NY Times calls Hillary a "Femi-Nazi"

[annagull]

props to Atrios for pointing this out:
http://www.atrios.blogspot.com/

This is from the NY Times Sunday Book Review:

'The Perfect Wife': The Un-Hillary

And yet, just as Hillary Rodham Clinton was more complicated than her feminazi image, surely Laura Bush has a few currents, a little tension, in her inner life. After all, as Ann Gerhart writes in ''The Perfect Wife'' this is a bright, educated, exceedingly well-read woman, with many liberal friends who cannot abide her husband's conservatism.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/15/books/review/15TONERT.html

email: [email protected]

If it's disgusting to call Bush Hitler, it is equally disgusting to call a former First Lady and US Senator a "Nazi".

[ComerPerro]

1. I really loathe the term femi-Nazi

And you know the funniest thing about it?

Most people who say "femi-Nazi" as a regular part of their vocabulary almost never get laid.

[barbaraann]

2. If ANYONE is a feminazi, it's Barbara Bush (the older one).

Just my opinion.

[Womblestuffer]

14. Actually Barbara Bush is a man, he/she just kept the eggs warm till the

little satans hatched

[maveric]

LOL!!!!!!!

You just made my night with that one!!

[maveric]

55. LOL!!!!!!!

You just made my night with that one!!

[cardlaw]

3. Actually,

it says she has garnered the image of a feminazi. Doesn't actually call her one.

[buycitgo]

9. so if someone says dumbo has garnered the reputations as

a lazy, lying, good for nothing, cowardly, abortion-forcing, RAPIST, you'd have no trouble with that appearing in print EVERY time his name appeared......RIGHT?

you think people here aren't aware of such cadgy distinctions?

thanks so much for your time

[cardlaw]

21. I didn't

say it wasn't a tactless attempt at throwing labels on people. Merely stating an opinion.

Thanks so much for YOUR time.

[buycitgo]

36. what you seemed to imply is that the effect wasn't achieved

the effect of slipping in the nazi reference in the time-honored, sleazy manner of referring to other sources, or saying that "people have said"

you SEEM to accept the very objectionable use of the most underhanded tactics, in service of propagandistic methodology

so you don't approve of such slimy tactics?

would've been nice to include that initially

see what I'm saying?

[htuttle]

10. Laura Bush has garned herself a few colorful images....

...but they don't use those names in this article.

The 'Stepford Librarian' is one of them, for example.

[Bandit]

18. What does a feminazi look like?

:shrug: you are splitting hairs. It is namecalling from the party of compassion.

[cardlaw]

22. I'm a

law student. I split hairs for a living.

[buycitgo]

38. so how does a law student split hairs to make a living?

don't lawyers split hairs to make a living, not law students?

you work in a beauty parlor?

so far, you don't look to be a very successful hair splitter

[buycitgo]

37. a lot like this

[leesa]

41. Even worse, sounds like it implies she deserved the title somehow.

Very insecure men and women need to title a strong woman in this manner. She has done nothing even remotely resembling Nazi behavior, unlike Babs, or other shrill liberal, homosexual, non-christian haters of the GOP. Now THAT is classic Nazi behavior!

[sadiesworld]

4. I'm sure B. Goldberg will pick this up for his next diatribe.

[Chicago Democrat]

5. Don't forget Laura

aka "Magda Geobbels"; I bet she wips him.

[diamond14]

29. pickles (the permanent housewife) wore that same old lavendar

suit to a NASCAR race....does that make any sense at all???

must be the ZOLOFT...keeps that SMILE on pickles' face, even while MORE of OUR soldiers are KILLED...and pickles ALWAYS stands behind bush*, always...and smiles...

seems that she never takes off that old lavendar suit, for cleaning or maybe just for a change of pace...



this photo came from the WH web page...it didn't take long for shrub to get that publicity up, using government funds and web sites...

[diamond14]

44. here's the comparison laura fashion photos....(pics)

cannot imagine why laura thinks that old lavendar suit is the appropriate fashion attire for a NASCAR race track...


same old lavendar suit....

thanks to Betty Bowers' column on ReTHUGlican glamour...
http://www.bettybowers.com/fl2.html
A true lady is always worried about showing up in public in the same outfit as someone else. Avoid this potential problem by completing your Liz Claiborne stretch slacks with a Butterick jacket you can make yourself using fabric from an old lilac bridesmaid's dress.

