Morelike blowback.

It's been pretty dismal being a woman lately.

I for one am sick of the pervasive anti woman attitude on MSNBC (aka Misogynist Sexist National Boys Network). Watching MSNBC feels like sitting in a men's locker room or a frat party. The network is so redolent of testosterone it stinks.

Look at the names heading up all big shows: Christopher, Keith, Joe, Tucker, Tim, Brian. No diversity in that line up. Political analysis and commentary is left almost exclusively to white men.

MSNBC has few, if any, women of power or position. That explains why we are bombarded with snide sexist comments. The men at MSNBC just don't get it.

Matthews may be unique in his view that New Yorkers are more compassionate than the rest of America. Most Americans vote self interest not pity. Matthew's was forced to make an apology. He failed. Instead of an apology viewers heard a rambling self reverent whine.

Now David Shuster opines in smug frat boy parlance that the Clinton's pimp their daughter. Shuster didn't accuse Romney of pimping his sons. Suspending Shuster is not good enough. MSNBC needs to change its anti women policy and performers.
jd

You are exactly right. MSNBC is like a frat party, of course, that is, if you have never been to a frat party to see what one is like. Your trade in tired male stereotypes is disgusting and bigoted. I would be offended if I were a frat guy, as is I am just saddened.

Misogyny is no big deal? Objecting to misogyny is disgusting and bigoted and tired? Women are just ignorant when they get upset at sexist attitudes?

More broadly, the left needs to back away from the idea that the media is always out to get us.

That would be a lot more persuasive in a context where a newscaster wasn't using language borrowed from the 'bitches and hos' lexicon of Gangsta rap to talk about a female politician and her daughter.

You may be right, the media may not "always be out to get" the left. But sure as shooting they were taking a stab at women here, and misogyny of various sorts has been a staple, particularly of Clinton's coverage.

So, can I suggest you take your head out your ass and have a look around. Or at least look at the actual case?

It doesn't serve us well to become insular and immune from criticism by claiming that we are under constant siege from the media. Such a line of thought just doesn't help advance left wing policies in the end.

Well, maybe barbecuing a few hack journalists will make "pimping" and "vaginal-Americans" and "castrating bitch" as unacceptable as race based language. If so, I'm all for it.

And frankly, your argument that we should give the media a pass hasn't been adopted by the right wing which squeals like a stuck pig at the slightest affront... with the result the the media adopts their language and bends over backwards to avoid offending them.

Maybe the left should launch a few volleys against the media. They sure as hell aren't doing us any favours.

That Shuster felt he could make the "pimp" remark
should tell you something about MSNBC and the MSM, especially how they comment on anything Clinton. Look, maybe Shuster was simply following the lead of Matthews and Tucker.

As others have pointed out, Shuster and his ilk would never make that comment about a Republican's family.

By the way, in Shuster's two apologies he didn't mention the words "pimping out."

I think Shuster's e-mail remarks about reporters not being granted access to Chelsea are valid, if they are true. However, the pimp reference seems out of context to that point. Maybe I missed something.

Schuster's choice of words were sexist and I would be furious if they were used in reference to my daughter.

I will, however, cut him some slack because, although he is a regular contributor to MSNBC, he is not usually in the host's chair. It can't be easy being politically correct all the time while maintaining a fast paced conversation on live TV. But it is what is required and he should not be allowed back on air until he proves he can restrain himself.

I don't believe his comment was on a par with Imus' infamous "nappy-headed ho" comment, which, by the way, was made on the same network.

It is more in line with the tasteless comment the Golf Channel commentator made a couple of weeks back about lynching Tiger Wood. I think she was suspended for a couple of weeks.

Both remarks reflect an underlying societal prejudice but I would not charge that the commentators who made them are racist or sexist based on their offhand remarks.

Finally, I don't think Hillary would have dropped out of the Feb. 26 debate. A campaign that is reportedly struggling for funds can't turn its back on that kind of exposure.

