Ludicrous Logic
There’s new criticism about Rush Limbaugh’s verbal assault on Sandra Fluke. Pundits are arguing that because Limbaugh attacked a private citizen, rather than a public figure with the means to fight back, his comments are especially unfair.
The logic is troubling. Pundits are essentially saying that if you are a public figure, and you are a woman, you should expect this kind of language. People are going to call you sexist names; it’s all part of the game, right? Wrong.
Name It. Change It. praises Washington Post Op-Ed writer Erik Kemple for pointing this out. There are no caveats for an attack like this. People like Nancy Pelosi and Sarah Palin may be able to withstand the criticism, but that doesn’t make it right. That’s like saying they asked for it. When a woman chooses to enter a public debate – the way Fluke did – should she prepare for a barrage of sexist slander to follow?
Public figures should expect more scrutiny and accountability, Kemple explains, but not more sexism.
“From there, however, it’s a leap to assert that misogyny is somehow more okay when dealing with Sarah Palin (massive public figure) than with Sandra Fluke (once-private figure now emerging as a public figure).”
Kemple points out the double standard: women weighing a run for office must consider the fact that they’ll endure this kind of language; men will not.
Finally, Kemple takes Limbaugh and Bill Maher – who weighed in on this debate – to task for the way they speak about women in general and recommends two things the highly paid members of the “media-entertainment complex” can do.
“One is to refrain from using misogynic terms when referring to private women. Two – and this may be pushing things – is to refrain from using misogynic terms when referring to public women, including Sarah Palin.”
Right on, Erik! When you attack one woman, you attack all women.
Published by Kate McCarthy on 03/16/2012