38).
— DRJ
hillary’s locked up the pudgy androgynous troll vote. maybe there’s some way she can make him a thuperdelegate.
assistant devil's advocate (3f1372) — 4/10/2008 @ 11:15 am“Doesn’t that make him a misogynist?”
Was his lack of support gender based? Ie, calling her a bitch, etc…?
“In Billy Elliot, he wrote a song about her death described as “very offensive.”)”
People have tried calling Huck Finn offensive too.
stef (8a983a) — 4/10/2008 @ 11:21 amstef,
Doesn’t Elton John take the position that if Americans won’t support Hillary, it must be because she’s a woman? What goes around, comes around. We should be able to view his treatment of Thatcher the same way.
DRJ (a431ca) — 4/10/2008 @ 11:27 amI’m guessing that “The Bitch Is Back” wasn’t on the playlist.
I'm Geekier (25af5f) — 4/10/2008 @ 11:34 amThanks very much for the link DRJ. Your post is great.
stef, if a song had been about Hillary by Toby Keith, you can bet your last dollar he would have been called misogynist. In case you didn’t know, Thatcher is still alive… writing a song that celebrates each day brings her closer to dying is pretty offensive.
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/10/2008 @ 11:39 amI’m Geekier,
Heh. I bet not.
DRJ (a431ca) — 4/10/2008 @ 11:47 am“Doesn’t Elton John take the position that if Americans won’t support Hillary, it must be because she’s a woman? ”
Thats not in the excerpt you posted. What makes you say he takes that position?
“In case you didn’t know, Thatcher is still alive… writing a song that celebrates each day brings her closer to dying is pretty offensive.”
He wrote a song in a musical where miners celebrate her death. You can bet that miners had some very offensive thoughts about Thatcher. People know the difference between a work of fiction with an offensive character vs. actually being offensive. People know the difference between a Mark Twain character using racist words and Mark Twain being a racist.
stef (6e6b68) — 4/10/2008 @ 11:55 amI construe this Elton John statement as a belief that Americans who don’t support Hillary refuse to support her because she’s a woman:
How else could you construe it?
DRJ (a431ca) — 4/10/2008 @ 12:05 pm…the misogynistic attitude of some of the people of this country, and I say to hell with it,
And what is Elton doing to stop the forced marriages, wife beating, polygamy, denial of education and genital mutilations taking place in Great Britain by those lovely brown people called Muslims?
Perfect Sense (b6ec8c) — 4/10/2008 @ 12:06 pm“if a song had been about Hillary by Toby Keith”
– Stashiu3
Who’s Toby Keith?
Leviticus (e87aad) — 4/10/2008 @ 12:06 pmYou really can’t see that he said Americans who don’t vote for Hillary are misogynists? He was at a fundraiser for Hillary, talking about women’s rights, tells Americans they can go to hell for being misogynists, and tells Hillary he loves her and should be the next President. If that wasn’t his point, what was? What else did he talk about that Americans might be misogynists about? At a fundraiser for Hillary no less. It’s not reasonable to separate all of that, I don’t understand why you keep trying.
Twain’s work is not relevant because DRJ wasn’t really calling Elton John a misogynist. She was pointing out that it would be dishonest to do so, just as it was dishonest of John to call Americans not voting for Hillary guilty of “misogynistic behavior”.
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/10/2008 @ 12:09 pmDon’t diss Toby. 😉
(I’m assuming you were joking, but if not feel free to Google. I’m not derailing the thread.)
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/10/2008 @ 12:12 pm” How else could you construe it?”
I construe it as he thinks people are mysoginistic.
He doesn’t say why he thinks that, or what it is they do or don’t do that leads him to think that. How do you get from his statement that it is because of a lack of support for Hillary? Stashiu says he talked about women’s rights too. Don’t you think it could be that he finds people misogynistic because there’s not enough support for women’s rights?
“It’s not reasonable to separate all of that, I don’t understand why you keep trying.”
So he talked about women’s rights and critiqued misogyny in this country. And yet it must have been lack of a support for Hillary. Could be. I don’t see it. Why he thinks there is misogyny in america is certainly not in the excerpt. I doubt it’s because he reads this blog and people respond to me by talking about who I date.
“Twain’s work is not relevant because DRJ wasn’t really calling Elton John a misogynist. She was pointing out that it would be dishonest to do so, just as it was dishonest of John to call Americans not voting for Hillary guilty of “misogynistic behavior”.”