[catzies]

6. Thank you. I emailed them my disgust.

:thumbsup:

[slappypan]

7. uh ...

proposing an unwieldy, convoluted national health care system = invading and brutally occupying Europe, perpetuating genocide and systematically exterminating millions of people

I want to know what these people are smoking.

[Wickerman]

12. yep as opposed to

enacting an unwieldy, convoluted national health care system. We would've been in much better shape had we taken Hil's plan. By now we could've ironed out the differences, the drug companies and insurance companies wouldn't have transferred so much wealth to their top execs, though. Now we are stuck with band-aid approaches that serve no one but the shareholders and top execs of the 4 profits. Meanwhile, people die in the richest country on earth for lack of health care.

[diamond14]

8. NYT calling a U.S. Senator a nazi...hopefully, all OUR senators

will stand up and object to this....


IMO, calling powerful women 'feminazis' is just another form of discrimination....it is a nasty term, designed to degrade ALL women, who obtain even marginal levels of power....it is no different from nasty terms used to degrade Blacks, and Jews and others...it should NOT be tolerated in any form....

once upon a time, I had a dream that women would rise to positions of power in America and represent WE THE PEOPLE....and Americans would DEMAND respect for those women, who overcame so many obstacles and paved the way for everyone's daughters....

[Feanorcurufinwe]

11. I feel compelled to point out your inaccuracies.

1. This was written by Robin Toner, and appeared IN the NY Times. The editorial board of the Times didn't write it.

2. It doesn't call HC a feminazi, it says she has a feminazi image. I don't think that is true either, but nevertheless, it is different from the characterization in your thread title.

[scottcsmith]

15. Why mention it at all?

Wasn't eight years of Rush Limbaugh using the term enough? Why should the Times even mention it?

Unless Robin Toner is a nationally syndicated columnist, the editors at the Times would have approved the story, and the use of the term "feminazi."

[Feanorcurufinwe]

24. Why ignore what I actually said and pretend I am defending Robin Toner?

[annagull]

17. Aren't the editors supposed to edit out things like 'Nazi"?

1. Editors are resposible for the content in their newspapers. Hence the name "Editor"; they edit the content.

2. By using a slur to describe someone's image, and I can't think of a much worse slur than being called a "Nazi", you are propagating said slur. They could have said, "Mrs. Clinton's polarizing image", etc. Instead, they described her as a Nazi.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

26. So newspapers should not publish controversial views?

That is the logical extension of your argument.

[Bandit]

45. Yes editors are supposed to edit out major controversy

You don't call a United States Senator a Nazi without some backlash.

[Rich Hunt]

39. you are correct

It is horrible writing, though, because it presumes that the reader knows what a 'feminazi image' is. Therefore, it subtly gives weight to those who can most easily conjure that image in their minds.

The term 'feminazi image' is less vivid to those who don't subscribe to the notion of a 'feminazi'.

It's just bad writing all-around. I hate when people get published in the NYT who are so clearly unqualified to be there.

[G_j]

56. yes the only honest way to have used the term

would have been to state that the "image" was created by Rush and others.

[scottcsmith]

13. Damn that liberal media!

Imagine that: a liberal newspaper, the "newspaper of record" as the shrill right-winger Ann Coulter calls it, bringing up the old Limbaugh trademark "feminazi."

If right-wingers really think the media is liberal, they need psychiatric help, and quickly. The liberal media has been very quiet on reporting the troops coming back home to the United States from Iraq with life-changing injuries. Oh sure, the NY Times magazine did a piece, but I cannot remember any other large, mainstream newspaper doing the same.

What's happening with the Plame investigation? Who knows. The liberal media isn't telling us. How about the investigation into the Republican staffers that accessed classified Democratic memos and documents from Democrat computers? Dunno.

Even Bush's National Guard record, which was a minor issue in the 2000 campaign, took four years before the "liberal" media decided it was an issue.

How about the complete fuck-up that was the Iraq WMD intelligence? Shouldn't the press be calling for Bush's head? People blame Bill Clinton for the intelligence failures of the 1990s. No one seems to want to blame Bush for the intelligence failures during his term. No one, in fact, wants to hold Bush accountable -- for anything.

Where's the liberal media when you really need it?

[pnb]

16. NYT did not call her a feminazi

They said that that is her image. That doesn't mean they think she is or isn't one...just that other might.

In addition, the term does not compare her to an actual nazi either as some here seem to think. The term feminazi is its own term with its own "meaning."

