« Today's puzzler | Main | Did that mob look familiar? »
Thursday, 28 August 2008
Robert's 'sexist' cartoon
Robert's in trouble now! He mentioned to me a few minutes ago the negative attention his cartoon from yesterday about Hillary and Barack has garnered, particularly on a blog called "Feminist Law Professors."
That blog took time out from considering "Which Wine Should I Bring To A Party At My Dean’s House?," a post that demonstrates at least a sense of humor of a sort, to bristle over "Political 'Humor' in the South Carolina MSM," which features Robert's cartoon. It was filed under the category, "Sexism in the Media."
Key commentary from that blog:
That’s the same cartoonist that produced this and this and this and this.
Now I invite your commentary...
Posted by Brad Warthen at 03:57 PM in 2008 Presidential, Barack Obama, Blogosphere, Elections, Feedback, Hillary Clinton, Media, Talk amongst yourselves, The State, Women
Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4ea353ef00e554b442878834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Robert's 'sexist' cartoon:
» Xanax overdose. from What happens when you crush xanax xr.
Generic xanax no prescription. Xanax. Generic xanax 2 mg no prescription. Xanax class action. Xanax cocktail. [Read More]
Tracked on Sep 15, 2009 11:39:58 PM
Comments
By the way, the author of the blog is Ann Bartow, who describes herself as a professor of Law at the University of South Carolina School of Law, in Columbia.
Her blog's stated purpose is "to build a stronger community of feminist law professors across geography, law schools, and scholarly subject areas. Every feminist law professor is a unique individual, and nothing about her life, views or work should be presumed from her presence in the blogroll, other than that she considers herself a feminist."
Posted by: Brad Warthen | Aug 28, 2008 4:57:37 PM
What's sexist about it? "Release" hell on him!!!
Posted by: SC Hillacrat | Aug 28, 2008 5:25:12 PM
Don't actually see word "sexist" used in the post, could you maybe be projecting? Or just trying to heap abusive scorn on anybody who dares challenge you in any way, as usual? Hey, purged all the female reporters at The State yet? Or just almost? Better get busy, there are still a couple left...
Posted by: reader | Aug 28, 2008 5:32:26 PM
P.S.
When Robert does my much requested remake of this one (the 6/11/08 one):
http://ariail.thestateonline.com/?p=315
and "Nutclackers" are mass-marketed
and Reverend Jackson isn't offended by racism or sexism...
THEN the Female Law Professors Guild can chime in!!!!!!!
Posted by: SC Hillacrat | Aug 28, 2008 5:34:01 PM
How dare anyone criticize Arial???? He's genuine "out" Southern racist, a vanishing breed.
Posted by: yeah lets get them fired! | Aug 28, 2008 5:38:29 PM
Of course, Bamy could be sexually offended by the Nutclackers promo - but, it really IS all about BAMY!!!!!!
Posted by: SC Hillacrat | Aug 28, 2008 5:45:32 PM
"reader," Robert told me he had been accused of being "sexist" (prompting him to come into my office and say "Sexist? It's not sexist! Why is it sexist?" etc.). I was going to attribute that to him, but then I saw that the critical post had been filed under the heading "Sexism in the Media."
So "sexist" wasn't exactly a leap of assumption on my part.
Posted by: Brad Warthen | Aug 28, 2008 6:03:04 PM
Of course, there weren't too many women around to ask if it was "sexist." being as you have aggressively purged most of them from The State, right?
Posted by: reader | Aug 28, 2008 6:13:39 PM
Anyways, how could depicting Hillary's delegates as violent KKK types about to lynch Obama possibly be sexist?
Posted by: Not a fan of Robert "the First Amendment for Me But Not For Thee" Ariail | Aug 28, 2008 6:39:39 PM
There is a cook, gardener, athlete, and senior citizen -- who happen to be of the female gender. How do you get to KKK from there? Lynching, yes. KKK, no.
Posted by: SC Hillacrat | Aug 28, 2008 6:59:48 PM
The FLP blog is absolutely right. The cartoon presents Hillary voters as hysterical, out of control, unattractive women who will try to harm Obama. Satire is fine, but if the State newspaper wants to traffic in these types of offensive images they should be prepared to hear from the many SC citizens who will be offended. If your paper promotes sexism be prepared to defend sexism.
Posted by: concerned sc woman | Aug 28, 2008 7:56:49 PM
Ariail should accept the implicit compliment that criticism from these folks brings.
Feminist theory is as valid a theory in science as is the notion that unidentified flying objects (UFOs) are extraterrestrial in origin. In other words, while there are folks who truly believe in the theory, there’s no evidence that stands up to outside scrutiny, it’s quite difficult to engage adherents in a calm discussion, but it does prevent true-believers from working in productive private enterprises and off the streets where they might ruin the economy.
Unlike environmentalists, these gals (okay, there are some guys, but I don’t usually drink beer and play pool with them, nor they with me) can make no claim to benefitting society. Even the greenies can claim -- proof is another matter -- that their efforts have made the sewers smell sweeter or the skies cleaner.
The feminists can claim what? That they’ve tried to use politics to rig the free market so that females working in administrative positions get paid equal to firefighters? They’ve used Title IX to reduce the number of sports available to males, and have succeeded in increasing the percentage of females in college passed 50%. Why That’s Fantastic!
That one blog entry should have been re-titled “Which Whine Should I Bring To A Party At My Dean’s House?”.
Posted by: Mike Cakora | Aug 28, 2008 7:57:07 PM
Is that what they always mean by WTF?!?!?
Too sweet!
Posted by: Anon. | Aug 28, 2008 8:27:21 PM
Anon --
What else could WTF mean other than "Why That's Fantastic?
Heck, it’s even a category on my blog.
Posted by: Mike Cakora | Aug 28, 2008 9:45:21 PM
I recall seeing an editorial cartoon featuring Bill and Obama: Obama is hit from a thrown frying pan and Bill says "I would duck when she gets mad." I don't remember if the cartoonist was Arial. I saw it on Daryl Cagle's website (www.cagle.com).
Posted by: Ralph Hightower | Aug 29, 2008 5:39:15 AM
I found the cartoon neither offensive nor funny. And it didn't make much of a point either. This is really much ado about nothing.
Posted by: bud | Aug 29, 2008 7:19:21 AM
No wonder he is an Ariail fan...
Posted by: Mike Cakora appears from his blog to be a white supremacist | Aug 29, 2008 8:47:29 AM
Sheesh.
Me, a white supremacist? Heck, I’ve never even burned a question mark on a Unitarian’s front lawn…
I truly admire the courage of the anonymous slander and do so appreciate the intelligence and energy employed in making the case.
I’m more than willing to engage in a battle of wits, but not with the unnamed and unarmed.
BTW, when you posted your comment, you left behind your IP address.
Posted by: Mike Cakora | Aug 29, 2008 9:37:02 AM
Ann Bartow...just goes to prove #24 on Rush Limabugh's Undeniable Truths: Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women access to the mainstream of society.
Seriously Ann, get a life, stop taking things so seriously. Then again, please keep talking. You provide some humor in this dark world...
Posted by: buster | Aug 29, 2008 10:07:51 AM
wow, that last post by buster took the level of discourse to a brand new low. imho, ad hominen comments about another individual's appearance have no place in discussions among adults.
Posted by: ssk | Sep 2, 2008 9:46:20 PM