DRJ raised the offensiveness of the song in addition to the lack of support. I suspect that British miners not only failed to support Thatcher, but were also misogynists. And depictions, even fictional ones, of them are going to show that.
stef (3dc89d) — 4/10/2008 @ 12:26 pmstef,
I want to understand your point. Are you saying that Elton John was making the general point that Americans are misogynists, but he did not connect that to the fact that Hillary is behind in the Democratic primary?
DRJ (a431ca) — 4/10/2008 @ 12:35 pmElton John is sooooo yesterday!
Another Drew (f9dd2c) — 4/10/2008 @ 12:39 pmQuit living in the past people (oops, forgot, that’s all the Boomer’s/Hippies have).
“Are you saying that Elton John was making the general point that Americans are misogynists, but he did not connect that to the fact that Hillary is behind in the Democratic primary?”
The statement you posted doesn’t make that connection. He could have made other statements that did make that connection — but we dont have them here.
He apparently also made statements about women’s rights. So he could also have connected his belief about misogynistic Americans to those points about womens rights. That would make more sense, but we don’t have statements that make either connection.
stef (8bb588) — 4/10/2008 @ 12:41 pm“Don’t diss Toby.
I’m assuming you were joking, but if not feel free to Google.”
– Stashiu3
I was. Heh.
Leviticus (68e8c2) — 4/10/2008 @ 12:43 pmSeriously folks,
Paul from Fl (47918a) — 4/10/2008 @ 12:44 pmThe Piano player says we should vote Hillary into office.
Jesus, Mary and Joseph! the freakin’ Piano Player?!? Who the hell cares What he thinks/ wants!?!
Yeeeesh Come On!
stef,
According to the article, here’s what Elton John said:
To accept your characterization of John’s comments, we have to assume that John made two unconnected, arbitrary observations about misogynistic Americans and Hillary’s campaign. To accept my characterization, we infer that John was saying misogynistic Americans won’t vote for Hillary because they hate women.
It seems like your position that we cannot make judgments about what people mean based on inferences — they must say what they mean outright. I’ll hold you to the same standard of proof in future discussions.
DRJ (a431ca) — 4/10/2008 @ 12:58 pmStef, it was a Hillary fundraiser. He wasn’t there to talk about women’s rights, he was there to raise money for Hillary to run for President. And DRJ’s point was that to call John a misogynist for writing the song would be wrong. Just like it’s wrong to say Americans are behaving in a misogynist manner if they don’t vote for Hillary. It doesn’t matter how you try to frame it, he said “to hell with” Americans for their misogynistic behaviors… I’m not ok with that.
You don’t want to see the implication about Hillary, fine. What about the actual statement then? Is it ok to paint Americans as poor on women’s rights and as misogynists since that’s all you’re seeing was said? It’s not ok for me and I’m not really believing you’re that dense, so don’t bother answering unless you want. I’m not really interested in parsing words with you anymore, it’s a waste of time.
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/10/2008 @ 1:00 pmstef,
In light of your opinions on this thread, I think you should re-evaluate your condemnation of Trent Lott. After all, did Lott explicitly endorse racism or did you just infer it from his contemporaneous statements and context?
DRJ (a431ca) — 4/10/2008 @ 1:15 pm“It seems like your position that we cannot make judgments about what people mean based on inferences — they must say what they mean outright.”
Didn’t someone here say he talked about womens rights? Is that in the inference at all?
“He wasn’t there to talk about women’s rights, he was there to raise money for Hillary to run for President. ”
So he was there to play music. He also talked about women’s rights, misogyny and Hillary becoming the next president. All this means he must have the nonsensical view that misogyny is THE only cause of lack of support for Hillary, as opposed to other views, such that misogyny exists in America, or even that misogyny is a possible cause of a lack of support for hillary/
“It doesn’t matter how you try to frame it, he said “to hell with” Americans for their misogynistic behaviors… I’m not ok with that.”
Hey, to hell with anyone for their misogynistic behaviors. I never cease to be amazed when I post here and people start talking about who I date and whether the football team would be more stimulating to me. It is an amazing community where that gets a pass and other things don’t. But maybe people let the personal shit slide and try to focus on the issues. Good thing then.
stef (ca2b75) — 4/10/2008 @ 1:19 pm“After all, did Lott explicitly endorse racism or did you just infer it from his contemporaneous statements and context?”
