"too radical, too weird and too far ahead of its time"
August 5, 2015 9:22 AM Subscribe
Rebecca Traister, Huffington Post: Lets Go Full Crocodile, Ladies - "A documentary that disappeared more than 40 years ago—available to everyone for the first time here—is a gift to modern-day feminists. It's belligerent, it's hilarious, and it reveals exactly what the Clinton campaign is missing."
Oh man, Warren Beatty gets told.
posted by louche mustachio at 9:36 AM on August 5, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by louche mustachio at 9:36 AM on August 5, 2015 [2 favorites]
I'm afraid it will hurt too much to watch this, which means I probably should.
posted by emjaybee at 10:18 AM on August 5, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by emjaybee at 10:18 AM on August 5, 2015 [3 favorites]
Over a decade ago, Bust Magazine ran an article on this movie. I've been waiting for it to leak on the internet ever since that became a thing.
posted by pxe2000 at 10:49 AM on August 5, 2015
posted by pxe2000 at 10:49 AM on August 5, 2015
I'm afraid it will hurt too much to watch this, which means I probably should.
Yeah, the bit in Traister's article about having to be nice and not giving a rat's ass about trigger warnings and so on really resonated with me. I cannot get too angry or the genie will not go back in the bottle.
posted by immlass at 11:24 AM on August 5, 2015 [1 favorite]
Yeah, the bit in Traister's article about having to be nice and not giving a rat's ass about trigger warnings and so on really resonated with me. I cannot get too angry or the genie will not go back in the bottle.
posted by immlass at 11:24 AM on August 5, 2015 [1 favorite]
I may want to watch this just to see how allies then differed from allies now, if they do. The summary gives some indication:
posted by Halloween Jack at 12:06 PM on August 5, 2015
“Why were we mobbed by hundreds and hundreds of photographers? Why did people run up to us and touch us and crowd us?” Hochman muses afterward. “Because [stripper] Liz Renay has breasts. … So what? She’s a beautiful woman. But if a man walked onto the convention floor with a big cock …”Dude.
posted by Halloween Jack at 12:06 PM on August 5, 2015
I still miss Bella Abzug, and not just for her hats.
posted by allthinky at 12:44 PM on August 5, 2015
posted by allthinky at 12:44 PM on August 5, 2015
Hmmm...
" The convention was the scene of the first meeting of the newly formed National Women's Political Caucus, which nominated congresswoman Shirley Chisholm as the first woman presidential candidate in American history."
But wikipedia says...
"On January 25, 1972, she became the first major-party black candidate for President of the United States and the first woman to run for the Democratic presidential nomination (US Senator Margaret Chase Smith had previously run for the 1964 Republican presidential nomination)."
/pedant
posted by symbioid at 4:46 PM on August 5, 2015
" The convention was the scene of the first meeting of the newly formed National Women's Political Caucus, which nominated congresswoman Shirley Chisholm as the first woman presidential candidate in American history."
But wikipedia says...
"On January 25, 1972, she became the first major-party black candidate for President of the United States and the first woman to run for the Democratic presidential nomination (US Senator Margaret Chase Smith had previously run for the 1964 Republican presidential nomination)."
/pedant
posted by symbioid at 4:46 PM on August 5, 2015
"In 2015, there remain plenty of self-styled progressive men who harbor (often unconscious) resentments toward women in politics. They roll their eyes at “single issue” priorities and make it clear that there are far more important things at stake in elections than the lack of female representation on state, local and federal levels. Their influence might explain why a recent poll out of Iowa shows 59 percent of Democratic women supporting Hillary Clinton compared to 39 percent of Democratic men."
It's absolutely true, and rather revolting to see. Most people -- both men and women alike -- simply do not fully see and consistantly engage on real equality for women, even though sexism in the US is every bit as obvious as racism.
In fact, there are a lot of aspects of sexism against women that are not faced as aggressively as racism against minorities... which, perhaps, explains why women are smuggled into the country and held as slaves, every day in every major city, with few convictions and weak sentences.
