Ann Coulter lives under a bridge...

[LunarSage]

Kinda not funny.

Why?  It's the same basic attitude that this woman seems to have.  Was my sarcasm not obvious?   ???

[Trieste]

Because first of all there are echoes of "This country hates the straight white man" rants that have popped up from time to time, which makes it come across as the "ha ha only serious" kind of 'joking'. Second of all, Coulter's expressed views are pretty reprehensible, and emulating them even in jest is really not a very funny joke.

[Lux12]

I've adopted the stance that she's not even a conservative, she's just mentally ill and in desperate need of therapy and or medication lately. Her views are just insane.

[LunarSage]

Because first of all there are echoes of "This country hates the straight white man" rants that have popped up from time to time, which makes it come across as the "ha ha only serious" kind of 'joking'. Second of all, Coulter's expressed views are pretty reprehensible, and emulating them even in jest is really not a very funny joke.

I disagree entirely... but for the sake of civility I will refrain from further comment.

[Trieste]

Well, to be clear, I'm not sure that's what you intended, sure, but intent and interpretation are two different things.

[Shjade]

Women have influenced politics loooooong before being allowed the vote. She's a reasonably attractive woman talking about politics - there are men bound to listen to her.

This.

Also, have you listened to some of the people who get on the air to talk politics? If freaking Joe the Plumber can be a thing, I'm sure women would still be on the air to voice their opinions regardless of whether or not they themselves could vote.

[Lux12]

This.

Also, have you listened to some of the people who get on the air to talk politics? If freaking Joe the Plumber can be a thing, I'm sure women would still be on the air to voice their opinions regardless of whether or not they themselves could vote.

Indeed. The problem with this country is that we listen to and worship celebrities as if they are divine authority. We can and will make a celebrity of anyone, and then people will listen to them.

[gaggedLouise]

As for revoking the 19th amendment (women's right to vote), going the easy way here and quoting the Wikipedia article on AC. Wiki can be inaccurate for sure but at least these statements are well cited - look up the article for the inline citations at the section Political activities and commentary:

She mostly serves as a political pundit, sometimes creating controversy ranging from rowdy uprisings at some of the colleges where she speaks to protracted discussions in the media. Time magazine's John Cloud once observed that Coulter "likes to shock reporters by wondering aloud whether America might be better off if women lost the right to vote.". This was in reference to her statement that "it would be a much better country if women did not vote. That is simply a fact. In fact, in every presidential election since 1950—except Goldwater in '64—the Republican would have won, if only the men had voted.". Similarly, in an October 2007 interview with the New York Observer, Coulter said:

"If we took away women's right to vote, we'd never have to worry about another Democrat president. It's kind of a pipe dream, it's a personal fantasy of mine, but I don't think it's going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women.
It also makes the point, it is kind of embarrassing, the Democratic Party ought to be hanging its head in shame, that it has so much difficulty getting men to vote for it. I mean, you do see it's the party of women and 'We'll pay for health care and tuition and day care—and here, what else can we give you, soccer moms?' "

The soccer moms/democrats quote has been around already in this thread, I can see that, but it seems to make the point that she casts certain large groups of society and their voting muscle as parasitical in themselves: they are voting and acting the way they do because they want to be cranky whiners and get pampered by the state.

For the record, her arguments are being borrowed outside of the U.S. too. She's making this trick quick stopper argument that if citizens, activists, artists or members of a profession are advancing a new issue, or pitching a reform of something, trying to get the question into the wider political arena - a pitched issue of which they can't, as individuals here and now, cover the entire cost for getting it through into law, or for keeping it going once it has become law, then they are hypocrite morons (as soon as they want to get it to mainstream attention and galvanize a movement around those issues) and represent only a parasite interest. While the lobbying power of big business behind the scenes or tv channels doing "news" with an agenda wouldn't represent any kind of partisan interest, see, they have the money to advance their issues, it's their money (um, though it might just as likely be loaned at a friendly bank or the fruit of rogue business practises) so they are in the right! Now, that one's been widely copied and I'd say she's a direct source for it. You could see it as a move of self-interest too: that kind of idea of what the rules of the game should look like helps punditism of course, it makes the talk pundits and PR agents prime players.

[Chris Brady]

Because first of all there are echoes of "This country hates the straight white man" rants that have popped up from time to time, which makes it come across as the "ha ha only serious" kind of 'joking'. Second of all, Coulter's expressed views are pretty reprehensible, and emulating them even in jest is really not a very funny joke.

Bold: It does, but that's only because it's the current fad.  It's always 'cool' to be against 'The Man', a fictional monolithic entity out to repress whatever rights you (the general you, not anyone specific) believe are being repressed.

Or rather, it's the newest group to be part of 'The Man'.  Corporations, the Government (and I'm talking ANY country's gov), you're local grocery chain, whatever cultural, racial, religious minority you believe is in 'power', whatever.

