Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
Sun May 31, 2015, 04:08 AM May 2015

Yet another shitstorm...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6751580

And there's at least one other thread of hyperventilation.

My interpretation of this cartoon, which can barely be fit in edgewise with all the yakking going on over there, is that the lowered viewpoint is a standard convention for artists, photographers and sculptors to show strength and power, not a "crotch shot." The lines on her thighs are simply shadows, not the tops of pantyhose (which, last I heard, don't have tops going down to the knees). I assume everyone here knows about pervs and skeezy upskirt pix taken under the table or with cameras on shoes, and that this ain't it. But, hey you see what you want to see, even if it gives a big hint that you do have a dirty mind after all.

Bernie is tiny simply because at this point in the campaign he is overwhelmed by Hillary, and by "moving left" she will move off the couch and give him some room. I'm not sure about her moving off the couch and squishing Bill, but the point is made that she now outshines whatever there is left of him.

Yes, I am aware that Hillary wears pantsuits, but one would think that a knee-length skirt on a woman, even Hillary, would not cause a stir. Are skirts now verboten? Too girly? On the road to porn? To me, the artist putting her in a skirt emphasizes that a woman has achieved power. I suppose we should be relieved he didn't show her feet in 5" heels.

But, hey, that's just me. Without an agenda.

Anyone else see it this way?









18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Yet another shitstorm... (Original Post) TreasonousBastard May 2015 OP
Haven't you heard of thigh high hose? TexasTowelie May 2015 #1
You really think those are thigh high hoses he drew? ProudToBeBlueInRhody May 2015 #8
Of course I know what they are, but... TreasonousBastard Jun 2015 #11
You would be surprised. TexasTowelie Jun 2015 #15
Then that would support my point that... TreasonousBastard Jun 2015 #18
This message was self-deleted by its author Warren DeMontague May 2015 #2
Ya know, the more I think about it, he may have been... TreasonousBastard Jun 2015 #12
I agree on what you think he's trying to convey. Inkfreak May 2015 #3
I agree with you. TM99 May 2015 #4
I am constantly amazed... JayhawkSD May 2015 #5
I plead guilty to starting an unnecessary thread ove this... TreasonousBastard Jun 2015 #13
Jury results... MannyGoldstein May 2015 #6
Does this remind you of the... TreasonousBastard Jun 2015 #14
Golden BB tactic Major Nikon Jun 2015 #17
What an eye opening thread that was ProudToBeBlueInRhody May 2015 #7
Looks normal. westerebus May 2015 #9
I didn't like it because it was diminutive of Sanders. n/t lumberjack_jeff Jun 2015 #10
Diminution is the happy hour of political cartoons. Eleanors38 Jun 2015 #16

TexasTowelie

(111,928 posts)
1. Haven't you heard of thigh high hose?
Sun May 31, 2015, 04:41 AM
May 2015

That certainly explains why you could see lines just above the knees.

I also think that the cartoon is sexist--I don't recall any political cartoon ever published which emphasizes the crotch bulge on a man. McClatchy publications are some of the most conservative publications that are published on a daily basis around the country. The fact that the editors didn't realize that the cartoon is sexist reflects on the fact that their editorial board rooms are dominated by men.

I apologize if I don't confirm your POV since I'm a man, but ridicule of that cartoon seems entirely appropriate to me and I understand why women would feel that the cartoon is demeaning.

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
11. Of course I know what they are, but...
Mon Jun 1, 2015, 11:37 AM
Jun 2015

I doubt many women wear them today in a business setting.

At any rate, I still say that if showing a woman in common business clothing is sexist, then the clothing itself is sexist. This time it's the legs-- next time it will be the hair, the red lips, the hips... OMG!!! CLEAVAGE!!!

Perhaps women running for office should wear the burqa? At the very least a hijab...