It's frustrating to see a cautious, overly tactful woman trying not to offend, trying to ingratiate themselves, trying not to overstep their bounds with voters by too strongly focusing on the plight of women, trying desperately not to be called an angry woman... only to be called fake instead... after the presidency of a cautious, overly tactful black man, who tried not to offend, tried to ingratiate themselves, tried not to overstep their bounds with voters by too strongly focusing on the plight of blacks, tried desperately not to be called an angry black man... only to be be called fake, and distrusted as a catalyst of change, no matter how much meaningful change happened during their administration.
This does *NOT* mean that we shouldn't elect black candidates or women. It means that we should be calling out these sexist, racist catch-22s which set people up for failure, no matter what choices they make. And Hillary is a great example of this happening over and over throughout her career.
Too inexperienced at politics, and only in politics because of her husband? Too old, too phony, and too corrupted by the system. A haggish, lecturing, Nurse Ratched-type, full of internalized anger towards men? A vain,wealthy, out-of-touch phony, with her haircuts, clothes, and star-studded, elitist friends. It's either one or the other... or, worse, both at the same time. Hillary is a socialist who also happens to be a corporate sellout.
These are the kind of fundamentally sexist, catch-22 arguments that the GOP uses against Hillary all the time... and it has been depressingly obvious how much supposedly enlightened progressives have basically scooped them up with a big spoon, digested and internalized them, and spewed them out again, usually in a slightly less transparently offensive way. It's behavior that is damaging to everything they stand for, and which could foment a major rift in the party, while seeing to it that the GOP wins the election.
If Hillary doesn't win the nomination -- again -- it will be obvious that she will never get another chance. As such, there will be little real incentive for her or her supporters to strongly support the alternative that oftentimes demeans and marginalizes both them and their candidate.
In truth, though, the progressives are likely going to find their candidate cannot win, in large part because the Democratic Party system -- and debates, and endorsements, and superdelegates -- are decisively stacked against them in a way that is clearly different than Hillary vs. Obama. It also doesn't help that Bernie "I am not a Democrat" Sanders isn't a Democrat, repeatedly rejected becoming a Democratic Party nominee, and cannot get on the ballot in numerous states without perjuring himself by swearing he is a registered member of the Democratic Party. .. something that most certainly will be challenged in the courts.
So, yeah... either way you look at it, there's going to be a lot of hurt feelings at the end of this contest... and our inability to see sexism for what it is and call it out when it occurs is going to make coming together that much more difficult.
posted by markkraft at 11:21 PM on August 5, 2015 [3 favorites]
It's absolutely true, and rather revolting to see. Most people -- both men and women alike -- simply do not fully see and consistantly engage on real equality for women, even though sexism in the US is every bit as obvious as racism.
In fact, there are a lot of aspects of sexism against women that are not faced as aggressively as racism against minorities... which, perhaps, explains why women are smuggled into the country and held as slaves, every day in every major city, with few convictions and weak sentences.
It's frustrating to see a cautious, overly tactful woman trying not to offend, trying to ingratiate themselves, trying not to overstep their bounds with voters by too strongly focusing on the plight of women, trying desperately not to be called an angry woman... only to be called fake instead... after the presidency of a cautious, overly tactful black man, who tried not to offend, tried to ingratiate themselves, tried not to overstep their bounds with voters by too strongly focusing on the plight of blacks, tried desperately not to be called an angry black man... only to be be called fake, and distrusted as a catalyst of change, no matter how much meaningful change happened during their administration.
This does *NOT* mean that we shouldn't elect black candidates or women. It means that we should be calling out these sexist, racist catch-22s which set people up for failure, no matter what choices they make. And Hillary is a great example of this happening over and over throughout her career.