Lott explictly endorsed Thurmond’s candidacy, saying it was a good thing and would have prevented problems. That don’t make him racist. There’s no need to infer what Thurmond’s candidacy was about.
stef (ca2b75) — 4/10/2008 @ 1:24 pmstef…
Another Drew (f9dd2c) — 4/10/2008 @ 1:25 pmWe post crap like that about you because your postings indicate a complete lack of depth, and we just don’t give a rat’s ass about your thoughts, because it has been amply demonstrated that they are composed of bat guano.
Elton is the typical limo-lib celebrity; they get up in front of the camera, filled to the brim with self-righteousness (they are ARTISTES, in case you didn’t know), telling the rest of us what beastly knuckle-draggers we all are, then hop back into their limos and spend millions (which is what we proles are supposed to donate to the less fortunate) in gifts on themselves. The likes of Elton John are dysfunctional narcissists who live in their own guilded world full of irony yet purport to tell the rest of the world its faults.
Paul (0f949e) — 4/10/2008 @ 1:26 pmAssuming stef is correct, and Elton John wasn’t saying that misogyny was to blame for people not supporting Hillary, then this statement:
is the biggest non sequitur I’ve ever seen.
Maybe Elton’s going a bit daft in his advancing years?
Steverino (e00589) — 4/10/2008 @ 1:37 pmHe certainly did… A couple of decades after said candidacy was gone.
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 4/10/2008 @ 1:41 pm“He certainly did… A couple of decades after said candidacy was gone.”
Yup. Several decades later: when we thought that the people who thought that candidacy was a good idea were long dead, or at least out of power.
stef (7f891f) — 4/10/2008 @ 1:43 pm*rolls his eyes*
You are a parody of yourself, my dear. Please don’t ever change…
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 4/10/2008 @ 1:47 pmIs Elton John allowed to donate to a campaign in the U.S.? I think he is a British citizen. Am I missing something here? Of course, I am older than a Boomer, so maybe senility has set in.
PatAZ (56a0a8) — 4/10/2008 @ 3:41 pmWhy not? If “Mambo No. 5” was appropriate for her first Senate run in 2000, nothing should be off the table now.
Xrlq (eaa3a6) — 4/10/2008 @ 3:45 pmElton John is a fat pig who can play damn good music. Oh, He doesn’t write his lyrics. Sorry DJR, Lee Hall wrote the “Merry Christmas Maggie Thatcher” song lyrics.
Wiggum in 08
CES (30864f) — 4/10/2008 @ 3:47 pm“Is Elton John allowed to donate to a campaign in the U.S.?”
My understanding is that foreigners can volunteer their services, but not donate money. I don’t know if there are limits on how much value one can volunteer, but I would imagine that a celebrity appearance represents a lot of value.
stef (3b5233) — 4/10/2008 @ 3:50 pmLast night at Radio City Music Hall in New York, British singer Elton John performed for a Hillary Clinton fundraiser. This is what he told the crowd (Hillary was also present.)
“I’ve always been a Hillary supporter. There is no one more qualified to lead America.”
Then he struck out at Americans with this:
“I’m amazed by the misogynistic attitudes of some of the people in this country. And I say to hell with them.”
As yet, I have not heard anything about Mrs Clinton rebuking those remarks like John McCain reacted when Bill Cunningham used a McCain rally to say bad things about Barack Obama.
Here is my reaction:
How dare you, Mr John, come to our country and speak about our people (even some of them) in that manner. It’s one thing for you to inject yourself into our electoral process. It is quite another to come here and bad-mouth us. The fact that many Americans (of both genders) have an intense dislike of Mrs Clinton is not because we are misogynists. It is because she is dishonest, arrogant, ruthless and not qualified to be a presidential contender. That’s why.
Furthermore, I would never dream of going to your country and telling them who should be prime minister and insulting those who disagree with me. When I visit another country, I conduct myself like a guest.
And to Mrs Clinton: When are you going to apologize for John’s comments? You are responsible for bringing in a supporter (from another country) who insults Americans who may not agree with him.
As for Elton John- go home.
gary fouse
fouse, gary c (7b7c7c) — 4/10/2008 @ 5:47 pmfousesquawk
I’ve seen Elton John’s line reported as “To hell with them” (by the Politico) and “To hell with it” (the original post link from the NY Daily News). Anyone know which is right?