TexasTowelie

(111,928 posts)
15. You would be surprised.
Mon Jun 1, 2015, 01:46 PM
Jun 2015

I saw women in thigh high hoses frequently and I worked for an insurance company. It would also fit a stereotype by portraying Hillary wearing "granny" stockings.

Totally classless act by the cartoonist and McClatchy publishers are toó dime-witted not to realize it.

Response to TreasonousBastard (Original post)

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
12. Ya know, the more I think about it, he may have been...
Mon Jun 1, 2015, 11:46 AM
Jun 2015

thinking about Sharon Stone's legs being used to excellent effect by an expert manipulator.

But, in the grand scheme of things in political discourse-- what's wrong with that?

Inkfreak

(1,695 posts)
3. I agree on what you think he's trying to convey.
Sun May 31, 2015, 07:03 AM
May 2015

And I don't THINK he was going for the sexist commentary. But I don't know the guy and his intent. And I can see why it's considered sexist.

However, I do know that DU has been suffering from Bernie/Hillary thread wars and this is a change of pace for some. We will resume the endless "Bernie/Hillary Suck Because..." threads shortly.

 

TM99

(8,352 posts)
4. I agree with you.
Sun May 31, 2015, 08:14 AM
May 2015

The artists intent is clear.

All of the sexism and sexuality issues are being read into by people's own psychological issues and perceptions.

To expect, as we do today, that we must anticipate any and every possible way someone may or may not get even remotely offended by a work of art, a turn of phrase, etc. is ridiculous.

 

JayhawkSD

(3,163 posts)
5. I am constantly amazed...
Sun May 31, 2015, 10:53 AM
May 2015

...at the trivia over which people can spin endless discussion. And you can take that any way you want to.

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
13. I plead guilty to starting an unnecessary thread ove this...
Mon Jun 1, 2015, 11:50 AM
Jun 2015

but I have been banned from two groups here for arguments that roughly followed the following form:

Them-- "I hate that car."
Me-- "Why"
Them-- I hate blue cars."
Me-- "That's a red car."
Them-- "So, you hate cars? You are the problem!"

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
6. Jury results...
Sun May 31, 2015, 11:24 AM
May 2015

On Sun May 31, 2015, 11:13 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Yet another shitstorm...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/111415226

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

"hyperventilation" "yakking" "you do have a dirty mind after all" "putting her in a skirt emphasizes that a woman has achieved power"

So much sexism is one call out thread. This guy has some obvious issues with women if he thinks that putting them in a skirt emphasizes "power". What? The power between her legs? Unfuckingbelievable what gets posted here these days.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun May 31, 2015, 11:20 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: "Does my sexiness upset you?
Does it come as a surprise
That I dance like I’ve got diamonds
At the meeting of my thighs?"

I think we can leave this OP in a group.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: grow up.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This post is not only acceptable, it's dead on.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Agree with the alert.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

TreasonousBastard

(43,049 posts)
14. Does this remind you of the...
Mon Jun 1, 2015, 11:59 AM
Jun 2015

Great Spiderwoman's Ass Debate?

Unfuckinbelievable what gets alerted on these days

FWIW, one post I had hidden the deciding vote was to hide because "The post isn't bad, but I'm voting to hide because TB is an asshole and I don't like him."

Major Nikon

(36,818 posts)
17. Golden BB tactic
Mon Jun 1, 2015, 05:19 PM
Jun 2015

Alert on everything and some are bound to get through. The number of reads vs the number of posts is very telling. At least it means they have to read the posts, so not a total loss.

ProudToBeBlueInRhody

(16,399 posts)
7. What an eye opening thread that was
Sun May 31, 2015, 01:53 PM
May 2015

Some people have some real imagination.

When the pearl necklace entendre was invoked, I lost it....

westerebus

(2,976 posts)
9. Looks normal.
Sun May 31, 2015, 05:09 PM
May 2015

Woman sitting in a skirt with her knees crossed. HRC? Ok. So what? Nothing is out of the ordinary.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Men's Group»Yet another shitstorm...