[annagull]

19. So you're saying "femi-nazi" is really kinder than "nazi"?

Suppose I think Laura Bush is a "Bush-Nazi"? Will the NY Times report this as her image? Don't you think describing anyone as "Nazi" is pretty damn extreme, especially in the NY Times?

[pnb]

25. If enough people thought so..

...and the term Bush-nazi because a well known term for many, many years like feminazi, it just might. Unfortunately, that's not the case.

The term feminazi was an arbitrary term thought up by some idiots trying to demean the woman's movement. It has nothing to do with real nazis so:

1) no one is being described as a nazi so your question is moot
2) they didn't describe her as a nazi, they pointed out that others did so (again, not a real nazi, see above) so your question is moot

[ThoughtCriminal]

20. They did say it was her "Image"

why say that was her image? It's one held by a odd bunch of lunatics.

Imagine the outrage if they printed "Despite President Bush's Brown Shirt image..."

[pnb]

28. Did you even read the article?

If you don't understand the context from there, nothing I could say would answer your question...

[FredScuttle]

35. Or imagine this example:

"And yet, just as Colin Powell was more complicated than his house nigger image..."

I can't believe the defense of the use of "feminazi" on this board...digusting.

[pnb]

42. I don't agree with the image...

...but the fact is, Powell DOES have an image to some as a house nigger. Saying so is not an indefensible thing...actually its not even an attackable thing. It just is.

Read the article.

[FredScuttle]

50. you are oh, so wrong...

just because nutcases from the fringes of either party have pet names for their favorite targets on the other side does not give the NYT a free pass to absorb them into descriptions of them as if these were universally accepted sobriquets. Professional respect and even a half-hearted attempt at the appearance of non-bias demands that the NYT not resort to this juvenility in its paper. Calling Colin Powell a house nigger is every bit as outrageous and ridiculous as calling Hillary a feminazi (or, as in the article, having a feminazi image) and the NYT should be ashamed for allowing this into print.

The semantics over how the term was used ("feminazi image" instead of just going ahead and calling her a feminazi) are pointless...the insult to Senator Clinton is crystal clear.

[FredScuttle]

51. by the way, I did read the article...

Doesn't change my view...here are the relevant paragraphs (bold emphasis mine):

(opening paragraph)
"From the very beginning, Laura Bush has been presented as the un-Hillary: a traditional wife and mother, who embraced only the most uncontroversial causes in public policy -- like the importance of early reading skills. A woman more likely to throw herself into decorating a presidential getaway in Texas than reinventing the American health care system. Modest, unambitious, dedicated to her man.

And yet, just as Hillary Rodham Clinton was more complicated than her feminazi image, surely Laura Bush has a few currents, a little tension, in her inner life..."
(snip)

Seems to me that the writer, in transitioning from 1st to 2nd paragraph is equating Hillary's attributes (untraditional, controversial, ambitious, attention-seeking, the infamous health care plan), presented in contrast to Laura Bush, as synonymous with a "feminazi image" Again...what the fuck?!!!

[smirkymonkey]

48. It seems to be par for the course around here,

slurs directed toward women are rarely taken seriously by a majority of posters on this board. They just don't get it.

[Jimb100]

52. More accurately...

If they printed "Rush's Brown Shirt image..." you might get less argument.

Actually all these nazi references are really inappropriate, (slapping myself on the wrist) don't better describe anything and carry way to many connotations to be innocent.

[Bandit]

23. Ridiculous

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it probably is a duck. A nazi is a nazi whether it's a manly nazi or a feminine nazi or a Bush* Cabal Nazi.

[pnb]

27. You obviously know nothing about the term then

in this case it doesn't walk or quack like a duck so...

[bobbyboucher]

31. You seem too familiar with the term,

sorry to say. Don't search for some scant ground to defend the indefensible.

[pnb]

32. Ha ha ha

Well yes, I do know what the term refers to...and I actually read the article which was pointing out generalizations.

You tell me not to search for some scant ground to defend the indefensible? Well, that is laughable. If you really think that, I would have to respond that you shouldn't search for some scant ground to attack NOTHING...except of course for a term which was not even used in a bad manner here.

[put out]

57. I would like to know how the term

"feminazi" could be used in a good manner.

I, too, know what the term refers to. Perhaps you are kidding. I will try to believe that, and not that you really think that the pejorative term is NOTHING.