DRJ (a431ca) — 4/10/2008 @ 5:58 pmEverything I’ve seen says “to hell with them”. I’m checking to see if I can find something authoritative now.
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/10/2008 @ 6:20 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lm1NTbTr2PI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbypHirJuAQ
These are the only two videos I found at YouTube… I have my Javascript doing something right now that interferes, so I can’t watch them until it’s complete. See if one of them has the words (probably the first one as there were several comments referring to the quote… all saying “to hell with them”.
Hope this helps, I’ll check them myself later when my other stuff finishes.
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/10/2008 @ 6:25 pmNeither of those had it. This one does.
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/10/2008 @ 7:27 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMA7tlit0wg
It’s clearly “to hell with them”.
Thanks, Stashiu. I’ll correct it … er, them … it.
DRJ (a431ca) — 4/10/2008 @ 7:56 pmOh, I was wondering why you asked. I didn’t even notice the difference until I saw the update. Good thing one of your other sources had the correct quote from the start (wink-wink, nudge-nudge). 😉
Thanks again for the link. Traffic went through the roof (my roof is much lower than y’alls roof you know… mine almost reaches your
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/10/2008 @ 8:15 pmkneesankles) today. Always great to get a link from here.Does anybody have Elton talking about the other stuff stef claims he says?
daleyrocks (906622) — 4/10/2008 @ 8:59 pmdaleyrocks, I don’t see stef claiming he said anything… as usual. At least not on this thread. She’s worthless to talk to because it looks like she’s making a point, but when you look closer there isn’t anything there. I’m not wasting my time on her anymore because every time I try to have a discussion with her, she pretends to miss the point and goes off on a tangent. Like the Twain reference above.
Do you see something I missed?
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/10/2008 @ 9:09 pmStashiu,
The thanks go to you for making this story better, although I’m not happy at the corrected version because now Elton John’s quote is even worse.
He clearly said to hell with them – Americans – solely because he disapproves of the way they voted. That’s odd because, as a homosexual who knows about being labeled and discriminated against, I thought he would be more sensitive about labeling people.
DRJ (a431ca) — 4/10/2008 @ 9:20 pmStashiu3 – From #22
“So he was there to play music. He also talked about women’s rights, misogyny and Hillary becoming the next president.”
She was trying to argue her way out of a hole as usual, but also change the subject later in the comment.
She needs to cowboy up and admit her mistakes.
daleyrocks (906622) — 4/10/2008 @ 9:30 pmIf he had said “to hell with it” I probably wouldn’t have even done a post on it. It would have sounded like he was catching himself before going on a rant after a poorly chosen statement. Easy for me to forgive that… you start off saying one thing, realize how it sounds, and just say, “to hell with it” to drop the subject. Not the most graceful way to do it, but I wouldn’t get bent out of shape over it by any means.
But you’re right, “to hell with them” is much worse and directly attacks any American who doesn’t plan on voting for Hillary. That definitely caught my attention (as it did yours, obviously) and prompted me to point out how typical this tactic is for the Left. Don’t forget that Hillary hasn’t said anything on this (AFAIK). When somebody supporting McCain emphasized Obama’s middle name, McCain quickly condemned it and wanted it stopped.
Hillary doesn’t appear to have a problem with this and probably believes it is true to a large extent. In her mind, nobody could dislike her policies, personality, political record, or anything else about her… so not voting for her must be because she’s a woman. Best.Dem.Primary.Eva!!
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/10/2008 @ 9:44 pmShe’s going to say that she was just repeating what others on the thread had already said, and shouldn’t she trust them? That’s what I mean about it looking like she’s making a point, but she leaves herself a rhetorical out absolving her from responsibility for anything in her comment.
Semantically worthless drivel and (IMO) a waste of your time. She’ll never admit she made a mistake, it’s always someone else who made it.
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/10/2008 @ 9:50 pmStashiu3 – I don’t recall others saying Elton was there talking about womens rights.
daleyrocks (906622) — 4/10/2008 @ 10:39 pmHere is where it came from:
First quoted line of the post. Then I mention it in #11 and she refers to me saying something about it in #12.