Because humans always need a 'Them' to focus on for whatever it is.  Right now it's minorities vs. 'The White Man', it'll change when the next cultural focus someone with a microphone (AKA Internet) decides to spend their time persecuting.

[Lux12]

Bold: It does, but that's only because it's the current fad.  It's always 'cool' to be against 'The Man', a fictional monolithic entity out to repress whatever rights you (the general you, not anyone specific) believe are being repressed.

Or rather, it's the newest group to be part of 'The Man'.  Corporations, the Government (and I'm talking ANY country's gov), you're local grocery chain, whatever cultural, racial, religious minority you believe is in 'power', whatever.

Because humans always need a 'Them' to focus on for whatever it is.  Right now it's minorities vs. 'The White Man', it'll change when the next cultural focus someone with a microphone (AKA Internet) decides to spend their time persecuting.

The oppressed seek to rise above their status and those in power continue to try and oppress those considered the other to maintain their privilege. It's a story as old as civilization itself. The man is no fiction, but rather a word used to refer to the collective institutions, norms, attitudes, and individuals used to hold a group deemed the other by society down, and these are very real.

[Trieste]

The oppressed seek to rise above their status and those in power continue to try and oppress those considered the other to maintain their privilege. It's a story as old as civilization itself. The man is no fiction, but rather a word used to refer to the collective institutions, norms, attitudes, and individuals used to hold a group deemed the other by society down, and these are very real.

That's a good way of putting it. Loss of privilege does not equal oppression. *shrug*

[LunarSage]

Society doesn't hate the straight white man... it hates the rich straight white man.  What I take exception to is the current popular generalizing belief that just by being a straight, white male, success and money will rain down upon you.  That's absolute bullshit and I resent being lumped in with the 1% because of my gender, ethnicity and sexuality.  I actually have more in common with many minorities based on nothing but the fact that I'm poor rather than racial differences.  To many however, that doesn't matter.  I'm a straight, white man... I'm apparently part of the problem.  Nevermind that I'm living month to month with no ability to save.  I am by no stretch of the imagination rich.  Nevermind that I'm disabled and can't work. 

I'm still waiting for the magical success that's supposed to be mine by simple virtue of being white.

[Trieste]

It's not a difference between rich and poor, but more a leg up in how you're treated.

Minorities are still more likely to be stopped and searched on the road.

Minorities are still more likely to be arrested.

Minorities are more likely to be placed on death row and have higher execution rates, especially if their victim is non-minority (i.e. if the victim is white).

I'm not going to go chasing down a dozen million sources that people probably won't read, but minorities (especially minority women) are more likely to be on social assistance, were more likely to be single parents at least until the 90s (haven't checked the statistics lately), and there is evidence that minorities receive some of the worst medical benefits as a group in the country.

I'm not saying that it doesn't suck to live paycheck to paycheck, but do be aware that you're at least less likely to be harassed by bored cops, thrown in jail, investigated by Social Services, and so on and so forth. Just because you don't feel privileged doesn't mean you don't have privileges that you take for granted.

[LunarSage]

Granted, but people act as though life is somehow "easy mode" if you're a SWM.  I strongly disagree.  It depends on your circumstances.  I refuse to have a broad stroke of generalization applied to me or anyone else based on race.  No one in progressive areas of society would tolerate doing so to a minority, but it's far more acceptable in those areas to discriminate against SWMs due to some fucked up "they have it coming" mentality at worst and "there's no such thing as bigotry toward a straight white male" in many cases.  Just because I'm straight, white and male doesn't invalidate my right to be offended when bigotry is directed at me (yes I realize it's less common, but it does happen).

[Trieste]

The very fact that you have the luxury (and audacity!) to declare that you refuse to be painted by the brush of your race is part of the proof. Compared to the fourteen year old juvenile being tried as an adult and put away for the majority of his life, that is easy mode!

Your righteous indignation hat is blocking your empathy beams!  >:(

[LunarSage]

Because I've had everything in life handed to me due to the color of my skin.  Right.

Whatever.  I refuse to be made to feel guilty about my ethnicity.

Nevertheless, you're beginning to take this to a level beyond civility... so I'm going to walk away.

[Trieste]

It was an attempt to add some humor.

It's not a case of feeling guilty - it's a case of feeling positive. Your ethnicity (and sexuality, and gender) brings with it privilege that others are aspiring to. Rather than seeing them as bringing you down, wouldn't it be more positive to look at it as lifting everyone up to the same level?

Because I've had everything in life handed to me due to the color of my skin.  Right.

I never said this. I said you're essentially in easy mode because you don't stand at risk to lose your liberty or your life more easily. Do you see the difference?

[LunarSage]

It was an attempt to add some humor.

It's not a case of feeling guilty - it's a case of feeling positive. Your ethnicity (and sexuality, and gender) brings with it privilege that others are aspiring to. Rather than seeing them as bringing you down, wouldn't it be more positive to look at it as lifting everyone up to the same level?