Oh, and one last thing. MSNBC is heavily weighted towards the male point of view in prime time. Most of the women mentioned in one of the comments above appear during the day......And that's of course because the programming execs must think there are so many housewives at home who are tuned in while they use GE products to do the house work.

For another view , here's Jane Hamsher at
Firedoglake.

"And on that awkward segue, I'll bring up the latest contretemps -- comments made by David Shuster to the effect that Chelsea Clinton was being "pimped out" by the campaign. It may surprise everyone but I actually wasn't bothered by them. The phrase is ubiquitous, I use it all the time and although it is a loaded term my initial impression was that in the wake of all the truly awful sexist stuff that's come down the pipeline from MSNBC over the course of this campaign, much of which I have personally railed about, this just didn't fall into that category."

She goes on to give a recent example of using "pimped" herself and being surprised when friends complained. Basically ,in my words not hers, she thinks that in general discourse the word has evolved into something different from its original usage. Sort of like "homely" changing to mean ugly instead of domestic.

Anyway you can read her yourself.

What do I think personally ? I was offended. If HRC-for whom I didn't vote- is now exploiting it, fair enough. And that word apart I disagree with Shuster's overall point that HRC is over using.

Unlike every other candidate? Come on.

AOBTW I have an indelible memory of the 19 year old Chelsea- after Bill admitted his affair with Monica- walking to the helicopter holding the hands of the parents who were a foot on either side of her but were otherwise a million miles apart.

Good for her family. Good for the Democrats.
Sad that she was forced into that role,
admirable that she performed it so well.

I resent anyone who would hurt her.

P.S. I'm not suggesting for a second that Josh Marshall is condoning what Shuster did. I absolutely do not believe that. I just don't follow the distinction you have made between racist words directed at African Americans and sexist words directed at women.

I think you're out of touch. People talk about pimping their cars when they augment them in some way. It's a term that's passed 'way beyond its original meaning. As a verb, it now means to beautify or augment something to make it more appealing to others.

Actually, Hillary's campaign is "pimping" Hillary's candidacy by using the popular and appealing Chelsea as a representative. Though I agree that this whats-his-name is obviously a Clinton-hayer, this is really not any worse than any of many of the race-baitings about Obama that have come from Hillary and Bill.

For the record, the term "pimp" and "pimping" has been moving into mainstream language from the subculture of gangster rap. Gangster rap reduces all women to 'bitches and ho's, and is obsessed with male prowess and potency and material acquisition. Women in Gangsta rap have no identity and no worth except as objects to be used as commodities 'ho's' and even the slightest resistance to this commodification warrants contempt 'bitches.'

In the world of Gangster Rap, money and ostentatious material goods are the measures of success and masculinity. Thus the emphasis on possessions - diamond studs or gold inlays in teeth (grills), extravagant jewelry and clothing (gear), and of course women 'ho's'.

In this subculture, the 'pimp' is an elevated figure. The 'pimp' is of course, a master of 'ho's' and therefore has elevated sexual and financial/material potency. More than that, the pimp ostentatiously displays his wealth and potency, in clothes, in his vehicle, in his possessions.

Thus 'pimping' becomes synonymous with tasteless or extraordinary extravagance as well as sexual use. In some circumstances its commensurate with extravagant or excessive exploitation, with of course, the sexual aspect as a distinct undertone used to add a dimension of intensity of flavour to the metaphor or symbol.

This is the context in which it enters the mainstream language.

The fact that there's a TV show called "Pimp my Ride" doesn't make it a normal and commonplace word. In American culture automobiles are often highly sexualized - if you doubt that go and watch 20 years of Ford and GM commercials. 'Pimping' a car is essentially displacing sexual display into elaborately or extravagantly overaccessorizing a vehicle. Conceptually, its about six inches from something really and profoundly unsavoury.

Look at it this way: Would you like your daughter dating a young man who brags about 'pimping' his ride, or has it done up explicitly.