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/10/2008 @ 11:27 pmStashiu3 – Nothing in the article on that subject apart from that intro – which was my point and I believe the point of others. It was a pure Hillary event and that’s what the misogyny referred to unless stef can provide information otherwise. The burden is on her.
“The concert, billed as “Elton-Hillary: One Night Only” sold out just this week, with 6,000 tickets ranging in price from $125 to $2,300, according to a spokesman for the Clinton campaign”
daleyrocks (906622) — 4/11/2008 @ 1:22 amdaleyrocks,
Oh, absolutely a Hillary event. The point wasn’t women’s rights, it was make money for Hillary. I was one of the others making that point. I agree with you, I was just saying what BS stef will use to slide through as if it’s someone else’s fault. She won’t meet the burden, that’s why she’s a waste of time.
What she says never has any real meaning, so she never feels accountable for it.
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/11/2008 @ 4:00 am“Does anybody have Elton talking about the other stuff stef claims he says?”
Stashiu said it on comment 11.
“That’s what I mean about it looking like she’s making a point, but she leaves herself a rhetorical out absolving her from responsibility for anything in her comment.”
You said he talked about women’s rights. I had started by saying the excerpt didn’t show what DRJ thought it showed. Once you told me he talked about women’s rights, I noticed that strengthened the argument against the inference that his intended the nonsensical meaning DRJ was trying to argue for.
“It was a pure Hillary event and that’s what the misogyny referred to unless stef can provide information otherwise. ”
I suspect he sang more than he talked about hillary or women’s rights. The article doesn’t tell us how much he talked about women’s rights or even if he brought it up. Face it, there really isn’t much to go on here — specially to make the specific nonsensical point DRJ wants to make — and all you got is your burden shifting argument.
stef (8bb588) — 4/11/2008 @ 4:25 amSee? Complete drivel, semantically null. Certainly not worth wasting your time on daleyrocks.
Thanks for making my point stef. Your comment was at least good enough for that.
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/11/2008 @ 5:07 amI could just boldly assert that my meaning was the true one, the null hypothesis, and the burden is on others to disprove it. That would really get us somewhere, that would help us work out what is going on.
This is a joke right? Did he play ‘Candle in the Wind’? Its a Hillary event, so that means its probably about Hillary.
stef (de28de) — 4/11/2008 @ 5:26 amYes, you could. That’s called having an opinion instead of always implying others are wrong without anything to back it up.
Semantically null BS sure isn’t going to do it. Some of us have already worked out what is going on just fine thank you. If you think it’s something else, try saying so instead of saying we’re wrong because we can’t prove it to your satisfaction. You’ve already shown that nothing will satisfy you because you won’t take a position.
It’s kind of pointless to use hyperbole when it’s not used to support a position. This is why people start calling you names and such. You act like their positions are stupid, but never establish your own character. Keep treating people with contempt and you can expect them to keep attacking you back. Engage in some honest debate with a back-and-forth dialog and you might get a little respect. Until then, you’ve lost that presumption through your own behavior.
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/11/2008 @ 5:54 am“That’s called having an opinion instead of always implying others are wrong without anything to back it up.”
My opinion is that Elton Johns statement does not mean “opposition to Hillary means you’re a misogynist.” I find that idea to be nonsensical, and also unsupported by the quoted statements. I argue this based on the fact that there are several other interpretations that are possible — that he was speaking generally about womens rights being one. I also include the most sensical — but perhaps for people here, offensive — opinion that misogyny is A cause of opposition to Hillary, not THE cause of opposition to Hillary. Note the difference in logic here: mysogyny causes opposition to Hillary, but not opposition to Hillary means misogyny.
But, apparently, this has no semantic value and in fact justifies any misogyny or other behavior here.
stef (3baa7d) — 4/11/2008 @ 6:51 amNobody here has argued differently. A misogynist is going to be against Hillary. There are misogynists in the United States. Where can you show anyone finding that offensive here?
So DRJ’s point about Trent Lott was accurate? Unless someone says what they mean outright, we can’t infer that meaning from context? We’ll hold you to that standard then. However, Elton John wasn’t there to talk about women’s rights… he was there to raise money for Hillary’s campaign. It’s not nonsensical to draw an inference when you take that into context.
Again, hyperbole only works when you have a point to emphasize. Since you still haven’t said what he meant, only what you believe several alternatives might be, you haven’t made a point… only tried to discredit others. Note that I haven’t made any personal attacks on you, just on your reasoning and online behavior. Unless you have something else, we’re done.
Stashiu3 (c8e98a) — 4/11/2008 @ 7:09 amOk stef…
Taking what you just wrote at face value…
Show us one single misogynist who opposes Hillary.
See the problem???
You, and Elton John, have to ASSUME the personal opinions and beliefs of a person to make the original statement. Yes, you have given an opinion. But, no different than saying that racism is a reason to oppose Obama, but not that opposing Obama is racist. You have to now PROVE that someone is racist to make the argument.
Prove to us that someone who is a misogynist opposes Hillary.
Prove your own point.
Good Luck….
reff (bff229) — 4/11/2008 @ 7:16 am“A misogynist is going to be against Hillary. There are misogynists in the United States. Where can you show anyone finding that offensive here?”
I said perhaps offensive, but if nobody thinks its offensive then all the better. reff has a problem with it, at least he’s not solving it by telling me who to date.
“So DRJ’s point about Trent Lott was accurate? Unless someone says what they mean outright, we can’t infer that meaning from context?”
From Trent Lott I don’t infer much at all. Trent Lott said Thurmond’s candidacy was a good thing and would have prevented problems — that we should have listened to him. There’s no need to infer — that was the statement!
“Since you still haven’t said what he meant, only what you believe several alternatives might be, you haven’t made a point… only tried to discredit others.”
I’ve said several times what I think is a sensible interpretation. I’ve given you arguments for why these are more sensible. I can’t reach a full conclusion because I don’t have a the full remarks — for example, I cant tell how connected it is to his talk of women’s rights rather than saying that lack of support for Hillary makes one a mysogynist.
I’m sorry but I prefer to not reach a definite conclusion when I lack definite facts. I’m perfectly happy to articulate which conclusion the facts before me make more or less likely, but if I’m not comfortable making a final pronouncement, I wont. It really wont help me make one if my wish to not talk out of my ass and not reach a premature conclusion is instead used to justify idiocy towards me.
“Show us one single misogynist who opposes Hillary.”
Have you ever heard someone argue that a woman can’t be president? Does that count?
stef (88a652) — 4/11/2008 @ 8:04 amYou couldn’t do it again…you couldn’t prove your own argument…
I can make arguments that a woman would not be a good president…not that they can’t….
I would vote for a person such as Margaret Thatcher or Condi Rice or Kay Bailey Hutchinson as President, and they are women….
Your words: “Have you ever heard someone argue that a woman can’t be president? Does that count?”
Now, show us the person you speak of? I haven’t heard that argument among my peers….I have heard the argument that Hillary would not be a good President, and logical and factual arguments to that end….but not because she is a woman….
You can’t even prove your own point, can you???
reff (bff229) — 4/11/2008 @ 9:40 am“Now, show us the person you speak of?”
http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2006/10/03/women-leaders-against-nature/
stef (1d54b7) — 4/11/2008 @ 9:50 amGood for you, you found something solid to back your argument…and to answer my question…
Now, come back and refute her points…
Good luck…
reff (bff229) — 4/11/2008 @ 10:11 amOh, and one last request…
Prove that LaShawn Barber is a misogynist….maybe, just maybe, she has valid points about why women should not be president….
reff (bff229) — 4/11/2008 @ 10:23 am“Prove that LaShawn Barber is a misogynist….maybe, just maybe, she has valid points about why women should not be president….”
Those points are misogynous, valid or not.
stef (7ca4a3) — 4/11/2008 @ 10:39 am#63…
Well, that’s a very reasoned response!
Dont’ confuse me with facts, my mind is made up.
Facts to a Liberal, are as Kryptonite to Superman!
Another Drew (f9dd2c) — 4/11/2008 @ 10:52 am“Dont’ confuse me with facts, my mind is made up.”
Reasons for it being ‘unnatural’ for women to be president are misogynous, no matter their merit. Is this controversial? Is there some other definition of misogyny you use?
stef (e035a3) — 4/11/2008 @ 10:59 amThat word does not mean what you think it means, stef.
Pablo (99243e) — 4/11/2008 @ 11:05 amWell, stef, first thing is, I’m a Conservative, and we are interested in ideas – we don’t usually give a crap where they come from if they’re good ideas.
Another Drew (f9dd2c) — 4/11/2008 @ 11:24 amI don’t deal in Gender. I don’t deal in Race.