I never said this. I said you're essentially in easy mode because you don't stand at risk to lose your liberty or your life more easily. Do you see the difference?

It's all good, Trieste. 

I've come across people who do take it to the extremes though, and that's all I'm saying.  I've met people (minorities and non minorities) who's goal has seemed to be to make me feel guilty about being white, or straight, or a man.  My point is that's just as wrong as persecuting a minority... but it seems like often (in non racist areas), bigotry towards a SWM is not only acceptable, it's secretly applauded by many.  I'm not saying you're doing this... but it happens and it's really not fair in my opinion.

I try to judge people based on their actions and personality rather than gender, ethnicity or sexual preference (I have prejudices too, just like everyone else... that can't be helped, but it can be worked on).  I think in a perfect world we could all judge each other based on the individual.

I do see what you're saying, but do you at least marginally see my point?

[Torch]

The following is an excerpt from a Washington Post Opinion page written by Jonathan Capehart, an African-American journalist who also appears as a contributor to MSNBC:

One of the burdens of being a black male is carrying the heavy weight of other people’s suspicions. One minute you’re going about your life, the next you could be pleading for it, if you’re lucky. And far too many aren’t.

You’ve heard me talk about the conversation my mom had with me before my first day at a predominantly white school. Reading about Trayvon reminded me of the list of the “don’ts” I received after my sheltered existence in Hazlet, N.J., was replaced with the reality of Newark when my mother remarried in the 1980s.

    “Don’t run in public.” Lest someone think you’re suspicious.

    “Don’t run while carrying anything in your hands.” Lest someone think you stole something.

    “Don’t talk back to the police.” Lest you give them a reason to take you to jail or worse

There was also being mindful that you are being watched in stores. Watched turned to followed as I got older. To this day, if a sales person is overly attentive to what I might be looking for I leave the store. Never to return. And then there was keeping a distance of deniability from white women when walking on the street. Lest you be accused of any number of offenses, from trying to snatch her purse to sexual assault.

In the early 1990s, I saw a T-shirt for sale on Canal Street in New York that neatly and bluntly summed up my frustration with this situation: “No white lady I don't want your purse.”

I believe the point Trieste is trying to make is that as a white man, you will never have to have this sort of conversation with your son. You will have no need for the T-shirt with the caption reading "No white lady, I don't want your purse".

That is the essence of "white privilege". Simply by the virtue of the color of your skin, and for no other reason (not class, not education, not social standing, not economic standing) you are exempt from the type of stereotypes that plague black men. It is an undeniable fact.

[Torch]

  I think in a perfect world we could all judge each other based on the individual.

Of course we could.

But none of us live in that world. We live in this one, the imperfect one.

[LunarSage]

The following is an excerpt from a Washington Post Opinion page written by Jonathan Capehart, an African-American journalist who also appears as a contributor to MSNBC:


I believe the point Trieste is trying to make is that as a white man, you will never have to have this sort of conversation with your son. You will have no need for the T-shirt with the caption reading "No white lady, I don't want your purse".

That is the essence of "white privilege". Simply by the virtue of the color of your skin, and for no other reason (not class, not education, not social standing, not economic standing) you are exempt from the type of stereotypes that plague black men. It is an undeniable fact.

I'm really not arguing that, though.

Yes, I agree with every bit of the above... but it still doesn't make the (admittedly rarer) cases of bigotry and assumptions regarding SWMs ok in my opinion.  It's apples and oranges.

[Torch]

I'm really not arguing that, though.

I know, you were arguing this:

I'm still waiting for the magical success that's supposed to be mine by simple virtue of being white.

You don't get "magical success". What you do get is freedom from automatic suspicion. Big difference.

[LunarSage]

I know, you were arguing this:

You don't get "magical success". What you do get is freedom from automatic suspicion. Big difference.

I've seen articles and arguments where some people genuinely believe that being a SWM is an instant ticket to success and money, as though every SWM in the country is a Kennedy or something.  All I'm saying is that's not true.

I realize that you and Trieste and many others weren't implying that... but I've run into it often enough that I felt the need to address it.

[auroraChloe]

Ms Coulter was recently UNINVITED to speak at/to College Republicans at Fordham University.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/11/13/fordham-college-republicans-rescind-invitation/


i find her attempts to redefine 'retard' as loser rather disingenuous.  she knows exactly what she meant when she tweeted it in reference to the President and is now pathetically backpedaling.  ([noembed]saw on a recent Piers Morgan show[/noembed])

i wouldn't doubt Bill Maher bangs her, though... after inserting a nice n' snug ball gag.   :o 

[Shjade]

*watches Piers Morgan clip*

Ann Coulter: "I don't believe it is a racist country." - regarding racism in the U.S.A.

*facepalm*