[Bandit]

34. Please tell us all about the term Feminazi

What does the expression mean to you? I know what Feminist means and I know what Nazi means. Suppose you tell us what Feminazi means. And also tell us what one looks like. Since it is the image we are supposed to be seeing.

[pnb]

43. What do I think of?

Well, personally I don't think of anything. But people who believe the term? They use it to describe a woman they think is pushing feminism down their throat, generally in an angry manner...said angry manner is what gets other things described with the nazi-ending to.

Like the soup-nazi on Seinfeld...no one was actually comparing him to a real nazi. It was a known use of the suffix used as a joke. Same with feminazi, except that one isn't funny. It normally is not used to actually make a valid comparison to real nazis.

But again I say, read the article...the way it is used is obvious.

[buycitgo]

46. tell you what; I'll read the article, if you read Ellul

it's VERY obvious why they chose to include that particular little word, out of all the others in the lexicon

words mean things, both in and out of context

the fact that it appeared at all is very telling

[loudnclear]

30. Let's get a "rapid response" out there to point this out !

We can not give anything a pass...especially the media propaganda.

[Eric J in MN]

33. I wrote. The NY TIMES was wrong. The paper shouldn't let Rush Limbaugh

I wrote. The NY TIMES was wrong. The paper shouldn't let Rush Limbaugh pick its adjectives.

I'm sure that ROBIN TONER doesn't consider Hillary Clinton a "feminazi," but that isn't the issue.

The issue is that just because an idiot with a microphone uses tasteless terms, doesn't mean those terms should be echoed in The NY TIMES, even under the guise of describing someone's image.

If a talk-show host calls the Democratic nominee a "traitor," will the NY TIMES describe him as having "a traitorous image?" I hope not.

[dand]

40. The greatest First Lady of all time......

and our future President doesn't need us to defend her against the NYT,
she is the way above their crap.

[October]

47. Kick

Do not let them get away with this.

I wrote them and demanded a front-page apology.

Women are at least half the population. How dare they!


:grr:

:grr:

:grr:

[AgadorSparticus]

49. Hillary is one smart cookie. That must scare some people.

The problem I have with labeling her "image" as feminazi is that most people don't read everything. They jump to conclusions (remember the Bush inspired link between Al Queda and Saddam?). So, they'll go straight to -->HC is a feminazi, bypassing the image crap altogether--much like what we are doing here on this thread. It's irresponsible and negligent of the NYT. They should be far above this sort of cheap, pathetic rhetoric against someone of that stature.

[scottxyz]

53. "Bush is more complicated than his Hitlerian image..."

For those of you having a hard time understanding why it was wrong for the NYT editors to let this get printed, check out this comment from atrios.blogspot.com and it should be crystal-clear:

I really don't see the cause of the fuss over this. Hillary does have a "feminazi image" for a lot of folks out there.

Yes, and Bush does have a "Hitler image" for a lot of folks out there. So let's change that sentence to read, "And yet, just as George W. Bush is more complicated than his Hitlerian image, surely Laura Bush has a few currents, a little tension, in her inner life." Is that acceptable to you?

= = =

Also bear in mind the uproar that happened when MoveOn.org received some ads which dared to compare Bush to Hitler (because of the unprovoked wars they started).

The original posting from atrios is at:
http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004_02_15_atrios_archive.html#107694239284117837

I have written a letter to [email protected], asking them why I should bother buying their paper anymore, when I can read right-wing libel for half the price in the NY Post, and get my Krugman on-line now.

[Bowfin]

54. Feminazi

The word does not appear in dictionaries- its origin was a hateful man who coined it as a pejorative to further his hate-mongering. Its use here is yellow journalism, propagandistic. And besides putting down Hil, it is intended to further reify and legitimize the term. The editors should definitely have caught it.

[phrenzy]

58. Sensitive

Jesus H Christ DUers can be way over sensitive sometimes. I agree that the term 'femi-nazi' is pathetic and is used as simple minded right wing sloganeering. But at the same time, while we all know it is offensive, it is using the ...-nazi suffix in a less than serious manner.

Like somebody said - the term 'Nazi' is used all the time to describe uptight, rigid and shrill people. That doesn't make it right, but it is not the same as saying somebody is literally a 'Nazi'

In any case - this writer was guilty of at least stupidity - All he would have had to do was put the term "so-called" in front of "feminazi" and it would have been clear.

Instead he wrote it as if it were a given that it was a FACT that Hillary had a 'feminazi' image. Which is in itself derogatory.