I deal in ideals.
If you’ve got one that has merit, it will be considered, and debated, and picked-apart to find its’ deficiencies, if any.
Hiding behind terms like misogynous, racist, etc., is just the lazy persons’ cover for not wanting to deal with something in an intellectually honest manner.
“Hiding behind terms like misogynous, racist, etc., is just the lazy persons’ cover for not wanting to deal with something in an intellectually honest manner.”
I’m not interested in arguing whether women can or should be president. I think its kind of a ridiculous argument to take on anyway. If you think thats lazyness, go ahead. But saying that women can’t be president is misogynous no matter how strong of an argument you make.
“That word does not mean what you think it means, stef.”
I’m going by dictionary.com here. Anybody else using a different definition should pipe up.
stef (0ea84b) — 4/11/2008 @ 11:37 amstef,
I think you are confusing cause and effect. In my opinion, a person’s beliefs are misogynous if the opinion is motivated or caused by a hatred for women. If there is another reason that motivates a person to have an opinion – for instance, a disagreement on policy or theory – that is not misogynous. It is a coincidental effect.
DRJ (a431ca) — 4/11/2008 @ 11:42 am“If there is another reason that motivates a person to have an opinion – for instance, a disagreement on policy or theory – that is not misogynous. It is a coincidental effect.”
A disagreement on policy or theory with a particular woman clearly does not make one a misogynist. Agreement with the idea that women in general should not be president does. This [from the link I posted]:
“Do I think a woman should be president of the United States, Commander in Chief of the armed forces, and all the rest? For all of the above stated reasons and several more I didn’t discuss, no.”
Misogyny. No matter how valid the stated and unstated reasons.
stef (034065) — 4/11/2008 @ 11:56 amSo am I, and I see the definition “hatred of women” repeated 6 times. So, if someone thinks that a woman should not be Commander in Chief, this means they hate women?
Pablo (99243e) — 4/11/2008 @ 12:05 pmstef,
No matter how valid the reasons?
Hmmm. It sounds like you are saying motivation/reasons don’t matter if the opinion is directed at women as a group. I disagree.
I could believe that men should never work in day care or women should never be allowed in combat (and, for the record, I believe neither) without being a man-hater or a woman-hater.
DRJ (a431ca) — 4/11/2008 @ 12:08 pmAnd someone who thinks mothers should be the primary caregivers for babies, and not fathers – are they a misandrist? Does this mean they hate men?
Pablo (99243e) — 4/11/2008 @ 12:10 pm“So am I, and I see the definition “hatred of women” repeated 6 times.”
Do you see this at the top:
“hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women.”
?
If you don’t want to go with that, let me know and I wont argue with you anymore on this issue.
“Hmmm. It sounds like you are saying motivation/reasons don’t matter if the opinion is directed at women as a group. I disagree.”
I have no idea how one can have a categorical opinion that women are unfit for something — that doesn’t treat them as individuals — without having negative views of women in general.
stef (5e2e3a) — 4/11/2008 @ 12:23 pm“I’m not interested in arguing whether women can or should be president…”
Neither am I stef. I’m interested in whether or not this woman should be President. Just as I would argue whether or not that man should be also.
It is all about their ideas, and ideals, and the “content of their character”.
Those are the things that matter.
Another Drew (f9dd2c) — 4/11/2008 @ 12:28 pmYou’ve got to get past your hang-ups.
I have no idea how one can have a categorical opinion that women are unfit for something — that doesn’t treat them as individuals — without having negative views of women in general.
A woman can be unfit to be president, and completely and perfectly fit to be a mother…and I think my wife could be president, and is an awesome mother…so, based solely on that, I can’t possibly be a misogynist….But, Hillary can’t possibly be a good president, and that has nothing to do with hatred of women….
The two are not inclusive, or exclusive…they are different….
You try combine “not capable of being president” with “hatred of women.”
That is your problem…you can’t separate the two, and millions and millions of reasonable adult voters can…
reff (bff229) — 4/11/2008 @ 12:37 pmTo borrow what Christopher Hitchens said to Andrew Sullivan the other day, Elton John just needs to stop being such a lesbian over the fact that some people, including a lot of men, just don’t want to vote for Hillary.
daleyrocks (906622) — 4/11/2008 @ 1:19 pm