Too inexperienced at politics, and only in politics because of her husband? Too old, too phony, and too corrupted by the system. A haggish, lecturing, Nurse Ratched-type, full of internalized anger towards men? A vain,wealthy, out-of-touch phony, with her haircuts, clothes, and star-studded, elitist friends. It's either one or the other... or, worse, both at the same time. Hillary is a socialist who also happens to be a corporate sellout.
These are the kind of fundamentally sexist, catch-22 arguments that the GOP uses against Hillary all the time... and it has been depressingly obvious how much supposedly enlightened progressives have basically scooped them up with a big spoon, digested and internalized them, and spewed them out again, usually in a slightly less transparently offensive way. It's behavior that is damaging to everything they stand for, and which could foment a major rift in the party, while seeing to it that the GOP wins the election.
If Hillary doesn't win the nomination -- again -- it will be obvious that she will never get another chance. As such, there will be little real incentive for her or her supporters to strongly support the alternative that oftentimes demeans and marginalizes both them and their candidate.
In truth, though, the progressives are likely going to find their candidate cannot win, in large part because the Democratic Party system -- and debates, and endorsements, and superdelegates -- are decisively stacked against them in a way that is clearly different than Hillary vs. Obama. It also doesn't help that Bernie "I am not a Democrat" Sanders isn't a Democrat, repeatedly rejected becoming a Democratic Party nominee, and cannot get on the ballot in numerous states without perjuring himself by swearing he is a registered member of the Democratic Party. .. something that most certainly will be challenged in the courts.
So, yeah... either way you look at it, there's going to be a lot of hurt feelings at the end of this contest... and our inability to see sexism for what it is and call it out when it occurs is going to make coming together that much more difficult.
posted by markkraft at 11:21 PM on August 5, 2015 [3 favorites]
It should be pointed out that this isn't the first time Bernie Sanders ran for an executive position. In 1986, he ran as an Independent against Democrat Madeline Kunin and Republican Peter Smith.
Sanders started his campaign much like his presidential campaign, saying "we have not entered this race to win only 10 percent of the vote. We are in to win.'' He began his campaign divisively, by smearing his opponents, saying that there was little difference between the two. ''It is absolutely fair to say you are dealing with Tweedledum and Tweedledee.''
Kunin replied to Sanders' rhetoric in a Village Voice interview, saying,
"I think (Sanders) has messianic tendencies. That’s not uncommon in politicians. But it does mean he dismisses everyone else’s alternative solutions…His approach is always to tear down… A lot of what he says is rhetoric and undoable… He has to create a distinction between us, and to do that he has to push me more to the right, where I really don’t think I am. I don’t think it’s fair. He’s not running against evil, you know."
Sanders had an initial surge in polls and at one time had around 20% support, but by October, after a series of debates, the Sanders campaign was forced to lower their expectations.
Within his campaign organization feelings were frayed and hopes disappointed. It had not become the grassroots uprising they expected... Ellen David-Friedman, who managed the campaign for several months, accused Sanders of "focusing more on a candidacy and less on (growing) an organization", and expanding the movement. Anarchist thinker Murray Bookchin, who lived in Burlington, was more blunt. "Bernie’s running a one-man show."
Democrat Madeline Kunin, who went on to become Governor, did an interview recently and commented on how sex and gender effect perceptions of candidates.
"I think if you could be partisan-blind, and just objectively look at (Hillary Clinton's) qualifications, there’s no doubt in my mind, and I think many people’s minds, that she is most qualified person to be president of the United States. Her experience in foreign policy, her experience as a senator, her experience even as a spouse who witnessed everything that happened, if not first-hand, certainly second-hand.
I know her both personally and from – I hope – an objective political perspective. She’s smart; she’s a quick study, she’s much more sociable and warm than can be put across sometimes on television and the media. . . I don’t think (Hillary) needs anybody to move her (to the left), frankly, I think she’s already there …
Hillary has to do two things, of course: She has to win the primary and she has to win the general election. Bernie is focused on the primary and ... can go as far left as he wants and worry later whether he can attract the middle. Hillary still has to attract some centrist positions and voters. And also, [it’s] a matter of style.
[Sanders] can be flamboyant, but if a woman had that kind of style, we'd be very put off. I mean again, there go the gender stereotypes. A man can shout, a man can be extreme, and not be considered hysterical. If a woman had that same kind of style, she would be considered hysterical.. .
I believe (Hillary) is the strongest woman and the most capable, and I would add the word compassionate. Her concentration on children’s issues, on education, on early childhood, on childcare, on paid family leave – these are now the gut issues for families and with her at the helm, we will get them done."
posted by markkraft at 4:15 AM on August 6, 2015 [4 favorites]
Sanders started his campaign much like his presidential campaign, saying "we have not entered this race to win only 10 percent of the vote. We are in to win.'' He began his campaign divisively, by smearing his opponents, saying that there was little difference between the two. ''It is absolutely fair to say you are dealing with Tweedledum and Tweedledee.''
Kunin replied to Sanders' rhetoric in a Village Voice interview, saying,
"I think (Sanders) has messianic tendencies. That’s not uncommon in politicians. But it does mean he dismisses everyone else’s alternative solutions…His approach is always to tear down… A lot of what he says is rhetoric and undoable… He has to create a distinction between us, and to do that he has to push me more to the right, where I really don’t think I am. I don’t think it’s fair. He’s not running against evil, you know."
Sanders had an initial surge in polls and at one time had around 20% support, but by October, after a series of debates, the Sanders campaign was forced to lower their expectations.
Within his campaign organization feelings were frayed and hopes disappointed. It had not become the grassroots uprising they expected... Ellen David-Friedman, who managed the campaign for several months, accused Sanders of "focusing more on a candidacy and less on (growing) an organization", and expanding the movement. Anarchist thinker Murray Bookchin, who lived in Burlington, was more blunt. "Bernie’s running a one-man show."
Democrat Madeline Kunin, who went on to become Governor, did an interview recently and commented on how sex and gender effect perceptions of candidates.
"I think if you could be partisan-blind, and just objectively look at (Hillary Clinton's) qualifications, there’s no doubt in my mind, and I think many people’s minds, that she is most qualified person to be president of the United States. Her experience in foreign policy, her experience as a senator, her experience even as a spouse who witnessed everything that happened, if not first-hand, certainly second-hand.
I know her both personally and from – I hope – an objective political perspective. She’s smart; she’s a quick study, she’s much more sociable and warm than can be put across sometimes on television and the media. . . I don’t think (Hillary) needs anybody to move her (to the left), frankly, I think she’s already there …
Hillary has to do two things, of course: She has to win the primary and she has to win the general election. Bernie is focused on the primary and ... can go as far left as he wants and worry later whether he can attract the middle. Hillary still has to attract some centrist positions and voters. And also, [it’s] a matter of style.
[Sanders] can be flamboyant, but if a woman had that kind of style, we'd be very put off. I mean again, there go the gender stereotypes. A man can shout, a man can be extreme, and not be considered hysterical. If a woman had that same kind of style, she would be considered hysterical.. .
I believe (Hillary) is the strongest woman and the most capable, and I would add the word compassionate. Her concentration on children’s issues, on education, on early childhood, on childcare, on paid family leave – these are now the gut issues for families and with her at the helm, we will get them done."
posted by markkraft at 4:15 AM on August 6, 2015 [4 favorites]
> Oh man, Warren Beatty gets told
You can literally see his face drop, lol
posted by moody cow at 8:32 AM on August 6, 2015
You can literally see his face drop, lol
posted by moody cow at 8:32 AM on August 6, 2015
What I want to know is why haven't I heard of Florynce Kennedy before? Hitting Google immediately.
posted by EvaDestruction at 10:47 AM on August 6, 2015
posted by EvaDestruction at 10:47 AM on August 6, 2015
« Older Ai Pioppi: Human powered fairground; with good... | As Tech Booms, Workers Turn to Coding for Career... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by wyndham at 9:35 AM on August 5, 2015 [4 favorites]