"Pimping" or "Pimped" in clothing refers to hyper or extravagant sexualization or ostentation. Thus for the most part, a girl who is "pimped" is generally meant to be dressed like a prostitute or stripper, or is dressed to appear sexually promiscuous or available. For a man to be "pimped" generally means to be dressed extravagantly or garishly - gold, furs, velvet, outrageous colours or patterns.

"Pimping" continues to be synonymous with excessive or extraordinary exploitation. As in "I pimped you, motherf*ck*r", or "my boss is really pimping me." The sexual connotation remains as an intensifier. It's similar to screw or fuck, as in "I screwed this guy in a deal." Or "I got fucked at work."

"Pimp" does not mean dress up or enhance. It definitely does not mean 'to beautify or make appealing to others.' You're thinking of "primp" which is an utterly different word, perhaps a coflation of "prepare" and "improve".

"Pimp" is a nakedly vile and sexist word, which has entered the mainstream from a nakedly vile, vicious, and violent sexist subculture, and its kept all of its ugly baggage. The inherent sexism and misogyny is intact, the inferential sexual and exploitative aspects are intact. And that is exactly the sense in which it was used by Shuster.

I'm not a feminist, but frankly, I'm getting sick and tired of these moronic excuses for sexism and misogyny.

It's been pretty dismal being a woman lately.

It's been pretty dismal being a woman for 5,000 years.

Unfortunately, a Hillary Clinton presidency isn't going to change that much.

It's been pretty dismal being a woman in Iraq for the last 5 years. I'm sure some winger on the boar will tar me as a Saddam-lover for pointing out that the condition of women under Saddam was a hell of a lot better than in many other spots in the Arab and Muslim world. And Bush's and Hillary's war have definitely changed that condition for the worse. Thanks, Hillary. Way to stand up for feminist principles. You go, girl!

To clarify my last comment:

Shuster's comments were disgusting. We've seen a lot of racism and sexism in this campaign, which isn't a bit surprising. We see racism and sexism even when there aren't women and African Americans running.

What I don't want to see happen is HRC turning this into a reason to vote for her, especially on so-called "feminist" principles. She did that in New Hampshire. She shouldn't be allowed to do it again.

Too many feminists (such as Katha Pollitt, Laura Flanders, and Frances Kissling have written at length about why HRC is not the feminst candidate.

It's quite fair to point out the sexism and the racism in the media, in this campaign, and always. It's not fair for HRC to use this to political advantage.

One commenter said, "I wonder how Josh would feel if we went around talking about Pimping his daughter? Or his wife? What do you think the reaction would be if someone accused him of Pimping his mother?

Josh is out of touch on this one, and offensively out of touch...."

Sigh... Comments such as this either:

1. Really don't understand that Schuster's comment wasn't meant literally (in terrible taste, yes, but not meant literally).

2. Or else they do, and they are intentionally twisting the issue for partisan reasons.

TPM is my favorite blog. It's my home page and I read every post immediately. In 2 years, I have never felt compelled to log in and comment but my horror and shame at the comments here has forced me to speak up.

If you're intelligent enough to follow Josh Marshall, you should be intelligent enough to see the patently obvious Karl Rove "wedge issue" technique at play here as Hillary tries to portray herself as the victim of a sexist attack from David Shuster. And you should also see the bigger picture and its implications.

David Shuster is the only MSM figure to take the Valerie Plame saga seriously and he fought tirelessly in the trenches on that story and many others involving the criminal behavior of Rove & Cheney.

David Shuster is no more a sexist than Todd Gitlin is. He's just trying to loosen up his stiff image by trying to be funny. He put his foot in his mouth and he apologized twice and Hillary is still going after his job.

David Shuster's role, like Olbermann's, has changed from impartial journalist to partisan pundit, and the issue behind this is that Shuster is not pro-Hillary.

But why, pray tell, is the most courageous MSM figure in the battle against Rove and Cheney anti-Hillary? And why is Hillary willing to sacrifice him for her little PR stunt?

