Discussion: Racism vs. Sexism

Marx

Pixelated
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
55,013
Reaction score
3
Points
31
From the outset, we all knew that this election was going to be different. For the first time in American history, the Democratic nomination will either be an African-American man or a woman. Throughout this campaign things have been very touch and go. The media coverage has been far from fair, in my opinion. I have seen one candidate (Sen. Hillary Clinton) badgered and relentlessly attacked while the other (Sen. Barack Obama) has been treated with the utmost courteousy and respect. In my view, while neither is acceptable in any form, sexism seems to be "less abrasive" than racism. Without this turning into something negative, how do you feel about this? Does one issue appear to be more "acceptable" or "less abrasive" than the other?
 
Great topic.

If I recall correctly, black men were allowed to vote before white women in this country, which says something about the male-dominated views that influence legislature and...well, everything else in this country. So I think sexism is going to be more tangible at this point than racism.

But don't worry. If Obama becomes the nominee, we WILL see racism in this country at its ugliest--especially in the media. A young black whipper-snapper, versus a white, wrinkled old guard? Trust me, people's real fears will show through by November.

For now, White Men will remain in control of this country and ALL minorities--including blacks and women--will continue to play second fiddle.
 
Great topic.

If I recall correctly, black men were allowed to vote before white women in this country, which says something about the male-dominated views that influence legislature and...well, everything else in this country. So I think sexism is going to be more tangible at this point than racism.

But don't worry. If Obama becomes the nominee, we WILL see racism in this country at its ugliest--especially in the media. A young black whipper-snapper, versus a white, wrinkled old guard? Trust me, people's real fears will show through by November.

For now, White Men will remain in control of this country and ALL minorities--including blacks and women--will continue to play second fiddle.

The timeline for voting is absolutely correct. I just wonder if we have progressed any further as a nation. (Or if we are still in the mindset that women shouldn't be powerful, in control, or able to voice their own opinions.) It just seems to me like Barack Obama has been placed in a "bubble," one that no one dares to pop. I think it just goes to a larger picture beyond politics. If a woman is forceful and steadfast, she is seen as a b****. When a man acts exactly the same way, he is seen to be superior and heroic. If a woman shows emotion, such as Hillary Clinton's tearful moment before New Hampshire, she is seen as weak. If a man shows that kind of emotion, he is seen as gentle and fatherly.
 
Like I said, the media will turn on Barack and "pop that bubble".

They've only protected him thus far to carry him to this point. For the sake of sensationalism...but once he goes toe-to-toe with McCain, I doubt they'll treat him the same way.

And the status quo will prevail. :rolleyes:
 
Like I said, the media will turn on Barack and "pop that bubble".

They've only protected him thus far to carry him to this point. For the sake of sensationalism...but once he goes toe-to-toe with McCain, I doubt they'll treat him the same way.

And the status quo will prevail. :rolleyes:

I'm not so sure. The attacks and vocabulary will definately be stepped up, but I think it is a very fine line they will be walking.
 
What about female minorities who have to deal with racism outside of their race and sexism within?

Yes, LS is right about the vote. Black men did get to vote before white women, and MINORITY WOMEN too. But what about those unpublished stories of MW who were discouraged to vote by fathers and brothers who didn't believe that women should vote?

The reason why minority women usually go gender before race is because society, as a whole, will see race before gender, and will act accordingly. Always has been that way. That's why hoses and dogs where used on women and men by Bull Connor and crew.

Now a days is the split is still there. O. Winfrey gets blasted by alot of her WW viewers for endorsing Obama, claiming that she chose race over gender.

Even though minority women, in this country have had equal rights the least longest, doesn't mean that they can not speak their mind. Well, that is unless your names are Michelle Obama and Oprah Winfrey.

I still think it's funny when Hillary and supporters whine about unfair treatment, and I have yet to see someone ask Hillary (or supporters) if she considers herself "white or female first," like minority females have been asked by the media, "are you voting with your skin color or vagina today?"

BTW, when did Title 9 get passed?
 
The timeline for voting is absolutely correct. I just wonder if we have progressed any further as a nation. (Or if we are still in the mindset that women shouldn't be powerful, in control, or able to voice their own opinions.) It just seems to me like Barack Obama has been placed in a "bubble," one that no one dares to pop. I think it just goes to a larger picture beyond politics. If a woman is forceful and steadfast, she is seen as a b****. When a man acts exactly the same way, he is seen to be superior and heroic. If a woman shows emotion, such as Hillary Clinton's tearful moment before New Hampshire, she is seen as weak. If a man shows that kind of emotion, he is seen as gentle and fatherly.

I don't know, I can't really buy this, I see Hillary as just a cold, calculated and incredibly fake, having a vagina really has nothing to do with it. She comes across to me as a bad-actor in a b-movie, while Obama is giving the Oscar worthy performance. Hillary needs to take some lessons from her husband, one of the big things that got him elected was his personality, when he talked to you, you felt like the only person in the room, Hillary doesn't have this ability.
 
^ Agreed.

There are nice, kind female polititians with vaginas as well. So anatomy (aka a person's sex) has zero to do with it. Actually I'm intrigued with the idea of a female U.S. president--just not THAT female. :dry:
 
What about female minorities who have to deal with racism outside of their race and sexism within?

Yes, LS is right about the vote. Black men did get to vote before white women, and MINORITY WOMEN too. But what about those unpublished stories of MW who were discouraged to vote by fathers and brothers who didn't believe that women should vote?

The reason why minority women usually go gender before race is because society, as a whole, will see race before gender, and will act accordingly. Always has been that way. That's why hoses and dogs where used on women and men by Bull Connor and crew.

Now a days is the split is still there. O. Winfrey gets blasted by alot of her WW viewers for endorsing Obama, claiming that she chose race over gender.

