HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Gender & Orientation » Men's Group (Group) » Yet another shitstorm...

Sun May 31, 2015, 03:08 AM

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, 2869 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 18 replies Author Time Post
Reply Yet another shitstorm... (Original post)
TreasonousBastard May 2015 OP
TexasTowelie May 2015 #1
ProudToBeBlueInRhody May 2015 #8
TreasonousBastard Jun 2015 #11
TexasTowelie Jun 2015 #15
TreasonousBastard Jun 2015 #18
Warren DeMontague May 2015 #2
TreasonousBastard Jun 2015 #12
Inkfreak May 2015 #3
TM99 May 2015 #4
JayhawkSD May 2015 #5
TreasonousBastard Jun 2015 #13
MannyGoldstein May 2015 #6
TreasonousBastard Jun 2015 #14
Major Nikon Jun 2015 #17
ProudToBeBlueInRhody May 2015 #7
westerebus May 2015 #9
lumberjack_jeff Jun 2015 #10
Eleanors38 Jun 2015 #16

Response to TreasonousBastard (Original post)

Sun May 31, 2015, 03:41 AM

1. Haven't you heard of thigh high hose?

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TexasTowelie (Reply #1)

Sun May 31, 2015, 12:56 PM

8. You really think those are thigh high hoses he drew?

Seriously?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TexasTowelie (Reply #1)

Mon Jun 1, 2015, 10:37 AM

11. Of course I know what they are, but...

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...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TreasonousBastard (Reply #11)

Mon Jun 1, 2015, 12:46 PM

15. You would be surprised.

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 to dime-witted not to realize it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TexasTowelie (Reply #15)

Mon Jun 1, 2015, 06:13 PM

18. Then that would support my point that...

showing women wearing commonly accepted clothing is not sexist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TreasonousBastard (Original post)

Sun May 31, 2015, 03:45 AM

2. I think he probably should have thought about how it would look, and done the same idea differently.

Last edited Mon Jun 1, 2015, 05:57 PM - Edit history (1)

I get what he was trying to convey- Hillary is a massive, unmovable presence in the Democratic Primary Process, and if everyone is honest they'll admit his campaign- and his chances- are dwarfed by her.

But unfortunately the way it's drawn lends itself to too much weirdness around legs and skirts and Basic Instinct, not to mention the distressingly common "little man/giantess" fantasy.

Ohman should have known better. That said, he's an eminently talented and successful cartoonist, and I'm sure his career will survive. Political Cartoonists tend to offend people on a regular basis, for all sorts of reasons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #2)

Mon Jun 1, 2015, 10:46 AM

12. Ya know, the more I think about it, he may have been...

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?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TreasonousBastard (Original post)

Sun May 31, 2015, 06:03 AM

3. I agree on what you think he's trying to convey.

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TreasonousBastard (Original post)

Sun May 31, 2015, 07:14 AM

4. I agree with you.

 

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TreasonousBastard (Original post)

Sun May 31, 2015, 09:53 AM

5. I am constantly amazed...

 

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JayhawkSD (Reply #5)

Mon Jun 1, 2015, 10:50 AM

13. I plead guilty to starting an unnecessary thread ove this...

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!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TreasonousBastard (Original post)

Sun May 31, 2015, 10:24 AM

6. Jury results...

 

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #6)

Mon Jun 1, 2015, 10:59 AM

14. Does this remind you of the...

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."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TreasonousBastard (Reply #14)

Mon Jun 1, 2015, 04:19 PM

17. Golden BB tactic

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.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TreasonousBastard (Original post)

Sun May 31, 2015, 12:53 PM

7. What an eye opening thread that was

Some people have some real imagination.

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TreasonousBastard (Original post)

Sun May 31, 2015, 04:09 PM

9. Looks normal.

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

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TreasonousBastard (Original post)

Mon Jun 1, 2015, 09:29 AM

10. I didn't like it because it was diminutive of Sanders. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #10)

Mon Jun 1, 2015, 02:55 PM

16. Diminution is the happy hour of political cartoons.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread