On Liberal Contempt Toward Conservatives
I know there has been, and probably will be, much ado made about alleged liberal elitism, and how we apparently look down our noses at "flyover country" (a.k.a., "middle America", "real America", "Jesusland").
But did it ever occur to people that it's not always simple, evil contempt? Did it ever occur to anyone that there might be a reason?
In 2008, for instance, many of the same conservatives who ravaged Hillary Clinton throughout her years in the White House, tenure in the Senate, and presidential primary run suddenly cried foul when people started laughing at GOP vice-presidential candidate and then Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. Apparently, by conservative standards, it's only sexism if a conservative woman happens to be laughed at for being a complete idiot. And, come on, even that is mildly humorous in itself.
In 2010, it was Christine O'Donnell, to say the least. I'm sorry, but just how do we conclude that, when laughing at a woman who argued that women are there to serve their husbands sexually, the reason we're laughing must be that we hate women? Mice with fully-functional human brains? She has special clearance above that of the President of the United States? She doesn't even know what the First Amendment means? Her primary victory was one of a few that cost Republicans majority control of the United States Senate? Obviously, we must be laughing—the only reason we could be laughing—is because we hate women.
Anyway, speaking of hating women ... er, actually, that's ... I mean ... okay, let's just cut to the excerpts.
Michael Reagan, conservative radio host and son of former President Ronald Reagan, published an article that is rather hard to figure. Some highlights:
See, here's the thing: I'm laughing. It's a ridiculous argument: We can save the American concept of family by sticking women back in the kitchen where they belong.
Now, some might think it wrong of me—you know, elitist, snotty toward "real Americans"—to laugh, but what are we supposed to think? To the one, Mr. Reagan often presents himself as if he is supposed to be taken seriously. To the other, he publishes what can only be a satire of the political values he claims to represent. So, sure, it's funny.
Because the one thing we cannot conclude, lest we be terrible, elitist prigs, is that Michael Regan really is that stupid and chauvinist. He wants a parent in the kitchen, then he should learn to cook and get his ass in there.
No, really. Are we really supposed to take him seriously? Are we really supposed to think that the slow decay of male supremacy in our society is destroying not only American families, but the nation itself?
It reminds me of Eric Cartman. ("You get your bitch ass back in the kitchen, and make me some pie!")
And, yeah, after a while, hearing these sorts of arguments on a regular basis, some might start to think conservatives are actually serious about this sort of stuff. And yes, they'll probably start to hold such ideas—and the people who promote them—in contempt.
____________________
Notes:
Reagan, Michael. "Kitchen is not a Dirty Word". The Cagle Post. December 17, 2010. Blog.Cagle.com.. December 17, 2010. http://blog.cagle.com/2010/12/17/kitchen-is-not-a-dirty-word/
I know there has been, and probably will be, much ado made about alleged liberal elitism, and how we apparently look down our noses at "flyover country" (a.k.a., "middle America", "real America", "Jesusland").
But did it ever occur to people that it's not always simple, evil contempt? Did it ever occur to anyone that there might be a reason?
In 2008, for instance, many of the same conservatives who ravaged Hillary Clinton throughout her years in the White House, tenure in the Senate, and presidential primary run suddenly cried foul when people started laughing at GOP vice-presidential candidate and then Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. Apparently, by conservative standards, it's only sexism if a conservative woman happens to be laughed at for being a complete idiot. And, come on, even that is mildly humorous in itself.
In 2010, it was Christine O'Donnell, to say the least. I'm sorry, but just how do we conclude that, when laughing at a woman who argued that women are there to serve their husbands sexually, the reason we're laughing must be that we hate women? Mice with fully-functional human brains? She has special clearance above that of the President of the United States? She doesn't even know what the First Amendment means? Her primary victory was one of a few that cost Republicans majority control of the United States Senate? Obviously, we must be laughing—the only reason we could be laughing—is because we hate women.
Anyway, speaking of hating women ... er, actually, that's ... I mean ... okay, let's just cut to the excerpts.
Michael Reagan, conservative radio host and son of former President Ronald Reagan, published an article that is rather hard to figure. Some highlights:
• "Our moms are being all but ostracized by a raging cadre of radical feminists should they dare to consider cooking for their families to be a major part of their traditional role as wives and mothers."
• "In modern America, the feminists would take Mom out of the kitchen and put her in the drive-thru lane at the local fast-food chain (ironically, that’s verboten also)."
• "If mothers would once again start teaching their daughters the time-honored role of family chef, and fathers would make sure that their wives are honored and cherished for making the kitchen one of their principal domains, we’d be a lot better off."
• "Instead we have a First Lady who sees her role as First Mother not only to instruct us on what we victuals we should eat, but warns us that the menu at the local fast food emporium is the diet from Hell."
• "If she and her fellow radical feminists would devote more time to praising and defending the produce farmers and retailers bring us, and less time playing the role as diet dictators, meals would be family celebrations instead of burdensome chores for the moms who cook them."
• "Moreover, giving Mom a day off from cooking dinner by a making a family trip to the nearest hamburger joint would be seen as a gift to her rather than one of the mortal sins in an imaginary list of dietary commandments."
• "A happy home is one in which moms teach their daughters how to cook tasty meals for their future families and dads teach their sons that one of their roles in family life is drying the dishes and otherwise doing chores around the house to lighten Mom’s burdens."
• "Finally, women should understand and act on the time-honored truth that the fastest route to a man’s heart is through his stomach, and not always through the drive-in window at the nearest fast-food restaurant. That’s one way we can begin to put the family — and America — back together."
• "In modern America, the feminists would take Mom out of the kitchen and put her in the drive-thru lane at the local fast-food chain (ironically, that’s verboten also)."
• "If mothers would once again start teaching their daughters the time-honored role of family chef, and fathers would make sure that their wives are honored and cherished for making the kitchen one of their principal domains, we’d be a lot better off."
• "Instead we have a First Lady who sees her role as First Mother not only to instruct us on what we victuals we should eat, but warns us that the menu at the local fast food emporium is the diet from Hell."
• "If she and her fellow radical feminists would devote more time to praising and defending the produce farmers and retailers bring us, and less time playing the role as diet dictators, meals would be family celebrations instead of burdensome chores for the moms who cook them."
• "Moreover, giving Mom a day off from cooking dinner by a making a family trip to the nearest hamburger joint would be seen as a gift to her rather than one of the mortal sins in an imaginary list of dietary commandments."
• "A happy home is one in which moms teach their daughters how to cook tasty meals for their future families and dads teach their sons that one of their roles in family life is drying the dishes and otherwise doing chores around the house to lighten Mom’s burdens."
• "Finally, women should understand and act on the time-honored truth that the fastest route to a man’s heart is through his stomach, and not always through the drive-in window at the nearest fast-food restaurant. That’s one way we can begin to put the family — and America — back together."
See, here's the thing: I'm laughing. It's a ridiculous argument: We can save the American concept of family by sticking women back in the kitchen where they belong.
Now, some might think it wrong of me—you know, elitist, snotty toward "real Americans"—to laugh, but what are we supposed to think? To the one, Mr. Reagan often presents himself as if he is supposed to be taken seriously. To the other, he publishes what can only be a satire of the political values he claims to represent. So, sure, it's funny.
Because the one thing we cannot conclude, lest we be terrible, elitist prigs, is that Michael Regan really is that stupid and chauvinist. He wants a parent in the kitchen, then he should learn to cook and get his ass in there.
No, really. Are we really supposed to take him seriously? Are we really supposed to think that the slow decay of male supremacy in our society is destroying not only American families, but the nation itself?
It reminds me of Eric Cartman. ("You get your bitch ass back in the kitchen, and make me some pie!")
And, yeah, after a while, hearing these sorts of arguments on a regular basis, some might start to think conservatives are actually serious about this sort of stuff. And yes, they'll probably start to hold such ideas—and the people who promote them—in contempt.
____________________
Notes:
Reagan, Michael. "Kitchen is not a Dirty Word". The Cagle Post. December 17, 2010. Blog.Cagle.com.. December 17, 2010. http://blog.cagle.com/2010/12/17/kitchen-is-not-a-dirty-word/