Even though minority women, in this country have had equal rights the least longest, doesn't mean that they can not speak their mind. Well, that is unless your names are Michelle Obama and Oprah Winfrey.

I still think it's funny when Hillary and supporters whine about unfair treatment, and I have yet to see someone ask Hillary (or supporters) if she considers herself "white or female first," like minority females have been asked by the media, "are you voting with your skin color or vagina today?"

BTW, when did Title 9 get passed?

All very good points Reicho! There are definately cases to be made all around.
 
^ Agreed.

There are nice, kind female polititians with vaginas as well. So anatomy (aka a person's sex) has zero to do with it. Actually I'm intrigued with the idea of a female U.S. president--just not THAT female. :dry:

That's very true, but I still think that they are seen as sub-par.
 
From the outset, we all knew that this election was going to be different. For the first time in American history, the Democratic nomination will either be an African-American man or a woman. Throughout this campaign things have been very touch and go. The media coverage has been far from fair, in my opinion. I have seen one candidate (Sen. Hillary Clinton) badgered and relentlessly attacked while the other (Sen. Barack Obama) has been treated with the utmost courteousy and respect. In my view, while neither is acceptable in any form, sexism seems to be "less abrasive" than racism. Without this turning into something negative, how do you feel about this? Does one issue appear to be more "acceptable" or "less abrasive" than the other?
If Hilary was a man, she would probably be badgered and relentlessly attacked EVEN MORE, and have less support (cause she ain't a woman). What I find even more hilarious is the "teH oppressIONing" white male delegates seem to support Hilary moreso than Obama. Oh my. :lmao:
 
If Hilary was a man, she would probably be badgered and relentlessly attacked EVEN MORE, and have less support (cause she ain't a woman). What I find even more hilarious is the "teH oppressIONing" white male delegates seem to support Hilary moreso than Obama. Oh my. :lmao:

You really think so? Policy-wise she and Obama are virtually the same.
 
If Hilary was a man, she would probably be badgered and relentlessly attacked EVEN MORE, and have less support (cause she ain't a woman). What I find even more hilarious is the "teH oppressIONing" white male delegates seem to support Hilary moreso than Obama. Oh my. :lmao:

Sweet Jesus. Para is here. :bow:
 
One also questions if either Hilary or Obama would be this far if both of them were fat balding white men. But I really don't care, what I find more funny is the white-male superdelegates she and her supporters seem to think lowly of, are her biggest supporters.
 
One also questions if either Hilary or Obama would be this far if both of them were both fat, balding white men. But I really don't care, what I find more funny is the white-male superdelegates she and her supporters seem to think lowly of are her biggest supporters.

It does make you wonder...I really liked Biden too. He has always seemed very Presidential to me. (Speaking of white candidates.)
 
Like I said, the media will turn on Barack and "pop that bubble".

They've only protected him thus far to carry him to this point. For the sake of sensationalism...but once he goes toe-to-toe with McCain, I doubt they'll treat him the same way.

And the status quo will prevail. :rolleyes:

:whatever:

Almost every major media outlet varies from extremely liberal to moderately liberal.

It won't matter what Obama's race, gender or sexuality is - he will be the precious golden boy of the left and thus of the meida.
 
If Hilary was a man, she would probably be badgered and relentlessly attacked EVEN MORE, and have less support (cause she ain't a woman). What I find even more hilarious is the "teH oppressIONing" white male delegates seem to support Hilary moreso than Obama. Oh my. :lmao:

And if Barack was white he wouldn't be in the race.
 
:whatever:

Almost every major media outlet varies from extremely liberal to moderately liberal.

It won't matter what Obama's race, gender or sexuality is - he will be the precious golden boy of the left and thus of the meida.

He has been the media's "golden boy" since day one. That's why I think no one else ever really had a chance to begin with.
 
And if Barack was white he wouldn't be in the race.

They should get a black/middle-eastern/asian mixed feministing hermaphrodite environmentalist with a visible handicap, that is left handed and has the initials P.C. to run for President :D
 
They should get a black/middle-eastern/asian mixed feministing hermaphrodite environmentalist with a visible handicap, that is left handed and has the initials P.C. to run for President :D

Oh my :funny:
 
He has been the media's "golden boy" since day one. That's why I think no one else ever really had a chance to begin with.

Hillary had a chance and blew it. Her own mistakes made Obama a possible viable candidate - once he was made viable he was able to be picked up by the media and carried over the goalline.
 
Hillary had a chance and blew it. Her own mistakes made Obama a possible viable candidate - once he was made viable he was able to be picked up by the media and carried over the goalline.

I'm not saying that Hillary hasn't blown it. I am saying that when she announced her candidacy, there was an extreme amount of "inevitability." The media tried to make her the inevitable candidate, not without help from Hillary though. Once Barack won Iowa, the media picked a new horse to ride to the end. They haven't looked back since.
 
Like I said, the media will turn on Barack and "pop that bubble".

They've only protected him thus far to carry him to this point. For the sake of sensationalism...but once he goes toe-to-toe with McCain, I doubt they'll treat him the same way.

And the status quo will prevail. :rolleyes:

The status quo BETTER prevail, because I for one do NOT want the most liberal, inexperienced, and unclear candidate in the entire race as this country's next President.
 
The status quo BETTER prevail, because I for one do NOT want the most liberal, inexperienced, and unclear candidate in the entire race as this country's next President.

I did not want one of the most conservative, inexperienced, and hypocritical candidates to "win" in 2000. But look who we got!
 
I did not want one of the most conservative, inexperienced, and hypocritical candidates to "win" in 2000. But look who we got!

oh%20snap.jpg
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,530
Messages
21,752,353
Members
45,586
Latest member
Adrian Chase
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"