Where was Hillary during the Plame saga? Hiding. She never once stood up for Valerie Plame, the "fair game wife" whose career as a nuclear non-proliferation expert was ruined by real sexists. What are the chances that Hillary will do anything to expose and undo the historic crimes against democracy that have been committed by the Bush Administration.

And you - all of you - should be ashamed that you're falling for this ridiculous ruse of kicking Shuster when he's down in order to create a divisive wedge issue within the democratic party.

You've all been fooled just as badly as the hapless evangelicals who vote against their jobs and their way of life so they can battle the gay bogeymen that politicians whom Hillary is emulating have created.

Being a white male of almost 60 years you might think that I have a different take on this. I don't. I totally agree with the vast majority of posters, and I do think that if Shuster had worked where I did for almost 30 years(US Post Office), he would have been fired on the spot. I have seen it happen. In my working career, I had women ,black men and women, asian and american Indian supervisors. While I grew up in a mostly white area of the country, I found,both in the militry and the Post office, that it makes no difference what race or gender a person is, the only thing that matters is whether or not that person can do the job assigned, worker, supervisor, whatever. All people should be treated the same. Don't forget that this is the basic policy of both the Military and the Civil Service of both the federal(almost 50% of all supervisory and Post Master jobs belong to women) and state and local governments-I am speaking of course of the professional civil servent, not the political appointees. Its too bad that the same policy does not exist on TV, they could use it.

Earth to TimBob: Shuster is not a sexist. He used inappropriate slang and you're having exactly the PavRovian response that this ruse was designed to create in you.

Other than the etymological root of the slang term "pimp" what is sexist about David Shuster?

If a female realtor sells me a bad adjustable rate mortgage, and I later say "she screwed me", I mean that she cheated me, in spite of the more literal slang connotation of the verb "to screw". I probably wouldn't want to say that on television because you say on television has to meet a much higher linguistic standard and Shuster "screwed up" by violating that standard, but he is by no means a sexist and he's obviously quite bit more progressive and concerned about our democracy that the people here who are losing sight of the larger war to fight this petty battle while the Republicans sit back and guffaw in glee.

CS - With regard to sexual harrassment, I was going to say none of the Clintons is currently employed by MSNBC, but now that I think about it, given General Electric's contributions to Hillary's campaign, I guess they do work for the same boss.

By the way, have any of you on the Shuster witch-hunt even HEARD of Valerie Plame? Or have any idea how tirelessly Shuster pursued that story while Hillary and the rest of the MSM were looking the other way?

Wait ... is "witch-hunt" sexist?

If "shuck and jive" (legitimately), and then "fairy tale" and "roll the dice" (more of a stretch) provided the occasion for a wave of intense scrutiny about racial politics and racist dogwhistles, it seems only fair to apply our collective interpretive skills to this use of "pimp," no?

Posted by timba February 10, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink

Posted by timba February 10, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink

Both well thought out and insightful. Thanks.

To the extent that people feel that I was being pejorative . . .

Ha! Well, it sure wasn't meant as complimentary! Am I right?

The secret is that at least half of the Obama "miracle" consists in being very permissive about the use of the old Clinton insults from the '90s, and his partisans exhibit, over and over, the same blind hatred of the Clintons as Tom Delay used to. Well, I guess those $70 million from Starr were well spent: the first contributions to the Obama campaign committee: bringing the nation together by tearing Democrats apart.

Valdron,

Great 12:28 post!

Anyone who tries to excuse "pimping" as common slang and no big deal doesn't understand what it means. As common slang it is used to refer to objects, not human beings.

In fact, it was the obvious unprofessionalism of Mr. Shuster's comment that really caught my attention. It completely undermined any point he was trying to make. What seems obvious to me is that if Mr. Shuster's grasp of the English language is so poor that when left without a teleprompter he needs to fall back on slang, and slang that doesn't accurately describe his point at that, he should really consider a profession that doesn't put him on television.